Discussion
boxst said:
The should have a lightning -> lightning cable to charge the buds from the phone whilst also being able to listen to music through them?
No idea how these doohickeys work however if they go wireless then I would not want a wire. Or is the existing lightning adapter going to hard wire. Then if I am charging the phone, how do I listen to wired earphones. Going to be interesting however I am not going to be slavering over the video cast, will wait for the digest version on Mac Rumors.A lot of rumours are saying that they are going to majorly hold back this year as next year's phone will be the 10th anniversary one and they will be going all out.
Not sure if this is true, but I wouldnt be surprised considering how much apple hold stuff back.
May be a bit dangerous for their share price for them to do this though.
Not sure if this is true, but I wouldnt be surprised considering how much apple hold stuff back.
May be a bit dangerous for their share price for them to do this though.
I'm glad Apple is catering to several sizes rather than laughing off big phones for years though.
I'm a big fan of big phones, but I can see the merit in having a smaller phone (esp one handed use?).
Never had a problem with pocket size though, not even on suit trousers.
That said, screen size is far from everything.
5.5" vs 5.7"
I'm a big fan of big phones, but I can see the merit in having a smaller phone (esp one handed use?).
Never had a problem with pocket size though, not even on suit trousers.
That said, screen size is far from everything.
5.5" vs 5.7"
p1stonhead said:
BlueFiestaST said:
pincher said:
Am I right in thinking that you won't be able to charge the phone and listen to music through headphones, if what they are saying about removing the 3.5mm jack is true?
NinjaPower said:
List of predictions from IFL Science:
Reiterated rumors Apple plans to remove the 3.5-millimeter earphone jack. He said the extra space will be utilized to make room for a second speaker.
Instead of earphones, the iPhone will come with wireless “Lightning EarPods” and an Earpod-to-headphone adapter
Reiterated rumors Apple plans to remove the 3.5-millimeter earphone jack. He said the extra space will be utilized to make room for a second speaker.
Instead of earphones, the iPhone will come with wireless “Lightning EarPods” and an Earpod-to-headphone adapter
'We have made it unbelievably simple for you to still use your old headphones with the Apple lightining to 3.5mm adapter'
Everyone else;
'Is having to carry an adapter with you more simple than just keeping the heaphone jack?'
Apple;
'Unapologetically so'
CAPP0 said:
p1stonhead said:
BlueFiestaST said:
pincher said:
Am I right in thinking that you won't be able to charge the phone and listen to music through headphones, if what they are saying about removing the 3.5mm jack is true?
NinjaPower said:
List of predictions from IFL Science:
Reiterated rumors Apple plans to remove the 3.5-millimeter earphone jack. He said the extra space will be utilized to make room for a second speaker.
Instead of earphones, the iPhone will come with wireless “Lightning EarPods” and an Earpod-to-headphone adapter
Reiterated rumors Apple plans to remove the 3.5-millimeter earphone jack. He said the extra space will be utilized to make room for a second speaker.
Instead of earphones, the iPhone will come with wireless “Lightning EarPods” and an Earpod-to-headphone adapter
'We have made it unbelievably simple for you to still use your old headphones with the Apple lightining to 3.5mm adapter'
Everyone else;
'Is having to carry an adapter with you more simple than just keeping the heaphone jack?'
Apple;
'Unapologetically so'
Although people have already made third party designed adapters like this so it will probably fairly easy to keep things working;
pincher said:
Seems like a f
king stupid idea to divert away from an industry standard, just to save a millimetre sell people headphones from a company known to sell overpriced junk, which they have to have a ROI on after overpaying for. 
efaking stupid idea to divert away from an industry standard, just to The added benefit of course is some more vendor lock-in. Are you really going to consider a phone without lightning after paying 400 gbp for some nice lightning headphones?
pincher said:
Seems like a fking stupid idea to divert away from an industry standard, just to save a millimetre
It isn't about thinness, the iPod touch with 3.5mm jack was thinner than the phone. It may be partly about internal volume. I think it's possibly more to do with having earphones that can also work with the watch.king stupid idea to divert away from an industry standard, just to save a millimetre Esseesse said:
pincher said:
Seems like a fking stupid idea to divert away from an industry standard, just to save a millimetre
It isn't about thinness, the iPod touch with 3.5mm jack was thinner than the phone. It may be partly about internal volume. I think it's possibly more to do with having earphones that can also work with the watch.king stupid idea to divert away from an industry standard, just to save a millimetre Esseesse said:
It isn't about thinness, the iPod touch with 3.5mm jack was thinner than the phone. It may be partly about internal volume. I think it's possibly more to do with having earphones that can also work with the watch.
p1stonhead said:
Hadnt thought of that. Probably spot on actually.
That doesn't make any sense.iP 6s: Bluetooth, lightning or 3.5mm
iP 7?: Bluetooth or lightning
What part of dropping the 3.5mm connector would mean "having earphones that can also work with the watch"?
Edited by ZesPak on Wednesday 7th September 10:20
ZesPak said:
Esseesse said:
It isn't about thinness, the iPod touch with 3.5mm jack was thinner than the phone. It may be partly about internal volume. I think it's possibly more to do with having earphones that can also work with the watch.
p1stonhead said:
Hadnt thought of that. Probably spot on actually.
That doesn't make any sense.iP 6s: Bluetooth, lightning or 3.5mm
iP 7?: Bluetooth or lightning
What part of dropping the 3.5mm connector would mean "having earphones that can also work with the watch"?
Edited by ZesPak on Wednesday 7th September 10:20
I can see them going down this route.
I assume you are not able to use the Bluetooth headphones when flying as the phone will be in airplane mode? That will be a pain as I fly most weeks so will have to either carry around the headphone adapter or two pairs of headphones. That said, my iPhone 6 contract ran out a couple of weeks ago so I will be close to the front of the queue for a 7!
HappySilver said:
I assume you are not able to use the Bluetooth headphones when flying as the phone will be in airplane mode? That will be a pain as I fly most weeks so will have to either carry around the headphone adapter or two pairs of headphones. That said, my iPhone 6 contract ran out a couple of weeks ago so I will be close to the front of the queue for a 7!
No reason you can't have Bluetooth on whilst in a plane. BA have the following information - All Bluetooth accessories (for example wireless keyboard, headphones, etc) may only be used during the flight but must remain switched off for taxi, take-off and landing.p1stonhead said:
They want to package bluetooth headphones with the phone and possibly the watch (which should be revised today too) and dont want to bother with the heaphone jack any more.
I can see them going down this route.
Ok... see my post.I can see them going down this route.
They really don't have to remove the jack to package bluetooth earphones? My phone actually came with a bluetooth headset, and it still has a jack...
The question was: why remove the industry standard jack?
ZesPak said:
p1stonhead said:
They want to package bluetooth headphones with the phone and possibly the watch (which should be revised today too) and dont want to bother with the heaphone jack any more.
I can see them going down this route.
Ok... see my post.I can see them going down this route.
They really don't have to remove the jack to package bluetooth earphones? My phone actually came with a bluetooth headset, and it still has a jack...
The question was: why remove the industry standard jack?
They will sell them by the millions.
(but perhaps a tad less than other generations).
ZesPak said:
The question was: why remove the industry standard jack?
Because they have enough clout that they can. Being cynical I think it's more about the supply chain and a new generation of (forced) peripherals, and licensing. Samsung have shown you can have the regular ports and IP68 water-resistant certification, so it's not that.
That being said I haven't yet used the headphone jack once, so I wouldn't lose any sleep about it going. I would hazard a guess that Apple have metrics on headphone jack usage and consider the people who are doing so are the ones more inclined to upgrade and/or buy the latest headphones, etc. Those of us who barely ever use it will moan - but aren't particularly affected in a practical sense anyway.
ZesPak said:
You're not wrong but it's not the reason.
They don't do stuff "just because".
My 2 cents? Royalties on Apple-approved headphones.
Well yes that of course. They also bought 'Beats' dont forget so probably want to expand on that.They don't do stuff "just because".
My 2 cents? Royalties on Apple-approved headphones.
I must admit, I very very rarely use headphones with my phone.
I hardly ever listen to music on it other than the car and then its done by bluetooth.
Edited by p1stonhead on Wednesday 7th September 11:08
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff