Review: Apple's "goofy looking" horribly expensive $550 AirPods don't even have the most basic of functionality

[Arlen Holder]

Dateline today...
o These goofy looking horribly expensive AirPods lack basic functionality.

Verbatim because apologists deny whatever facts they _hate_ about Apple,
where apologists blame everyone but Apple for Apple's own decisions.
o Apple always _removes_ functionality so they can sell it back to you!

"One thing you will not find: a 3.5mm or 2.5mm analog audio input,
which is standard issue on noise-canceling headphones at this price
point - that's how you plug into an airplane seat-back entertainment
system to watch the movie.

Apple knows this is a common use case, because it is selling a $35
3.5mm-to-Lightning cable for exactly that purpose.

That brings you to $585 for the AirPods Max, which is just $15 less
than an entire iPhone 11."

o At $549, they need to deliver more than just good sound
<https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/10/22166888/apple-airpods-max-design-comfort-price-features>

"I have no idea what's going on with the AirPods Max case,
which is a goofy one-piece contraption that's folded
and glued over on itself to form a case."

"It is one of the cheaper-feeling things Apple has ever made,
in my estimation - the second in a trend that started with the
MagSafe Duo Charger. I hope there is not a third thing."

"Whether Apple has actually done enough here to justify the staggering
premium over the competition is an open question"
--
Apple's strategy is to remove basic functionality so you will buy it back.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-12-10 7:48 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> Dateline today...
> o These goofy looking horribly expensive AirPods lack basic functionality.
>
> Verbatim because apologists deny whatever facts they _hate_ about Apple,
> where apologists blame everyone but Apple for Apple's own decisions.
> o Apple always _removes_ functionality so they can sell it back to you!
>
> "One thing you will not find: a 3.5mm or 2.5mm analog audio input,
> which is standard issue on noise-canceling headphones at this price
> point - that's how you plug into an airplane seat-back entertainment
> system to watch the movie.
>
> Apple knows this is a common use case, because it is selling a $35
> 3.5mm-to-Lightning cable for exactly that purpose.
>
> That brings you to $585 for the AirPods Max, which is just $15 less
> than an entire iPhone 11."

Ummmmmmm.... ...no.

1. Apple doesn't sell a $35 Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cable. It's $9USD.

2. Apple doesn't sell it so that people can watch movies on flights.

[b...@ripco.com]

In comp.sys.mac.system Alan Baker <notony...@no.no.no.no> wrote:

> 1. Apple doesn't sell a $35 Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cable. It's $9USD.

Not to start an argument but the adapter is $9, the cable (1.2m) is in fact
$35.

Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the
headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just
isn't going to work.

-bruce
b...@ripco.com

[b...@ripco.com]

In comp.sys.mac.system b...@ripco.com wrote:

> Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the
> headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just
> isn't going to work.

Never mind, this is wrong on my part.

I'm not sure what that adapter and/or cable could be used for except to use
with a home stereo. 1/4" to 1/8" adapter, a 1/8" extention cable to the
adapter, adapter into the phone.

Seems messy.

But can they really be used that way?

Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.

I know that adapter is used to connect wired headphones to the lightning
port on phones without the headphone jack, but does it work in reverse?

-bruce
b...@ripco.com

[Arlen Holder]

On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:21:16 -0000 (UTC), b...@ripco.com wrote:

> Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.

This is more evidence Apple removes functionality so you can buy it back.

I think it's interesting that headphones that ungodly expensive don't even
have the most basic of the most common of the most useful functionality.

It's more evidence of why I claim Apple's ungodly profits are due solely to
their brilliant MARKETING which caters to an extremely gullible customer.

You just can't make those ungodly profits off an intelligent customer.
o You just can't.

Are you sure you can sit back in an airplane seat & listen while plugged in
o For _less_ than the $35 for the "audio" cable Apple is promoting

Do you have a cite for your proof that it does _not_ cost that 35 bucks
o Just to get back the basic functionality that Apple removed on purpose
--
This is more evidence Apple removes functionality so you can buy it back.

[Arlen Holder]

On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:59:28 -0000 (UTC), b...@ripco.com wrote:

>> 1. Apple doesn't sell a $35 Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cable. It's $9USD.
>
> Not to start an argument but the adapter is $9, the cable (1.2m) is in fact
> $35.

Hi BJE,

I saw your retraction which came after this post, but are you sure of that?
o Alan Baker brazenly denies _all_ facts he simply doesn't like about Apple

So his credibility (as with all the apologists), is utterly worthless
o People that wrong that often couldn't last a week in the Silicon Valley

This is yet another example of apologists brazenly denying reliable cites:
o Review: Apple's "goofy looking" horribly expensive $550 AirPods don't
even have the most basic of functionality
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/REJLJ4fYTfU>

I don't see any of Alan Baker's idiotic (always wrong) posts unless/until
someone responds, where it's always these Type III apologists who can't
even click on links before they brazenly deny Apple does what Apple clearly
does.

This was published 2 days ago, which seems to confirm a $35 "audio" cable:
o Apple releases $35 bi-directional Lightning to 3.5mm Audio Cable
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/12/08/apple-releases-35-bi-directional-lightning-to-35mm-audio-cable>

"Apple has quietly added a Lightning to 3.5mm bi-directional audio
cable to its online Apple Store, a $35 accessory that can be used
with the just-launched AirPods Max"

It used to shock me how incredibly stupid (in different ways) apologists
are, but as always, it proves the problem with this newsgroup is simply
that the apologists exist (there are fewer than a half dozen adults).
o Type I (nospam) will defend MARKETING decisions to the death
o Type II (Alan Browne) never seem to be able to doublecheck facts
o Type III (Alan Baker) don't even _click_ on cites before denying them

"Surfacing in the online Apple Store on Tuesday and appearing as a
recommended item when ordering the AirPods Max, the Lightning to
3.5mm Audio Cable is a fairly straightforward product.

Measuring 1.2 meters (3.9 foot) in length, the cable has a 3.5mm
headphone jack on one end, and a Lightning connector on the other.

Apple advises it can be used to connect the AirPods Max and
Beats Solo Pro headphones to 3.5mm audio sources, which would enable the
personal audio accessories to work with hardware that doesn't offer
wireless connectivity.

It would also make the AirPods Max usable with the headphone jacks
supplied in modern airplane seats, an industry that doesn't like
passengers using wireless connectivity in general."
--
What's shocking is how apologists still brazenly deny all facts without
comprehending them, and, it always turns out, without even _clicking_ on
the cites before they brazenly deny what those cites clearly state.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-12-11 4:21 a.m., b...@ripco.com wrote:
> In comp.sys.mac.system b...@ripco.com wrote:
>
>> Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the
>> headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just
>> isn't going to work.
>
>
> Never mind, this is wrong on my part.
>
> I'm not sure what that adapter and/or cable could be used for except to use
> with a home stereo. 1/4" to 1/8" adapter, a 1/8" extention cable to the
> adapter, adapter into the phone.

How about any set of headphones with a 3.5mm plug?

>
> Seems messy.
>
> But can they really be used that way?
>
> Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.
>
> I know that adapter is used to connect wired headphones to the lightning
> port on phones without the headphone jack, but does it work in reverse?

Nope.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-12-11 7:21 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:21:16 -0000 (UTC), b...@ripco.com wrote:
>
>> Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.
>
> This is more evidence Apple removes functionality so you can buy it back.
>
> I think it's interesting that headphones that ungodly expensive don't even
> have the most basic of the most common of the most useful functionality.

Are they hiding the fact that their headphones don't have a 3.5mm plug?

No.

>
> It's more evidence of why I claim Apple's ungodly profits are due solely to
> their brilliant MARKETING which caters to an extremely gullible customer.
>
> You just can't make those ungodly profits off an intelligent customer.
> o You just can't.
>
> Are you sure you can sit back in an airplane seat & listen while plugged in
> o For _less_ than the $35 for the "audio" cable Apple is promoting

Yes.

>
> Do you have a cite for your proof that it does _not_ cost that 35 bucks
> o Just to get back the basic functionality that Apple removed on purpose
>

Do ever provide cites for your bullshit?

[Alan Baker]

'This isn't new. It's existed since the Beats Solo Pro and is cheaper on
Amazon.'

[Savageduck]

On Dec 11, 2020 at 4:21:16 AM PST, "b...@ripco.com" <b...@ripco.com> wrote:

> In comp.sys.mac.system b...@ripco.com wrote:
>
>> Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the
>> headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just
>> isn't going to work.
>
>
> Never mind, this is wrong on my part.
>
> I'm not sure what that adapter and/or cable could be used for except to use
> with a home stereo. 1/4" to 1/8" adapter, a 1/8" extention cable to the
> adapter, adapter into the phone.

The most common use of a Lightning(headphone end) to 3.5mm 1.2m cable will be
for the airline seat back audio outlet, as the airlines do not provide BT
connectivity.

> Seems messy.
>
> But can they really be used that way?
>
> Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.

...or via the optional 1.2 m Lightning to 3.5mm cable.

> I know that adapter is used to connect wired headphones to the lightning
> port on phones without the headphone jack, but does it work in reverse?
>

I doubt that would work, or even be necessary.
--
Regards,
Savageduck

[Fishrrman]

On 12/10/20 10:48 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> "Whether Apple has actually done enough here to justify the staggering
> premium over the competition is an open question"

(sigh)
I guess it's sumthin' about Apple mystique, or whatever.

For myself, I do fine with a pair of these:
https://www.amazon.com/Koss-KTXPRO1-Titanium-Portable-Headphones/dp/B00007056H

[Alan Baker]

That's why we have different products: because people have different needs.

I don't know if Apple's offering is worth the money...

...but the idea that if it succeeds it can ONLY mean that it's because
of the "mystique" is just such bullshit.

People buy Apple's products over and over and over, because they work
well for them.

[John]

Well damn. You technically incompetent dweebs. Though they were high
priced my new Airpods Max arrived from Best Buy today. Definitely
superior sound to Bose, Sony, and the B&W I own. Cost a little more but
sound quality can easily be discerned as being superior to everything
else priced at 549 or under. Easily. Was thinking about returning them
if they did not beat out the others. No way. I am keeping them and
selling all the others. After listening to the Airpods Max the others
just are not listenable anymore.

Sure the case is bullshit. But with the sound quality nothing else matters.

[sms]

I don't think anyone would use the wired connection when using the
headphones with their phone. The wired connection is mainly for use on
airplanes.

There's an extensive review that compares the Airpods Max to Bose and
Sony models:
<https://www.pcmag.com/news/apple-airpods-max-vs-bose-noise-cancelling-headphones-700-vs-sony-wh-1000xm4>.
Bottom line, the Airpods Max are pretty good, for a first generation
model, but have a way to go to catch Bose and Sony in several respects.

Low-Frequency Noise Cancellation: Winner: AirPods Max

Midrange and High-Frequency Noise Cancellation: Winner: Tie (Bose Noise
Cancelling Headphones 700 and Sony WH-1000XM4)

Adaptive Noise Cancellation: Winner: Tie (Bose Noise Cancelling
Headphones 700 and Sony WH-1000XM4)

Noise Cancellation Controls: Sony WH-1000XM4

Transparent/Ambient Monitoring: Winner: Sony WH-1000XM4

Audio Performance: Sony WH-1000XM4

Mic Clarity: Winner: Bose Noise Cancelling Headphones 700

Numerous reviews that state essentially the same conclusion: pretty
good, but not quite up to the Bose or Sony models, and too expensive.

[nospam]

In article <rrl3ur$1r7$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

>
> I don't think anyone would use the wired connection when using the
> headphones with their phone.

of course not, since phones have bluetooth, which sounds just as good
and is far more convenient.

> The wired connection is mainly for use on
> airplanes.

no it isn't. the wired connection is for older sound systems that lack
bluetooth.

very few people bring large headphones on a plane when much smaller
ones exist, notably airpods pro.

[Arlen Holder]

On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 23:50:46 -0800, John wrote:

> Though they were high priced my new Airpods Max

> Sure the case is bullshit.
> But with the sound quality nothing else matters.

Hi John,

FACTS & ASSESSMENT of facts are what sensible people comprehend.

You're correct on all three counts above:
a. The AirPods Max are ridiculously priced by all accounts
(save for Apple MARKETING who thinks they're perfectly priced).

b. The AirPods Max case is just laughable by all accounts
(one outfit called it a comical "shoulder boulder holder").

c. The sound quality is fantastic by most accounts I've seen to date

Tom's Hardware summarized some of the reviews:
o The Verge gave AirPods Max an 8.5 out of 10
o PC Mag gave AirPods Max an 4 out of 5
o Rolling Stone gave AirPods Max only complained about the port
o Marques Brownlee complained that they'll be ruined by sweat
etc.

Overall, nobody seems to be complaining about the sound quality.
o Is AirPods Max price worth it? The reviews are in
<https://www.tomsguide.com/news/airpods-max-review-roundup-read-this-before-you-buy>

What they complain about (logically so) are some of these things:
o Astronomically over priced
o Hard to repair (due to glue & non-user-removable batteries)
o No water resistance whatsoever
o Lightning port instead of a USB-C port
o Missing the U1 chip which would have added "high-end" value
o A carrying case that is the laughing stock of the industry
--
One bug.... and the entire untested core iOS house of cards falls down.
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/7Mc1sX9XISA>
Google asked "Was it really that easy?", to which the answer was "Yes".
Google proved iOS core code dating back to 1985 has _never_ been tested!

[sms]

On 12/12/2020 8:10 PM, Fishrrman wrote:
> On 12/10/20 10:48 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
>>   "Whether Apple has actually done enough here to justify the staggering
>>    premium over the competition is an open question"
>
> (sigh)
> I guess it's sumthin' about Apple mystique, or whatever.

Expect the early adopters to pay the $549 just because they're Apple
aficionados.

Given the numerous evaluations comparing them to the Bose and Sony
offerings, with the sound quality of the Airpods Max being excellent,
but not quite to the level of the competing products, the price will
likely come down to something more reasonable after the holidays, say $399.

[nospam]

In article <rrm170$qrs$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

> Given the numerous evaluations comparing them to the Bose and Sony
> offerings, with the sound quality of the Airpods Max being excellent,
> but not quite to the level of the competing products,

although sound quality is subjective, many people say it's better.

> the price will
> likely come down to something more reasonable after the holidays, say $399.

no, especially since they're currently backordered for 2-3 months.

[Savageduck]

On Dec 19, 2020, nospam wrote
(in article<191220201826009792%nos...@nospam.invalid>):

Current orders will deliver February 17-23.

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <0001HW.258EC8BA03...@news.giganews.com>,

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> > > the price will
> > > likely come down to something more reasonable after the holidays, say
> > > $399.
> >
> > no, especially since they're currently backordered for 2-3 months.
>
> Current orders will deliver February 17-23.

that's 2 months, and only for grey & silver.

for green, blue and pink, it's 12-14 weeks, or 3-3.5 months.

[Savageduck]

On Dec 19, 2020, nospam wrote

(in article<191220201854000568%nos...@nospam.invalid>):

Damn! What will I do without pink?

--
Regards,
Savageduck

[sms]

On 12/19/2020 3:48 PM, Savageduck wrote:

<snip>

> Current orders will deliver February 17-23.

Ah, then the price cuts will be delayed until the early adopters have
all made their purchases.

This is just so strange. It would be understandable if it were a much
better product than the Bose or Sony, in order to justify the much
higher price, but it's not. It's less capable and the sound quality is
not quite as good. I guess the fact that they're available in a choice
of colors is one plus. The free engraving is another plus.

I'm confused about the Lightning to 3.5mm cable description: "Connect
AirPods Max to your iOS or iPadOS device." If the Airpods Max have a
Lightning connector then the 3.5mm end of the cable can only connect to
an older iPhone that has a headphone jack or you have to also use the
short Lightning to 3.5mm jack adapter. Wouldn't you really want a
Lightning to Lightning cable for a wired connection to the iPhone? Plus
a USB-C to Lightning cable to use them with a Macbook. Of course this is
all moot if you use Bluetooth with your portable device as most people
probably will do.

Also, that cable
<https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MXK22AM/A/lightning-to-35-mm-audio-cable-12m-white>
has two design flaws. First of all it's too short at 1.2m, so a stereo
3.5mm extension cable will often be needed, i.e., if you stand up on an
airplane, to let someone out of your row, you don't want to have to
remove your headphones to do so. Second, for use on an airplane you
really want the 3.5mm plug to be a right-angle plug because the narrow
seat width in coach means you're going to need to be very careful not to
break the 3.5mm straight connector, especially on the $35 Apple cable.
Hopefully the $9 Lightning to 3.5 mm Headphone Jack Adapter will work in
both directions and you could use it with a male-male 3.5mm cable where
one side is right angle <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0793L4MST>.

It's pretty amazing that at $549 they don't include the necessary cable
to use them on an airplane, or with other devices, and the case is not
nearly as nice as what you get with the Sony.

On the Bose and the Sony (and even on cheaper noise canceling
over-the-ear headphones) you can charge them even while they're
connected to a wired source (like on an airplane), but once again Apple
has not included a 3.5mm jack. Maybe you can use one of those dongles
that has both a 3.5mm jack and Lightning jack to a Lightning plug
<https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HLJV2ZM/A/belkin-35-mm-audio-charge-rockstar>
so you can charge while connected to wired source.

And for g-d's sake, even the $72 Taotronics Sound Surge 90 has followed
Bose and Sony and charges via USB-C (like the iPad and MacBook). Can
Apple finally get with the program and move every new product to USB-C?!

Finally, one thing to take with you on international travel is one of
these: <https://www.adorama.com/hoymm492.html>. Surprisingly, there are
still some older airplanes that use the dual mono (left + right)
headphone jacks in the armrest. I ran into this in 2019 on a flight to
Italy. A lot of the older, wired, noise-cancelling headphones included
one of these adapters.

[nospam]

In article <rrn6q2$k7h$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

> > Current orders will deliver February 17-23.
>
> Ah, then the price cuts will be delayed until the early adopters have
> all made their purchases.

there are no price cuts coming anytime soon. you're trolling.

> This is just so strange. It would be understandable if it were a much
> better product than the Bose or Sony, in order to justify the much
> higher price, but it's not. It's less capable and the sound quality is
> not quite as good. I guess the fact that they're available in a choice
> of colors is one plus. The free engraving is another plus.

clearly trolling.

[Lewis]

In message <191220201826009792%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <rrm170$qrs$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>> Given the numerous evaluations comparing them to the Bose and Sony
>> offerings, with the sound quality of the Airpods Max being excellent,
>> but not quite to the level of the competing products,

> although sound quality is subjective, many people say it's better.

Certainly their is not question that they are significantly better at
high volumes, where the Sony products are well know for turning the
sound into a mush.

Early comments from audidweebs were that Apple's claims of <%1
disruption were impossible in headphones so cheap, but when they

--
> I miss the old days. I haven't killed anyone in years.
>
That's sad.

[Lewis]

In message <rrn6q2$k7h$1...@dont-email.me> sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> This is just so strange. It would be understandable if it were a much
> better product than the Bose or Sony,

They are. My Air Pods Pro (not Max) are MUCH better than my Sonys.
Spacial audio alone is an entirely different and far superior audio
experience to anything the Sonys can do.

> in order to justify the much higher price, but it's not.

You are free to not purchase them. No on cares that you think they are
too expensive.

> It's less capable and the sound quality is not quite as good. I guess
> the fact that they're available in a choice of colors is one plus. The
> free engraving is another plus.

And now you are just making shit up.

> It's pretty amazing that at $549 they don't include the necessary cable
> to use them on an airplane, or with other devices, and the case is not
> nearly as nice as what you get with the Sony.

They are designed to be used on BT with an Apple device. That is why the
cable is not part of the package.

> Finally, one thing to take with you on international travel is one of
> these: <https://www.adorama.com/hoymm492.html>. Surprisingly, there are
> still some older airplanes that use the dual mono (left + right)
> headphone jacks in the armrest. I ran into this in 2019 on a flight to
> Italy. A lot of the older, wired, noise-cancelling headphones included
> one of these adapters.

That's nice for the insignificant percentage of people who want to plug in
to the plane's shitty audio instead of simply using their own devices
to listen to their own audio choices.


--
I got fired from the zoo for feeding the pelicans

...to the tigers.

[Lewis]

...tested, they were forced to eat their words.


--
'Good and bad is tricky, she [Esme] said. 'I ain't too certain about
where people stand. P'raps what matters is which way you face.'

[Arlen Holder]

On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:14 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

>> Early comments from audidweebs were that Apple's claims of <%1
>> disruption were impossible in headphones so cheap, but when they
>
> ...tested, they were forced to eat their words.

Why is it that Type III apologists, which Lewis clearly is...
o Never seem to have even a single cite of fact

Is it simply that every single belief the apologists have
o Is fabricated out of thin air?

What planet do these Type III apologists come from that people believe them
just because they said it (it's pretty much what Apple MARKETING does).
--
Apologists literally identify with whatever Apple MARKETING feeds them.

[Alan Baker]

On 2020-12-20 12:55 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:14 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:
>
>>> Early comments from audidweebs were that Apple's claims of <%1
>>> disruption were impossible in headphones so cheap, but when they
>>
>> ...tested, they were forced to eat their words.
>
> Why is it that Type III apologists, which Lewis clearly is...
> o Never seem to have even a single cite of fact

Like you haven't cited a single fact in this reply?