Apple announcement today

[Jonrox]

Then you missed the point of what the OP was saying. They didnt do anything to innovate, they did it to force people to use their products.

Nope I didn't miss anything. You guys are just wrong.

The innovation is getting rid of cords on a device that has traditionally always been able to support having a wired peripheral... this was the first step. Next up is wireless charging. I look forward to the day I don't need cords for anything. If you're willing to spend the money you can get pretty decent wireless headphones and the technology will only keep improving. They don't yet matchup to wired options, but they're getting better (and honestly are good enough for most people).

Wooden... they did think differently by taking what apparently is being seen as a radical step, to get rid of a dedicated headphone jack. People were losing their minds over this step to push towards a wireless world. It was a bold move, as evidenced by the initial outcry that has since largely subsided. Going wireless in the manner they did was a vastly different way of thinking than their competitors.

[TylerM4]

The innovation is getting rid of cords on a device that has traditionally always been able to support having a wired peripheral... this was the first step. Next up is wireless charging. I look forward to the day I don't need cords for anything. If you're willing to spend the money you can get pretty decent wireless headphones and the technology will only keep improving. They don't yet matchup to wired options, but they're getting better (and honestly are good enough for most people).

Wooden... they did think differently by taking what apparently is being seen as a radical step, to get rid of a dedicated headphone jack. People were losing their minds over this step to push towards a wireless world. It was a bold move, as evidenced by the initial outcry that has since largely subsided. Going wireless in the manner they did was a vastly different way of thinking than their competitors.

Sweet, an Apple Extremist!

1st - I think we should start by visiting the dictionary definition of "Innovate"
to make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products.

I'd say removing a feature does not fit that definition.

2nd - they didn't do anything to actually force a change in the industry. All they did was force people to buy adapters. And what a crappy thing to force anyway - " Hey! Let's force people to dispose of their existing electronics that they're happy with so they'll buy new electronics! Screw the environment this is good for people and they'll thank us for it!"

Dude. Apple has done a lot of great innovating - I'll give you that. But removing the headphone jack - that was done for profit alone.

[Woodenhead]

Yep.

My brand, right or wrong.

[Even Steven]

Wireless everything would be awesome.

No headphone wires, no charging wires, no data cables.

[Jonrox]

Wireless everything would be awesome.

No headphone wires, no charging wires, no data cables.

But if you do it by removing ports and the associated cords, it's not innovation.

[Atomoa]

Wireless everything would be awesome.

No headphone wires, no charging wires, no data cables.

Then when your wireless charger breaks, instead of a 5 dollar cable replacement you're looking at a full mainboard replacement because Apple glued/potted everything together on the inside to prevent unauthorized repair depots from cutting into their profit vector.

Now you own a brick that can't charge made by a company that doesn't believe in board level repair.

[Jonrox]

1st - I think we should start by visiting the dictionary definition of "Innovate"
to make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products.

I'd say removing a feature does not fit that definition.

So changing the "established" method of connecting headphones while "introducing" a "new product" doesn't fit the definition you provided? I'm pretty sure it even uses your exact words.

2nd - they didn't do anything to actually force a change in the industry. All they did was force people to buy adapters. And what a crappy thing to force anyway - " Hey! Let's force people to dispose of their existing electronics that they're happy with so they'll buy new electronics! Screw the environment this is good for people and they'll thank us for it!"

If they didn't force a change, then people wouldn't be so upset. The adapters are a short-term solution while the transition to being completely wireless finishes. Would you rather have seen Apple completely do away with all ports and truly force you to change everything?

There will be a day very soon that you look back at wires and cords and realize that Apple was changing things for the better. They were just nice enough to give you an option to use while the transition began.

[Even Steven]

Then when your wireless charger breaks, instead of a 5 dollar cable replacement you're looking at a full mainboard replacement because Apple glued/potted everything together on the inside to prevent unauthorized repair depots from cutting into their profit vector.

I don't care much for profits, I'm talking about ease of use. I have a sound bar for my TV that acts as wireless speakers for my phone. I just walked into the house, and put on some jazz music so I can prance around, wash dishes, and so on. I don't have to leave my phone plugged in with wires, it's all bluetooth'ed. It's in my pocket and I can do as I please.

I then jump into a car to go grocery shopping, and my phone connects to the car right away, no AUX cables, no headphones, it connects instantly and I'm enjoying music on a snowy drive.

Technology is awesome.

[TylerM4]

So changing the "established" method of connecting headphones while "introducing" a "new product" doesn't fit the definition you provided? I'm pretty sure it even uses your exact words.

They didn't change anything, they just removed a port. What's new? An adapter? I'm sorry but adapters have been around forever. Are you somehow claiming apple invented Bluetooth and it didn't exist prior to release on the i7? When the only thing "new" is the removal of something - that's not innovation. Sure - replace the headphone jack with something else that's innovation. But that didn't happen hear. The headphone jack was replaced with an adapter that contains a headphone jack.

There will be a day very soon that you look back at wires and cords and realize that Apple was changing things for the better. They were just nice enough to give you an option to use while the transition began.

Good lord. Stop drinking the Koolaide. Nobody is ever going to credit Apple for removing wires until they actually do something that helps with removing wires. Forcing people to buy replacement hardware is not finding a solution for wires. What you call "Innovation" the rest of the industry calls "Forced Obsolescence". While you seem to thing this is a good thing, the electronics industry considers it underhanded and driven by profit.

In fact - let's expand on this some. If Apple actually wanted to help the world get rid of wires, they'd do things like participate in establishing a universal wireless charging standard. Energizer has established an excellent standard that they're offering the world for free and they've been begging Apple to odopt. Nobody has developed a standard that's better and it's free for Apple to use. BUT, apple refuses to use it. Why? Because then other parties would be able to build chargers and Apple wouldn't get any royalties from it. Apple wouldn't get it's $4 every time someone builds a coffee table that automatically starts charging your phone as soon as you put it down. So what do we have today - NOTHING. Thanks Apple for driving wireless!

Calling Apple an Innovator for removing a headphone jack is the same as calling Ford environmentally conscious by making cars that don't get people to their destination so they're forced to ride the bus.

[Poindexter]

My understanding is that the iPhone 7 and the airbuds do use Bluetooth and work with any other manufacturer's product. The issue has always been having both wireless airbuds sync up with each other and iphones solved this with their own w1 chip which makes their product unique. But I may be wrong, not exactly a tech guru. I just didn't like the fact that they look like a golf tee sticking out of each ear.

[TylerM4]

My understanding is that the iPhone 7 and the airbuds do use Bluetooth and work with any other manufacturer's product. The issue has always been having both wireless airbuds sync up with each other and iphones solved this with their own w1 chip which makes their product unique. But I may be wrong, not exactly a tech guru. I just didn't like the fact that they look like a golf tee sticking out of each ear.

Yeah I'm definitely getting my info mixed up. Early reports were that it wasn't Bluetooth, but seems apple has clarified. I'll edit my post to remove confusion. Thank-you for bringing to my attention!

[forum]

I don't care much for profits, I'm talking about ease of use. I have a sound bar for my TV that acts as wireless speakers for my phone. I just walked into the house, and put on some jazz music so I can prance around, wash dishes, and so on. I don't have to leave my phone plugged in with wires, it's all bluetooth'ed. It's in my pocket and I can do as I please.

I then jump into a car to go grocery shopping, and my phone connects to the car right away, no AUX cables, no headphones, it connects instantly and I'm enjoying music on a snowy drive.

Technology is awesome.

Bluetooth is okay. Its works if your not fluent with modern technology. When you're streaming audio using Bluetooth, it drains your phone battery and you eventually need your phone plugged in. Same crap when an incoming call.

If you want to go to the next level, get yourself a Google Chromecast and a Google Play subscription. Then you won't have to keep your phone on and stay within 30 feet of your stereo. You can transparently move between your car and your house still. Maybe you live in a small home where Bluetooth reaches everywhere in the home (40 foot bubble). Bluetooth is a single room solution. For larger homes Sonos or Google Chromecast is where it's at.

[Urban Cowboy]

I don't care much for profits, I'm talking about ease of use. I have a sound bar for my TV that acts as wireless speakers for my phone. I just walked into the house, and put on some jazz music so I can prance around, wash dishes, and so on. I don't have to leave my phone plugged in with wires, it's all bluetooth'ed. It's in my pocket and I can do as I please.

I then jump into a car to go grocery shopping, and my phone connects to the car right away, no AUX cables, no headphones, it connects instantly and I'm enjoying music on a snowy drive.

Technology is awesome.

Bluetooth is okay. Its works if your not fluent with modern technology. When you're streaming audio using Bluetooth, it drains your phone battery and you eventually need your phone plugged in. Same crap when an incoming call.

If you want to go to the next level, get yourself a Google Chromecast and a Google Play subscription. Then you won't have to keep your phone on and stay within 30 feet of your stereo. You can transparently move between your car and your house still. Maybe you live in a small home where Bluetooth reaches everywhere in the home (40 foot bubble). Bluetooth is a single room solution. For larger homes Sonos or Google Chromecast is where it's at.

I would beg to differ. Next level? Level of expense perhaps.

For the average Joe using recent hardware, advanced bluetooth sound is quite impressive and sufficient for most average folk.

Battery draining is hardly an issue given it's not that difficult to keep a phone charged in an automobile, or home for that matter, so it's hardly an issue.

From what I've read Chromecast for the car is still a pain to say the least, not to mention just another unnecessary expense when most every vehicle now comes with bluetooth.

In the home, from my observations most still use good quality sound systems, with a lot of the new builds having built in sound, so again Chromecast or bluetooth for that matter, are neither here nor there.

Sounds almost as if someone owns stock in google given the repeated purchase suggestions.

With a fairly decent sound system in the truck, I can play a CD or the same song via bluetooth, and I'd dare most average folk to tell the difference.

I'm sure no matter how much technology advances, we'll always have those who still think vinyl and a needle scraping through grooves is the best sound quality ever.

Back in the day, my album collection was actually mostly comprised of the higher priced half speed masters, and compared to the sound I got from them, I'll take my digital and bluetooth any day thank you very much.

[Jonrox]

Bluetooth is okay. Its works if your not fluent with modern technology. When you're streaming audio using Bluetooth, it drains your phone battery and you eventually need your phone plugged in. Same crap when an incoming call.

If you want to go to the next level, get yourself a Google Chromecast and a Google Play subscription. Then you won't have to keep your phone on and stay within 30 feet of your stereo. You can transparently move between your car and your house still. Maybe you live in a small home where Bluetooth reaches everywhere in the home (40 foot bubble). Bluetooth is a single room solution. For larger homes Sonos or Google Chromecast is where it's at.

Sonos is a great solution for older homes that aren't already wired for sound.

When we built our place we installed a multi-zone Nuvo system that's paired with an Airplay enabled Marantz receiver. With this system, we can easily stream anything from our iPads throughout the house in any or all zones (Apple Music, Spotify, downloaded music). We can also play anything that's hooked up to the receiver throughout the house... PVR's, PS4, etc...

An AirPlay-enabled receiver makes everything pretty simple... especially for large homes since it also doesn't work through Bluetooth.

[maryjane48]

the issue is bluetooth sound sucks . id rather listen to scratchy lp lol.