Hacker News Reader

Comment by jamesrcole | Hacker News Reader

You say you don't see how it follows, yet you yourself say it will cause more wireless headphones to be sold. And if it causes Apple to sell more wireless headphones, then it will also cause other manufacturers to sell more wireless headphones. Greater volume of sales will bring down the price of wireless headphones.

> in fact, it just shows the truth, in that apple just wants to be able to sell more and more dongles and bluetooth headphones

The idea that this is simply a cheap cash-grab sounds like a conspiracy theory to me.

But even if it's a purely financial decision, so what? Aren't financial considerations behind most things companies do?

If HN is to be believed, most people absolutely hate the fact that the phones don't have headphone jacks. So if people hate it, and won't buy the phones because of it, then how can it also be a cash grab?

View on HN

> You say you don't see how it follows, yet you yourself say it will cause more wireless headphones to be sold.

no i didn't. i said apple wants to sell more wireless headphones and dongles. removing the audio jack forces users to look at the new shiny airpods, or whatever they're called, and say "i need that". then they need dongles for integration purposes. yet, they didn't need the dongle before and could still buy wireless headphones.

of course it's a cash grab. that is how apple operates. conspiracy theory? the ceo is literally an expert in operations and logistics, probably apple's greatest strength behind their marketing. it can't be any other decision, because like i said, other phone makers are able to integrate it just fine.

"Apple will sell more wireless headphones, but this won't mean they sell more wireless headphones." That's what you're saying.

If people are going to buy more wireless headphones because of these phones, then they're going to buy them from a range of manufacturers -- in fact mostly other manufacturers because the Apple ones are so pricey.

If people are going to buy more wireless headphones because of these phones then the prices will go down. Do you dispute this? Because this is the point that you originally claimed I didn't make.

> i said apple wants to sell more ... dongles.

Do you know that the phones (up until latest models) come with a dongle so there's not going to be a large number of sales of them?

> of course it's a cash grab. that is how apple operates

It's ridiculous to suggest that everything apple does is just a cheap cash grab.

> It's ridiculous to suggest that everything apple does is just a cheap cash grab.

What's so ridiculous about it? Have you not seen the rate at which Apple are increasing the prices across all their products?

And petty practices like not including the lightening to 3.5mm adapter or fast charger on a $1000+ phone e.t.c.

The person I was replying to said "of course it's a cash grab. that is how apple operates". Increases in the prices of their products hardly equates to everything they are doing being a cash grab. Are their privacy, accessibility or environmental (manufacturing processes, packaging choices, etc) measures all, for example, cash grabs?

i just want to remind you that the original discussion that i initiated was to point out that apple has not given any legitimate reason for removing the audio jack. there is simply no need to remove it. creating a thin or water resistant phone is not an explanation since other manufacturers include the audio jack and have no issues with these features.

your argument is that it helps the wireless headphone market. i don’t think it does in a way that actually matters, but even that doesn’t explain why it was removed in the first place. why does apple care about that market outside of their own sales? the real reason why they removed it is to further increase accessory sales and to market themselves as a design leader, which further sells devices. they have created this mystique that they do and others will follow. unfortunately, that is somewhat the case given other dynamics.

the fact of the matter is that there is zero benefit to the consumer of an iphone for having the audio jack removed. there is benefit to apple’s cash flow by removing it. and here we are.

what you originally said was "but that doesn’t really answer the question of “why remove it?”". You're shifting the goal posts by saying "apple has not given any legitimate reason for removing the audio jack. there is simply no need to remove it." I've given a reason for removing it. You don't just get to declare a reason as not "legitimate". You say "the fact of the matter is that there is zero benefit to the consumer of an iphone for having the audio jack removed.", which just ignores the cost benefit, without arguing against that benefit.

Apple has always removed design features that they don't think are where things should head in the future. That's important to do in the longer term. If you consider any single one of the things they've removed from their computers, it might not seem a big deal, but together they are. Removing things they don't see as part of the future helps them to push technology in the direction they think is best. And removing what they see as unnecessary features can save on costs - costs that might be small per unit but large in terms of the sorts of volumes they are dealing with.

Somethings that bothers me about your argument, is that Apple doesn’t support existing highend audio codecs (presumably to avoid paying the licensing fees) and doesn’t include wireless headphones or an adapter for 3.5mm in the box.

Instead they include wired headphones with a proprietary plug.

If you want high quality headphones with an iphone you have to buy some that license a proprietary Apple protocol or chip or settle for lower sound quality generic Bluetooth audio.

> Apple doesn’t support existing highend audio codecs

I am aware this is an issue for some people. At the same time it's not an issue for other people.

> doesn’t include wireless headphones or an adapter for 3.5mm in the box.

Their latest models don't include adapters, their earlier ones without headphone jacks did.

> If you want high quality headphones with an iphone you have to buy some that license a proprietary Apple protocol or chip or settle for lower sound quality generic Bluetooth audio.

The issue with Bluetooth isn't Apple's fault, though.

But if you want high quality headphones then, yes, you have that choice to make. But we need to acknowledge that not everyone has those requirements.

"The idea that this is simply a cheap cash-grab sounds like a conspiracy theory to me."

Conspiracy theories are sometimes true.

In this case, vendor lock-in is Apple's bread and butter, and it doesn't take any mental gymnastics at all to recognize that removing a standard and universal port without any actually good reason fits that pattern remarkably well.

1) it still allows standard 3.5mm headphone jacks to be used.

2) Bluetooth is a standard, and Apple isn't the only company that makes Bluetooth headphones.

...if you want to settle for lower quality Bluetooth audio.

Apple don’t support high quality Bluetooth audio standards except with the license of their own proprietary technology.

Yes. I have never said or implied that it's suitable for everyone.

This same point applies to the criticisms of a lack of a headphone jack, too: the things those people are concerned about, such as sound quality, aren't an issue for everybody, either.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com