> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only. I think noise cancellation really shines when out and about in public, like the subway. But I can't imagine anyone using those things on the go, at least not where I live.

FYI here are some examples of why I swear by my noise cancellation headphones while working from home during a pandemic in a densely populated city:

- Washing machine and dishwasher running cycles during the day - The fridge vibrating at higher frequencies (don't know much about fridge mechanics but this soemthing fridges to do maintain a certain temperature) - Other people in the household talking, cooking, making coffee, fetching cutlery and plates etc. - The high decible hum of delivery scooters/mopeds usually accelerating much faster than they should in what is supposed to be a quiet road - Road noise from delivery vehicles which are heavier than your typical car

(ps admittedly the last two points are only a problem when I have the windows open but occassionaly someone revs an engine which can be heard through the windows)

- During summer months with the windows open, passers' by can be heard from my desk. I live on just off a "quiet road" in my city, my desk is on the first floor and is on the other side of the room from the road. Yet people's conversations are loud enough to make a noise.

Individually there is little wrong with these sounds (except maybe mopeds which I wish were quieter) but collectively they cause noises during working hours for which I am grateful to have noise cancelling headphones at home.

PS I guess Apple are also targeting people who will take these to the office eventually.

Don't forget the city soundscape's public enemy number one: leafblowers.

I'm totally with you on needing quiet when working from home. My much more economical solution is a pair of industrial earmuffs with earbuds inside if I want sound. In particular mine are the 3M Peltor X5A: https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company-us/all-3m-products/~/3M-...

I've had mine 7 years and swear by them.

Where in Stockholm do you live? IMO, you're giving an unfair and exaggerated view of Stockholm as a whole. Yes, there are some areas that are more affected by criminal gangs than other areas. But I wouldn't go as far as saying that there's a high risk of getting robbed "around Stockholm".

I've lived in the inner city parts of Stockholm most of the time (Östermalm/Norrmalm, Södermalm, Kungsholmen).

I would definitely not wear 500-600 USD headphones in any of those areas.

But I think crime in Stockholm is a bit off topic. However I don't think the inherent risk of being robbed - wherever you are in the world - is off topic for the discussion.

People rob kids of Airpods all the time, because it's a status item. These new Airpods will be a status item too. This will increase the risk of robbery - be it in Europe or the US or elsewhere.

I'm sure there are larger cities in the world where the likelihood of getting robbed is low (Tokyo?), but that'd be the exception rather than the norm.

> I would definitely not wear 500-600 USD headphones in any of those areas.

I would say that the risk of being robbed in any of the mentioned areas is very low, even during night-time (if you don't actively are looking for trouble)

Whether you are targeted for a mugging is dependant on whether the criminal thinks you are an easy target. Most muggings will be crimes of opportunity.

I used to live in a very dodgy part of Spain near Gibraltar. I was never mugged or beaten up. I've been told by people "You look like you can handle yourself". Some of work collegues which were skinner, more fresh faced got robbed, beaten and in one case had what they believe to be a gun pulled on them. I never had any problems. I don't look like an easy target due to my appearence and size, those guys unfortunately do due to their size and appearence.

I'm afraid I have to disagree. Every time I had to pass through some of those places at night it was a scary experience. Got robbed twice, I can't remember how many times I had to leg it. And I only lived in Sweden for 2 years.

There might be a risk for a kid getting robbed of expensive gear - but adults not wearing headphones for the robbery risk? Never heard of it as a fellow Stockholmer.

Not yet. But considering there have been 136 robberies for expensive watches in Stockholm in six months, it is just a matter of time.

https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/y3G4Pg/polisen-varnar-k...

> But considering there have been 136 robberies for expensive watches in Stockholm in six months, it is just a matter of time.

136 robberies of expensive watches in an area with 2.3 million people. Of them 64 happened in the city proper (1 million people).

Yeah, "it's just a matter of time".

You probably need to rob about 136 AirPods Max in order to get the same amount of value from a single expensive watch.

On top of that, tech doesn't have nearly the same resell value as high-end watches.

I have to imagine it's easier to steal wireless headphones though. You'd just hook them and pull as you leg it past

For one headphone maybe, but I’m finding it harder to imagine a maneuver to grab one from each ear while you run past someone.

Headphones (AirPods Max), not earphones (AirPods).

Ahh I read wireless and my brain thought AirPods.

Is this because of pandemic where economy are not as good and crime rate are higher? Or is that a norm?

I have always thought Stockholm as somewhat safer than ( Greater) London in my book.

Lol this dude reminds me of my parents who wouldn't let me walk ten blocks home at night in my tiny ass Canadian home town because of how "dangerous" it gets after dark. Never mind the crime rate is literally an order of magnitude below any of the various American metros in which I've lived (and walked home after dark in, never experiencing any issues).

Some peoples' perception is entirely driven by watching too much local news, and yet they somehow convince themselves they or their friends have personally have experienced all of this. Hook them up to a lie detector and it would draw a perfectly flat line as they spin their tales.

> Hook them up to a lie detector and it would draw a perfectly flat line as they spin their tales.

I don’t follow.

A flat line on a polygraph (whose accuracy is a debate for another time) would indicate they are telling the truth, or rather that they believe to be doing so.

I get that you’re claiming their perception of reality is skewed, but deriding people for saying what they genuinely believe to be true is odd.

It's just a weird feature of the human psyche you notice as you get older. People convince themselves that things they heard about from the news or other people actually happened to them or their friends. Maybe it starts out as a simple story told at a gathering, exaggerating for entertainment & abridging context for simplicity - "one time my friend..." - but after repetition and several years becomes a thing they believe literally happened as they told it. You often see this manifesting as tales of local criminal acts or encounters with homeless people. This sincere fabricational tendency, while humorous, does ultimately amplify a very skewed & harmful perspective in local politics.

It's the reason why boomers swear they were present at every major event during their lifetimes, as though we're surrounded by Forrest Gumps.

Yes, I understood your larger point. What I don’t get is the relevance of the polygraph line, which essentially amounts to “but they think they’re telling the truth”. Well, yes, I sure hope they do and are arguing in good faith rather than deliberately lying.

That sentence appears to argue that you think them passing the polygraph is a bad thing—why make the comment otherwise—which doesn’t make sense to me. It doesn’t affect your larger argument, but it doesn’t support it either and thus stood out. It’s as if you had ended your post with “bananas are radioactive”—true, but I’d be left wondering why you had felt the need to mention it.

I don't think it can reasonably be called good faith - it arises from a sort of carelessness with the truth, wanting to be embalmed in justification of the worst cruelties of our society at ground level so as not to critically engage with them. Much more preferable to deal with cynical political operators who don't believe what they say. Those are quite rare, and usually more transparent, so would not explain why this sort of thing pops up so much online.

If that answer doesn't satisfy you then call it observational humor regarding urban & suburban neuroses. Not really sure what you're driving at otherwise.

Let me assure you, your "tiny ass Canadian home town" have little in common with Stockholm 2020

Perhaps, but not in the sense that you mean. Stockholm is by all accounts one of the safest cities in the world.

> Never mind the crime rate is literally an order of magnitude below any of the various American metros in which I've lived

A discussion about Sweden and you couldn't help yourself huh.

The "the local crime rate is apocalyptic" personality tendency knows no borders.

No, it is because of a demographic shift due to oversized non-workforce immigration. Due to this, there are more and more areas characterized as "special vulnerable" (my translation of a Swedish police term). This is partly explained in English on this wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_area

The page shows how they have evolved since 2015 but if you go back to 2000 or so, they were just a handful.

Basically, the immigration has been larger than the society can "organically" integrate, and the result are new structures in society which did not exist before.

It is because of huge immigration and extremely poor integration which has lead to lots of segregation which is now manifesting in violence and crime.

You made quite a few big leaps there. Care to expand how all those are linked and immigration is therefore the cause of violence and crime?

Sweden has taken in way more immigrants than our systems can swallow, this means the system as a whole is leaking. This has lead to lots of segregated areas where there is no future, just people living on welfare getting nowhere in life, as much as 60% of kids fail to even finish High School in these areas, even thou they get 3x-4x of the funding compared to other schools in "good areas". And you get NOWHERE in Sweden without education.

The vast majority of the immigrants is also men which has skewed the male/female ratio in certain age groups.

The violence we see now is mainly from second-generation immigrants because they have no real connection with their home country and they have no real connection with Sweden either since they have grown up in areas where there are no Swedes.

These aimless young men + a system that have failed them + a fast growing gangster culture that promises money and respect + no real consequences for young criminals (4years max for murder, rape is a couple of months maybe if anything at all) leads to a very fast growing criminal networks / gangs.

The gangs now also have an endless supply of young men willing to do whatever it takes since we a constantly taking in more people even thou the system is showing no signs of being better at integration people.

I wanna be very clear thou, this is not due to race/skin-color or other racist bullshit, it is simply input vs output, ANY system in the known universe that gets overburden crashes or starts behaving in unfavourable ways and that is where we are now.

How do you think this situation could best be remedied?

Not parent but I think there is no efficient remedy. The shift in Swedish demographics are so significant that we are basically in a new era.

By pulling the break, give the system time to adjust and come up with efficient ways of integrating the people already in the country and when we start to see positive numbers then we can start taking in more people again.

I just checked sweden's sentence lengths. The penalty for rape is 4-10 years and murder is often 10+ years.

Atleast that part of your claims is wrong.

I wrote "young criminals" I should be more clear, the gangs often use people below the age of 18 to commit murders since you then you get 4 years juvenil but are usually out before that due to 2/3 rule. There is even a saying in these circles: "Att brösta en 4:a för att bli en 100-gubbe" meaning Do the 4 years and become a 100-man, in other words commit a murder and you get respect and will be taken care of when you get out.

Well, for obvious reasons no one in Sweden wants to maintain clear crime statistics that would capture perpetrators' backgrounds, but there's this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45269764

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50339977

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden#Birthplace_of_p...

Ah, so this is just anticipatory fear-mongering, that thing some people who get off on fantasizing about bad things happening do.

Got it.

There’s a personality type that enjoys complaining that their city is just the worst and they would leave if they weren’t just so accommodated etc. I’m not saying that’s you; I don’t think it is.

But when it happens in Sweden, do they call it “Stockholm syndrome”?

Ahah good effort!

It is not the fear of being robbed, but more a general feeling of personal safety, e.g. hearing cars, bicycles or any people around you, is why I don't like to wear any kind of headphones while walking around. I feel deprived of an important sense. This of course would be worse with any kind of noise-cancellation. Only when sitting town in a train I feel reasonably comfortable, but also a bit nerveous about missing an important announcement.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

Open plan office spaces and public transport, including airplanes ;-)

Outside, that's a different story.

I thought Stockholm was ridiculously safe? (I've never been to Sweden)

It's safer than say London, Birmingham, Paris or Rome.

Less safe than say Oslo, Amsterdam, Edinburgh or Copenhagen.

Basically in the middle among major European cities.

Compared to the US it is much safer than Chicago, Detroit or Atlanta and less safe than for example Denver or Boston.

Comparatively it's one of the safest cities in the world, as in, its less safe then maybe 4-5 cities in your list?

Sure it has a couple of dodgy areas, but I lived in Sodermalm and Kungsholmen and never felt unsafe around those, I moved from Brazil and my hometown gets as many robberies reports in a day as Stockholm gets a year.

I can understand some people might be targeted for these status items but I never had any issues moving around even with an expensive laptop, phone, headphones with me, taking the public transport every day.

It’s hard to say a city is safe/not safe as they are so big, and it varies wildly across areas

When it comes to Stockholm, I can have an image. I've been there on vacation for a total of 2 months. I've made friends in Tensta, Södermalm and in Östermalm and slept in all places.

If someone tells me that Östermalm is now a place where people rob you more easily than 10 years ago, then I have enough of a feeling how the social landscape changed. In Stockholm, I've experienced a couple of crime-ish situations in those 2 months that I didn't experience to such a frequent or great extent in Amsterdam (where I live).

In short: it might be that things in Stockholm have gotten a bit more sour.

Honestly, what is the point of this comment ?

It’s an isolated anecdote of which there are tens of millions of others just like it in the cities you mentioned. Crime stats should be based on up to the minute evidence not anecdotes.

Thanks for the feedback.

I dislike reading anecdotes as evidence as well. However, sometimes I personally simply feel free enough to express myself on HN and don't think any further than that. In most cases, this is fine, but in some cases I become part of the problem (posting anecdotes that are interpreted as "evidence").

So I'm happy you posted your reaction as I feel it's the reason why I've been downvoted a couple of times as well. Upon rereading my comment, I agree with your comment. I'll try to finetune my behavior accordingly.

They have great statistics, but then you read something like this

https://www.economist.com/europe/2020/11/28/why-sweden-strug...

https://www.thelocal.se/20200923/the-situation-right-now-is-...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50339977

and realize Police simply lets criminals walk free without charges.

Remember Gizmondo? Failed mobile device startup from around 2005 that turned out to be a big scam? You might remember famous Ferrari Enzo crash in LA https://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-ferrari28feb28-story.htm... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gizmondo That was part of Swedish mafia.

It is. All these other kids saying otherwise are just spouting poppycock, and some of it frankly seems like thinly veiled racism. (It's the immigrants, you see!)

Look, if there are people there's gonna be crime. That's just the way it goes. But as far as moderately large cities go, Stockholm is far from dangerous. Like anywhere else some areas will be worse than others, but the parts being discussed in these comments – the inner city – are not the favelas these people seem to claim. Stockholm is a perfectly fine city, but haters gonna hate and all that I guess.

Thugs getting off too easy though, now that's a real thing.

Not any more. Stockholm (and Sweden in general) has problem with rape:

https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-r...

I'm generally the person to be very critical of Sweden, but this is somewhat unfair as the definition of "Rape" in Sweden is incredibly broad, and includes people who can't give consent such as those experiencing fear.

Heck in 2018 they passed a law that says "Any sex act which does not have explicit consent is rape"[0] including those where there are no threats, coercion or violence of any kind.

I mockingly considered creating a "consent" app which could be signed with BankID.

Sweden is also unique in that it counts every offence as an occurrence of rape- meaning that if you're "raped by your husband 12 times a year" those are 12 separate cases of rape and not 1 (like it would be in the UK).

There is also speculation that in Sweden they take rape reports very seriously, which leads to more people coming forward with cases of rape.

This line of thinking has been discussed before, sadly by the extreme far right.[1]

[0]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44230786

[1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39056786

> I'm generally the person to be very critical of Sweden, but this is somewhat unfair as the definition of "Rape" in Sweden is incredibly broad, and includes people who can't give consent such as those experiencing fear.

I'm unsure if I'm reading the way you worded this incorrectly or not.

Are you saying people who are too scared to say no are only included because the definition is "incredibly broad"?! Do you think people too scared to say no shouldn't be included?

If so, I'd argue you must have a very narrow personal definition, which worries me.

I'm critical of Sweden in that the people have blind trust of authority and are failing to integrate people (this includes me, as a British migrant), and will go to great lengths to avoid any mention of demographics when talking about crime. Talking about it _at all_ will get you branded a racist.

However I'm saying that the definition of rape in Sweden is broader than other countries and encompasses more things, so the same action in the UK could be classified as domestic violence or sexual harassment (thus, not rape) but in Sweden it would be rape.

For one (of many) example(s), in the UK it's impossible for a woman to rape a man, because legally the perpetrator needs to penetrate the victim. This is not the case in Sweden.

The point I imagine is that few other countries count rape statistically that way.

Statistics from between 10-16 years ago.

Not sure how it is remotely relevant to life today.

This section of Wikipedia article refers to data from 2018.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden#Birthplace_of_p...

Is this recent enough?

'Rape' is a very grey crime, and it depends entirely on so many factors.

So 'rape' is the crime that's really not worthy of easy comparison between nations.

Like if you were a grad student, literally doing a thesis on it - ok, but otherwise, it's just a chunky one.

Depends on where you are and the time of day.

Used to be. Those days are past us.

Why is that? Any pointers for further reading?

It looks like it has gotten much worse in recent years. There was a 60-minutes block from Australian TV on the topic. I couldn't find the whole video, but here's a fragment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kpRVk9KOmo

Just to pick one reputable source in English

https://www.economist.com/europe/2020/11/28/why-sweden-strug...

Sweden has taken in around 1-1.2 million people in the last 10 years or so, roughly 10% of the population. Mainly from countries that have vastly different values than swedes.

These huge numbers in combination with really poor integration has lead to a very segregated society. You now read about gang shootings, rapes, humiliation robberies (they rob the victims then piss them in the mouth or cut off an ear or so, just for fun). These things are happening daily now, it used to be maybe once a year you read about a shooting or particular nasty rape/robbery.

>You now read about gang shootings, rapes, humiliation robberies...

Oh my god.... And then I realise last time I was there it was before GFC. This is very sad to hear / read.

Maybe not so off-topic if you think about it.

If you recall, the early iPhones were stolen the lot until Apple tied the devices to the Apple ID. This allowed you to lock the device and make it a worthless piece of hardware when the owner wanted it to be.

In principle, with all the electronics on the AirPods, one could imagine a situation where they are locked to an Apple ID and if they are stolen they could be locked down. This would dramatically lower the resale value and prevent future thefts if Apple were to implement this.

Really? I live in Malmo, Sweden (affectionately called "Crime City" by the locals) and I don't get the impression I'd be robbed.

Mostly because criminals know that the resale of apple goods is entirely on the parts, which is not worth much.

>Mostly because criminals know that the resale of apple goods is entirely on the parts, which is not worth much.

Isn't that mostly due to activation lock? Is there any kind of similar mechanism for the AirPods Max?

hmm. my reading suggests you need to go a little south to Ystad for crime.

I remember people used to say the same thing in early days of Apple mobile devices that shipped with (then) unusual white in-ear headphones. White headphones -> high probability of an expensive gadget in a pocket.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

I never wear headphones when walking/biking etc, but I’ve worn mine pretty much non-srop at home for the past year. The computer fan, neighborhood noices, fridge, all is quieter and the music is better. I focus better.

Where they really have shown themselves to be indispensible though is on my 2h30 roundtrip daily commute by train[1], complete bliss.

[1] On hold since March..

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

WFH kids, dogs etc. AirPods pro help a lot with that situation for me.

Exactly. My desk is next to my dryer, which is currently running, and my furnace is in a closet behind me. ANC helps block those noises, which would be inescapable otherwise unless I wanted to play my music way too loud.

Yeah, same with three kids here (although it does mean people on video calls hear them, or in one case a fire alarm, before I do). I have to admit I will sometimes wear them either way though, I feel it helps me focus.

I was ambivalent about noise-cancellation until two things happened at home this year…

- With the assistance of a friend, I rebuilt my kitchen. He swore by his AirPod Pros, I dealt with hours of tablesaws and sanding with foam in my ears.

- Then my building owners jackhammered apart the rooftop overhead in an asbestos removal project.

Now I’m thanking my AirPod Pro every time my neighbor’s baby wakes up at night.

I don't think noise cancelling headphones protect you from hearing damage though so you made the right choice

I usually refer to my headphones as neighbor cancelling headphones. I live in an apartment and while my neighbors are nice people, inevitably you get some noise from televisions, people moving around, etc. Noise cancellation gets rid of most of that. Also, I like being able to walk around in my place without having to worry about wires.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

Some of us have kids banging around the house all day.

Hmmm, sounds like Stockholm is way more dangerous than NYC? Or is just your neighborhood really dangerous.

> I never really understood the combination of noise cancellation and home use only.

Sadly, you can't (realistically) wear them in bed while you sleep.

Bose makes a product specifically for sleeping. I don’t have any experience with them myself.

https://www.bose.com/en_us/products/wellness/noise_masking_s...

Keep in mind the Bose Sleepbuds aren’t for music, just sleep sounds. My girlfriend got some, but they gave her headaches.

“Unlike headphones, Sleepbuds™ don't stream music or podcasts. They play content only from the Bose Sleep app.”

I've actually used AirPods Pro (and my girlfriend used her Bose QC35 IIs) to fall asleep in a hotel room with a very thin wall and a loud conversation in the next room over. If you toss and turn or insist on sleeping on your side, they might not work, but if you just sleep on your back or front there shouldn't be much of an issue.

Not these new ones, no. I have worn AirPods Pro while falling asleep, both for music and for noise canceling, and in my ears, they're comfortable.

The original AirPods weren't, but the Pro are, at least for me.

I'm central UK and had the exact same thought when I saw these announced — it would be a brave soul who wears these where I grew up!

Try living in a commie block in some Central European city. The walls are incredibly thin.