Hacker News Reader

Comment by greenpresident | Hacker News Reader

After moving audio to USB-C, you only need one jack for charging and audio. Space saved right there. You'll also notice that 3.5 > 2.6, so it allows for thinner phones (for whatever that's worth...).

USB-C also grips the jack on the inside, likely making the connector inside the phone smaller. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

View on HN

After moving audio to USB-C, you only need one jack for charging and audio. Space saved right there.

You're kidding, right? It's not "space saved" if phones are still hand-sized (or larger); there is plenty of empty space around the edge for two, three, or more ports even after allowing for blank areas to hold onto. A dumbphone from 10 years ago was smaller, yet still managed to include audio and charging/data.

The situation is even more puzzling with laptops and tablets, where the device is obviously large enough to accommodate several full-size USB ports around its edge, and yet manufacturers seem reluctant to add even one; there's also this amusing site: http://www.tabletswithusbports.net/

"You'll also notice that 3.5 > 2.6"

And originally phones came with a 2.5mm plug for audio.

Not a convincing argument you're making, here.

"After moving audio to USB-C, you only need one jack for charging and audio."

Okay, so I'm back to a splitter for audio and power at the same time (which is very often when you're on the road using the GPS on your phone and avoiding local FM stations.)

"USB-C also grips the jack on the inside, likely making the connector inside the phone smaller."

Guess how a TRS jack works?

Which is great, right up until you want to charge the device and use the audio jack. Now we're back to a splitter.

Or you can have two general purpose ports.

Or,you know, add another port..

If smartphone manufacturer replace the 3.5mm jack with a USB-C port to save space, doesn't adding a second USB-C port (which will remained unused most of the time) defeat the point and also increase their costs?

This argument, which was everywhere when apple launched the 7, seems like such a straw man. How often do people actually do this? Me: never. If you are charging your device, odds are good that you are within a foot of your desktop of laptop.

Four words: power bank + Pokemon Go.

Or substitute ANY popular mobile game, because gaming essentially guzzles your battery, and you don't want your fellow subway riders have to listen to your game. (People actually have gotten violent towards offenders)

I agree it's not often that I do it, but it does happen. For instance if you're on a plane? Normally I'll have my phone charging via powerbank or USB port, and I'll have my headphones plugged in obviously so I don't annoy everyone.

It's not everyday, but it's still going to be annoying the times where it does come into play.

My wife does this pretty much every night with her iPhone SE. Listens to music on her EarPods while keeping it charged up.

Gaming on the go is one example, but also - if you happen to have a workplace that frowns on streaming music, or for some reason decide to use phone as your music source, then you actually want to listen while charging, so that when you leave work you don't have an almost-dead battery.

Twice daily. Charge the phone while running a line into the car's aux in.

do they even make car stereos anymore that do not have Bluetooth?

Bluetooth audio quality is lossy and poor, compared to an analog line. Plus, my car's Bluetooth driver crapped out, putting it in a constant "starting up" state that even pulling the battery hasn't resolved.

> Bluetooth audio quality is lossy and poor

Bluetooth audio can be lossy and poor.

The default minimum standard SBC codec is pretty terrible, no doubt, but every device worth using supports many other codecs which are sufficiently high quality for car use. AAC and MP3 are commonly supported, which also happen to be the formats your audio probably is already in. A player focused on quality could, in theory, pass the raw input data over the Bluetooth link for it to be decoded on the car/headphone side. In that case there would be no quality loss, though you'd lose the ability to mix in other audio such as notifications, so I doubt this mode is used by default on smartphones. Dedicated music players may support it.

Since there's arbitrary codec support technically with support from both sides you could also send a lossless stream up to the bandwidth limits. I don't believe there's widespread support for any lossless codecs, but the technology definitely allows it.

Even if you're just using one of the high-quality lossy codecs like aptX you still have to keep in mind the environment. Unless you have an uber-luxury car the noises of normal driving will have more of an effect on the audio quality than the Bluetooth stream. Sure, you might be able to tell the difference when parked, but unless you spend a lot of time sitting around waiting in your car that's not very relevant.

Problem: phones drop standard audio connector.

Solution: buy a new car.

I think the trend of designing devices by shedding use-cases until they become good at one very specific thing but almost completely useless at everything else is somewhat unsettling and a bit disappointing. Of course it could go too far in the other direction, but I think sacrificing so much flexibility is not a good solution in the long term.

Then again, the companies probably don't want to put out such flexible devices; they want you to pay for it in the form of extra adapters and such.

3am saturday morning. Big critical system goes down, multiple teams involved to fix the mess so conference call needed, I get paged into it too.

My phone wouldn't have lasted the 4-5 hours that call lasted without being connected to the USB port at the same time, I fear. :)

On average, probably four out of five work days a week for me.

My phone already indexes all of my podcasts and audiobooks, why wouldn't I want it to play them everywhere?

On road trips, my phone provides music via a 3.5mm connection and I power it using a charger that plus into my lighter socket, the phone is plugged in via a lightning connector. It also does navigation with the on screen map and directions spoken over the music.

If it were just music it would be ok, but once you want the screen showing a map all the time you're going to run out of juice really fast.

The majority of devices that implement type C will likely also have induction charging.

Nope, with faster charge via usb power delivery built in, inductive charging is on its way out. The premise is that a short plug in gives enough charge to keep going. See the nexus line, which used to include inductive charging and dropped it with the usb-c compatible phones.

Sadly, the number of phones with wireless charging have plummeted over the years. There's practically only Samsung left now. It's dead, Jim. Such a shame.

For the last year I've been doing exactly that with an iPhone dock. Yes it's an additional accessory, but if you have a $600+ phone plus $600/yr for service then you can probably afford a dock. So, let's move on from this talking point.

So, then you use a splitter. Most people don't do this. Optimize for the many, not the few.

Wouldn't the better solution be to have wireless headphones so you are tethered to the chair while your phone is charging?

Or, just switch charging to a 3.5mm jack.

The later iPod shuffles did that, if I remember correctly. Not bad except for the fact that some people are going to be plugging chargers into audio-only ports, inevitably causing some damage.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com