Removal of the headphone jack : the future or a marketing scheme?

Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by aertus, Oct 22, 2017.
  1. Strangelove424
    The exact chip is an Apple/Cirrus part number 338S00105 they sell for $2-7 per chip. Wholesale might be cheaper, with Apple having a partnership with Cirrus, but the cost savings benefit on Apple's part is nothing to sneeze out. With the chip occupying 5mm of board space, I'm still not buying the "we're giving you guys more features" justification. This is very typical of Apple. Ditch the stylus. Ditch flash. Ditch optical drives. Sometimes they are correct in their prediction of redundancy, but their enthusiasm to forgo features, parts, and 3rd party obligations always benefits them not the consumer. Consumers only swallow it because I assume they feel like they are on the vanguard, at the cutting edge trend line of technology, that Bauhaus image of an Apple user sitting in front of his antiseptically clean, empty desk, with nary an interesting thing to plug in and play with in sight. Apple loves to sell that image, because it's such a simple one. And for some reason people eat it up.

    I'm a regular consumer too, and won't be buying a utilitarian device like a smartphone that doesn't have the utility of plugging in 99.9% of headphones that exist, including 100% of my own.
     
    Harry Manback and RockStar2005 like this.
  2. Currawong Contributor
    "$2-7 per chip" -- I'm sure not for Apple. I don't think the part savings are so grossly simple as that anyway, with the whole design surely a highly complex arrangement of design vs. cost.
    "Ditch the stylus" -- there never was one. Steve Jobs didn't want the mess that was the Newton and Palm devices. The story behind the touch design is well-documented by people involved.
    "Ditch Flash" -- Was never there in the first place, and they have been held to ransom before with third party software that they had to rely on. Flash has proven to be a speed, reliability and security disaster.
    "Ditch optical drives" -- A huge waste of space with lousy capacity that were inevitably going to die with increases in internet speeds and thumb drive capacities. I still have a 2011 17" MacBook Pro. I long ago removed the optical drive and put a second HDD in the space. I own a MacBook now for work. I used to carry around the MacBook Pro and believe me I'm VERY glad not to have to any more.
     
  3. Strangelove424
    You can “ditch” a technology if the entire industry/market embraces it, but you refuse to. Nobody is there for the classes they 'ditched' in school. That is the very nature of ditching something. It’s not a semantic pretzel, it’s the simple idea that there was a thing, and one refused to do the thing. Incidentally, they had this all before in other products, so the “never was one” justification which assumes Apple never had the will/talent to implement is invalid. OS-X supported Flash and the stylus was on Newtons. And now the stylus returns in the form of the iPad “pro” version for more money. Optical drives are still necessary if you buy CD music or software, or author to BD/CD. My drives get plenty of use.

    It will always amaze me how Apple has managed to build such strong consumer allegiance in spite of its dictates. Minimalism is the most expensive feature of all. I own a Mac, but mostly use a computer I built myself, one with all the components I chose to add to it.
     
  4. bigshot
    I don't have the time or interest to build my own computer. I want to just use it. Apple is very good at knowing what I need and giving it to me out of the box. The OS makes sense and allows you to do the same thing five or six different ways, so you can find what feels right to you. I've been around Macs since the Apple II. They work for me. Occasionally, I have to get over a hump, like when SCSI changed to USB. Same thing with the headphone jack dongle. But considering how much I use my Macs for- from music, to movies, to editing movies, recording and burning music, photography with photoshop, graphic design with indesign, spreadsheets, databases, internet, etc- I'm willing to pay 10-15% more and choose an off the shelf configuration because it just works right away.
     
  5. Strangelove424
    I have been using both operating systems/computers since the Apple II and IBM 5150. I understand the benefits of both platforms. I was using Macs for a while almost exclusively for creative content production. To say I've been disappointed with how they treated creative pros would be an understatement. They abandoned X-Serve, leaving small post production shops with tens of thousands invested in the lurch. The Mac Pro became an even more expensive and even more proprietary system. And FCP-X ruined a workflow and upgrade path for many, including myself. That was my end of line with Apple. Building and maintaining a system is not easy, but being at the whim of Apple is much more difficult. For me, it was completely unsustainable.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2017
  6. bigshot
    I just shifted to Premiere.
     
  7. Strangelove424
    Me too. It's awesome software. The whole Adobe suite is useful, I always integrate Photoshop, Illustrator and AfterEffects into projects, and you can link assets into Premiere live so if you go back to edit the asset in PS, AI, or AE, it will show up as the new version immediately. I was using Premiere on my Mac Pro w/ an ATI, but finally got it on my PC w/ an Nvidia card, so can use the Mercury engine now. I never have to render anything anymore to preview, it's pretty cool.
     
  8. Currawong Contributor
    "Refuse" is not "ditch". OSX may have included Flash, but they refused to include it on the iPhone. Steve Jobs wanted a phone that worked without a stylus. He didn't design the Newton! That was a project entirely done while he was not at Apple, and he killed it upon his return. The decision to make a stylus for people to draw with doesn't negate the fundamental design that uses fingers for interaction.

    I'm with you when it comes to the treatment of pro users. For me, it was the abandoning of Aperture. Switching to Lightroom was hell. I don't want to switch to Premier and go through that again.
     
  9. bigshot
    Aperture still works. I use it still.
     
  10. Strangelove424
    The fundamental point remains that they neglected features that would have been helpful for their customers to have. Perhaps their rational was logical, even in foresight, but at the time their conclusion benefited them, not the consumer. On a personal note, the lack of stylus and commercial focus of the iPad was a major let down to me. I remember when Apple pitched a tablet computer called the Knowledge Navigator. It was a serious vision that included education and content creation, with UI and inputs no less precise than a desktop with the intimacy of a tablet. Eventually a 3rd party company called Modbook came out, which married the guts of an Apple MacBook to a pressure sensitive screen. I was very tempted to buy one. Where the entire iOS line ended up was not what I imagined. But I never imagined they could make the money they have with iOS either.

    I never got Lightroom in any suite, and never wanted to pay extra. Instead I use OCD folder structure, Bridge as a viewer, then edit in Photoshop. Premiere really isn't too far off from FCP 7. Imagine FCP 7 with multi core support, hardware acceleration, and some features you were dying for, and that is pretty much Premiere.
     
  11. reginalb
    The great thing about Apple is that it just works, you know.

    [​IMG]
     
    Harry Manback and PETEBULL like this.
  12. bigshot
    Two monitors, ethernet and a camera and a phone all at once! I have a couple of those adapters. I should try that!
     
    ev13wt likes this.
  13. fianbarr
    You are correct for calling me out. I apologize for not thinking my argument through. My main problem with Wireless headphones is that I can only use them with my phone, not my headamp, not my home stereo, nor any other devices that I have lying around that have a standard headphone out. Add to this that a wireless headphone is generally about £100 more expensive than the wired version, and the conclusion is that a wireless headphone is not for me. And I thus will stick with a phone that has a headphone out.
     
    RockStar2005 likes this.
  14. RockStar2005
    I agree with you. Wireless isn't worth it (yet) if you ask me. MAYBE for speaker listening, but not on headphones.
     
  15. Niouke
    APTx will provide almost lossless transmission, in ideal conditions. As the bandwidth diminishes with the signal quality and distance, the codec used will be of lesser quality. Audiophiles that worry about the 5% should stick to the good old cable.
     

Share This Page