Lol rekt.

Lol
Yeah, its obvious some people will be interested in this, I don't think I've said otherwise. To think those people are the average smartphone users is a whole different deal. As said, thats not exactly the group Apple focuses on.

You're seriously advocating that Apple doesn't care for their average user? WTF?

I think they're arguing that Apple is playing to its base rather than trying to expand its market, which seems true to me. Like I've seen a lot of complaints about removing the jack but I doubt more than a small percentage actually change to a different mobile OS over it, whereas Apple reaps greater profits per user on the new scenario, or something like that.

For the record the new 7 is a nothing upgrade and I won't be doing so, but least of which due to the absense of the audio port.

A lot of people itt fancy themselves better business people and phone designers than Apple. It is pretty amusing.

I just don't buy that this is a move that is focused around making more money on licensing fees / headphones because it doesn't seem to make any sense.

Apple makes a **** ton of money from an iPhone user. If they honestly felt dropping the jack would lose them a significant amount of possible market share (either current users or new users) - they wouldn't do it. It's unlikely they could make up the lost revenue with the new revenue.

Since everyone ITT is giving their hot takes - I'll repeat mine. Apple wanted to drop the jack for their next generation model. There are already rumours of a full screen phone (edge-to-edge screen) and its quite possible putting the head phone jack behind that screen wasn't feasible (or was going to cost too much in space/lost features).

I doubt Apple had high expectations for this phone anyway. So it makes sense to move the controversial move to this iteration so it doesn't take away from the next one. It also sets up the next phone to be a 'huge success'.

^^ The brand loyalty that Jobs created is actually incredible. Similar to battered wife syndrome. The "they did it for the next phone" argument. Lol. So why didn't they shelve the switch until they were able to deploy the accompanying lightning headphone features? Hardware changes they make on this phone have nothing to do with next year's model.

It's simple. They're forcing the revenue streams that 3rd party headphone manufacturers are capturing over to themselves. And it's at the expense of the end user having to carry around adapters if they want to do something as simple as charge their phone and listen to music at the same time. Is that advancement?

You're not a math guy are you?

He's not really a business guy either. Or an engineering guy. Hell, he's not really a 'thinking' guy.

I mean I believe that Apple genuinely thinks that this move will make the iPhone better, I'm not so cynical yet to declare it a pure cash grab. I actually think it's much ado about nothing and in a couple of years everyone will forget about it as I expect other developers will follow suit.

They didn't do this to make more money on lightning licenses.

They did it because they want to move forward with their roadmap for the phone.

They'll probably have 0 ports on the phone by the time we get to iPhone 9.

With them moving home button to haptic and not really a button we will also probably have no buttons by then as well. Volume, mute, home and off buttons will all be virtual with haptic. It'll literally be a fully sealed device that's a screen with battery and chips under it.

I get it. They have cultivated an extremely loyal customer base who will buy anything Apple puts on the shelf. It is good businesses to take advantage of that. But it doesn't mean you have to follow the mob and buy into a product that's objectively worse. At the end of the day a smartphone is supposed to make things more efficient not less.

Analog is worse on every phone because it's analog, once it goes through the DAC you lose information and you have limited power to drive external headphones.

And the point that I was making was there are a ton of new capabilities driving digital to the headphones. Higher quality DACs for audiophiles. Better noise processing. Digital EQs. Louder speakers. Etc, Etc.

I didn't reference the Verge for their business sense, just their technical reporting, because that article made no sense. Apple increased the cost of every iPhone by dollars in hopes of getting pennies back from licensing lightning connectors? And if they lose sales because of the decision, it costs them billions, how is the MFI program ever going to make up for that?

Again, they didn't drop it, they spent more to move it to a dongle. And it can't create more profits unless it sells more phones.

Great phones create brand loyalty. Apple clearly thinks the charging while listening use case is much less important to their customers than you do, and I'm thinking they've researched it a bit more in depth than you.

Clearly they think they made the best set of compromises possible for this phone, and so far preorders seem to be supporting their judgement. They significantly increased battery life, screen quality, water resistance, and performance without increasing costs, size or weight by any significant amount.

IPhones have almost always been objectively better than their competitors, and it's not even close. To say otherwise means you have no clue about how phones are engineeered and what's important to users.

The whole "can't listen to music while charging the phone" argument is pretty disingenuous. Not only do I imagine that the percentage of iPhone users who have EVER headphoned and charged at the same time is relatively small, there are a thousand headphones out there that you CAN use while the phone is charging without an additional adapter.

Want to use your old headphones? Use the included adapter. Want to use your old headphones and charge at the same time? Grab a set of bluetooth earbuds or grab an adapter.

On the scale of earth shattering slaps in the face, this seems like much ado about nothing.

That said, is it an amazing new iteration? Nope, just incrementally better in ways that may or may not interest a particular consumer.

This is complete nonsense. Analog is not intrinsically worse. You don't necessarily lose information in the digital to analog conversion any more than you necessarily lose information in the analog to digital conversion. You can lose information if the DAC isn't good enough, but the iphone 6 DAC can convert 44100 Hz sampled digital music to analog with no information loss.

What about crosstalk running a stereo signal over a single jack?

What about interference, esp. so close to a big LCD screen and electronic components?

Why not just run pure digital all the way to the speaker so you have 100% the same signal, and the ability to still do digital processing before running it through a DAC?

lol crosstalk and interference are negligible on an iphone. Everyone was satisfied with the audio quality coming from the analog jack. But at least you're shifting away from analog signal is intrinsically worse, information is lost in the D/A conversion. Progress!

Lol.


It's a hell of a lot closer than suggesting every phone has made a similar trade off as removing a freaking jack that is used in music situations (both in and output), lasers, thermometers, microphones, spectrum analyzers, etc.

I've been told that before, but I'm more inclined to believe you... once you provide evidence.

Yeah, but when is your new 7 arriving?

Everything you're saying is completely negligible when you simply replace the included headphones with a decent pair of $30-50 earbuds. Using a well-recommended pair of sub $100 earbuds will make all the difference in the world. Everything you're saying will not matter in the context of smartphone usage. The hardware in the actual earbud is significantly more of a factor than where the DAC is located. Also where are you getting that the DAC is higher quality?

So if you're using non-stock iPhone earbuds, you need to use the lightning-to-3.5mm adapter, which makes carrying your device around more cumbersome and worse to use in a lot of ways.

I thought the verge article you linked presented the mechanism in which they'll create more profits very well. Any manufacturer who wants to sell a product with a lightning port has to pay licensing fees. The profit motive to drop the 3.5mm seems great. The benefits you're outlining seem to be your inferences/reading between the lines>>>>>>>>Apples marketing.

Yea let's just blindly trust them.

Have we seen battery life tests? I've literally never seen a battery life estimate that's lived up to the marketing (Apple and Android alike).

The panel in the iPhone 7 is identical to the 6s (5.5-inch LED-backlit IPS LCD, 1920 x 1080 pixels (401 ppi), 67.7% screen-to-body ratio)

Water resistance - I don't think they changed much. I think they just made a few minor tweaks to get the IP67 certification.

I stand corrected on the battery increase criticism. I just saw some leaks from a Japanese spec sheet. The 6s Plus to the 7 Plus battery size is actually pretty staggering. It goes from a 2750mAh battery to a WHOPPING 2900mAh. For those of you counting at home that's a 5% increase in battery capacity. Holy mother$&%& s&#* can we lightning port up any more components puhlease!?

http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/13/...-capacity-3gb/

I enjoy that you think you're scoring here when you're just continuing to display how ignorant you are. Keep up the good work!

If I actually was being ignorant you'd be picking apart my arguments with facts rather than going ad-hominem.

What arguments? You don't like that they are dropping the plug. You think it's a money play. Do you have anything to back that up but your feels? Do you know what percentage of their revenue comes from licensing fees for accessories? From selling accessories? From selling headsets? Or even from Beats? You also reject out of hand that the removed it because Apple thinks the analog port isn't part of a world class phone. There isn't much left but to call you names...