I believe that the iphone is by far the best executed mobile phone platform and the best hardware - and has been from day one.
However, I have never purchased or used an iphone because of my stubborn indignation over the lack of plain old USB for charging.
Contrary to all expectation and experience, everyone in the world got together on one little thing - establishing the global standard for USB charging - and the world was actually a very slightly better place. And apple shat all over that, and continues to do so, in order to make (on average) an extra $10 for every iphone sold.
So fuck that and fuck their iphone.
They stuck with 30-pin because it was something their customer base had already bought into, and they didn't want to force a change. They went with Lightning because, let's be honest, micro-USB is shit — every micro-USB device I've owned has had the connector fail within two years. Lightning can handle 12W of power, micro-USB 9W. Lightning is reversible. Lightning has no moving parts on the connector, prone to breaking (or worse) grabbing onto your $700 device with a death grip and bring nigh-unremovable.
It would be great if they switched now to USB-C. They're clearly in the works on that, but didn't want to make a connector change on their phones after only two revs.
I have had a number of lightning connectors fail on me. They're designed to fail. Pressure-held copper edge-connectors for devices went out with the Commodore 64's user port.
The fact that it is reversible is convenient but hardly worthy of consideration as a feature alongside "ubiquity" "cost" and "durability".
The old iPhone connector had it's limitations but it was established and really quite solid in my experience. Micro USB perhaps has limited features technically, and is ugly, but I don't believe the advantages that Apple presents for lightning outweigh the drawbacks.
As an interface it has a couple of niche use-cases that it fulfils but it is a step backwards in terms of connector design and in fact has a "worse" connector than the two other interfaces it purports to improve upon.
Props to Apple for padding out their profit margin and all that but they can absolutely go and shite if they think I'm going to swallow their "better connector" bullshit.
And they expect me to use it instead of a headphones jack now as well!
I'm always surprised by folks talking about failing microUSB ports. The microUSB port on my old G2 (HTC Desire Z) still works fine as does the miniUSB port on my G1 (HTC Dream).
I'm always surprised by folks talking about their non-failing micro-USB ports, as if that somehow discounts other people's devices that have failed.
At this point, you might be tempted to claim that I would be able to use the same cables as other devices. To this, I'll point to the ongoing switch to USB-C and note that's you're buying new cables anyway.
Micro USB was a shitty plug. USB-C is better, but you can actually thank Apple for that, because it's a reaction to the Lightning plug.
My least favorite thing about my 5x is that it's USB-C. I regret upgrading before USB-C became more commonplace.
I'll note that almost everyone who complains about lightning seems to not be an Apple user. Apple users seem fine with the horror of not sharing cables with Android devices. Apple users are also pretty happy that random hotels and whatnot have docks for their phones.
Oh, it's absolutely not. Apple makes a killing selling adapters. It's the users who get screwed.
Suggesting they'd knowingly sabotage #1 for #2 is absurd.
Clearly many of these decisions have been popular. I'd even wager that this an unprofitable decision for them, in the short term. This might sound counter to my original assertion that they're sabotaging billions of iPhone revenues for millions of accessory revenues, but it isn't.
There's a third thing they're optimizing for, and I think they're willing to sacrifice both of those revenues for it. USB-C is the "right" thing forward. Bluetooth is the "right" thing forward. They're trying to push the industry towards these things (whether or not it's a good idea is something you can agree or disagree with), and they're willing to sacrifice earnings if they believe make that future come sooner.
Happened with floppy drives, happened with CD drives, and it's happening now with USB-C and the removal of the audio jack. For better or worse, the bean-counters have never been in charge at Apple, and that's been one of their greatest long-term strengths.
Also, another point: I have a medical device and a Kindle which both charge via micro-USB, meaning I only had to bring one charger when I traveled. Huge benefit.
Apple customers aren't getting "screwed" as you claimed.
If you're still using micro USB, I hate to break the news, but you will absolutely be buying some new cables in the future.
Apple obviously knows this, as they just moved their macbook to USB-C.
now i can charge my android phone with the same cable as my macbook, android is more compatible with the new macbook than the iphone is; thats an embarrassment
This is a baseless claim. They happen to use the same connector. iOS has a number of far more meaningful integration points with OS X, including iCloud and Messages.
both of which are atrocious.
In your case, you're carrying two other devices that use Micro-USB, which is great for you. Unfortunately you're likely to be facing a choice of replacing all of your devices or carrying two cables regardless the next time you upgrade your phone.
Where "trending towards obsolescence" means "has realistically at least three years of non-negligible use for Micro USB", versus "was replaced by its manufacturer just over four years ago" (September 2012).
I'm yet to see gym equipment (a niche example) with Lightning, it's only 30 pin connectors.
If they'd gone with micro-USB, you would have the exact same complaint two or three years from now. That micro-USB devices still have 2 or 3 more years left of ubiquity is just a function of this exact moment in time, and you could have said that three years ago for 30-pin too.
That's a 11 year run.
I bet those treadmills are not even that old yet.
So let's call it. Micro-USB, 2007 -> 2016 (9 years). It had less of a run than the 30 pin dock connector!
---
I still have USB-B, USB-Mini and USB-Micro, and USB3-Micro-B devices... some were built even after USB-Micro was available, yet they still use USB Mini (which in most cases is a lot more sturdy than Micro). I have a ton of different cables for different devices because there was no real standardization until USB-C very very recently.
Why was the same vocal crowd not out when manufacturers switched from Mini to Micro and everyone had to buy all new cables?
With USB3 there is also a USB3-TypeB connector, which is not even backwards compatible with USB-TypeB...
Please use the downvote button for comments that are not relevant to the discussion, not as the "I disagree" button. We aren't reddit. My point is factual, 26 million Americans move every year. The challenges and hassels would be comparable if we had different plugs for all our appliances and electronics are analogous to the problems we have with different standards for charging ports on our cell phones, just a larger scale.
Imagine what the market for appliances would look like if we had to accommodate for different outlets. Imagine if your kitchen aid stand mixer you bought for 600 dollars wasn't compatible with the apartment complex you wanted to move into. Or your iron, or your tv, or your charger for your laptop, or your hair dryer.
Also, my oven is actually an entirely different plug from my TV, and my dryer is different still. My lightbulbs connect through a totally different interface that doesn't even look like a plug! I actually seem to be doing okay with that.
I'm trying to illustrate why your analogy isn't good. How many phones do you own that are 100 years old? How many of those charge with Micro-USB? How many of them even have connections not designed to be hard-wired?
It's unreasonable to point at electrical standards that took decades to reach and have stood for decades and say "look, standards are great" as if that logic is applicable to phones that will be replaced in a few years that are using standards that have existing for less than a decade (Micro-USB) and only a year (Type-C). In the past two decades there have been over a dozen changes to the USB spec and almost a dozen different physical connectors.
While consistency is great, standardizing on a bad standard too early isn't a good thing. Would USB-C exist if not for Lightning?
> but 220 volt outlets are standardized in the US as well.
Kind of. There are both 3-prong (NEMA-10) and 4-prong (NEMA-14) 220 plugs in wide use. There are actually a whole bunch of "standard" connections in lesser use.
> The point is because of Apple continuing to "move us forward" we will never have something to standardize around.
If the alternative is that we were stuck with Micro-USB for a hundred years, then I'm very happy that Apple "moved us forward".
Not sure about 100 years old, but I can tell you my past 6 phones have all charged with Micro usb. The Blackberry Storm and the Blackberry Storm 2, a Moto Droid, LG G2, Nexus 4, and my current Samsung phone. I can still use the same charger, both wall and car, I got with my LG, with my current phone.
In 3 years, USB-C will dominate the market, but will have only a 3-year history of backwards compatibility. Assuming Apple keeps the lightning connector for that time (and I expect they will; 30-pin had a longer lifespan than Micro-USB), they'll have a 7-year history and a far longer history of backwards compatibility than USB-C.
At some point in the future, Apple might even jump on the USB-C train for their phones. But I think it will be a while, and I don't think Apple is doing the wrong thing by their customers by waiting.
> In 3 years, USB-C will dominate the market,
Which is another type of fallacy, but that's besides the point -- why will they change? Because everyone wanted a different charger or because some company decided to be "brave" and "courageous" and change them?
As for why? My pet theory is because the companies making phones could no longer defend the outdated and annoying Micro-USB in the face of Lightning.
It was a completely bonehead move on Apple's part IMHO. I know they had their reasons for doing it, but I still think it was a big mistake.
I reached that conclusion over the "can't install apps without the manufacturer's permission" thing. I've always been surprised more developers didn't feel the same way.
Reaching outside of the walled garden isn't hard, but there are more things to consider compared to installing an apk on Android.
Not being able to install apps is a nuisance; not being able to distribute apps for others to install is a deal-breaker, but the main thing is that I'm afraid of our world becoming a place where walled gardens are the typical model for consumer electronics.
In fairness, there are two huge new benefits to their new approach:
* You can charge on either the left or the right side. This reduces cable strain.
* If the cable breaks, you can swap it for another (cheap) USB-C cable, without having to buy another power brick.
There's an argument against Magsafe too: laptops are lighter now, so the magnets would have to be weaker to still work reliably, and thus also have more accidental disconnections (this is irritating). I'm not completely sold on this argument, but you can buy third-party USB-C Magsafe-like adaptors if it's really important to you.
For me, who's had several frayed chargers over the years due to cable strain, I really like their new approach.
(Note: there's a legitimate argument against Apple here too... I've heard that the reason Magsafe chargers are so susceptible to fraying is because they don't use PVC, and instead use a more 'environmentally-friendly' plastic, which is much weaker. They could still use more substantial strain relief regardless, but I'd guess they have aesthetic arguments against that, which is a silly reason for something so important. I'm not sure how much truth there is to this however.)
Yeah, that is a pretty weak argument :) The MagSafe works not by working (directly) against the strength of the magnet, but by the lever action of the connector eccentrically against the body. You can try this yourself by trying to pull the MagSafe away straight on compared to at a slight angle. Also, existing MagSafe is used with MBA, which are lighter than the new MBP. If that were really a problem, we'd already be seeing it.
I do hope that there are good third-party MagSafe replacements out there. The reviews of the Griffin BreakSafe are mixed. https://www.amazon.com/Griffin-BreakSafe-Breakaway-Chromeboo...
Or maybe Apple will come out with one in the future. I would love to know more about how Apple arrived at the decision to not provide some sort of MagSafe equivalent feature.
I think the difference now is that laptop batteries last a hell of a lot longer than they used to. So many people have a fixed charging location (e.g., a desk) and spend a lot less time in some place with a cable precariously stretched across the room to reach a couch or w/e.
Just a personal theory, maybe not true for others.
I can't either. A this point it's more the convenience of being able to pick up and go without needing to unplug the machine, and one I'll miss when I eventually get a new machine. That said, it's human nature not to remember things that don't happen.
That's a market that exists, sure. Is it a big market? I doubt it.
Is it wrong? We'll see. I think a lot of people work with their laptops plugged in as a matter of habit rather than necessity. That doesn't make it wrong, though.
Apple doesn't use a shitty micro-USB plug? End of the world. Laptop manufacturers use a cornucopia of power plugs that change basically all the time? Crickets.
And well, many many other problems with that new thing that are entirely unrelated to USB.
Someone else raised an interesting point about docks. The lightning connection is designed to be strong enough to support a phone in a doc. I'm pretty sure this is not a design consideration for USB-C given how no one seems to care about Android docks.
Ridiculously fast charging, plus the ability to use the same charger for both your laptop and your phone.
Being able to consolidate all the chargers I own is an unbelievably exciting promise. That's only an option for me because I use an Android phone.
How much faster are we talking? I haven't seen any numbers with this claim, nor any justification. There are fast charging systems on the market already with Micro-USB. Qualcomm says their quick-charge solution (used in the new Pixel phones) works with A, Micro, C and others.
https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/quick-charge/fa...
> plus the ability to use the same charger for both your laptop and your phone.
I'm not sure that's really all that compelling. It's nice, but I don't think it's nearly as nice as, say, my dock working.
The iPad Pro seems to support quick charging with the Lightning to USB-C cable and MacBook 29W USB PD adapter. And charges about twice as fast (2.5 hr vs 5 hr).
The advantage of USB-C isn't so much in physical connection but the actual capabilities of the interface. Lightning isn't very powerful by comparison.
It is? I've been charging my Moto G for a few months like that.
They are in a shitty place right now. They can't go USB-c without pissing off a good amount of their customers, but they can stick with lightening forever either (it's already starting to show its age WRT transfer speeds and other abilities)
Additionally, Why do I HAVE to use Itunes to sync the phone? I just want to grab a photo off of it.. where's my USB mode?
It's all just data in USB mode!
Thankfully, the comment you replied to is moot as well. I plug my phone into my machine, unlock the screen, and pull pictures off it all the time.
Still, when putting music on it, I'm left wishing that I had the option to use something like gtkpod, like I used to use with my iPod, back in the day.
The stress of holding up the entire mass of the connected device (that can be as large as an iPad Pro!) is on the connector; and the stress of being held up by that connector is on the tiny part of the device that grips it. That'd be impossible with a USB connector (even USB-C), on both sides.
As it stands if you have a brand new Macbook Pro and iPhone 7 you can't connect the two without an adapter, which is just stupid.
All that being said, it'a interesting to use this logic to deduce what Apple does or doesn't consider an "accessory." The iPhone, iPad, iPod? Accessories. The Apple TV? Computer! The port to plug it into a computer—for XCode provisioning et al—is USB-C! To connect to it right now, you need either a MacBook with its charger cable; or the new MBP, plus an extra C:C cable; or a USB-A male:male cable (rare!) plus Apple's "MacBook USB" (female-USB:male-USB-C) adapter. A male-A:male-C adapter would be great, but nobody has yet made one. The market is very nascent.)
Without a cable, not without an adapter. Very big difference. I can use the same cable to charge my phone from my MacBook's power supply and from the MacBook itself. When I travel, I only take one power supply and two cables. Even if the iPhone and the MacBook used the same connector, I'd still take two cables so I could simultaneously charge them both, so I don't have to carry any extra hardware.
Yes, it would be nice if they could use the same cable, but at least I don't have to take any extra cable or dongle for charging my iPhone (I still need dongles for other things, though).
[1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/neptune/neptune-pine-sm...
But none of that matters. If I bought a personal iPhone, I'd miss a few things. I like installing software that isn't on the Google store (specifically, F-Droid, Amazon, and Humble Bundle, in my case). I like having a little Linux system on my phone, and being able to remote into it. I like using scp to get files on and off, torrenting on the phone, being able to expand the device's memory when my needs change, and plugging it in like a giant USB key if I'm somewhere that my laptop doesn't get wifi.
Tellingly, I just bought a new Android phone that took some pretty blatant design cues from Apple's hardware. I think the choice mirrors the choice of which device I use in different situations, in a way.
My first preference would be a desktop computer: powerful CPU+GPU, comfortable inputs, very nice outputs (multiple large monitors, a nice speaker system), and enough storage for everything I want, with room to spare. My next would be a laptop; it's not as nice, but it's certainly easier to carry into the living room. Past that, my phone isn't as capable, but it's easier to put in my pocket...so I'm stuck with whichever tools fits my requirements in my current situation.
I've always found it interesting that the Android/iOS debate seems to go only one way. My handful of Android friends have tried convert with some new feature that does x and y over the years, yet I've never found myself trying to convince them to make the opposite switch. I think your quote sums that up pretty nicely.
I don't think I'm going back to the audiologist to spend more hundreds of dollars a second pair that only works with iPhones and not my Mac or any pro audio equipment. Or depending on any battery device (like wireless headphones) that can't be plugged in while operating. Or having a device in my pocket that I can't plug in to a real PA system to test. Or paying what I currently pay for headphones that are iOS XOR Android.
Apple may be right for the millions who only ever use the included headphones, but in a world with compelling iOS alternatives that still have headphone jacks, I'm not throwing away the rest of my equipment or carrying adapters everywhere.
It adds too many unnecessary steps.
Adapters suck for unpredictable situations but those aren't common enough and Apple knows this.
Using a pair of headphones with multiple devices? At least between phone and laptop? That's not a corner case, even though Apple seems to think so by skipping out on a Lightning port on the Macs after putting out lightning headphones.
As long as you do that, the pain of having a (free) dongle attached to it kind of fades in comparison.
Is there a site we can legally use to register that bet? I'd be interested in taking it.
I honestly don't think that the headphone jack will ever go away. Wireless audio is like wireless internet, in that it's better than nothing but worse than something with wires and a stable connexion.
I daresay you're correct that Apple think they're right, but … I think they're wrong. The question is, can they remain irrational longer than the rest of the market can be rational? I _think_, given Android's market success, that they ultimately can't: Apple have made too many mistakes in too short a timespan.
But only time will tell.
http://longbets.org. Also the site Warren Buffet used to bet that he could beat hedge funds with the S&P 500.
Obviously if you don't have a 3.5mm jack, that doesn't help.
You need a local wifi network for the CC, so you have to setup a wifi hotspot with your phone. Then you make the connection. The downside is that you cannot use car stereo buttons to skip to the next song. And you probably need double usb-charging for the CC and the phone. That's quite a lot of work to setup each and every drive, but for longer drives it might be a good option.
https://www.amazon.com/Antec-Portable-Bluetooth-Receiver-Hea...
Pair this with your phone, and plug it into power. When your car turns on, it powers on, pairs with your phone, and spits audio out over 3.5mm to the car stereo.
Comes with a 3.5mm male -> 3.5mm male plug for this purpose.
I think they are legal, because the winnings doesn't go to the participants, but to a charity of the winners choosing.
At this point we've been up for 14 years. If we're good enough for Warren Buffet's million-dollar bet [1], I'd say we can handle this bet too.
regardless of the claim, you are just setting yourself up for failure when you make unbound claims like that, nothing lasts forever.
It depends on what factors you value. Wired beats wireless for reliability and speed. It gets crushed for convenience, though.
My home wireless is really spotty. I want to run Ethernet to several locations... in order to install more access points.
I don't know of any website that let you place a bet like that, but you could probably place it at a bookmakers.
> Wireless audio is like wireless internet, in
> that it's better than nothing but worse than
> something with wires and a stable connexion.
Worked at a much larger tech company 1 year ago. Had a desktop that was plugged in, so there's that. Guess I overstated (though I can't say I actually did plug it in myself). Also had a laptop that I worked on over wireless without problems. There were 5k-10k people in that office.
Still I do almost everything over wireless.
I bet within a decade we will all happily buy autonomous cars without a steering wheel. This is because in a decade, battery life, software, connectivity and manufacturing experience will provide a large benefit and will be normalized.
I find it extremely difficult to believe that this will provide a 10x better experience. Here is what Apple is doing:
* The Computer is the Hub for all devices
* the cloud is the Hub
* the phone is the Hub
That's fine. Except that if my phone is using bluetooth to be constantly connected to my headphons & iwatch, as well as occasionally my computer; AND it can power my headphones it really dosn't matter if you give me 2x the previous phones battery I am running 4x the amount of devices off it. Apple needed to deliver a phone that lasts >3 days and headphones that aren't a chopped up earbud that can max out at 2 hours.
the iphone 7s will probably be awesome, this is the bridge model as Walt Mossberg put it, and it doesn't seem realistic to even consider buying it.
Sure, absolutely when Rezence” or “PMA,” or whatever the wireless charging standard becomes is ubiquitous. However we don't have that today, no will we have it in 18-24 months, the general duration of a customer's contractual obligation to a carrier and phone model.
And for people that need to type and talk at the same time, sometimes for hours at stretch - for maintenance window or outages or even just long conference calls, not being able to accessboth a headphone jack and a power simultaneously on their phones is a real deal breaker.
I don't think the OP is necessarily pooh-poohing change but rather being pragmatic and practical for the immediate term.
But definitely it is not going to be proprietary lightning digital audio port that requires external DAC and licensing.
Something like a USB-C for everything could be doable - but as far as I know, USB-C ports are thicker than 3.5mm jacks.
No, sorry. I actually enjoy the music I listen to.
Are you saying that because you think there will be a better alternative to the 3.5mm jack a decade from now? What does that have to do with what Apple is doing now?
I suppose I realized this when I saw folks at a former employer's manufacturing department all buying $100 BT headphones... because that meant they could set their phone down and not worry about yanking it off the lab bench.
Now instead they have to worry about:
- charging stations
- how the headphones identify themselves to the computer
- skype and/or Windows arbitrarily refusing to acknowledge them as headphones during calls
- DRM
- more than 20$ on average price increase
- Security and privacy
It would likely have taken me a full workday to get them up to speed on any security/privacy issues.
As for DRM, not only do I think they wouldn't care so long as their music played, but I'm with everyone who sees no difference between a remote DAC and a local one. (Heck, these folks in manufacturing could easily have disassembled the headphones and put in an analog output at the appropriate point, they had the relevant rework skills -- and that would not trip any phone-internal tamper sensors.)
Apple wasn't the first company to ditch it, or even the second...
http://www.androidcentral.com/moto-z-doesnt-have-headphone-j...
Now your headphones must come with all the electronics required for USB-C and their own seperate DACs. This means they're going to be slightly more expensive without any actual improvement over your 3.5mm headphones. Not to mention all of those threats of DRM and whatnot looming around. So with that in mind, why would I possibly want to make the move to USB-C?
But thank god I have a thinner phone, I was really having issues sliding it under doors.
I'll take that bet. A decade, so lets say, we bet for $100,000? Is that Ok with you?
How about he wins if >50% of smartphones sold in the U.S. in 2026 lack 3.5mm headphone ports.
I'd personally bet $10k against you/OP on this.
That's the other guy's fault, though, because he (foolishly) offered a bet where the taker has "(almost) complete control of the outcome":
>>> I would be willing to bet that within a decade you HAPPILY buy a phone without a headphone jack, whether that be an Android or iPhone.
Might as well call him on it.
Now I actually do believe the OP will "happily" buy a phone without a headphone port. But not if he has a financial incentive to change his behavior.
Honestly, the OP might resign himself to it, but I'll doubt he'll be happy about it. It's not like headphones are currently connected with obsolete digital interfaces (e.g. RS232). Headphones are, by their very nature, analog, and making their connection digital just makes integration harder.
The wireless standard used by headphones (possibly not BT) will have enough bandwidth to no longer be the bottleneck in wireless audio quality. And more importantly they'll never need to be "charged".
Who's going to miss cables?
And the reason they aren't cutting prices is likely because they're more profitable with prices as they are, not because they're afraid of admitting a mistake.