New Phone

[Happy Face 29]

Yeah and I can no longer find a charging cable for my Rio PMP300 but then again it's also fucking ancient.

 

Can't you just use a firewire to USB adapter?

 

But I can find an aux cable/charger/plug for my amp/walkman/diskman/minidisk going back decades.  Get lush audio quality.

[Park Life 71]

$159 for a bit of vibrating film, a magnet and a plastic cover made in China by suicide workers for I reckon $2. Thanks Apple.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Park Life

[Renton 21579]

The state of those "airpods"

Only £159. Bargain.

[ewerk 30558]

Whereas Samsung users can pay £169 for one whole hour of listening pleasure.

 

http://shop.samsung.com/uk/samsung-gear-iconx-black-291575/

[Gemmill 44805]

Or they could plug some headphones into their headphone jack, Jack.

[ewerk 30558]

Or plug in the bundled headphones to the lightning port grandad.

 

Funny how it's the non-Apple users getting upset about this.

[Happy Face 29]

I'm an apple user. 

 

It's the old space pen innit.

 

The yanks looked at earphones and thought "how can we limit their use to 5 hours at a time or only when they aren't charging their device?"

 

Normally people would look at them llike they were daft, make like the Russians and keep using a pencil.

 

Charge £160 and draw an apple on it and people fall in love with the solution to a problem that doesn't exist ...actually introduces problems... and throw their money at it.

 

I'm sure we'll all be living with it soon.  I can't get any phone with a changeable battery or extendable memory because Apple showed "courage".

 

Fingers crossed for the V20 though  extendable memory to 2 TB and battery swapping up the ying yang. Defiance!

[ChezGiven 0]

 

 

Charge £160 and draw an apple on it and people fall in love with the solution to a problem that doesn't exist ...actually introduces problems... and throw their money at it.

 

 

Hang on. The issue in this thread has been driven by you personally claiming that this was evidence of corporate malpractice and reflected ulteriour commercial motives. 

 

I moved last year to bluetooth headphones so its an advantage to not have a 3.5mm jack. If this is a general trend, we dont need the jack. They provide an adaptor for the jack for when you need it. If you have wireless headphones as loads of people now do, you wont need the jack unless you are using your iphone to play through a home music system. If you play mp3s through a home music system, you're a cunt and dead to me anyway. Small domestic speaker systems designed for plugging phones into are an acceptable exception. 

 

You also claimed this new digital connector would be able to control to which amplification systems the signal was sent, which was too incredible for me to leave in the thread as it basically assumed that digital signals could interpret analog inputs. Which is very funny and daft  

[Happy Face 29]

Hang on. The issue in this thread has been driven by you personally claiming that this was evidence of corporate malpractice and reflected ulteriour commercial motives. 

 

I moved last year to bluetooth headphones so its an advantage to not have a 3.5mm jack. If this is a general trend, we dont need the jack. They provide an adaptor for the jack for when you need it. If you have wireless headphones as loads of people now do, you wont need the jack unless you are using your iphone to play through a home music system. If you play mp3s through a home music system, you're a cunt and dead to me anyway. Small domestic speaker systems designed for plugging phones into are an acceptable exception. 

 

You also claimed this new digital connector would be able to control to which amplification systems the signal was sent, which was too incredible for me to leave in the thread as it basically assumed that digital signals could interpret analog inputs. Which is very funny and daft

 

Driven by me personally?  

 

I mentioned the concerns over DRM that are being widely published.

 

YOUR accusation is too incredible for ME to stay in this thread....

 

[Renton 21579]

I use Bluetooth speakers when I'm on the move. But they're a hassle because of the need for recharging. I don't think the audio is as good as wired either. Until battery issues are sorted out, wired aren't being replaced. And yes, I like to have the ability to charge while listening.

[ChezGiven 0]

Driven by me personally?

 

I mentioned the concerns over DRM that are being widely published.

 

YOUR accusation is too incredible for ME to stay in this thread....

 

 

What? I mean you prompted the issue being debated but were then implying that the issue was being debated because people were falling in love with the solution. I was merely pointing out that it was the other way round. 

[Happy Face 29]

I think you've taken a general point personally. 

[ChezGiven 0]

I think you've taken a general point personally. 

 

Not at all, i was disagreeing with how you framed the debate in the thread that's all.

 

Anyway, i found an article which answered my question from yesterday

 

http://futureofmusic.org/blog/2016/09/06/did-labels-ask-apple-remove-headphone-jack

 

"Record labels are embroiled in larger battles than preventing individuals from manually copying music through their headphone jacks"

 

So the answer was that the concern was that the digital wire would stop people who are copying the music through the audio jack output from their phone to store the file that they already have free access to. 

[Gemmill 44805]

 

 

So the answer was that the concern was that the digital wire would stop people who are copying the music through the audio jack output from their phone to store the file that they already have free access to.

That sentence is a shitshow. [emoji38]

[Happy Face 29]

That sentence is a shitshow. [emoji38]

 

I assume it's a copy and paste error.

 

Copying music through the audio jack? 

[NJS 4377]

Naive question but can you copy mp3s to an iPhone and use a non iTunes app to play them?

 

My cynical assumption was that they plan to remove/ban such apps if they exist and then restrict bluetooth/lightning audio output to iTunes only.

[ewerk 30558]

Yeah you can play music through third party apps, just as you can play non-iTunes purchased music through iTunes.

[Happy Face 29]

Not at all, i was disagreeing with how you framed the debate in the thread that's all.

 

Anyway, i found an article which answered my question from yesterday

 

http://futureofmusic.org/blog/2016/09/06/did-labels-ask-apple-remove-headphone-jack

 

"Record labels are embroiled in larger battles than preventing individuals from manually copying music through their headphone jacks"

 

So the answer was that the concern was that the digital wire would stop people who are copying the music through the audio jack output from their phone to store the file that they already have free access to. 

 

Interesting article.  You disagreed with how you perceived I framed the date.  But I disagree with that too.

 

The issue in this thread has been driven by you personally claiming that this was evidence of corporate malpractice and reflected ulteriour commercial motives.

 

Miles out.  I specifically said I didn't think they were looking to do anything illegal.  There's only evidence of what apple have done in the past, like charging extra for DRM free music.That evidence of what actually happened suggests it wouldn't be beyond them to use the technology for their own commercial interest, as they're well entitled to do.  It wouldn't necessarily be good for consumers though.

 

I moved last year to bluetooth headphones so its an advantage to not have a 3.5mm jack. If this is a general trend, we dont need the jack.

 

You doing something doesn't indicate a trend.  Or suggest one is coming.  Despite bluetooth headphones being about for years, they're still outnumbered 4:1 by wired headphone sales. So you might not need a headphone jack but others still seem to have a place for it

 

If you play mp3s through a home music system, you're a cunt and dead to me

 

Again, it's not about you.

 

You also claimed this new digital connector would be able to control to which amplification systems the signal was sent, 

 

I did? Quote that one back at me please? I think an article I quoted might have mentioned that the digital lead could be used in the same was as an HDMI lead to limit output.

[ChezGiven 0]

That sentence is a shitshow. [emoji38]

 

Exactly, representing the convoluted thinking that got us to the point where this was 'evil corporate America' forcing DRM on us. 

[Happy Face 29]

Naive question but can you copy mp3s to an iPhone and use a non iTunes app to play them?

 

My cynical assumption was that they plan to remove/ban such apps if they exist and then restrict bluetooth/lightning audio output to iTunes only.

 

 Ewerk is spot on and I've not seen anything to suggest they'll change what he says.

 

The debate on here seems to me to be whether Apple could implement further restrictions due to the new wire.  The article Chez posts explaining why they won't also clarifies "it is a technical possibility that an all-digital audio feed could include DRM".  So I'm not sure why it's still being discussed.

 

Whether Apple implement further restrictions and to what extent is the debateable thing, and there's less consensus on that.

[ChezGiven 0]

It doesnt clarify for me how but it does agree with the statement. Am still confused on that point. 

[Happy Face 29]

Okay, that makes no sense to me. I understand how digital only output can restrict which devices can connect but I still don't see how that affects DRM, particularly when a digital to analogue audio adapter is almost certain to be available. ios has been facing increasing pressure from Android for years now, I don't see why they would attempt to further alienate existing Android users.

 

The second part seems to be about standardising DRM as they have done with video. Yet I can still easily watch my illegally downloaded TV shows and movies on my Apple device.

 

I think there's an awful lot of panty wetting going on over this. The audio jack is most likely being removed because it frees up space and it isn't a major inconvenience to double up on the lightning port.

 

 

My views are evolving from chatting to you chaps and reading more.  I've completely changed my initial ill-formed opinion that DRM could in any way be the "biggest" factor in the decision.  It was a reflexive comment from reading one article.  Further articles and discussion here don't completely remove all doubts I have  that it can be used to benefit apple and lock in consumers to the apple way further. The palava with Match and adding DRM to everyone's existing non-DRM library and that sort of thing should leave anyone cautious about how badly Apple can implement such things.

 

That article Chez posted reflects the view of the one I read that gave me the 4:1 number.  The biggest factor is obviously not DRM, but hardware...

 

 

given that Apple owns Beats, the number one seller of wireless headphones in America, it’s probably worth keeping in mind the next time you wonder why things had to change.

 

 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/apple-iphone-7-wireless-headphones-sales-chart-2016-9

[Renton 21579]

Isn't that what I said yonks ago?

[Gemmill 44805]

Alright Billy Bigtits.

[ChezGiven 0]

If me and Renton have both gone wireless, its a sure sign the rest of the world will be following soon.