iPhone 12, iPhone 12Max, iPhone 12 Pro, & iPhone 12 Pro Max [name, price, fitment, camera, screen, cpu, ram, & 5G specifications]

[Arlen Holder]

Probable basic specs:
iPhone 12, $650/$750 128GB/256GB 5.4" OLED (BOE), A14 6-core CPU, 4GB RAM
iPhone 12 Max, $750/$850 128GB/256GB 6.1" OLED (BOE), A14 6-core CPU, 4GB RAM
iPhone 12 Pro, $1000/$1100/$1300 128GB/256GB/512GB 6.1" OLED (Samsung), A14 6-core CPU, 6GB RAM
iPhone 12 Pro Max, $1100/$1200/$1400 128GB/256GB/512GB 6.7" OLED (Samsung), A14 6-core CPU, 6GB RAM

Probable hardware specs:
iPhone 12, Dual Rear cameras, Sub 6-GHz 5G, aluminum body, no headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
iPhone 12 Max, Dual Rear cameras, Sub 6-GHz 5G, aluminum body, no headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
iPhone 12 Pro, Triple cameras & Lidar, Sub 6-GHz 5G, mmWave 5G, no headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
iPhone 12 Pro Max, Triple cameras & Lidar, Sub 6-GHz 5G, mmWave 5G, no headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
--
Bringing adult truth to the Apple newsgroups using simple yet honest facts.

[John]

All examples of superior looks, superior technology, superior
performance, and superior human factors.

[geoff]

'Superior human factors' like the smug devotees.

geoff

[nospam]

In article <mtWdnSN0-YrlgibD...@giganews.com>, geoff

a perfect example of jealousy.

[geoff]

Hardly. I could go out and buy any, or all, of those this morning.

Might have to go without food for a few months though, and they still
wouldn't be able to do what I do want, and can do (as can other phone
platforms) things that I don't particularly need/want.

geoff

[nospam]

In article <hrmdnUkYx4v9sybD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>>> Probable basic specs:
> >>>> iPhone 12, $650/$750 128GB/256GB 5.4" OLED (BOE), A14 6-core CPU, 4GB RAM
> >>>> iPhone 12 Max, $750/$850 128GB/256GB 6.1" OLED (BOE), A14 6-core CPU,
> >>>> 4GB RAM
> >>>> iPhone 12 Pro, $1000/$1100/$1300 128GB/256GB/512GB 6.1" OLED
> >>>> (Samsung), A14 6-core CPU, 6GB RAM
> >>>> iPhone 12 Pro Max, $1100/$1200/$1400 128GB/256GB/512GB 6.7" OLED
> >>>> (Samsung), A14 6-core CPU, 6GB RAM
> >>>>
> >>>> Probable hardware specs:
> >>>> iPhone 12, Dual Rear cameras, Sub 6-GHz 5G, aluminum body, no
> >>>> headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
> >>>> iPhone 12 Max, Dual Rear cameras, Sub 6-GHz 5G, aluminum body, no
> >>>> headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
> >>>> iPhone 12 Pro, Triple cameras & Lidar, Sub 6-GHz 5G, mmWave 5G, no
> >>>> headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
> >>>> iPhone 12 Pro Max, Triple cameras & Lidar, Sub 6-GHz 5G, mmWave 5G, no
> >>>> headphone jack, no sdcard, no fm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> All examples of superior looks, superior technology, superior
> >>> performance, and superior human factors.
> >>
> >> 'Superior human factors' like the smug devotees.
> >
> > a perfect example of jealousy.
> >
>
> Hardly. I could go out and buy any, or all, of those this morning.

the fact you need to attack those who choose to buy one tells all.

> Might have to go without food for a few months though,

sounds like you can't afford to buy any of them, let alone all of them.

> and they still
> wouldn't be able to do what I do want, and can do (as can other phone
> platforms) things that I don't particularly need/want.

what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any of
the above?

and given that none of them have been announced, let alone released,
it's incredibly premature to claim that they won't do what you want,
since nobody outside of a very small group at apple knows what future
devices can and cannot do, and that's assuming the rumour that will be
the lineup is even correct.

the reality is that billions of people are *very* happy with iphones,
with the highest customer satisfaction rates in the industry, something
you simply cannot accept.

like i said, jealousy.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :

> what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any of
> the above?

Hi nospam,

We covered this in the past, many times, where you always get it wrong.
o There's _nothing_ on iOS by way of app functionality not on Android
And yet...
o There's _plenty_ app functionality in Android that is impossible on iOS.

Those are simply basic facts MARKETING will never tell you, nospam.
o Because MARKETING ignores the many things impossible to do on iOS.

The reason Android is more functional is simple, and quite logical:
o Apple iOS severely limits what apps can do; Android doesn't.

I realize you're asking "geoff" that question, but if you asked me, I could
easily give you, right off the top of my head, something like a score of
things I do all day every day on Android which are impossible to do on iOS.

For example, oh, say, loading your own app launcher, changing the
homescreen to be any grid, any number of icons, changing the name of any
app icon, putting an icon in two different places if you want, removing the
dock if you don't want it, extracting an app (even the system apps) to an
IPA/APK any time you want (whether or not that app still exists on the
official app store or in your backups), setting the default for things like
your web browser (and a zillion other things), running the official Tor
Browser (Mike Tegas, bless him, did his best with the iOS Onion Browser,
but even he said it was impossible to replicate what the official Tor
Browser does), automatic call recording, delayed by a few seconds full
screen scrolled screenshots that scroll off the screen if necessary, a
simple app drawer app (of all things impossible on iOS!), graphical wifi
and cellular signal strength debuggers that show graphs for all visible
access points, simply making a list of all apps installed on the device
into an editable text file on the phone itself, transporting APKs to
another phone, particularly via the sdcard (which simply doesn't exist on
iOS), using any app repository I want sans rooting/jailbreaking, youtube
streaming sans ads and youtube downloads on steroids for free via apps like
newpipe sans ads and yet even with anonymous channel subscription for
example, audio recording to a binary audio file at the same time you're
transcribing completely offline to an editable text file, eliminate the
Advertiser ID for privacy or eliminate the iCloud ID without any loss of
functionality, real FM radio, etc, (all off the top of my head).

How many was that which Android easily does, and has done for years, while
iOS _still_ doesn't do what a five-year old Android phone easily does.

As for hardware...

Over 99.9% of Android phones ever made have a 3.5mm headphone jack.
And Apple isn't even in the top ten for camera QOR this week (as usual).
And where's that scard which is so convenient to double Android storage?
etc.

You're welcome to claim you don't _need_ or _want_ any of that stuff,
nospam, but the result remains that iOS will never be close to Android in
functionality, simply because Apple limits what apps can do.

The end result always is, was, and will always be...
a. There's _nothing_ you can do on iOS that Android doesn't already do;
b. Yet, there's tons of app functionality on Android iOS can't do.
--
Apple MARKETING is a genius at extracting money from its customer base.

[geoff]

Bizarre extrapolation.

>
>> and they still
>> wouldn't be able to do what I do want, and can do (as can other phone
>> platforms) things that I don't particularly need/want.
>
> what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any of
> the above?

Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without an
additional kludge is the main thing.

>
> and given that none of them have been announced, let alone released,
> it's incredibly premature to claim that they won't do what you want,
> since nobody outside of a very small group at apple knows what future
> devices can and cannot do, and that's assuming the rumour that will be
> the lineup is even correct.

I couldn't give a fuck about what most present phones can do now or in
the future. I could (if I wanted to) watch a movie on either mobile or
wi-fi. I could control my garage door or fridge. I can take reasonable
snapshots (and better) photos, listen to music with CD-quality (or
greater) specs. I can make a video call. Etc etc etc, and that's 'just'
4G and not 'even' Apple.

>
> the reality is that billions of people are *very* happy with iphones,
> with the highest customer satisfaction rates in the industry, something
> you simply cannot accept.

Lots of happy religos too. Doesn't make it real.


> like i said, jealousy.


If that makes you happy, OK.

geoff

[Tony Cooper]

On Wed, 13 May 2020 15:22:03 +1200, geoff <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org>
wrote:

>> the reality is that billions of people are *very* happy with iphones,
>> with the highest customer satisfaction rates in the industry, something
>> you simply cannot accept.
>
>Lots of happy religos too. Doesn't make it real.
>
>
>> like i said, jealousy.
>
>
>If that makes you happy, OK.
>

Please do not distract these two. If
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[sms]

On 5/12/2020 8:22 PM, geoff wrote:

<snip>

> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without an
> additional kludge is the main thing.

That's why I'm keeping my 6s Plus for now. But many new Android phones
have also dropped the 3.5mm headphone jack and also require a dongle. I
use the headphones on my Samsung Note 9 often.

[For Steve Scharf (aka sms)]

On Tue, 12 May 2020 21:05:34 -0700, sms wrote:

> That's why I'm keeping my 6s Plus for now. But many new Android phones
> have also dropped the 3.5mm headphone jack and also require a dongle. I
> use the headphones on my Samsung Note 9 often.

Yet again...
o Apologists belief systems prove to be utterly & completely imaginary.

In fact, what Steve just said, yet again, proves, apologists are idiots.
o These apologists like SMS actually _believe_ Apple MARKETING bullshit!

FACT:
o *Over 99% of all Android models ever made have a 3.5mm headphone jack*

FACT:
o *How many of the existing Android phones lack headphone jack*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/ZjnD2kAf-mI/I3i2jT-mCAAJ>

As usual, apologists fundamentally lack any grasp of even simple facts.
--
Apologists believe anything that Apple MARKETING feeds them to believe.

[nospam]

In article <a76dnXHW-OJC-ibD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>
> >> Hardly. I could go out and buy any, or all, of those this morning.
> >
> > the fact you need to attack those who choose to buy one tells all.
> >
> >> Might have to go without food for a few months though,
> >
> > sounds like you can't afford to buy any of them, let alone all of them.
>
>
> Bizarre extrapolation.

not at all. you said you'd need to go without food just to buy one.

iphones are no more expensive than similar android phones, so clearly
you need to revisit your budget.

> >
> >> and they still
> >> wouldn't be able to do what I do want, and can do (as can other phone
> >> platforms) things that I don't particularly need/want.
> >
> > what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any of
> > the above?
>
> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without an
> additional kludge is the main thing.

headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without any
kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.

the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device) are very
limiting.

> > and given that none of them have been announced, let alone released,
> > it's incredibly premature to claim that they won't do what you want,
> > since nobody outside of a very small group at apple knows what future
> > devices can and cannot do, and that's assuming the rumour that will be
> > the lineup is even correct.
>
> I couldn't give a fuck about what most present phones can do now or in
> the future.

you obviously *do* give a fuck, since you said

> >> and they still
> >> wouldn't be able to do what I do want, and can do (as can other phone
> >> platforms) things that I don't particularly need/want.

and you should give a fuck because buying anything that doesn't do what
you want is silly.

> I could (if I wanted to) watch a movie on either mobile or
> wi-fi. I could control my garage door or fridge. I can take reasonable
> snapshots (and better) photos, listen to music with CD-quality (or
> greater) specs. I can make a video call. Etc etc etc, and that's 'just'
> 4G and not 'even' Apple.

all of that can easily be done on any iphone made in the last decade or
so.

thus your claim that the rumoured iphone 12 (official name unknown)
can't do what you want is *false*.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :

> thus your claim that the rumoured iphone 12 (official name unknown)
> can't do what you want is *false*.

Is nospam claiming that the score of modern things presented in this thread
are actually going to be finally possible on the new iPhone 12 models?

o *How many functionalities do you perform, every day, on Android*
*that are impossible on iOS [and vice versa]?*
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/qgcY3OFdwto>

Or is all that modern functionality still gonna be impossible on iOS 14?
--
Apple isn't going to change their stripes with the iPhone 12.

[geoff]

On 13/05/2020 10:39 pm, nospam wrote:
> In article <a76dnXHW-OJC-ibD...@giganews.com>, geoff
> <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> Hardly. I could go out and buy any, or all, of those this morning.
>>>
>>> the fact you need to attack those who choose to buy one tells all.
>>>
>>>> Might have to go without food for a few months though,
>>>
>>> sounds like you can't afford to buy any of them, let alone all of them.
>>
>>
>> Bizarre extrapolation.
>
> not at all. you said you'd need to go without food just to buy one.

Clearly can't identify a joke.

>
> iphones are no more expensive than similar android phones, so clearly
> you need to revisit your budget.
>
>>>
>>>> and they still
>>>> wouldn't be able to do what I do want, and can do (as can other phone
>>>> platforms) things that I don't particularly need/want.
>>>
>>> what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any of
>>> the above?
>>
>> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without an
>> additional kludge is the main thing.
>
> headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without any
> kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.

How exactly, if no 3.5 ?

>
> the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device) are very
> limiting.

My reference headphones are wired only. An bluetooth is still crap
quality, if one is discerning.

>
> thus your claim that the rumoured iphone 12 (official name unknown)
> can't do what you want is *false*.

Access for a 3.5\mm jack plug ? Without a kludge ?


geoff

[sms]

On 5/12/2020 8:22 PM, geoff wrote:

>> sounds like you can't afford to buy any of them, let alone all of them.
>
> Bizarre extrapolation.

Well some people do buy el-cheapo Android phones because of price. Apple
doesn't play in the sub-$399 space for new phones.

You can buy NOS (new old stock) of older model iPhones pretty
inexpensively and those are actually better phones than comparably
priced low-end Android phones. I.e., I'm currently using a Verizon MVNO
and they are selling new iPhone 6s Plus phones for $149.99 (the 6s and
6s Plus are the last iPhones before the headphone jack was decontented).

I currently use both a Samsung Note 9 and an iPhone 6s Plus. Price was
not an issue on either of them since my employer reimburses the cost of
a new phone. The Note 9 was $750 (MSRP of $1100) and the 6s Plus was
$149, both purchased about two years ago. I chose the 6s Plus over a
newer model specifically because of the headphone jack.

For the latest models of flagship phones it's true that iPhones carry a
large premium in price; not so much if you're comparing the MSRP, but
when comparing street prices because Samsung discounts heavily. For
example the unlocked Samsung S20+ 5G 512GB has an MSRP of around $1350
but ends up at around $960 direct from Samsung (today), while the iPhone
Pro Max 512GB is around $1449 direct from Apple (today). So a $100
difference in MSRP turns into a $490 difference in what you actually
have to pay. You don't get a 3.5mm headphone jack on either one.

Since the iPhone 12 models, with 5G, are closer competitors to the S20
line, it'll be interesting to see the prices of the iPhone 12.

[nospam]

In article <M9CdncAyF51lSSbD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without an
> >> additional kludge is the main thing.
> >
> > headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without any
> > kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.
>
> How exactly, if no 3.5 ?

by using the more capable and more reliable digital headphone jack
found on modern smartphones, both ios and android.

> > the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device) are very
> > limiting.
>
> My reference headphones are wired only. An bluetooth is still crap
> quality, if one is discerning.

then you've not used better bluetooth headphones.

however, even for the lesser models, the convenience of wireless is
substantial. no longer is someone limited to 3 feet of wire, which will
almost certainly get tangled or caught in something.

> > thus your claim that the rumoured iphone 12 (official name unknown)
> > can't do what you want is *false*.
>
> Access for a 3.5\mm jack plug ? Without a kludge ?

you did not specify an obsolete 3.5mm headphone jack.

every iphone comes with headphones in the box, which plug directly into
the iphone without any adapter.

third parties also sell headphones that do the same.

for older headphones, there is no kludge. connect an adapter to the
3.5mm plug and it's instantly compatible with modern devices, although
it will lack many of the benefits.

it's a non-issue.

it's also not just apple. numerous android phones, including the galaxy
s20 and google pixel, have made the transition to digital headphone
jacks.

in fact, apple set the standard for 3.5mm plugs on cellphones.

prior to the iphone, most cellphones had a proprietary jack or used a
non-standard 2.5mm plug, both of which required adapters to use
headphones with a 3.5mm plug.

<https://images.mobilefun.co.uk/graphics/productgalleries/7265/1.jpg>

oddly, the first android phone way back in 2008 did not have a 3.5mm
headphone jack, instead using non-standard ext-usb and shipped without
any adapters, a rather odd design choice. however, they did at least
include compatible headphones.

<https://www.engadget.com/2008-09-23-confirmed-t-mobile-g1-has-no-3-5mm-
headphone-jack.html>

transitions can be a hassle, but it's the only way to move technology
forward.

when usb first appeared, some people used adapters to keep using their
obsolete serial, parallel, ps/2 and various other legacy devices, while
others switched to the far more capable and more convenient usb.

when digital tv first appeared, some people used converter boxes for
their old and obsolete tvs, while others switched to *far* better and
much larger digital tvs.

these days, you can't even give away an old analog crt tvs. nobody
wants them and you can't legally toss them in the trash since they're
hazmat.

bringing it back to photography, mirrorless cameras can use older
lenses with an adapter, although with numerous limitations. most people
get new lenses to take full advantage of the format.

[nospam]

In article <r9h10m$tsq$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> For the latest models of flagship phones it's true that iPhones carry a
> large premium in price; not so much if you're comparing the MSRP, but
> when comparing street prices because Samsung discounts heavily.

there is no large premium. both are similarly priced with similar
feature sets, and actually, samsung is a bit *more* expensive.

> For
> example the unlocked Samsung S20+ 5G 512GB has an MSRP of around $1350
> but ends up at around $960 direct from Samsung (today), while the iPhone
> Pro Max 512GB is around $1449 direct from Apple (today).

you're not fooling anyone by comparing sale prices with full retail.

and the only reason why it would be discounted is because it's not
selling well.

[joe]

doesn't bluetooth still work even on phones with the real headphone jack

[nospam]

In article <r9h90s$1gr4$1...@esteban.tulanet.com>, joe

<nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> doesn't bluetooth still work even on phones with the real headphone jack

all headphone jacks are real. the difference is the plug type and its
capabilities.

bluetooth works regardless the type of headphone jack and is extremely
popular, one reason why there is no longer a need for a redundant
analogue headphone jack.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote :
> Get over yourself. Or don't, and keep complaining. Just know you look
> really idiotic to the rest of the world.

Type I apologist === nospam
Type II apologist === Steve Scharf
Type III apologist === Jolly Roger

For the permanent record, adults notice salient facts.
1. The discussion is about upcoming iPhone 12 specifications.
2. One of those specifications is the lack of basic functionality.
3. The apologists keep coming up with excuses for it lacks functionality.

Adults will notice _every_ conversation with apologists progresses
similarly, in that the apologists deny what any normal adult would simply
agree with.

There are three categories of apologists' denials, of which Jolly Roger &
Alan Baker are the most childish.

In the case of Alan Baker, he simply claims all afacts are lies.
In the case of Jolly Roger, he attacks the bearer of the facts.

Happens every single time an apologist is involved in discussing facts.
o Type I apologist: nospam will make claims even he doesn't believe.
o Type II apologist: these are simply ignorant and don't understand facts.
o Type III apologist: these actually _believe_ what they write and hence is
why they claim all facts are lies and anyone speaking facts must be an
idiot (in their minds).
--
NOTE: Since Jolly Roger uses a no archive bit, his post is included below
in its entirety, so that we may use this post as a reference to his.

> From: Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
> Newsgroups:
misc.phone.mobile.iphone,rec.photo.digital,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
> Subject: Re: iPhone 12, iPhone 12Max, iPhone 12 Pro, & iPhone 12 Pro Max
[name, price, fitment, camera, screen, cpu, ram, & 5G specifications]
> Date: 13 May 2020 18:48:21 GMT
> Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates
> Lines: 30
> Message-ID: <hi2tnl...@mid.individual.net>
> References: <r9cg2v$n25$1...@news.mixmin.net>
<Krmdnf5-z4hZQCfD...@giganews.com>
<mtWdnSN0-YrlgibD...@giganews.com>
<120520201819002338%nos...@nospam.invalid>
<hrmdnUkYx4v9sybD...@giganews.com>
<120520202037270750%nos...@nospam.invalid>
<a76dnXHW-OJC-ibD...@giganews.com>
> X-Trace: individual.net
E/hPoN34jmMpMUrDEVEcTAxfGbNz9eox/EDXx23N4/PveqlDMK
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:iIYvfJttz8tyscAITgpc0wUvip0=
> X-No-Archive: Yes
> MMail-Copies-To: nobody
> X-Face:
_.g>n!a$f3/H3jA]>9pN55*5<`}Tud57>1<n@LQ!aZ7vLO_nWbK~@T'XIS0,oAJcU.qLM
dk/j8Udo?O"o9B9Jyx+ez2:B<nx(k3EdHnTvB]'eoVaR495,Rv~/vPa[e^JI+^h5Zk*i`Q;ezqDW<
ZFs6kmAJWZjOH\8[$$7jm,Ogw3C_%QM'|H6nygNGhhl+@}n30Nz(^vWo@h>Y%b|b-Y~()~\t,LZ3e
up1/bO{=-)
> User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Darwin)
> Xref: news.killfile.org misc.phone.mobile.iphone:97580
rec.photo.digital:134644 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:82577

>
> On 2020-05-13, geoff <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>> On 13/05/2020 12:37 pm, nospam wrote:
>>>
>>> what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any
>>> of the above?
>>
>> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without
>> an additional kludge is the main thing.
>

> That's the main thing, eh? LOL...
>
> "ERRMEGHERD!!! Keeping one of these plugged into my headphones is such
> an inconvenience, guys. I literally waste minutes - ney, *hours* - a day
> messing with this kludge!: <https://jmp.sh/NpDyYXO>" - said nobody, ever
>
> I happen to have several wired headphones from Etymotic etc that I use
> with iPhones without a single issue. It's no inconvenience at all to me
> to keep a tiny adapter connected to them. Using them is no more
> cumbersome than without it. I grab the headphones from the case, plug
> them into the iPhone, and I'm listening to music, just as I did
> previously.
>
> Get over yourself. Or don't, and keep complaining. Just know you look
> really idiotic to the rest of the world.
>
> --
> E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
> I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.
>
> JR

[geoff]

On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:

>
> it's a non-issue.

It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.

> it's also not just apple. numerous android phones, including the galaxy
> s20 and google pixel, have made the transition to digital headphone
> jacks.
>
> in fact, apple set the standard for 3.5mm plugs on cellphones.
>
> prior to the iphone, most cellphones had a proprietary jack or used a
> non-standard 2.5mm plug, both of which required adapters to use
> headphones with a 3.5mm plug.

A few older ones did in the early days of smartphones, a decade ago.
Have seen a 2.5 on a cellphone for many years.

> when digital tv first appeared, some people used converter boxes for
> their old and obsolete tvs, while others switched to *far* better and
> much larger digital tvs.

Most of my headphones are far superior to anything any lossy wireless
headphone scheme can provide.


geoff

[geoff]

Once upon a time 128 kbps MP3s wre 'popular'. Probably still would be if
the norm hadn't crept up a little.

geoff

[geoff]

On 14/05/2020 6:48 am, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2020-05-13, geoff <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

>> On 13/05/2020 12:37 pm, nospam wrote:
>>>
>>> what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any
>>> of the above?
>>
>> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without
>> an additional kludge is the main thing.
>

> That's the main thing, eh? LOL...
>
> "ERRMEGHERD!!! Keeping one of these plugged into my headphones is such
> an inconvenience, guys. I literally waste minutes - ney, *hours* - a day
> messing with this kludge!: <https://jmp.sh/NpDyYXO>" - said nobody, ever
>
> I happen to have several wired headphones from Etymotic etc that I use
> with iPhones without a single issue. It's no inconvenience at all to me
> to keep a tiny adapter connected to them. Using them is no more
> cumbersome than without it. I grab the headphones from the case, plug
> them into the iPhone, and I'm listening to music, just as I did
> previously.
>
> Get over yourself. Or don't, and keep complaining. Just know you look
> really idiotic to the rest of the world.
>

I would soon have no work if I used that grade of device.

geoff

[nospam]

In article <vIKdndFCkN8S_SHD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:
>
> >
> > it's a non-issue.
>
> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.

nothing prevents you from doing so.

in fact, you have a *wider* choice of headphones with a digital jack
than if there's only an analogue jack.

> > it's also not just apple. numerous android phones, including the galaxy
> > s20 and google pixel, have made the transition to digital headphone
> > jacks.
> >
> > in fact, apple set the standard for 3.5mm plugs on cellphones.
> >
> > prior to the iphone, most cellphones had a proprietary jack or used a
> > non-standard 2.5mm plug, both of which required adapters to use
> > headphones with a 3.5mm plug.
>
> A few older ones did in the early days of smartphones, a decade ago.

they did after the iphone came out in 2007.

blackberry phones prior to the iphone did not have a 3.5mm headphone
jack:
<https://www.gsmarena.com/blackberry_7290-1348.php>
<https://www.gsmarena.com/blackberry_8700c-1349.php>
3.5mm jack No

> Have seen a 2.5 on a cellphone for many years.

that's why i said 'prior to the iphone'.

> > when digital tv first appeared, some people used converter boxes for
> > their old and obsolete tvs, while others switched to *far* better and
> > much larger digital tvs.
>
> Most of my headphones are far superior to anything any lossy wireless
> headphone scheme can provide.

a very tall claim unsupported by facts.

wireless headphones can be as good as wired, with a *substantial*
increase in convenience.

put whatever dac is in the phone into the headphones, or a different
one for those that think they can hear a difference (they can't).

[nospam]

In article <vIKdndBCkN97_SHD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >> doesn't bluetooth still work even on phones with the real headphone jack
> >
> > all headphone jacks are real. the difference is the plug type and its
> > capabilities.
> >
> > bluetooth works regardless the type of headphone jack and is extremely
> > popular, one reason why there is no longer a need for a redundant
> > analogue headphone jack.
> >
>
> Once upon a time 128 kbps MP3s wre 'popular'. Probably still would be if
> the norm hadn't crept up a little.

only because of storage limitations.

these days, many people use lossless flac/alac for archiving and
convert to mp3/aac for portable devices.

it's also not relevant to bluetooth headphones.

[geoff]

Um, is. Bluetooth uses lossy-encoding.

geoff

[nospam]

In article <J8mdnX02foT7FSHD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>
> >> Once upon a time 128 kbps MP3s wre 'popular'. Probably still would be if
> >> the norm hadn't crept up a little.
> >
> > only because of storage limitations.
> >
> > these days, many people use lossless flac/alac for archiving and
> > convert to mp3/aac for portable devices.
> >
> > it's also not relevant to bluetooth headphones.
> >
>
> Um, is. Bluetooth uses lossy-encoding.

so does mp3/aac.

streaming aac to bluetooth headphones incurs no additional loss when
done properly.

unfortunately, not all bluetooth headphones do that.

[geoff]

On 14/05/2020 11:26 am, nospam wrote:

>> Most of my headphones are far superior to anything any lossy wireless
>> headphone scheme can provide.
>
> a very tall claim unsupported by facts.
>
> wireless headphones can be as good as wired, with a *substantial*
> increase in convenience.
>
> put whatever dac is in the phone into the headphones, or a different
> one for those that think they can hear a difference (they can't).
>

FLAC or ALAC playback is certainly limited by the phone's electronics
(any brand). But I need to use the same (superior) headphones on
multiple devices, most without Bluetooth.

And I can hear a difference - even with older ears. Maybe many can't, or
don't care or know enough to try.

geoff

[sms]

nospam is wrong of course™. Very few phones had the 2.5mm headset jack.

I use my headphones on airplanes quite often (or used to anyway). I
prefer wired headphones because I can plug them into the airplane’s
headphone jack or into my phone or into my computer─can’t do that with
Bluetooth.

I did finally buy some high-end active noise-cancelling headphones that
are both Bluetooth and wired. They’re fine, but my older wired-only
high-end active noise-cancelling headphones have an advantage on long
flights because they use a single AA battery. With the Bluetooth
headphones I can’t have the noise cancelling on for a long overseas
flight without needing to charge, and the design is such that when the
headphones are on the charger the noise cancellation is off.

Of course the other issue is that the sound quality is better when
connected via analog versus Bluetooth.

[nospam]

In article <juqdnbMy9c5LESHD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >> Most of my headphones are far superior to anything any lossy wireless
> >> headphone scheme can provide.
> >
> > a very tall claim unsupported by facts.
> >
> > wireless headphones can be as good as wired, with a *substantial*
> > increase in convenience.
> >
> > put whatever dac is in the phone into the headphones, or a different
> > one for those that think they can hear a difference (they can't).
> >
>
> FLAC or ALAC playback is certainly limited by the phone's electronics
> (any brand). But I need to use the same (superior) headphones on
> multiple devices, most without Bluetooth.

that's easy to do

flac/alac is extremely rare on a portable device since any benefit is
entirely lost when listening on earbuds while walking, jogging,
commuting on a train or flying on a plane.

flac/alac is suitable for a music library to be played on a high end
(and overpriced) home system with large speakers.

> And I can hear a difference - even with older ears. Maybe many can't, or
> don't care or know enough to try.

you might think you can, but you can't.

[nospam]

In article <r9i4o9$6hs$2...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Very few phones had the 2.5mm headset jack.

actually, quite a few did, or they had proprietary connectors, or
nothing at all.

the iphone was the first phone to popularize a 3.5mm headphone jack.

> I use my headphones on airplanes quite often (or used to anyway). I

> prefer wired headphones because I can plug them into the airplaneıs
> headphone jack or into my phone or into my computer?canıt do that with
> Bluetooth.

of course you can do that with bluetooth. you just need an adapter for
the airplane system, not that there's anything on it to bother with.

> I did finally buy some high-end active noise-cancelling headphones that

> are both Bluetooth and wired. Theyıre fine, but my older wired-only

> high-end active noise-cancelling headphones have an advantage on long
> flights because they use a single AA battery. With the Bluetooth

> headphones I canıt have the noise cancelling on for a long overseas

> flight without needing to charge, and the design is such that when the
> headphones are on the charger the noise cancellation is off.

that's a limitation of the headphones you chose, not the technology.

> Of course the other issue is that the sound quality is better when
> connected via analog versus Bluetooth.

nope.

top quality bluetooth headphones will sound much better than cheapo
wired headphones.

[sms]

On 5/13/2020 5:12 PM, geoff wrote:

<snip>

> FLAC or ALAC playback is certainly limited by the phone's electronics
> (any brand). But I need to use the same (superior) headphones on
> multiple devices, most without Bluetooth.

Yes, that's the real issue. With a phone's DAC there's no real advantage
in sound quality to analog versus Bluetooth, regardless of the bit rate,
but when connecting to a high quality source the difference is
definitely discernible.

[nospam]

In article <r9i5qd$olf$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> > FLAC or ALAC playback is certainly limited by the phone's electronics
> > (any brand). But I need to use the same (superior) headphones on
> > multiple devices, most without Bluetooth.
>
> Yes, that's the real issue. With a phone's DAC there's no real advantage
> in sound quality to analog versus Bluetooth,

the phone's dac is not used with modern bluetooth headphones or those
that connect to the digital headphone jack.

> regardless of the bit rate,

false. low bit rates designed for voice will not sound good when used
for music.

> but when connecting to a high quality source the difference is
> definitely discernible.

actually, objective tests show that is false.

[geoff]

On 14/05/2020 1:09 pm, nospam wrote:
> In article <juqdnbMy9c5LESHD...@giganews.com>, geoff
> <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>
>>>> Most of my headphones are far superior to anything any lossy wireless
>>>> headphone scheme can provide.
>>>
>>> a very tall claim unsupported by facts.
>>>
>>> wireless headphones can be as good as wired, with a *substantial*
>>> increase in convenience.

Yes, convenient. Good enough for many, if not most (but not all) users -
if the 3.5mm socket is used solely for headphones. Which, guess what, it
isn't.

>>> put whatever dac is in the phone into the headphones, or a different
>>> one for those that think they can hear a difference (they can't).
>>>
>>
>> FLAC or ALAC playback is certainly limited by the phone's electronics
>> (any brand). But I need to use the same (superior) headphones on
>> multiple devices, most without Bluetooth.
>
> that's easy to do

Even easier with a plug/socket. Socket also more straightforward than a
kludge-with-a-jack for using as a test-signal source (also which I do
for PA as well as for electronic repair), and as an input device for
quick convenient spectrum analysis.

Also easier with a 3.5mm socket than having to purchase a new kludge
every time Apple change their output connection type.

> flac/alac is extremely rare on a portable device since any benefit is
> entirely lost when listening on earbuds while walking, jogging,
> commuting on a train or flying on a plane.

Not rare on my iPod or Samsung phone. Around 64GB of them.

>
> flac/alac is suitable for a music library to be played on a high end
> (and overpriced) home system with large speakers.

Or on quality headphones, or playing into an external amplification
system (which I do regularly).

>
>> And I can hear a difference - even with older ears. Maybe many can't, or
>> don't care or know enough to try.
>
> you might think you can, but you can't.

Well I produce the original media, as well as the data-reduced versions.
And I can. Blind. And even double-blind. Largely dependant on the
quality of the original recording or media.

geoff

[geoff]

On 14/05/2020 1:09 pm, nospam wrote:

>

> top quality bluetooth headphones will sound much better than cheapo
> wired headphones.
>

Grasping at straws, or stating the fucking-obvious ?

geoff

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what geoff <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote :

> Also easier with a 3.5mm socket than having to purchase a new kludge
> every time Apple change their output connection type.

There is only one reason for the "courageous" decision to _remove_ the
basic functionality of the 3.5mm socket, and that's...

*MONEY*

Likewise, there's only one reason for the "courageous" decision to _keep_
the Apple proprietary connectors on iPhones, and it's the same reason.

*MONEY*

There's a _reason_ I claim Apple MARKETING is brilliant at extracting
*MONEY*

See examples here...
o *What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?*
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/iUMbvDSxAwAJ>

For example, they turned a dead Chinese lady into a windfall...
--
Never forget how astoundingly huge Apple's margins are; they're not making
boatloads of money off of people who can think for themselves; they're
making that money off of PT Barnum's favorite type of customer.

[nospam]

In article <N72dnSZ6YPlvWiHD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>>> Most of my headphones are far superior to anything any lossy wireless
> >>>> headphone scheme can provide.
> >>>
> >>> a very tall claim unsupported by facts.
> >>>
> >>> wireless headphones can be as good as wired, with a *substantial*
> >>> increase in convenience.
>
> Yes, convenient. Good enough for many, if not most (but not all) users -

apple designs their products for most users, one reason for their huge
success.

niche players cater to their niches, but they'll always be just that,
niche.

trying to make one product that caters to the masses *and* niche can't
be done without substantial compromises and a recipe for disaster.

> if the 3.5mm socket is used solely for headphones. Which, guess what, it
> isn't.

it is for the vast majority of users, for those that even use it at all
(most do not), but regardless, it's been replaced with something much
more capable that can easily handle far more additional use cases than
an analogue jack could ever possibly do.

why do you hate progress?

> >>> put whatever dac is in the phone into the headphones, or a different
> >>> one for those that think they can hear a difference (they can't).
> >>>
> >>
> >> FLAC or ALAC playback is certainly limited by the phone's electronics
> >> (any brand). But I need to use the same (superior) headphones on
> >> multiple devices, most without Bluetooth.
> >
> > that's easy to do
>
> Even easier with a plug/socket. Socket also more straightforward than a
> kludge-with-a-jack for using as a test-signal source (also which I do
> for PA as well as for electronic repair), and as an input device for
> quick convenient spectrum analysis.

stop calling it a kludge. it's an adapter, just like all the other
adapters people use when technology advances, including usb-serial,
usb-a to usb-c, dvi-vga, dvi-hdmi, 75á-300á antenna, 1/4" headphone,
etc.

<https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71-aDI4E5aL._SL1500_.j
pg>
<https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/613L9LwygXL._SL1000_.j
pg>

<https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51CoOZ4HtHL._AC_SL1080
_.jpg>

> Also easier with a 3.5mm socket than having to purchase a new kludge
> every time Apple change their output connection type.

except that they don't do that. once again, your bashing is misplaced.

in the history of the iphone, apple changed the connection type *once*,
from the 30 pin dock connector to the much better lightning connector.

meanwhile, android has changed it *many* times, including mini-usb,
ext-usb, micro-usb, micro-usb3 and usb-c, and for usb-c, some devices
are still usb 2 while others are usb 3. it's a confusing mess.

you also keep ignoring that the first android phone did *not* have a
3.5mm headphone jack, nor did several models *before* the iphone 7,
including from motorola, along with *many* ones after, including the
samsung s20 and google pixel series.

the reality is that the old and obsolete 3.5mm headphone jack is
eventually going away because it's been replaced with newer technology.

there might be a few devices that hold on to the past, but they'll be a
tiny minority, just like film cameras.

> > flac/alac is extremely rare on a portable device since any benefit is
> > entirely lost when listening on earbuds while walking, jogging,
> > commuting on a train or flying on a plane.
>
> Not rare on my iPod or Samsung phone. Around 64GB of them.

it's a waste of space on a portable device.

keep them on a music server and listen to them on a high quality sound
system.

> > flac/alac is suitable for a music library to be played on a high end
> > (and overpriced) home system with large speakers.
>
> Or on quality headphones, or playing into an external amplification
> system (which I do regularly).

any difference will be inaudible, especially in the environments where
headphones are used.

> >> And I can hear a difference - even with older ears. Maybe many can't, or
> >> don't care or know enough to try.
> >
> > you might think you can, but you can't.
>
> Well I produce the original media, as well as the data-reduced versions.
> And I can. Blind. And even double-blind. Largely dependant on the
> quality of the original recording or media.

if the digital version is of the highest quality, you won't be able to
discern a difference, despite thinking you can.

obviously, anyone can tell the difference between an original and low
bit rate versions.

[nospam]

In article <N72dnSF6YPn3VSHD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> > top quality bluetooth headphones will sound much better than cheapo
> > wired headphones.
>
> Grasping at straws, or stating the fucking-obvious ?

you snipped the part that was in reference to, in a feeble attempt to
alter the context.

here's the original and completely bogus claim:

that statement is absolutely *false*.

the sound quality is a function of the headphones themselves, *not* the
connection type.

if the headphones are the same in both cases, then the sound quality
will obviously be the same.

in fact, the bluetooth headphones could potentially be better if they
use higher quality components (dac, amp, etc.), versus what can fit
inside a small space-constrained phone.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :

> apple designs their products for most users,
> one reason for their huge success.

IMHO, the fundamental reason for Apple's success...
o Is their MARKETING is one of the best on the planet.

*Apple is brilliant at MARKETING the mere _illusion_ of functionality.*
o Shockingly, their typical customer, _believes_ that MARKETING bullshit!

Examples:
a. They have people "thinking" their cameras are the best
b. They have people "thinking" their safety is the best
c. They have people "thinking" their innovation is the best
etc.

And yet, it's trivial to prove that's just MARKETING bullshit
o They brilliantly market the mere _illusion_ of functionality

But what's worse, is they make _excuses_ for their failures
o Which, I admit, people are stupid enough to believe.

For example:
A. People _believe_ it's the batteries that made them do it.
B. People _believe_ it's Google's fault iOS 13 has so many holes.
C. People _believe_ it's Qualcomm's fault Apple didn't ship 5G.

Notice you need a _combination_ for Apple's admittedly huge success...
1. Brilliant MARKETING (of the mere _illusion_ of functionality)
2. Coupled with some of the dumbest consumers one can imagine.

I posit that Apple would be absolutely nothing...
o Sans the combination of brilliant MARKETING & dumb consumer.
--
Every statement I make can be backed up with salient facts; but if it's an
opinion, then reasonable rational adults may well disagree if they like.

[sms]

On 5/13/2020 9:24 PM, geoff wrote:

> Yes, convenient. Good enough for many, if not most (but not all) users -
> if the 3.5mm socket is used solely for headphones. Which, guess what, it
> isn't.

Yeah, companies got pretty clever with using the 3.5mm headphone jack
for a variety of other functions. From Consumer IR transmitters, to
credit card readers to camera shutter controls. It's been accurately
described as a "three-channel communication interface." Other uses have
been thermometers, electric field meters, multimeters, even an oscilloscope.

On the iPhone the 3.5mm jack was the only royalty-free wired interface
available. On Android phones you at least have the USB socket and USB
OTG has been very useful.

Besides the lack of 3.5mm jack on the newer iPhones, you also have the
issue of the lack of support for the Bluetooth Serial Port Profile (SPP)
which is widely used in industrial, scientific, and medical equipment.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote :

Steve brings up a point that Apple "courageously" dropped the only royalty
free wired interface, which, again, boils down to the one & only reason:
*MONEY*

Every excuse by the apologists can easily be shot down with basic facts.
o There's a _reason_ Apple is so profitable and it's not innovation.

Apple enjoying the _lowest_ R&D percentage in high tech is not innovation.
o Apple limiting & removing the most basic functionality is not innovation.

Apple products lack the most basic of functionalities for one reason only:
o *MONEY*
--
Apple MARKETING is brilliant at being beileved by very gullible consumers.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-13 4:07 a.m., geoff wrote:
> On 13/05/2020 10:39 pm, nospam wrote:
>> In article <a76dnXHW-OJC-ibD...@giganews.com>, geoff
>> <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>>
>>>>>

>>>>
>>>>> and they still
>>>>> wouldn't be able to do what I do want, and can do (as can other phone
>>>>> platforms) things that I don't particularly need/want.

>>>>
>>>> what exactly do you want to do that you think can't be done with any of
>>>> the above?
>>>
>>> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At least without an
>>> additional kludge is the main thing.
>>

>> headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without any
>> kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.
>
> How exactly, if no 3.5 ?

Adapter.

>
>>
>> the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device) are very
>> limiting.
>
> My reference headphones are wired only. An bluetooth is still  crap
> quality, if one is discerning.

>> thus your claim that the rumoured iphone 12 (official name unknown)
>> can't do what you want is *false*.
>
> Access for a 3.5\mm jack plug ? Without a kludge ?

Whereby "kludge" you mean "simple adapter", right?

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-13 1:26 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
NOTE: Since Arlen Holder uses selective snipping to try to make himself
look intelligent, I'm replacing the on-topic parts of Jolly Roger's post
where we can all see who's being an "adult" and who is not:

> In response to what Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote :

This is what Arlen snipped:

>> "ERRMEGHERD!!! Keeping one of these plugged into my headphones is
>> such an inconvenience, guys. I literally waste minutes - ney,
>> *hours* - a day messing with this kludge!:
>> <https://jmp.sh/NpDyYXO>" - said nobody, ever
>>
>> I happen to have several wired headphones from Etymotic etc that I
>> use with iPhones without a single issue. It's no inconvenience at
>> all to me to keep a tiny adapter connected to them. Using them is
>> no more cumbersome than without it. I grab the headphones from the
>> case, plug them into the iPhone, and I'm listening to music, just
>> as I did previously.

All of it on on topic to the subject of what is appropriate in new
phones for connecting earbuds, headphones, etc.

>> Get over yourself. Or don't, and keep complaining. Just know you look
>> really idiotic to the rest of the world.
>
> Type I apologist === nospam
> Type II apologist === Steve Scharf
> Type III apologist === Jolly Roger
>
> For the permanent record, adults notice salient facts.
> 1. The discussion is about upcoming iPhone 12 specifications.
> 2. One of those specifications is the lack of basic functionality.
> 3. The apologists keep coming up with excuses for it lacks functionality.
>
> Adults will notice _every_ conversation with apologists progresses
> similarly, in that the apologists deny what any normal adult would simply
> agree with.
>
> There are three categories of apologists' denials, of which Jolly Roger &
> Alan Baker are the most childish.
>
> In the case of Alan Baker, he simply claims all afacts are lies.
> In the case of Jolly Roger, he attacks the bearer of the facts.
>
> Happens every single time an apologist is involved in discussing facts.
> o Type I apologist: nospam will make claims even he doesn't believe.
> o Type II apologist: these are simply ignorant and don't understand facts.
> o Type III apologist: these actually _believe_ what they write and hence is
> why they claim all facts are lies and anyone speaking facts must be an
> idiot (in their minds).

Literally nothing Arlen wrote was about the topic at hand.

Decide for yourself who is more "adult".

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-13 2:03 p.m., geoff wrote:
> On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:
>
>>
>> it's a non-issue.
>
> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.

Not if you just buy a $10 adapter.

>
>
>> it's also not just apple. numerous android phones, including the galaxy
>> s20 and google pixel, have made the transition to digital headphone
>> jacks.
>>
>> in fact, apple set the standard for 3.5mm plugs on cellphones.
>>
>> prior to the iphone, most cellphones had a proprietary jack or used a
>> non-standard 2.5mm plug, both of which required adapters to use
>> headphones with a 3.5mm plug.
>
> A few older ones did in the early days of smartphones, a decade ago.
> Have seen a 2.5 on a cellphone for many years.
>
>
>> when digital tv first appeared, some people used converter boxes for
>> their old and obsolete tvs, while others switched to *far* better and
>> much larger digital tvs.
>
> Most of my headphones are far superior to anything any lossy wireless
> headphone scheme can provide.

And the music you're listening to most of the time when you're listening
on your phone, what format is it in?

[Alan Baker]

You'd have no work if you used a $10 adapter to connect your headphones...

...to your phone?

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-14 9:42 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :
>
>> apple designs their products for most users, one reason for their huge
>> success.
>
> IMHO, the fundamental reason for Apple's success...
> o Is their MARKETING is one of the best on the planet.
>
> *Apple is brilliant at MARKETING the mere _illusion_ of functionality.*
> o Shockingly, their typical customer, _believes_ that MARKETING bullshit!
>
> Examples:
> a. They have people "thinking" their cameras are the best

Certainly Apple's cameras are among the very best.

> b. They have people "thinking" their safety is the best

You've yet to show it's any worse or that Apple has advertised their
safety as "the best".

> c. They have people "thinking" their innovation is the best
> etc.

Given that the modern world of personal computing technology has
basically been driven by Apple's innovations, I'd say that they have a
good reason to think that.

Every personal computer now uses the basic interface pioneered by Apple.

Every personal computer started using USB to connect to peripherals
after Apple made the first iMacs use it exclusively.

Every smartphone now uses a touchscreen interface that is basically a
copy of the original iPhone.

>
> And yet, it's trivial to prove that's just MARKETING bullshit
> o They brilliantly market the mere _illusion_ of functionality

It seems a lot of people disagree and Apple enjoys customer loyalty that
is the envy of almost every other company on earth.

>
> But what's worse, is they make _excuses_ for their failures
> o Which, I admit, people are stupid enough to believe.
>
> For example:
> A. People _believe_ it's the batteries that made them do it.

Nope.

> B. People _believe_ it's Google's fault iOS 13 has so many holes.

Nope.

> C. People _believe_ it's Qualcomm's fault Apple didn't ship 5G.

Nope.

>
> Notice you need a _combination_ for Apple's admittedly huge success...
> 1. Brilliant MARKETING (of the mere _illusion_ of functionality)
> 2. Coupled with some of the dumbest consumers one can imagine.
>
> I posit that Apple would be absolutely nothing... o Sans the combination
> of brilliant MARKETING & dumb consumer.

And products that everyone wants.

[nospam]

In article <r9k0uc$9ah$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> > Yes, convenient. Good enough for many, if not most (but not all) users -
> > if the 3.5mm socket is used solely for headphones. Which, guess what, it
> > isn't.
>
> Yeah, companies got pretty clever with using the 3.5mm headphone jack
> for a variety of other functions. From Consumer IR transmitters, to
> credit card readers to camera shutter controls. It's been accurately
> described as a "three-channel communication interface." Other uses have
> been thermometers, electric field meters, multimeters, even an oscilloscope.

an oscilloscope via the headphone jack is utterly hilarious.

all of those can be done far better with lightning, usb, wifi and/or
bluetooth.

such as this oscilloscope, which uses lightning or usb (choice of
cable), and would be impossible via a 3.5mm analogue headphone jack:
<https://www.oscium.com/oscilloscopes/imso-204>

> On the iPhone the 3.5mm jack was the only royalty-free wired interface
> available. On Android phones you at least have the USB socket and USB
> OTG has been very useful.

false.

> Besides the lack of 3.5mm jack on the newer iPhones, you also have the
> issue of the lack of support for the Bluetooth Serial Port Profile (SPP)
> which is widely used in industrial, scientific, and medical equipment.

that's an obsolete profile, which has been replaced with the far more
reliable and more capable bluetooth le.

[Alan Baker]

Why is the metric R&D as a percentage of revenue, Arlen?

If a company is working away on its products with a particular budget
for research and development...

...and suddenly their sales quadruple...

...is their R&D budget suddenly inadequate?

Apple sells a relatively small line of products with high margins.

It makes sense that their R&D is a smaller percentage of their revenues.

Now go on and respond with your typical ad hominems. :-)

[Alan Baker]

It's amazing to me that people so insistently cling to obsolete
technologies by pointing to the workarounds that have been devised.

It's thinking like this that means we now have people faxing from their
computers...

...directly into another computer...

...rather than just sending a PDF.

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 4:12 am, nospam wrote:

>
> meanwhile, android has changed it *many* times, including mini-usb,
> ext-usb, micro-usb, micro-usb3 and usb-c, and for usb-c, some devices
> are still usb 2 while others are usb 3. it's a confusing mess.

Why do you think that Android is a brand of cellphone and specifies a
connector ?

geoff

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 7:33 am, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2020-05-13 2:03 p.m., geoff wrote:
>> On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> it's a non-issue.
>>
>> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.
>
> Not if you just buy a $10 adapter.

Exactly. Which is a kludge and more fragile.

>
> And the music you're listening to most of the time when you're listening
> on your phone, what format is it in?

FLAC. Or if not for music listening, internally generated waveforms or
signals that have never been through a lossy-encoding system.

geoff

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 7:24 am, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2020-05-13 4:07 a.m., geoff wrote:

>
> Whereby "kludge" you mean "simple adapter", right?

Yes, something that sticks out and is held in place by slight friction,
and forms by virtue of its necessary depth a fulcrum.

geoff

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 7:34 am, Alan Baker wrote:

>
> You'd have no work if you used a $10 adapter to connect your headphones...
>
> ...to your phone?
>

No. If I used lossy-encoded music as a reference criteria.

geoff

[Alan Baker]

The plug for the headphones sticks out, doesn't it?

How is that different?

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-14 4:43 p.m., geoff wrote:
> On 15/05/2020 7:33 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>> On 2020-05-13 2:03 p.m., geoff wrote:
>>> On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> it's a non-issue.
>>>
>>> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.
>>
>> Not if you just buy a $10 adapter.
>
> Exactly. Which is a kludge and more fragile.

Why? Why need it be "more fragile"?

>
>
>>
>> And the music you're listening to most of the time when you're
>> listening on your phone, what format is it in?
>
> FLAC. Or if not for music listening, internally generated waveforms or
> signals that have never been through a lossy-encoding system.

You get that your phone cannot actually generate an analog wave form, right?

There is a Digital to Analog Convertor and EVERYTHING that the phone
outputs through the headphone jack starts as bits.

[Alan Baker]

So therefore it has nothing at all to do with whether or not the phone
itself has a 3.5mm headphone jack...

...which is what was under discussion...

...and what you have now (conveniently) snipped from the conversation.

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 11:49 am, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2020-05-14 4:43 p.m., geoff wrote:
>> On 15/05/2020 7:33 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> On 2020-05-13 2:03 p.m., geoff wrote:
>>>> On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> it's a non-issue.
>>>>
>>>> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.
>>>
>>> Not if you just buy a $10 adapter.
>>
>> Exactly. Which is a kludge and more fragile.
>
> Why? Why need it be "more fragile"?

Because it protrudes and increases the fragility due to the increased
moment of the fulcrum.

>>> And the music you're listening to most of the time when you're
>>> listening on your phone, what format is it in?
>>
>> FLAC. Or if not for music listening, internally generated waveforms or
>> signals that have never been through a lossy-encoding system.
>
> You get that your phone cannot actually generate an analog wave form,
> right?
>
> There is a Digital to Analog Convertor and EVERYTHING that the phone
> outputs through the headphone jack starts as bits.

Yes, and not all those internally-generated linear PCM bits (bytes
actually) need to be passed through an lossy-encoding process prior to
D-A conversion.

geoff

[geoff]

Firmer mounting of a more substantial socket direct to the PCB, as
opposed to the jack plugged into an adaptor (as you insist), then into a
USB or Lightning socket that is far less substantial and has minuscule
lead-outs soldered to the PCB.

Have you ever replaced either ? I have.

geoff

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 11:57 am, Alan Baker wrote:
> On 2020-05-14 4:47 p.m., geoff wrote:
>> On 15/05/2020 7:34 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> You'd have no work if you used a $10 adapter to connect your
>>> headphones...
>>>
>>> ...to your phone?
>>>
>>
>> No. If I used lossy-encoded music as a reference criteria.
>
> So therefore it has nothing at all to do with whether or not the phone
> itself has a 3.5mm headphone jack...
>
> ...which is what was under discussion...

What is under discussion is the necessity to use Bluetooth ( which is
inherently based on lossy-encoding, either as a source or applieded in
order to transmit) or an adaptor if no 3.5mm jack socket on a phone.

>
> ...and what you have now (conveniently) snipped from the conversation.

What I snipped was irrelevant. Do you enjoy or need clutter?

geoff

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-14 4:59 p.m., geoff wrote:
> On 15/05/2020 11:49 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>> On 2020-05-14 4:43 p.m., geoff wrote:
>>> On 15/05/2020 7:33 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>> On 2020-05-13 2:03 p.m., geoff wrote:
>>>>> On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it's a non-issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.
>>>>
>>>> Not if you just buy a $10 adapter.
>>>
>>> Exactly. Which is a kludge and more fragile.
>>
>> Why? Why need it be "more fragile"?
>
> Because it protrudes and increases the fragility due to the increased
> moment of the fulcrum.

It sticks out no farther than the headphones own 3.5mm plug.

Most have a short length of cable between the USB/Lighting plug and the
female headphone receptacle, so any strain on the cable would end up
allowing the 3.5mm connection to part rather than break the phone.

Congratulations:

You've actually discovered how such an adapter would make your phone and
headphones less likely to be damaged.

>
>>>> And the music you're listening to most of the time when you're
>>>> listening on your phone, what format is it in?
>>>
>>> FLAC. Or if not for music listening, internally generated waveforms
>>> or signals that have never been through a lossy-encoding system.
>>
>> You get that your phone cannot actually generate an analog wave form,
>> right?
>>
>> There is a Digital to Analog Convertor and EVERYTHING that the phone
>> outputs through the headphone jack starts as bits.
>
> Yes, and not all those internally-generated linear PCM bits (bytes
> actually) need to be passed through an lossy-encoding process prior to
> D-A conversion.

The point is that you aren't getting magical analog because you're
plugging in a 3.5mm headphone jack.

[Alan Baker]

An adapter with a short length of cable between its two connectors acts
to align the strain axially with the 3.5mm connection, and hence
allowing it to part without breaking anything.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-14 5:13 p.m., geoff wrote:
> On 15/05/2020 11:57 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>> On 2020-05-14 4:47 p.m., geoff wrote:
>>> On 15/05/2020 7:34 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> You'd have no work if you used a $10 adapter to connect your
>>>> headphones...
>>>>
>>>> ...to your phone?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No. If I used lossy-encoded music as a reference criteria.
>>
>> So therefore it has nothing at all to do with whether or not the phone
>> itself has a 3.5mm headphone jack...
>>
>> ...which is what was under discussion...
>
> What is under discussion is the necessity to use Bluetooth ( which is
> inherently based on lossy-encoding, either as a source or applieded in
> order to transmit) or an adaptor if no 3.5mm jack socket on a phone.

Ummmm... ...nope.

The discussion was what you can do instead of use a 3.5mm headphone jack...

...and specifically in the part of the thread I joined, using an adapter.

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 12:36 pm, Alan Baker wrote:

>>> You get that your phone cannot actually generate an analog wave form,
>>> right?
>>>
>>> There is a Digital to Analog Convertor and EVERYTHING that the phone
>>> outputs through the headphone jack starts as bits.
>>
>> Yes, and not all those internally-generated linear PCM bits (bytes
>> actually) need to be passed through an lossy-encoding process prior to
>> D-A conversion.
>
> The point is that you aren't getting magical analog because you're
> plugging in a 3.5mm headphone jack.

Did anybody suggest that one is ? Not that that is significant.

geoff

[geoff]

When force is applied, in any direct other than straight outwards, the
length of cable extends to and magnifies the force to the fulcrum, which
is the relatively flimsy USB or lightning connector.

geoff

[Alan Baker]

You're starting to show you're very, very dimwitted.

I'm going to walk you through this, step by step.

Yes or no:

If tension is placed on cord plugged into your phone, the worst
direction is at 90 degrees to the axis of the plug?

[nospam]

In article <XcydnRDnHOiHSyDD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> > meanwhile, android has changed it *many* times, including mini-usb,
> > ext-usb, micro-usb, micro-usb3 and usb-c, and for usb-c, some devices
> > are still usb 2 while others are usb 3. it's a confusing mess.
>
> Why do you think that Android is a brand of cellphone and specifies a
> connector ?

i don't.

[nospam]

In article <eZ-dnWUnJPbORiDD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>>> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of headphones.
> >>>
> >>> Not if you just buy a $10 adapter.
> >>
> >> Exactly. Which is a kludge and more fragile.
> >
> > Why? Why need it be "more fragile"?
>
> Because it protrudes and increases the fragility due to the increased
> moment of the fulcrum.

nope.

using the lightning port is *less* fragile. significantly so, that it's
almost impossible to damage the phone with excessive torque.

on the other hand, the analogue headphone jack is one of the most
common points of failure, one reason being excessive torque.

[geoff]

Yes. You finally got it. And in decreasing levels until 'straight out'.

It's not me who is the fuckwit.

geoff.

[geoff]

So how come "Android changed it *many* times ....", as above ?

geoff

[Alan Baker]

Great your answer is correct and your expansion is also correct.

Now, imagine you make yourself, a short cable 3.5mm male on one end and
3.5mm female on the other end and insert that between the phone and your
headphones.

Got it? Good!

Now, what happens when you pull on the headphone cable at 90 degrees to
the axis of the jack in the phone?

[nospam]

In article <maSdnehRYNKqdiDD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>> meanwhile, android has changed it *many* times, including mini-usb,
> >>> ext-usb, micro-usb, micro-usb3 and usb-c, and for usb-c, some devices
> >>> are still usb 2 while others are usb 3. it's a confusing mess.
> >>
> >> Why do you think that Android is a brand of cellphone and specifies a
> >> connector ?
> >
> > i don't.
> >
>
> So how come "Android changed it *many* times ....", as above ?

android devices. clearer now?

all of those connectors have been used on android devices in the same
time span that apple had two connectors, and if you skip ext-usb, only
*one* connector.

your claim that apple keeps changing connectors is false.

[geoff]

30-pin, Lightning, and supposedly next to USB-C and/or purely wireless
....

Not to mention 3.5mm jack to Lightning and wireless (and on to USB-C ?).

geoff

[nospam]

In article <NY2dnVfQQfoDlSPD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>>>> meanwhile, android has changed it *many* times, including mini-usb,
> >>>>> ext-usb, micro-usb, micro-usb3 and usb-c, and for usb-c, some devices
> >>>>> are still usb 2 while others are usb 3. it's a confusing mess.
> >>>>
> >>>> Why do you think that Android is a brand of cellphone and specifies a
> >>>> connector ?
> >>>
> >>> i don't.
> >>>
> >>
> >> So how come "Android changed it *many* times ....", as above ?
> >
> > android devices. clearer now?
> >
> > all of those connectors have been used on android devices in the same
> > time span that apple had two connectors, and if you skip ext-usb, only
> > *one* connector.
> >
> > your claim that apple keeps changing connectors is false.
> >
>
> 30-pin, Lightning, and supposedly next to USB-C and/or purely wireless

apple has only had the 30 pin dock connector and lightning. that's
*two* connectors.

trying to count rumoured future products, especially bogus rumours, is
extremely disingenuous.

oh, and there already is a purely wireless zero port android phone:

<https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2019/1/23/18194178/meizu-zero-p
hone-trends-hole-ports-buttons>
Phones have been shedding ports and buttons for a while now.
Headphone jacks are going extinct on most devices, and home and
back buttons have been replaced on nearly every iOS and Android
phone with software UIs. The new Meizu Zero is the first to take that
trend to its natural endpoint: it has no ports, buttons, or holes
that mar the exterior of the device.

According to Meizu, the Zero has łno buttons, no speakers holes,
no SIM card slot, [and] no charging port.˛ Most of the exterior of
the device is a seamless slab of ceramic (an effect thatąs only
slightly ruined by a protruding camera bump on the back and
what appear to be microphone holes on the bottom).

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 11:16:51 AM UTC-4, nospam wrote:
> geoff wrote:
>
> > >> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At
> > >> At least without an additional kludge is the main thing.
> > >
> > > headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without
> > > any kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.
> >
> > How exactly, if no 3.5 ?
>
> by using the more capable and more reliable digital headphone
> jack found on modern smartphones, both ios and android.

We've been through this particular debate before. The problem
with Apple's Lightning port also incorporating the function of
the legacy 3.5mm headphone jack is at least the following trades:

a) Said port is proprietary and incurs a licensing fee,
which is a burden on headphone suppliers because of product
fragmentation and/or increased manufacturing costs.

b) Utilization of said port for a headset makes it non-available
for other uses, such as recharging the device. The work-around
is to buy a dongle, which again increases net consumer costs
because the device has functionally become less capable by only
having a single interface instead of two.

c) the argument about "including the headphones *in* *the* *box*"
assumes that they're not a piece of crap. Apple's "in the box"
headphones are for many people, a "piece of crap", which is why
there's a viable aftermarket.

For a personal example, Apple's headphones have *never* fit my
ear canals adequately - - they fall out at the slightest move.
As such, I can't wear them and *always* have to buy a 3rd Party
aftermarket set...and Apple's Lightning-to-3.5mm adaptor is no
longer included with their phones.


> > > the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device)
> > > are very limiting.
> >
> > My reference headphones are wired only. An bluetooth is still
> > crap quality, if one is discerning.
>
> then you've not used better bluetooth headphones.
>
> however, even for the lesser models, the convenience of wireless
> is substantial. no longer is someone limited to 3 feet of wire,
> which will almost certainly get tangled or caught in something.

As opposed the the "certainty" of having a wireless earbud fall
out of one's ear and get lost?

Likewise, the relative convenience of not having a wire around
is a trade-off of having yet another device with a battery that
requires recharging and maintenance. Choose your poison.



> > Access for a 3.5\mm jack plug ? Without a kludge ?
>
> you did not specify an obsolete 3.5mm headphone jack.

Considering that Apple's brand new 2020 laptops have a 3.5mm
jack, it is incorrect to claim that interface as "obsolete".

Indeed, *every* Mac model that Apple sells today has the 3.5mm port:

https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-13/specs/
https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-16/specs/
https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/specs/
https://www.apple.com/mac-mini/specs/
https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/
https://www.apple.com/imac-pro/specs/
https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/


> every iphone comes with headphones in the box, which plug
> directly into the iphone without any adapter.
>
> third parties also sell headphones that do the same.
>
> for older headphones, there is no kludge. connect an adapter
> to the 3.5mm plug …

The adaptor is the klunge.

Now are those adaptors free? Nope.
Nor is one even included "in the box" anymore.


> prior to the iphone, ...

The introduction of the iPhone was ~13 years ago, which in
tech is "ancient history".

We can similarly note that we used Roman numerals before
Western Arabic numerals were adopted in the 9th century.


> transitions can be a hassle, but it's the only way to move
> technology forward.

Transitions are justified only when it is actually a step _forward_.

Given that the capabilities of an iPhone which lacks a 3.5mm
port are less than the capabilities of the same iPhone with,
just what the actual benefit is for the customer is not clear.

...particularly since a Lightning-based headset will work in
an iPhone which also has a 3.5mm jack - - but it now can't
do double-duty plugging into your Macintosh computer, because
the latter doesn't have a Lightning port.

-hh

[sms]

iOS devices have changed three times too. 30 pin, Lightning, and USB-C
(starting with iPad Pro but predicted for future iPhones as well). They
want to have the same connector on Macbooks, iPads, and iPhones, which
makes sense.

[nospam]

In article <050f45a7-5aa7-425b...@googlegroups.com>,

<recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:

> > > >> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At
> > > >> At least without an additional kludge is the main thing.
> > > >
> > > > headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without
> > > > any kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.
> > >
> > > How exactly, if no 3.5 ?
> >
> > by using the more capable and more reliable digital headphone
> > jack found on modern smartphones, both ios and android.
>
> We've been through this particular debate before. The problem
> with Apple's Lightning port also incorporating the function of
> the legacy 3.5mm headphone jack is at least the following trades:
>
> a) Said port is proprietary and incurs a licensing fee,
> which is a burden on headphone suppliers because of product
> fragmentation and/or increased manufacturing costs.

the cost to headphone makers is negligible, and zero with an adapter.

> b) Utilization of said port for a headset makes it non-available
> for other uses, such as recharging the device. The work-around
> is to buy a dongle, which again increases net consumer costs
> because the device has functionally become less capable by only
> having a single interface instead of two.

people normally use headphones when out, *away* from mains power, and
batteries last long enough that it's not an issue anyway.

however, if they do need to charge *and* listen at the same time (not a
common use case), they can put the phone on a wireless charging pad,
and using bluetooth headphones, roam about the house without issue,
even out into the yard.

> c) the argument about "including the headphones *in* *the* *box*"
> assumes that they're not a piece of crap. Apple's "in the box"
> headphones are for many people, a "piece of crap", which is why
> there's a viable aftermarket.

not very many, since they're the most popular headphones used, however,
for those who do think they're crap, they can buy something else, which
is what they would have done anyway.

in other words, no difference.

> For a personal example, Apple's headphones have *never* fit my
> ear canals adequately - - they fall out at the slightest move.

try duct tape.

> As such, I can't wear them and *always* have to buy a 3rd Party
> aftermarket set...and Apple's Lightning-to-3.5mm adaptor is no
> longer included with their phones.

add $10 to the price of the headphones. no big deal.

> > > > the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device)
> > > > are very limiting.
> > >
> > > My reference headphones are wired only. An bluetooth is still
> > > crap quality, if one is discerning.
> >
> > then you've not used better bluetooth headphones.
> >
> > however, even for the lesser models, the convenience of wireless
> > is substantial. no longer is someone limited to 3 feet of wire,
> > which will almost certainly get tangled or caught in something.
>
> As opposed the the "certainty" of having a wireless earbud fall
> out of one's ear and get lost?

it's not a certainty.

it's *really* hard to get airpods to fall out, even when jumping,
dancing, shaking one's head, etc., as numerous youtube videos
demonstrate.

that matches my own experience, where i tried to get them to fall out
and could not.

other bluetooth headphones have fitted eartips, nubs that hold them in
the ear or over the ear clips.

<https://storage.googleapis.com/gweb-uniblog-publish-prod/original_image
s/Pixel_Buds_-_Product_GIF_1.gif>

wired headphones are *more* likely to fall out due to the extra weight
of the wire constantly tugging, and also risks getting caught, which
will pull it out of the ear and sometimes cause damage.

> Likewise, the relative convenience of not having a wire around
> is a trade-off of having yet another device with a battery that
> requires recharging and maintenance. Choose your poison.

it is a tradeoff, and most people are choosing wireless over wired.

> > > Access for a 3.5\mm jack plug ? Without a kludge ?
> >
> > you did not specify an obsolete 3.5mm headphone jack.
>
> Considering that Apple's brand new 2020 laptops have a 3.5mm
> jack, it is incorrect to claim that interface as "obsolete".

it is obsolete, however, macbooks are an entirely different use case
than phones, where they are often connected to legacy audio equipment.

it's very rare that anyone uses headphones with a macbook.

> > every iphone comes with headphones in the box, which plug
> > directly into the iphone without any adapter.
> >
> > third parties also sell headphones that do the same.
> >
> > for older headphones, there is no kludge. connect an adapter

> > to the 3.5mm plug Š

>
> The adaptor is the klunge.

it is not a kludge.

connectors change over time. i've listed several, including usb/serial,
dvi/vga and usb-c/usb-a.

> Now are those adaptors free? Nope.
> Nor is one even included "in the box" anymore.

$10, which is almost free.

> > prior to the iphone, ...
>
> The introduction of the iPhone was ~13 years ago, which in
> tech is "ancient history".

which means it's time to move forward.

> We can similarly note that we used Roman numerals before
> Western Arabic numerals were adopted in the 9th century.

straw man.

> > transitions can be a hassle, but it's the only way to move
> > technology forward.
>
> Transitions are justified only when it is actually a step _forward_.

it is very much a step forward.

the capabilities of a digital headphone jack are *significantly*
greater than anything analogue can possibly do, opening up many more
opportunities not previously possible, some of which are outlined
below.

it's also significantly more reliable, eliminating one of the most
common failure points.

another key advantage is that the space it took up can be better used
for other purposes, plus it also makes sealing it against liquid and
dirt incursion much easier.

> Given that the capabilities of an iPhone which lacks a 3.5mm
> port are less than the capabilities of the same iPhone with,
> just what the actual benefit is for the customer is not clear.

false. not only are there more capabilities, but they are very clear.

with a digital jack, headphones can offer noise canceling simply by
piggy-backing the noise canceling *already* in the the phone, without
additional battery drain or circuitry in the headphones.

another benefit is health related, where the in-ear buds can monitor
body temperature and other vital signs, which is particularly useful
for those who don't normally wear a smartwatch.

a digital interface also allows for using a different dac and amplifier
circuitry, rather than being limited to what's in the phone, either in
the headphones or in a separate device. with analogue, you're stuck
with whatever circuitry is in the phone, which is normally very good,
but some people might want an alternative.

play/pause/skip is a hack with analogue headphones, connecting
different conductors in non-standard ways, whereas it's trivial with
digital, and not limited to just those functions either.

outputting both audio and video is also *very* easy, without needing
another ring on the plug. it's also not limited to only two channel
audio, which may be unusual for headphones but not for home theatre
systems.

digital also completely eliminates a potential compatibility problem,
since there are two standards for how an analogue plug is wired:
<https://blog.audio-technica.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Screen-Shot-
2015-04-15-at-1.38.15-PM.png>

> ...particularly since a Lightning-based headset will work in
> an iPhone which also has a 3.5mm jack - - but it now can't
> do double-duty plugging into your Macintosh computer, because
> the latter doesn't have a Lightning port.

except that almost nobody does that.

nevertheless, bluetooth headphones solves that problem.

[nospam]

In article <r9me7j$noj$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> iOS devices have changed three times too. 30 pin, Lightning, and USB-C
> (starting with iPad Pro but predicted for future iPhones as well). They
> want to have the same connector on Macbooks, iPads, and iPhones, which
> makes sense.

only twice, the dock connector and the lightning connector.

ipad pros have usb-c only because their use case is more aligned with
that of macbooks.

other ipads continue to have lightning.

there are zero viable rumours that iphones will switch to usb-c, and
very few people actually want that.

[Chris]

<recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 11:16:51 AM UTC-4, nospam wrote:
>> geoff wrote:
>>
>>>>> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At
>>>>> At least without an additional kludge is the main thing.
>>>>
>>>> headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without
>>>> any kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.
>>>
>>> How exactly, if no 3.5 ?
>>
>> by using the more capable and more reliable digital headphone
>> jack found on modern smartphones, both ios and android.
>
> We've been through this particular debate before. The problem
> with Apple's Lightning port also incorporating the function of
> the legacy 3.5mm headphone jack is at least the following trades:
>
> a) Said port is proprietary and incurs a licensing fee,
> which is a burden on headphone suppliers because of product
> fragmentation and/or increased manufacturing costs.

Yep. Meaning there are very, very few models available. Practically all,
like 99%, current wired headphones are analogue.

> b) Utilization of said port for a headset makes it non-available
> for other uses, such as recharging the device. The work-around
> is to buy a dongle, which again increases net consumer costs
> because the device has functionally become less capable by only
> having a single interface instead of two.

Yep. Have direct experience of this. Tried a third party dongle which
doubled up the analogue port with a lightning. It was cheap crap that
didn't last. Can't find any decent quality alternative.

> c) the argument about "including the headphones *in* *the* *box*"
> assumes that they're not a piece of crap. Apple's "in the box"
> headphones are for many people, a "piece of crap", which is why
> there's a viable aftermarket.

Yep. They sound poor and don't fit well being hard plastic.

>
> For a personal example, Apple's headphones have *never* fit my
> ear canals adequately - - they fall out at the slightest move.
> As such, I can't wear them and *always* have to buy a 3rd Party
> aftermarket set...and Apple's Lightning-to-3.5mm adaptor is no
> longer included with their phones.
>
>
>>>> the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device)
>>>> are very limiting.
>>>
>>> My reference headphones are wired only. An bluetooth is still
>>> crap quality, if one is discerning.
>>
>> then you've not used better bluetooth headphones.
>>
>> however, even for the lesser models, the convenience of wireless
>> is substantial. no longer is someone limited to 3 feet of wire,
>> which will almost certainly get tangled or caught in something.
>
> As opposed the the "certainty" of having a wireless earbud fall
> out of one's ear and get lost?

Actually that's extremely rare. My kids regularly go on in runs with their
AirPods and they never fall out.

>
> Likewise, the relative convenience of not having a wire around
> is a trade-off of having yet another device with a battery that
> requires recharging and maintenance. Choose your poison.

Yep. They have a very limited lifetime compared to wired ones. I have
headphones that are decades old. You can get Apple to "replace" the
battery in AirPods, which basically means you get new ones and they through
the old ones away.

We're supposed to be reducing waste not increased it.

>
> Given that the capabilities of an iPhone which lacks a 3.5mm
> port are less than the capabilities of the same iPhone with,
> just what the actual benefit is for the customer is not clear.
>
> ...particularly since a Lightning-based headset will work in
> an iPhone which also has a 3.5mm jack - - but it now can't
> do double-duty plugging into your Macintosh computer, because
> the latter doesn't have a Lightning port.

Nor anything else that traditionally has a headphone socket: radios, hifis,
PCs, cars, etc.

And then what happens when Apple changes the lightning port i.e. to move to
USB-C? All the headphones will be definitely obsolete.

[nospam]

In article <r9mins$qqp$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> And then what happens when Apple changes the lightning port i.e. to move to
> USB-C? All the headphones will be definitely obsolete.

one of *many* reasons why iphones are not going to switch to usb-c any
time soon.

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :

> there are zero viable rumours that iphones will switch to usb-c, and
> very few people actually want that.

Yet again, nospam, you don't speak for everyone.
o (You're basically nothing more or less than an Apple MARKETING parrot.)

*Most people, I think, would want one cable standard for their devices*.

Currently, I stock _multiple_ cables which essentially do the same thing...
o USB-C for my current Android phone
o Lightning for my current iPads
o 30-pin for my iPods (admittedly older devices)
o Micro-USB for older legacy devices
o Mini-USB for even older legacy devices
etc.

I don't personally care _what_ one standard they all switch to...
o But I think I'm with most people they should all use the _same_ standard.
--
Why wouldn't everyone want their mobile devices to use the same cable?

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-15 10:52 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :
>
>> there are zero viable rumours that iphones will switch to usb-c, and
>> very few people actually want that.
>
> Yet again, nospam, you don't speak for everyone.

You should take that lesson to heart every time you say "we"...

...which is quite a lot, Liar.

> o (You're basically nothing more or less than an Apple MARKETING parrot.)
>
> *Most people, I think, would want one cable standard for their devices*.

You don't speak for everyone, Liar.

I think most people don't give a damn provided they can get the cables
they need.

>
> Currently, I stock _multiple_ cables which essentially do the same thing...
> o USB-C for my current Android phone
> o Lightning for my current iPads
> o 30-pin for my iPods (admittedly older devices) o Micro-USB for older
> legacy devices o Mini-USB for even older legacy devices
> etc.
> I don't personally care _what_ one standard they all switch to...
> o But I think I'm with most people they should all use the _same_ standard.

"Yet again, [Liar], you don't speak for everyone."

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 12:18:27 PM UTC-4, nospam wrote:

> -hh wrote:
>
> > > > >> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At
> > > > >> At least without an additional kludge is the main thing.
> > > > >
> > > > > headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without
> > > > > any kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.
> > > >
> > > > How exactly, if no 3.5 ?
> > >
> > > by using the more capable and more reliable digital headphone
> > > jack found on modern smartphones, both ios and android.
> >
> > We've been through this particular debate before. The problem
> > with Apple's Lightning port also incorporating the function of
> > the legacy 3.5mm headphone jack is at least the following trades:
> >
> > a) Said port is proprietary and incurs a licensing fee,
> > which is a burden on headphone suppliers because of product
> > fragmentation and/or increased manufacturing costs.
>
> the cost to headphone makers is negligible, and zero with an adapter.

Last time I checked, there's still Apple's $4 license fee.
That's why Apple's adaptor costs $9 on the Apple Store.

Similarly, 3rd party headphones are sold at a wide variety of
price points. For example, here's an Amazon listing for four
(4) sets for $13, which is less than $4 each:

<https://www.amazon.com/earphone-Stereo-Earbud-Headphones-Colors/dp/B07L1RQDJM/ref=sr_1_14?dchild=1&fst=as%3Aoff&qid=1589563829&refinements=p_36%3A1253503011&rnid=386442011&s=electronics&sr=1-14>

Adding a $4/plug license fee to this product would double its price.

Plus it isn't only about retail price, but also the burden
to manufacturers of then having to design/manufacture/sell two
products instead of one to have the same market coverage.

> > b) Utilization of said port for a headset makes it non-available
> > for other uses, such as recharging the device. The work-around
> > is to buy a dongle, which again increases net consumer costs
> > because the device has functionally become less capable by only
> > having a single interface instead of two.
>
> people normally use headphones when out, *away* from mains power,
> and batteries last long enough that it's not an issue anyway.

It is still an increase in the discrete number of battery based
systems which must be maintained by the user.

Plus when said internal batteries aren't serviceable, the product
has a finite life.

Wearing NC earbuds on flights is probably my #1 use and on
inter/transcontinental flights, they help me to sleep. The
battery life in the Apple Airpods is ~five hours per charge,
which means that they'll die even on just a trans-Atlantic flight.
Sure, they can be recharged, but that means really waking up
because they ran out, and then having to really wake up to put
them into their charger, and then not having them for the next
~hour of attempted sleep.

> however, if they do need to charge *and* listen at the same time
> (not a common use case),

During those flights above, because a non-stupid traveler
knows better than to land with a dead phone.

> they can put the phone on a wireless charging pad,

I literally have well over a million air miles and have never
seen anyone trying to use a wireless charging pad on a flight.

> and using bluetooth headphones, roam about the house without
> issue, even out into the yard.

Traditional BT is only good for 10m. Apple's 30m claim is
under ideal non-obstructed conditions, but since they're a
hard plastic design, are doomed for many to be dropped & lost.

> > c) the argument about "including the headphones *in* *the* *box*"
> > assumes that they're not a piece of crap. Apple's "in the box"
> > headphones are for many people, a "piece of crap", which is why
> > there's a viable aftermarket.
>
> not very many, since they're the most popular headphones used,

Because they count each set that comes in the box. QED.

> ...however, for those who do think they're crap, they can
> buy something else, which is...

...which is why there's a 3rd party market, even though much
of it for Apple customers now require the hassles of a dongle
to be used with current iPhones.

> > For a personal example, Apple's headphones have *never* fit my
> > ear canals adequately - - they fall out at the slightest move.
>
> try duct tape.

Unlike you, I still have hair.

> > As such, I can't wear them and *always* have to buy a 3rd Party
> > aftermarket set...and Apple's Lightning-to-3.5mm adaptor is no
> > longer included with their phones.
>
> add $10 to the price of the headphones. no big deal.

Which is +100% to the cost of a cheap set, and even +33% to
+50% to the cost of a basic set.

And if $10 really is not a big deal to you, then show it by mailing
$10 cash this week to each poster on USENET who's disagreed with you;
for me, my mailing address can be found in my domain registry.

> > > > > the future is wireless. wired headphones (on any device)
> > > > > are very limiting.
> > > >
> > > > My reference headphones are wired only. An bluetooth is still
> > > > crap quality, if one is discerning.
> > >
> > > then you've not used better bluetooth headphones.
> > >
> > > however, even for the lesser models, the convenience of wireless
> > > is substantial. no longer is someone limited to 3 feet of wire,
> > > which will almost certainly get tangled or caught in something.
> >
> > As opposed the the "certainty" of having a wireless earbud fall
> > out of one's ear and get lost?
>
> it's not a certainty.

Then neither is your claim of dire consequences from cords.

> it's *really* hard to get airpods to fall out, even when jumping,
> dancing, shaking one's head, etc., as numerous youtube videos
> demonstrate.

You're invited to come to my place, insert them in my ears
yourself without causing pain or injury and I'll jump/shake
for two minutes. Each time one falls out, you'll pay me $100
each time. Clock will stop for headphone reset each time.
If none of them fall out, I'll pay you $500 in cash. Post your
travel details and I'll livestream it for the readership to enjoy.

> other bluetooth headphones have fitted eartips, nubs that hold them in
> the ear or over the ear clips.

Even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut: congratulations!

> wired headphones are *more* likely to fall out due to the extra weight
> of the wire constantly tugging, and also risks getting caught, which
> will pull it out of the ear and sometimes cause damage.

That presumes an "all other factors equal", which doesn't apply
when the 3rd party product was chosen to have a different earpiece
from Apple's, such as a soft and/or fitted eartip.

> > Likewise, the relative convenience of not having a wire around
> > is a trade-off of having yet another device with a battery that
> > requires recharging and maintenance. Choose your poison.
>
> it is a tradeoff, and most people are choosing wireless over wired.

Sorry, but because as you noted that Apple provides a wired set
in every box, there's still more wired sets "being chosen" out there,
even when some fraction of them are later replaced.

> > > > Access for a 3.5\mm jack plug ? Without a kludge ?
> > >
> > > you did not specify an obsolete 3.5mm headphone jack.
> >
> > Considering that Apple's brand new 2020 laptops have a 3.5mm
> > jack, it is incorrect to claim that interface as "obsolete".
>
> it is obsolete, however, macbooks are an entirely different use case
> than phones, where they are often connected to legacy audio equipment.

I didn't say only Macbooks.

It is **every** Mac that Apple sells.

> it's very rare that anyone uses headphones with a macbook.

You've made it obvious that you've not been teleworking the past
two months, or for that matter, had been working in an office with
coworkers under age 40 for … oh, at least the past _decade_.

> > > every iphone comes with headphones in the box, which plug
> > > directly into the iphone without any adapter.
> > >
> > > third parties also sell headphones that do the same.
> > >
> > > for older headphones, there is no kludge. connect an adapter
> > > to the 3.5mm plug Š
> >
> > The adaptor is the klunge.
>
> it is not a kludge.

All dongles are kludges from not having the appropriate interface built-in.

> connectors change over time. i've listed several, including
> usb/serial, dvi/vga and usb-c/usb-a.

The point here includes noting that going from two connector
ports to just one degrades the capabilities of the product.

> > Now are those adaptors free? Nope.
> > Nor is one even included "in the box" anymore.
>
> $10, which is almost free.

Have you mailed out those $10 bills yet?

> > > prior to the iphone, ...
> >
> > The introduction of the iPhone was ~13 years ago, which
> > in tech is "ancient history".
>
> which means it's time to move forward.
>
> > We can similarly note that we used Roman numerals before
> > Western Arabic numerals were adopted in the 9th century.
>
> straw man.

Your numbering system is 1,100 years old - time to move on!

> > > transitions can be a hassle, but it's the only way to move
> > > technology forward.
> >
> > Transitions are justified only when it is actually a step _forward_.
>
> it is very much a step forward.
>
> the capabilities of a digital headphone jack are *significantly*
> greater than anything analogue can possibly do, opening up many more
> opportunities not previously possible, some of which are outlined
> below.
>
> it's also significantly more reliable, eliminating one of the most
> common failure points.

If Apple had put TWO lightning ports on their iPhones, I'd not be
as critical.

And FYI, Apple is making the same mistake with their Thunderbolt 3
ports: having only two of them on a laptop pretty much dooms the
customer to a net larger footprint from having to add a T3 "hub",
which is a step backwards in functional portability.

> another key advantage is that the space it took up can be better used
> for other purposes, plus it also makes sealing it against liquid and
> dirt incursion much easier.

So long as there's any open port, going from 2 to 1 doesn't make
a real difference. Plus there are waterproof versions of the 3.5mm
headphone jack, so "get rid of it" isn't the only available solution.

> > ...particularly since a Lightning-based headset will work in
> > an iPhone which also has a 3.5mm jack - - but it now can't
> > do double-duty plugging into your Macintosh computer, because
> > the latter doesn't have a Lightning port.
>
> except that almost nobody does that.

You've also not worked with "Mac people" since 2016 either.

> nevertheless, bluetooth headphones solves that problem.

At a cost. NSTAAFL applies.


-hh

[recscub...@huntzinger.com]

On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 1:15:42 PM UTC-4, Chris wrote:

> -hh wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 13, 2020 at 11:16:51 AM UTC-4, nospam wrote:
> >> geoff wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> Plugging my preferred headphones straight into them. At
> >>>>> At least without an additional kludge is the main thing.
> >>>>
> >>>> headphones plug straight into *every* iphone ever made, without
> >>>> any kludge at all, including the headphones *in* *the* *box*.
> >>>
> >>> How exactly, if no 3.5 ?
> >>
> >> by using the more capable and more reliable digital headphone
> >> jack found on modern smartphones, both ios and android.
> >
> > We've been through this particular debate before. The problem
> > with Apple's Lightning port also incorporating the function of
> > the legacy 3.5mm headphone jack is at least the following trades:
> >
> > a) Said port is proprietary and incurs a licensing fee,
> > which is a burden on headphone suppliers because of product
> > fragmentation and/or increased manufacturing costs.
>
> Yep. Meaning there are very, very few models available. Practically
> all, like 99%, current wired headphones are analogue.

On Amazon, it initially looks like there's a lot of options,
but one has to read the fine print for "...devices requires
lightning plug adaptor for iPhone 7..."

> > b) Utilization of said port for a headset makes it non-available
> > for other uses, such as recharging the device. The work-around
> > is to buy a dongle, which again increases net consumer costs
> > because the device has functionally become less capable by only
> > having a single interface instead of two.
>
> Yep. Have direct experience of this. Tried a third party dongle which
> doubled up the analogue port with a lightning. It was cheap crap that
> didn't last. Can't find any decent quality alternative.

Apple doesn't sell an OEM one. Closest one can come to it that
I've found so far is "Belkin Lightning Audio + Charge Rockstar"
for $40, plus then the $9 Apple OEM lightning-3.5mm dongle.

But since that's (just barely) under $50 (before taxes & shipping),
nospam will wave his hand as a supposedly trivial expense. /s

> > c) the argument about "including the headphones *in* *the* *box*"
> > assumes that they're not a piece of crap. Apple's "in the box"
> > headphones are for many people, a "piece of crap", which is why
> > there's a viable aftermarket.
>
> Yep. They sound poor and don't fit well being hard plastic.

You need to drill a hole in your head and use duct tape! /S

> >> however, even for the lesser models, the convenience of wireless
> >> is substantial. no longer is someone limited to 3 feet of wire,
> >> which will almost certainly get tangled or caught in something.
> >
> > As opposed the the "certainty" of having a wireless earbud fall
> > out of one's ear and get lost?
>
> Actually that's extremely rare. My kids regularly go on in runs
> with their AirPods and they never fall out.

Some people are lucky; I've a couple of coworkers who've
looked into creating rematched sets.

> > Likewise, the relative convenience of not having a wire around
> > is a trade-off of having yet another device with a battery that
> > requires recharging and maintenance. Choose your poison.
>
> Yep. They have a very limited lifetime compared to wired ones. I have
> headphones that are decades old. You can get Apple to "replace" the
> battery in AirPods, which basically means you get new ones and they through
> the old ones away.
>
> We're supposed to be reducing waste not increased it.

Having a user-replaceable battery is also a godsend too; I have
a (surprised I've not worn them out yet) set of NC buds that
uses a single AAA; just one spare Alkaline provides ~30 hours,
enough to last a week and get me home from any continent.

> > Given that the capabilities of an iPhone which lacks a 3.5mm
> > port are less than the capabilities of the same iPhone with,
> > just what the actual benefit is for the customer is not clear.
> >
> > ...particularly since a Lightning-based headset will work in
> > an iPhone which also has a 3.5mm jack - - but it now can't
> > do double-duty plugging into your Macintosh computer, because
> > the latter doesn't have a Lightning port.
>
> Nor anything else that traditionally has a headphone socket:
> radios, hifis, PCs, cars, etc.
>
> And then what happens when Apple changes the lightning port i.e.
> to move to USB-C? All the headphones will be definitely obsolete.

Use the $10 that nospam's going to send you to prove his claim
that all of those costs are trivial...and then invest it wisely!


-hh

[Wilf]

On 15/05/2020 17:18, nospam wrote:
> it's *really* hard to get airpods to fall out, even when jumping,
> dancing, shaking one's head, etc., as numerous youtube videos
> demonstrate.

Not if they don't fit in your ears properly in the first place, which is
why I can't use them. (is it ok for me to say this here?). It's not a
huge deal, but my point is that one person's experience isn't
necessarily another's, so it's not helpful to assert things such as
earphone fit as an absolute given.

Wilf

[nospam]

In article <560875b4-3a5b-4cb7...@googlegroups.com>,

<recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:

> > > a) Said port is proprietary and incurs a licensing fee,
> > > which is a burden on headphone suppliers because of product
> > > fragmentation and/or increased manufacturing costs.
> >
> > the cost to headphone makers is negligible, and zero with an adapter.
>
> Last time I checked, there's still Apple's $4 license fee.

there's nothing to check, since licensing fees are not public and the
ndas are very strong. anyone claiming numbers is talking out their
butthole.

> That's why Apple's adaptor costs $9 on the Apple Store.

nope. the price of apple's adapter is what they think is a fair price.

in fact, apple's lightning adapter is actually *cheaper* than google's
usb-c adapter, which does not have any licensing fees:
<https://store.google.com/us/product/usb_c_headphone_adapter>

> > and using bluetooth headphones, roam about the house without
> > issue, even out into the yard.
>
> Traditional BT is only good for 10m.

traditional bluetooth is obsolete.

the official specs for bluetooth 4 is 200 feet and for bluetooth 5 is
800 feet, and that's without apple's w1 or h1 chip.

> Apple's 30m claim is
> under ideal non-obstructed conditions, but since they're a
> hard plastic design, are doomed for many to be dropped & lost.

you clearly have never used airpods.

30m (~100 ft) is a reasonable real-world estimate, given the
theoretical limits of bluetooth 4 & 5, and more than enough to cover a
house, including to another floor and out into the yard. btdt.

> > > c) the argument about "including the headphones *in* *the* *box*"
> > > assumes that they're not a piece of crap. Apple's "in the box"
> > > headphones are for many people, a "piece of crap", which is why
> > > there's a viable aftermarket.
> >
> > not very many, since they're the most popular headphones used,
>
> Because they count each set that comes in the box. QED.

nope. i'm not talking about what's in the box.

i'm talking about what people are actually using every day in real
world everyday usage.

before the lockdown, when crowds were common and it was easy to see
what people were using, the majority had wireless headphones, mostly
airpods but a small assortment of others.

of those who were using wired, there was *no* adapter. the headphones
were plugged directly into the lightning or usb-c port.

it was very rare to see an adapter being used.

with the lockdown, that may have changed to no headphones at all, wired
or wireless, since people are at home and won't be disturbing anyone by
using the phone's internal speakers.

> > ...however, for those who do think they're crap, they can
> > buy something else, which is...
>
> ...which is why there's a 3rd party market, even though much
> of it for Apple customers now require the hassles of a dongle
> to be used with current iPhones.

there is no hassle whatsoever.

connect the adapter to the end of the headphones and they're now
lightning headphones.

it only needs to be done once.

>
> > > > > Access for a 3.5\mm jack plug ? Without a kludge ?
> > > >
> > > > you did not specify an obsolete 3.5mm headphone jack.
> > >
> > > Considering that Apple's brand new 2020 laptops have a 3.5mm
> > > jack, it is incorrect to claim that interface as "obsolete".
> >
> > it is obsolete, however, macbooks are an entirely different use case
> > than phones, where they are often connected to legacy audio equipment.
>
> I didn't say only Macbooks.
>
> It is **every** Mac that Apple sells.

you said 'apple's brand new 2020 laptops'. that would be macbooks.

not that it matters, since headphones are rarely used on laptop or
desktop computers, mac or pc. however, what *is* common is connecting
to legacy audio equipment with legacy connectors, for video and audio
production.

switching to lightning on macbooks would be a *huge* mistake.

> > it's very rare that anyone uses headphones with a macbook.
>
> You've made it obvious that you've not been teleworking the past
> two months, or for that matter, had been working in an office with

> coworkers under age 40 for Š oh, at least the past _decade_.

until just recently, teleworking was not common, certainly not anything
anyone planned for or expected to happen so suddenly.

keep in mind that the airpods people have for their iphones will work
with their macs without needing to pair them, since one of the coolest
features is that the pairing from their phone automatically syncs
across all of the user's devices.

> > > > every iphone comes with headphones in the box, which plug
> > > > directly into the iphone without any adapter.
> > > >
> > > > third parties also sell headphones that do the same.
> > > >
> > > > for older headphones, there is no kludge. connect an adapter

> > > > to the 3.5mm plug ?

> > >
> > > The adaptor is the klunge.
> >
> > it is not a kludge.
>
> All dongles are kludges from not having the appropriate interface built-in.

false.

> > connectors change over time. i've listed several, including
> > usb/serial, dvi/vga and usb-c/usb-a.
>
> The point here includes noting that going from two connector
> ports to just one degrades the capabilities of the product.

except when one of them is redundant.

everything that can be done with an analogue jack can be done as good
or better with a digital jack. it's also more reliable.

this is also not unique to headphones.

usb made serial, parallel, adb and ps/2 ports redundant, so they were
removed, along with adding faster speeds, hot-plugging and the ability
to connect a lot of new devices that would otherwise not have been
possible.

it's called progress.

without progress, we'd still be using vga ports and low resolution
displays, serial printers (or worse, parallel), adb or ps/2 mice (or
worse, serial, as were the very early mice).

> And FYI, Apple is making the same mistake with their Thunderbolt 3
> ports: having only two of them on a laptop pretty much dooms the
> customer to a net larger footprint from having to add a T3 "hub",
> which is a step backwards in functional portability.

no it doesn't, since most people don't connect a lot of peripherals to
a laptop at the same time.

in fact, most do not connect anything other than power, and perhaps a
usb stick once in a while.

the future is wireless.

[geoff]

On 15/05/2020 10:10 pm, nospam wrote:
> In article <NY2dnVfQQfoDlSPD...@giganews.com>, geoff
> <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> meanwhile, android has changed it *many* times, including mini-usb,
>>>>>>> ext-usb, micro-usb, micro-usb3 and usb-c, and for usb-c, some devices
>>>>>>> are still usb 2 while others are usb 3. it's a confusing mess.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why do you think that Android is a brand of cellphone and specifies a
>>>>>> connector ?
>>>>>
>>>>> i don't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So how come "Android changed it *many* times ....", as above ?
>>>
>>> android devices. clearer now?
>>>
>>> all of those connectors have been used on android devices in the same
>>> time span that apple had two connectors, and if you skip ext-usb, only
>>> *one* connector.
>>>
>>> your claim that apple keeps changing connectors is false.
>>>
>>
>> 30-pin, Lightning, and supposedly next to USB-C and/or purely wireless
>
> apple has only had the 30 pin dock connector and lightning. that's
> *two* connectors.

"supposedly next ..." . 2 + 1 = ?

>
> trying to count rumoured future products, especially bogus rumours, is
> extremely disingenuous.

Thought that was a fairly firm intention. rBeat me with a club if I am
in error.

>
> oh, and there already is a purely wireless zero port android phone:

Wow. And there are hundreds that aren't. You still appear to confuse
Android with a brand of phone, or deliberately blur the distinction..

>
> <https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2019/1/23/18194178/meizu-zero-p
> hone-trends-hole-ports-buttons>
> Phones have been shedding ports and buttons for a while now.
> Headphone jacks are going extinct on most devices, and home and
> back buttons have been replaced on nearly every iOS and Android
> phone with software UIs. The new Meizu Zero is the first to take that
> trend to its natural endpoint: it has no ports, buttons, or holes
> that mar the exterior of the device.
>

> According to Meizu, the Zero has ³no buttons, no speakers holes,

> no SIM card slot, [and] no charging port.² Most of the exterior of

> the device is a seamless slab of ceramic (an effect that¹s only

> slightly ruined by a protruding camera bump on the back and
> what appear to be microphone holes on the bottom).

So .... ?

geoff

[geoff]

My ancient C Cowon media player uses something propriety(?) bewteen
30-pin and micro-USB. I think it has its own OS.

geoff

[geoff]

I wish you'd stop calling people wish a different opinion to your "Liar".

Are you quite a small man by any chance ?

geog

[geoff]

On 16/05/2020 4:09 am, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2020-05-14, geoff <ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

>> On 15/05/2020 11:49 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> On 2020-05-14 4:43 p.m., geoff wrote:

>>>> On 15/05/2020 7:33 am, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>> On 2020-05-13 2:03 p.m., geoff wrote:
>>>>>> On 14/05/2020 3:16 am, nospam wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it's a non-issue.

>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's an issue if\, as I said, I want to use MY choice of
>>>>>> headphones.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not if you just buy a $10 adapter.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly. Which is a kludge and more fragile.
>>>
>>> Why? Why need it be "more fragile"?
>>
>> Because it protrudes and increases the fragility due to the increased
>> moment of the fulcrum.
>

> Again, it's a non-issue. I've been using a couple of these adapters for
> multiple years without issue.
>

Lucky you. According to nospam a main advantage of Lightning is how
easily the plug breaks of, in order to protect the socket.

geoff

[Alan Baker]

I wish you'd answer the question I asked which completely destroys your
argument that an adapter makes your system more liable to experience
damage...

...but you ran away from that one, didn't you?

:-)

[Alan Baker]

Cat got your keyboard, Geoff?

Or are you embarrassed that you didn't see this earlier?

:-)

[nospam]

In article <GPadnQYToMS1uSLD...@giganews.com>, geoff

<ge...@nospamgeoffwood.org> wrote:

> >>>
> >>
> >> 30-pin, Lightning, and supposedly next to USB-C and/or purely wireless
> >
> > apple has only had the 30 pin dock connector and lightning. that's
> > *two* connectors.
>
> "supposedly next ..." . 2 + 1 = ?

what is supposedly next does not count until it actually happens, if it
does at all.

iphones have had only two connectors. full stop.

android phones have had a total of five connectors, or six if you count
port-less phones.

if you skip ext-usb, then android phones have had four connectors in
the same timespan as iphones had *one* connector.

your claim that apple keeps changing connectors is false.

> > trying to count rumoured future products, especially bogus rumours, is
> > extremely disingenuous.
>
> Thought that was a fairly firm intention. rBeat me with a club if I am
> in error.

as you wish.

there is no valid reason why iphones switching to usb-c makes any sense
at all, and a shitload of reasons why it's a bad idea.

> > oh, and there already is a purely wireless zero port android phone:
>
> Wow. And there are hundreds that aren't. You still appear to confuse
> Android with a brand of phone, or deliberately blur the distinction..

i'm not the one who is confused.

someone has to be first, and for no ports, it's the meizu zero, which
is an android device.

> > <https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2019/1/23/18194178/meizu-zero-p
> > hone-trends-hole-ports-buttons>
> > Phones have been shedding ports and buttons for a while now.
> > Headphone jacks are going extinct on most devices, and home and
> > back buttons have been replaced on nearly every iOS and Android
> > phone with software UIs. The new Meizu Zero is the first to take that
> > trend to its natural endpoint: it has no ports, buttons, or holes
> > that mar the exterior of the device.
> >

> > According to Meizu, the Zero has 3no buttons, no speakers holes,
> > no SIM card slot, [and] no charging port.2 Most of the exterior of
> > the device is a seamless slab of ceramic (an effect that1s only

> > slightly ruined by a protruding camera bump on the back and
> > what appear to be microphone holes on the bottom).
>
> So .... ?

the so is that if apple were to do the same and make an iphone without
ports, they'd be widely criticized, despite other companies having done
so before them, the same as what happened with the headphone jack.

and it looks like meizu isn't the only one:
<https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/28/21157292/vivo-apex-2020-concept-phon
e-cameras-screen-specs>
Like last yearıs Apex, the 2020 model has no ports or openings
and uses virtual buttons, which didnıt work too well in conceptual
form but were much improved on with the commercial Nex 3.

google is also rumoured to be considering it for future pixel phones.

the future is wireless.

[sms]

On 5/15/2020 4:31 PM, geoff wrote:

<snip>

> Lucky you. According to nospam a main advantage of Lightning is how
> easily the plug breaks of, in order to protect the socket.

LOL. Seriously, one nice thing about 3.5mm audio cables for phones is
that you can get them with right angle, very low profile plugs that are
less likely to act as a fulcrum.

The bigger issue is charging and listening at the same time, though
there are Lightning adapters with both a 3.5mm audio jack and another
Lightning connector for power.

Personally I don't like it when equipment manufacturers remove I/O ports
then make you buy, and carry around, dongles to gain back the
functionality that was decontented. I was setting up a cable modem the
other day and realized that my newest laptop lacked an Ethernet
connection. I had a USB-C to Ethernet adapter handy but how many people do?

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-15 6:14 p.m., sms wrote:
> On 5/15/2020 4:31 PM, geoff wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Lucky you. According to nospam a main advantage of Lightning is how
>> easily the plug breaks of, in order to protect the socket.
>
> LOL. Seriously, one nice thing about 3.5mm audio cables for phones is
> that you can get them with right angle, very low profile plugs that are
> less likely to act as a fulcrum.

A flexible lightning to 3.5mm adapter means that the 3.5mm connection
ends up align with any tension put on the cable...

...and then it will part long before any damage to the Lightning port
can happen.

>
> The bigger issue is charging and listening at the same time, though
> there are Lightning adapters with both a 3.5mm audio jack and another
> Lightning connector for power.
>
> Personally I don't like it when equipment manufacturers remove I/O ports
> then make you buy, and carry around, dongles to gain back the
> functionality that was decontented. I was setting up a cable modem the
> other day and realized that my newest laptop lacked an Ethernet
> connection. I had a USB-C to Ethernet adapter handy but how many people do?

I'm guessing almost everyone who has a laptop without an Ethernet port
and a need to connect to Ethernet.

It's just something that the vast majority of purchasers no longer do,
Steve.

[nospam]

In article <r9neq9$usf$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> > Lucky you. According to nospam a main advantage of Lightning is how
> > easily the plug breaks of, in order to protect the socket.
>
> LOL. Seriously, one nice thing about 3.5mm audio cables for phones is
> that you can get them with right angle, very low profile plugs that are
> less likely to act as a fulcrum.

<https://www.dewalt.com/products/accessories/miscellaneous-accessories/m
obile-accessories/90degree-audio-adapter-for-lightning/dxma1909037>

<https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61XNa457IRL._AC_SY450_.
jpg>

there's even a 180 degree cable:
<https://d2211byn0pk9fi.cloudfront.net/spree/products/81655/product/NR_A
8712011.jpg?1581070979>

> The bigger issue is charging and listening at the same time, though
> there are Lightning adapters with both a 3.5mm audio jack and another
> Lightning connector for power.

not an issue with wireless charging, which you keep claiming is much
better than wired charging.

it's actually not better, but it does allow for simultaneous charging
and headphone use.

it's also very rare that anyone actually needs to do that, especially
since audio playback is rated for 65 hours, and 80 hours for the pro
max.

> Personally I don't like it when equipment manufacturers remove I/O ports
> then make you buy, and carry around, dongles to gain back the
> functionality that was decontented.

there's nothing to carry around.

the bundled headphones plug in directly to the phone.

bluetooth headphones from any manufacturer work without dongles.

lightning headphones are available from several manufacturers, which
also plug in directly to the phone.

> I was setting up a cable modem the
> other day and realized that my newest laptop lacked an Ethernet
> connection. I had a USB-C to Ethernet adapter handy but how many people do?

use wifi, which is enabled by default.

another fabricated issue.

[Savageduck]

On May 15, 2020, sms wrote
(in article <r9neq9$usf$1...@dont-email.me>):

> On 5/15/2020 4:31 PM, geoff wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Lucky you. According to nospam a main advantage of Lightning is how
> > easily the plug breaks of, in order to protect the socket.
>
> LOL. Seriously, one nice thing about 3.5mm audio cables for phones is
> that you can get them with right angle, very low profile plugs that are
> less likely to act as a fulcrum.
>
> The bigger issue is charging and listening at the same time, though
> there are Lightning adapters with both a 3.5mm audio jack and another
> Lightning connector for power.

Being able to listen and charge at the same time with Lightning iOS devices is achievable with Pioneer Rayz Plus, which have a lightning connector, and an inline Lightning charging adaptor. They also have a USB-C version.

<https://www.pioneerrayz.com/earphones/rayz-plus>

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[Arlen Holder]

In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :

> your claim that apple keeps changing connectors is false.

Did you read the news today, nospam?
o *Apple is preparing to remove the traditional ports from next year's iPhone*

Everything in this post is _verbatim_ from this report today:
o *Apple Plans For A Radical Port-less iPhone*
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2020/05/15/apple-news-headlines-iphone-12-leak-design-usbc-lighning-iphone-se-macbook-pro-arm-intel-ipad/>

"Apple is preparing to remove the traditional ports from next year's iPhone.

Although the iPhone 12 is expected to bring in a number of changes,
2021's iPhone is preparing a radical step¡K to take away the
lightning port, to ignore USB-C, and to rely on just the smart
connector for any physical connections.

Forbes' Gordon Kelly: "[Front Page Tech's Jon Prosser] has now
added further information about this port-less phone.

He explains that there will technically be a port, in the form
of an Apple Smart Connector, but no port slot like you'd find
with Lightning or USB-C."
--
Apple is preparing to remove the traditional ports from next year's iPhone.

[geoff]

No..

geoff

[geoff]

Depends how hard you pull.

A 3.5mmm jack socket is lengthwise onto the pcb and is hugely stronger
that digital connector - Lightning or USB (Mini-USB being the most
resilient of the 3 on mobile phones due to its large/stronger pcb
lead-outs).

geoff

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-05-15 10:59 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> In response to what nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote :
>
>> your claim that apple keeps changing connectors is false.
>
> Did you read the news today, nospam?
> o *Apple is preparing to remove the traditional ports from next year's
> iPhone*

Where you wrote "news", you should replace it with "rumour".

>
> Everything in this post is _verbatim_ from this report today:
> o *Apple Plans For A Radical Port-less iPhone*
> <https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2020/05/15/apple-news-headlines-iphone-12-leak-design-usbc-lighning-iphone-se-macbook-pro-arm-intel-ipad/>

You get that "verbatim" doesn't mean "true" or "factual"...

...right?

>
>
> "Apple is preparing to remove the traditional ports from next year's
> iPhone.
> Although the iPhone 12 is expected to bring in a number of changes,
> 2021's iPhone is preparing a radical step�K to take away the lightning
> port, to ignore USB-C, and to rely on just the smart connector for any
> physical connections.
> Forbes' Gordon Kelly: "[Front Page Tech's Jon Prosser] has now added
> further information about this port-less phone.
> He explains that there will technically be a port, in the form of an
> Apple Smart Connector, but no port slot like you'd find with Lightning
> or USB-C."

So Ewan Spence of Forbes is reporting on what Forbes' Gordon Kelly is
reporting on what Jon Prosser claims an anonymous source has told him.

That's what you've got?

Oh, and one more thing:

In your eagerness to show off your supposedly great knowledge, you never
checked on what Gordon Kelly had ACTUALLY said.

'The news comes from Front Page Tech’s Jon Prosser, the standout Apple
leaker of 2020 with a near-perfect track record. Prosser explains that
Apple will remove the Lightning port but not for USB-C, instead the
company will shock the industry with the first “portless iPhone coming
next year”.

[You get that "next year" means 2021, right, twit?]

...

So should you wait for this big 2021 iPhone redesign? If you have an
iPhone 11 or iPhone XS model, I think so. That said, Apple is bringing a
lot to the table this year with new phone sizes, 5G across the range, a
potentially groundbreaking new chipset, upgraded cameras alongside the
company’s new LiDAR sensor and - most importantly - a price point that
is set to undercut the competition.

So yes, 2021 sounds radical but Apple’s 2020 iPhone plans are exciting
as well. For iPhone fans looking to upgrade, it’s going to be a tough call.'

The iPhone 12 isn't the one that is rumoured to be without a traditional
port, twit.

It is the NEXT iPhone after that.

Prosser's original tweet:

'One portless iPhone coming next year.

Never USB-C. Eventually, they’ll all be portless.'

<https://mobile.twitter.com/jon_prosser/status/1260518359332007936>

So:

Not the iPhone 12.

Not all iPhones at first.

And all speculation and rumour at this point.