This is everything wrong with Apple's decision to omit the headphone jack, and Google et al's moronic, slavish, decision to follow:
1. It was already a bad idea for the numerous reasons we've all expressed in prior threads.
2. The decision means Bluetooth headphones are now what many people carry around without having a wired backup, which means Bluetooth is their only option.
3. This means people now have to go through the security-problematic and user-unfriendly pairing process whenever they want to make use of their headphones including ad-hoc opportunistic-headphone-use situations like this one.
Between that and the poor quality of Bluetooth audio (did they literally just claim in the article that "analog audio" was something people were "saddled with"? Fuck that! If we'd switched to USB Audio I'd have understood, but Bluetooth?!), everyone's worse off and the tech industry, yet again, has added layers of complexity and brokenness to something that used to be simple and easy. And with absolutely no consumer benefit whatsoever. Bluetooth headphones have no serious advantages over wired headphones except in a tiny, tiny, set of use cases that are abnormal.
2. The decision means Bluetooth headphones are now what many people carry around
No it's not. Technology is the reason why Bluetooth headphones are now what many people carry around. Even those of us (like me) who have headphone sockets have precisely zero desire to screw around with cables. The last time I used corded headphones away from my desk was in 2016 when the cable got snagged by my hand on the running machine and sent my smartphone flying across the room. 2016 is relevant because this was BEFORE Apple removed the jack.
Apple could have done nothing, it wouldn't have stopped me
The first myth of management is that it exists. The second myth of
management is that success equals skill.
-- Robert Heller
Great job Crapple (Score:3, Insightful)
This is everything wrong with Apple's decision to omit the headphone jack, and Google et al's moronic, slavish, decision to follow:
1. It was already a bad idea for the numerous reasons we've all expressed in prior threads.
2. The decision means Bluetooth headphones are now what many people carry around without having a wired backup, which means Bluetooth is their only option.
3. This means people now have to go through the security-problematic and user-unfriendly pairing process whenever they want to make use of their headphones including ad-hoc opportunistic-headphone-use situations like this one.
Between that and the poor quality of Bluetooth audio (did they literally just claim in the article that "analog audio" was something people were "saddled with"? Fuck that! If we'd switched to USB Audio I'd have understood, but Bluetooth?!), everyone's worse off and the tech industry, yet again, has added layers of complexity and brokenness to something that used to be simple and easy. And with absolutely no consumer benefit whatsoever. Bluetooth headphones have no serious advantages over wired headphones except in a tiny, tiny, set of use cases that are abnormal.
What the fuck?
Re: (Score:2)
"Apple's decision to omit the headphone jack, and Google et al's moronic, slavish, decision to follow"
Among the many things that Apple did not invent are cell phones without 1/8th inch headphone jacks.
Re: (Score:2)
2. The decision means Bluetooth headphones are now what many people carry around
No it's not. Technology is the reason why Bluetooth headphones are now what many people carry around. Even those of us (like me) who have headphone sockets have precisely zero desire to screw around with cables. The last time I used corded headphones away from my desk was in 2016 when the cable got snagged by my hand on the running machine and sent my smartphone flying across the room. 2016 is relevant because this was BEFORE Apple removed the jack.
Apple could have done nothing, it wouldn't have stopped me