USB Type-C could kill your headphone jack. Here's how | Hacker News Reader

USB Type-C could kill your headphone jack. Here's how

cnet.com

9 pointsdoener17 comments

A couple things.

Don't blame USB Type-C for killing your headphone jack. Blame your device manufacturer.

And from TFA . . . "will really make USB Type-C the right connector for audio," Saunders said.

I say: Type-C will really be the right connector for DRM audio. How about I just keep my simple, standard and ubiquitous analog audio headphone jack.

to me the article's argument is as ridiculous as the argument that tablets will kill PCs

>Another is that it's harder to charge a phone if you have headphones plugged into its sole port.

>The new specification, due this quarter, adds features to ensure a USB headphone doesn't drain too much battery power...

The second isn't an answer to the problem of the first.

>As a result, with USB headphones, "the difference in battery life is negligible" compared with 3.5mm audio jacks.

It's not negligible because, so far it seems like we are going to have a choice of a charging cable or an audio cable. Currently I can listen to audio and charge my phone simultaneously, so in an hour my net battery life is +25%. The best the either/or situation can deliver is -0.0% (but likely something more along the lines of -5% in an hour of audio listening.)

Look, I know this article is a bit diluted, but haven't you always wanted to hear your favourite music filtered through an obnoxious reverb filter? Imagine, you can now have the experience of hearing Bob Marley perform in an opera theatre!

In all honesty this has to be one of my favorite quotes from the article: "But there are good arguments to be made for embracing USB audio, Saunders said, and the companies that make USB controller chips are very excited about the idea." Wow, the people manufacturing this thing are excited about it? No way

What is with the obsession with thinner phones? Also, is the headphone jack the real limiting factor in thinness?

Phone covers. If functional, they will add some mm to the thickness of the phone. I believe overall smartphone thickness to be the sum of phone + cover.

But why not integrate the phone cover with the phone itself? A phone ought to come with the right size cover (replaceable, durable) from the factory.

This sort of cover could be integrated (via screws or mechanical latches that would be unsightly on a bare phone) with the phone skeleton, making for a package which is both stronger and sleeker than, for example, iPhone + OtterBox.

The Moto G does this. The cover I bought from motorola replaces the entire back of the phone.

iPhone with integrated cover? Ugly, not cool, definitely not worth $700. That would never sell.

iPhone? Sleek, thin, $700. Better put a cover to protect this piece of art!

It drives crazy the engineer in me, but that's the way it is. And it's about as rational as buying a nice car and letting it sit in the garage.

I don't have a cover for my OnePlus One, and I don't believe I ever will. I have dropped it maybe 5 times, sometimes on concrete, and it's still fine (with some minor chips on the side). I'm very confident I won't scratch the display in any reasonably conceivable scenario.

Maybe instead of making thin phones so people can have covers, the focus should be on making more durable phones that don't need covers.

(Then again there's the whole obsession with personalization, especially in Asia - but they'll put rather bulky things on the phone in the first place, so thickness should not be a huge issue)

Honestly, the main issue i see with USB-C is that it tries to do too much. On top of the "regular" USB features, it also adds high-power power delivery to both devices and peripherals, analog audio, MHL, Thunderbolt, and DisplayPort, and i probably missed a few. Sure, having a single connector might seem easy, but i'm afraid it will result in a plethora of devices and cables which physically fit, but do not work with or will even damage your device.

That fancy usb c-to-displayport adapter you bought for your laptop? It won't work with your phone, because that requires a mhl-capable adapter which outputs hdmi, but don't try to use that one on your laptop, because your laptop doesn't output mhl, so it requires a regular adapter. Never mind trying to explain to someone that yes, usb-c cellphone chargers are indeed compatible between all cell phones, but laptop chargers aren't interchangable. And even headsets suddenly don't seem like such a great idea anymore: a headset might have a usb-c connector, but will it talk analog audio or usb to your device, and which one did your device support again? And why do all my adapters stop working when i try to use a usb hub?

I'm all for innovation, but even ignoring all the potential issues with backwards compatibility with legacy connectors (3.5mm is on everything!) and the limited number of ports, it seems like we're in for a whole lot of pain for a very limited gain and it just doesn't seen to be worth it.

It looks like a PR piece from a million miles away...

None of those arguments are particularly compelling. My suspicion is that this will lead to new forms of digital lockdown, since it effectively ends the analog hole on phones. Additionally, it replaces a know ultra-cheap technology with something that will be more expensive or can be pushed to be more expensive in the long run.

>ends the analog hole

Nah. You can't plug the analog hole, it's impossible - that's the point of calling it that. Your ears are analog, so somewhere along the way the signal has to become analog.

Worst case, you replace your ears with a microphone. Easier: tear open a pair of headphones and get at the driver wires. Easiest: buy one of the inevitable adapters for connecting iPhones to home stereos.

The expected release of the standard on this quarter is nicely inline with Apple rumours.

Could USB-C replace Lightning in iPhone? Probably not, but I would be happy if it did.

No. lightning is nicer anyway

Lightning might be pleasant but it's got some shortcomings:

  - The springs are in the device instead of in the cable, so your $700 device wears out instead of your $5 cable
  - It only has 8 pins
  - It's intentionally locked down to ensure Apple has control

USB Type-C is more open, more durable, and more powerful

Reply on news.ycombinator.com