What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Apple iPhone Thread (10 Viewers)

cstu said:
Most of the data I have on my phone doesn't need to be read at 400 MB/s.  I just need a large, cheap place to store data.
Click to expand...
That's how you use your phone. Sounds like SD is the way for you. Enjoy your phone :thumbup:  I like my storage to be fast and reliable. I'll enjoy my phone. 

OMG... did we just agree to disagree?! 

THAT. WAS. AWESOME.

 
As an aside, anyone know why a Y splitter wouldn't work on my MBP?  I was trying to watch a movie with my wife on a plane so that we could both use our earphones but had to use one each.  :bag:   I tried two splitters and multiple sets of earphones so I don't think it was an earphone or splitter issue.  Also, I've used a splitter for the same purpose before.

 
Northern Voice said:
Apple now knows everything that is ever plugged into it's phone. Nothing works without going through their software, what they intend to do with it remains to be seen but this gives them even more control over how users use their technology. http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/6/21/11991302/iphone-no-headphone-jack-user-hostile-stupid
Click to expand...
Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the audio going out through the lightning port is not post DAC? I don't know for sure but I think odds are VERY slim they'd require the incorporation of a DAC chip into the adapter... or at the headphone level. 

The audio coming out via lightning port is almost certainly post DAC analog audio, which pretty much destroys the DRM argument. 

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm not. Then again... this guy wrote the article, so that kinda explains a lot. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Another iPhone 7 question for which no one will likely know the answer:

Will Mophie change its input charging interface from USB to Lightning?  Will Apple allow it?  If not, Mophies become almost unusable.

For anyone who doesn't know, Mophie is a battery case that attaches to iPhones.

 
[icon] said:
Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the audio going out through the lightning port is not post DAC? I don't know for sure but I think odds are VERY slim they'd require the incorporation of a DAC chip into the adapter... or at the headphone level. 

The audio coming out via lightning port is almost certainly post DAC analog audio, which pretty much destroys the DRM argument. 

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm not. Then again... this guy wrote the article, so that kinda explains a lot. 
Click to expand...
There's no DAC needed with the lightning port, so if you want to call it HDCP rather than DRM, sure but the technology is clearly there to enforce what is listened to through the port, if they decide to use it. And ditto for any accessories with the lightning port vs. the headphone port. You don't think wanting a cut from Square and all the other third party companies making headphones, credit card readers etc.. is a factor in this? There's no great benefit to the consumer in taking out the headphone port (maybe sound at the very very high end but that's a small number of people). Only to Apple.

 
[icon] said:
Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the audio going out through the lightning port is not post DAC? I don't know for sure but I think odds are VERY slim they'd require the incorporation of a DAC chip into the adapter... or at the headphone level. 

The audio coming out via lightning port is almost certainly post DAC analog audio, which pretty much destroys the DRM argument. 

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm not. Then again... this guy wrote the article, so that kinda explains a lot. 
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone knows for sure, but I thought one of the reasons for ditching the jack was that the output through lightning port was digital not analog.  That would mean the chip is either in the adapter or headphones (we already know the AirPods have a chip in them).  

That being said, Apple's been very vague on this point and none of the reviews I read addressed the point.  

What I am more surprised at is that they didn't produce an AirPod variety that was connected in the back for exercise, etc.  They clearly went the athletic direction with Watch2.0 (or whatever they're calling it), but didn't with the AirPod which seems like a mistake. 

EDIT:  The entire AirPod/headphone thing is just very strange.  In concept, the AirPods (if done correctly) should be very powerful noise cancelling headphones (they are noise-cancelling when you talk, but I didn't see any indication if they are when music is playing, etc.)  Of course, then they would cut the legs out from their Beats brand which they are leaving with what looks like Bluetooth 5.0 support.  So you either get the best in technology, but worse earfit with no cord AirPods or worse technology, but more comfort.  Just a really strange dichotomy for Apple to leave itself.  It's almost like they pushed up the AirPods development as much as possible without getting 100% of the way there since they needed them for the phone.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Northern Voice said:
There's no DAC needed with the lightning port, so if you want to call it HDCP rather than DRM, sure but the technology is clearly there to enforce what is listened to through the port,
Click to expand...
Again.. do you have ANY evidence at all that it's not an analog audio being passed through the lightning port? 

 
And this is what I'm talking about with Apple sheep. This does not benefit you as a consumer in anyway. They can have more control over your device, whether they use it or not. It does limit your options for headphones, credit card readers and all other third party companies. It gives the consumer less choice and less control and you will fight to defend it, like you do everything else Apple, simply because it's Apple.

 
(HULK) said:
If you don't want to shell out to upgrade from a 6, you can just get this: http://appleplugs.com/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark
Click to expand...
This isn't 2009. Your phone doesn't have a floppy drive, and it shouldn't have a headphone connector either. When we made iPhone 6 and 6s, the world wasn't ready for the future. Now, it is. Apple Plug is the perfect solution. Fill in your archaic headphone connector with beautiful aluminium and plug yourself into the future.
Click to expand...
I actually thought that was real at first.  :lmao:

 
Northern Voice said:
And this is what I'm talking about with Apple sheep. This does not benefit you as a consumer in anyway. They can have more control over your device, whether they use it or not. It does limit your options for headphones, credit card readers and all other third party companies. It gives the consumer less choice and less control and you will fight to defend it, like you do everything else Apple, simply because it's Apple.
Click to expand...
First of all, I am not going to be getting a iP7.

Secondly,  I'm not defending the move as good for the consumer. I'm merely calling out your bull#### assertion that Apple has "DRM'd headphones"

... which you backtracked to HDCP

... then backtracked to "Well they may do it in the future"

.... then backtracked to childish name calling. 

 

 
It's funny that they felt it was courageous to remove a useful feature to reduce a wire but it wasn't courageous to add a feature (wireless charging) to reduce a wire. 

 
And for the record, earlier I stated I didn't want the jack gone in favor of thickness... I wanted a thicker phone with a bigger battery and durability that allowed me to not have to hide it in a ugly plastic case.  I, too, dislike this move. 

 
Northern Voice said:
And this is what I'm talking about with Apple sheep. This does not benefit you as a consumer in anyway. They can have more control over your device, whether they use it or not. It does limit your options for headphones, credit card readers and all other third party companies. It gives the consumer less choice and less control and you will fight to defend it, like you do everything else Apple, simply because it's Apple.
Click to expand...
Serious question, how does this limit your option for headphones?

 
[icon] said:
And for the record, earlier I stated I didn't want the jack gone in favor of thickness... I wanted a thicker phone with a bigger battery and durability that allowed me to not have to hide it in a ugly plastic case.  I, too, dislike this move. 
Click to expand...
Sure, I've mocked Apple in the past for decisions that were primarily profit-based but they actually benefited the consumer in some way.  There's no way to say this decision benefits the customer.

 
cstu said:
Sure, I've mocked Apple in the past for decisions that were primarily profit-based but they actually benefited the consumer in some way.  There's no way to say this decision benefits the customer.
Click to expand...
I fully believe it would benefit the consumer if they did it correctly (there's really no good technical reason to have the audio jack).  I just don't think the iPhone7/AirPod combo as currently constructed does so.  

I guess the real argument is if they should do this without having the headphone solution totally ironed out.  

 
Given that the "removal" of the headphone jack came with the addition of a second speaker, I'm fine with it.  I use the built in speaker (now speakers) more than I do the headphones, and I can still use headphones with the adapter that they give me with the phone. 

That said, I don't see the reason to spend that kind of cash to "upgrade" from a 6.  Yeah, I'm "upgrade eligible", but I'm still paying the retail price of the phone to do so, and the value of a used iphone 6 just took a tumble yesterday.

 
Sammy3469 said:
I fully believe it would benefit the consumer if they did it correctly (there's really no good technical reason to have the audio jack).  I just don't think the iPhone7/AirPod combo as currently constructed does so.  

I guess the real argument is if they should do this without having the headphone solution totally ironed out.  
Click to expand...
- People charge their phones in the car through the headphone jack

- People are happy with their wired headphones, which Apple sold to them

 
cstu said:
Sammy3469 said:
I fully believe it would benefit the consumer if they did it correctly (there's really no good technical reason to have the audio jack).  I just don't think the iPhone7/AirPod combo as currently constructed does so.  

I guess the real argument is if they should do this without having the headphone solution totally ironed out.  
Click to expand...
- People charge their phones in the car through the headphone jack

- People are happy with their wired headphones, which Apple sold to them
Click to expand...
How do you do that?

 
[icon] said:
First of all, I am not going to be getting a iP7.

Secondly,  I'm not defending the move as good for the consumer. I'm merely calling out your bull#### assertion that Apple has "DRM'd headphones"

... which you backtracked to HDCP

... then backtracked to "Well they may do it in the future"

.... then backtracked to childish name calling. 

 
Click to expand...
They have the ability to limit how you use your phone and your digital music more than they did yesterday. Do you disagree with this statement?

 
Northern Voice said:
And this is what I'm talking about with Apple sheep. This does not benefit you as a consumer in anyway. They can have more control over your device, whether they use it or not. It does limit your options for headphones, credit card readers and all other third party companies. It gives the consumer less choice and less control and you will fight to defend it, like you do everything else Apple, simply because it's Apple.
Click to expand...
I've had Beats wireless earbuds for over a year now. As a consumer why would I want a headphone jack?  

 
Northern Voice said:
You wouldn't. Many would. HTH.
Click to expand...
So this does benefit some consumers, in some ways.  That directly contradicts your earlier post where you said "this does not benefit consumers in any way", while referring to some as "Apple sheep".  

Perhaps dial it back a bit on the absolutes and name calling? 

 
[icon] said:
What does this mean. What specifically is your upgrade policy? 
Click to expand...
With Verizon.  What they do is they allow you to "buy" a new phone at 0% interest for 24 months.  So for instance, I just went on their website and see that my iphone 6 is newly eligible for an upgrade.  Great!  So while they don't yet have the iphone 7 listed, they do have the 6s, and $27.08 per month for 24 months for me to get it with them (27.08x24 = $650, which is the retail price of the phone).  Doing this won't alter my monthly phone bill, other than adding the $27.08 charge for the phone itself. 

So, with the iphone7 being the same $650, what's the point of being "upgrade eligible" if I'm going to spend $27/m to upgrade from a 6 to a 7?  What's the point of the upgrade if I'm still paying retail?

 
matttyl said:
With Verizon.  What they do is they allow you to "buy" a new phone at 0% interest for 24 months.  So for instance, I just went on their website and see that my iphone 6 is newly eligible for an upgrade.  Great!  So while they don't yet have the iphone 7 listed, they do have the 6s, and $27.08 per month for 24 months for me to get it with them (27.08x24 = $650, which is the retail price of the phone).  Doing this won't alter my monthly phone bill, other than adding the $27.08 charge for the phone itself. 

So, with the iphone7 being the same $650, what's the point of being "upgrade eligible" if I'm going to spend $27/m to upgrade from a 6 to a 7?  What's the point of the upgrade if I'm still paying retail?
Click to expand...
In that situation you aren't "upgrade" eligible as much as your layaway plan is over.  I think people like the term "upgrade" so they use it, when the plan as above isn't really an upgrade eligibility at all in the way that people thought about in lets say 2005. 

 
culdeus said:
In that situation you aren't "upgrade" eligible as much as your layaway plan is over.  I think people like the term "upgrade" so they use it, when the plan as above isn't really an upgrade eligibility at all in the way that people thought about in lets say 2005. 
Click to expand...
Right, back in the day I'd pay $99 or $199 for an iphone 4 or 5 (funny, my iphone lineage has been the 3g, 4, 5, and now 6).  When I'd do that, I'd sell or trade back my used one.  What they would do, though, is apparently charge me an extra $10 or $20 a month on my phone plan to make up for it, so it was all the same in the end or really close to it. 

 
tommyGunZ said:
So this does benefit some consumers, in some ways.  That directly contradicts your earlier post where you said "this does not benefit consumers in any way", while referring to some as "Apple sheep".  

Perhaps dial it back a bit on the absolutes and name calling? 
Click to expand...
It doesn't benefit wireless headphone owners because every iPhone since the 4s has had Bluetooth 4.0.

 
tommyGunZ said:
So this does benefit some consumers, in some ways.  That directly contradicts your earlier post where you said "this does not benefit consumers in any way", while referring to some as "Apple sheep".  

Perhaps dial it back a bit on the absolutes and name calling? 
Click to expand...
What was the benefit you're referring to?

 
Bluetooth sound quality at least in headphones is ok.  I challenge anyone to be able to really tell a difference between a aux and bt headphone short of some 800 buck ultra nerd thing.

Bluetooth sound quality in a car, versus an Aux cable is really bad.  It's so noticeably bad for me and when I have a choice I always use Aux.  I can't imagine jumping light to aux will do anything to solve that gap.  

 
cstu said:
My mistake - people were using the aux input on their car stereo to play music if they didn't have bluetooth.  With the 7 they won't be able to charge at the same time.
Click to expand...
There is a 85 dollar Y adapter for this purpose that has been announced.  I'm way too lazy to go find it again.

 
tommyGunZ said:
So this does benefit some consumers, in some ways.  That directly contradicts your earlier post where you said "this does not benefit consumers in any way", while referring to some as "Apple sheep".  

Perhaps dial it back a bit on the absolutes and name calling? 
Click to expand...
Hold on, you've had your wireless beats for a year, the iPhone 7 was announced yesterday. There's no new benefit to you, unless you want the ridiculous airpods.

 
coyote5 said:
culdeus said:
There is a 85 dollar Y adapter for this purpose that has been announced.  I'm way too lazy to go find it again.
Click to expand...
See, an $85 solution to the problem Apple created by fixing a problem that never existed!

http://mashable.com/2016/09/07/iphone-headphone-jack-courage/?utm_cid=hp-hh-sec#YZsLEz3hJiqN
Click to expand...
Great article! Loved this section...

"It comes down to one word," Schiller said. "Courage. The courage to move on and do something better for all of us."


Schiller was thoroughly mocked for those words on Twitter, and rightly so. Courage is marching across the Edmund Pettus bridge in Selma in 1965. Courage is facing down a tank in Tiananmen Square or a machine gun nest on the beaches of Normandy. Courage, by definition, involves doing something that makes you afraid. 

And what has Apple done? It has eradicated the most successful, most widespread and best-sounding audio standard in the world in favor of its own proprietary system. 

A number of words come to mind to describe this. "Hubris" is one; "arrogance" is another. Given the amount of $9 aux-to-Lightning cable dongles Apple is likely to sell, you could use "greed." Personally, I'd opt for "stupidity." 

Tweet from Chris Taylor
So I can drop my iPhone 7 in the toilet, but I can't charge it and use headphones at the same time? #AppleEvent
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
For the record, the name calling came first before any of these debates. Sorry that people came along to validate the name calling and then be offended by it.

 
Slapdash said:
They have wireless headphones but cannot yet figure out how to add wireless charging?
Click to expand...
This has always stumped me.  I hate trying to find the damn plug in the dark.  Someone needs to just let me throw my phone on my night stand and have it charge.  Weird they haven't added that yet.  I've always wondered if it's a patent issue.

 
Otis said:
Slapdash said:
They have wireless headphones but cannot yet figure out how to add wireless charging?
Click to expand...
This has always stumped me.  I hate trying to find the damn plug in the dark.  Someone needs to just let me throw my phone on my night stand and have it charge.  Weird they haven't added that yet.  I've always wondered if it's a patent issue.
Click to expand...
The iWatch can do it, so you'd think patent wouldn't be an issue. But then I'm not an attorney, I just stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.

 
tommyGunZ said:
Trading out a useless headphone jack for an additional speaker? 
Click to expand...
Wait, now the headphone jack was useless?  I mean you have a point that the additional speaker may be viewed as a benefit by some, but then you couldn't help throwing that last little dig in to diminish it.

 
iPhone 8 - Back by popular demand. The all new 3.5mm headphone jack with an additional speaker IN YOUR PHONE! Upgrade to the iPhone 8 and receive a $25 gift card to any Apple Store. The iPhone 8 is starting at $899.99. Come home.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
How Has The Widespread Normalization Of Social Media Impacted Your Life / Your Children's Lives? (22/30)
Replies
4
Views
1K
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
Mr. Ected
Apple Sued for lack of 'Lock Out' on iPhones while driving.
Replies
30
Views
1K
Doug B
Doug B
BobbyLayne
The 25 Greatest Films of the 21st Century So Far
2 3 4
Replies
155
Views
12K
El Floppo
El Floppo

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 10 (members: 0, guests: 10)
Back
Top