Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Cyber Monday Sale Extended! Courses ranging from coding to project management - all eLearning deals 20% off with coupon code "CYBERMONDAY20". ×

Comment Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots! (Score 1) 384

As devices get thinner, batteries get smaller, and battery life shrinks. Batteries aren't subject to "Moore's law". They do not gain power as they shrink in size.

Yes, but because of a corollary to Moore's Law, the devices powered by those batteries get more efficient; thus "effectively" increasing the battery-size.

Comment Re:Yea the proof is in the patent (Score 1) 384

Unfortunately this has come out a while back. Shortly after Apple bought Beats. It does appear Apple is moving away from the standard jack because it limits potential for a thinner design. Apple seems obsessed with thin and the only other thing holding Apple back on thin is bendgate. Apple will either have to find a more rigid material in a thin state, or have materials that withstand bending. So get ready to buy a ugly dongle if you want to use a standard headphone with iPhone's in the future. Or buy a wireless one.

They already developed that improved alloy.

Comment Re:Real bad news (Score 1) 384

I carry around a separate Fiio DAC and headphone amplifier with battery in it for listening to music.

You wanna talk about a company that is NOTHING but HYPE, that's Fiio.

I almost peed my pants from laughing while reading the sales brochure for the X5 Gen II. OMFG the utter bullshit!

First off, you simply can't design something that runs off batteries that has a power supply impedance low enough and grounding and shielding good enough to do a 24 bit DAC justice. And since pretty much ALL digital music is 16 bit, there is only SO much dithering can do with those other 8 bits. Sure you can hunt down a FEW 24 bit downloads; but (unfortunately) they simply are few and far between; so your 24 bit DAC, like lossless encoding formats, is simply assinine on a portable music player or phone.

Comment Re:Real bad news (Score 1) 384

Well, the IAP2 chip and license is about a buck, and then you'd need a DAC and amp. It's around $4-$5 minimum to do Lightning to powered analog for the electrical. Add the packaging required (either an on-cable box, or a separate box) and battery and you're up to close to $10 for the Lightning-to-highend headphone adapter. So figure $40-$50 MSRP. Not an insignificant amount!

I assume you're building these by hand in the U.S. out of off-the-shelf parts from TI or someone similar. I submit that, at scale, these could be manufactured in some faraway land for $2 to $3, landed cost. That puts them in the $20-30 retail world, even with insane margins. Just like nearly every other Apple adapter. They'll build the whole thing into the Lightning connector body, and have a short cable with the 3.5mm jack at the other end.

Comment Re:funny and sad (Score 1) 384

Apple has always been a parody. Except for maybe a breif period in 1983 with the Apple 2, and again in 2007-2009 when the iPhone was leading product of its type, but other than that, Apple products have been mostly stupid and gimmicky.

First off, the Apple ][ pretty much supported Apple from 1977 through 1992, and there wasn't a school from K through University in the U.S. that didn't have several dozen to several hundred of them. During the same time, at least up through the mid '80s, it was relatively rare to see a Wintel PC in a school. The terms Stupid or gimmicky has never been applied to the Apple ][ series.

Then we have the Macs, starting in 1984. I'm not sure what metrics you use to determine "Stupidity" or "Gimmicky-ness" (maybe if a computer doesn't come in a beige steel box, eh?); but Macs have been every bit as "Serious" of computers since at least the advent of the Macintosh II in 1987. Actually, the "toaster" Macs were pretty serious, too, compressing 80% of the software and hardware technology of the $10,000 Lisa (the computer so far ahead of its time that almost no one could understand it) into a cube 1/4 the size of the Lisa, and for nearly 1/10 the price. True, the Mac was SUPPOSED to be a Laptop (a "Dynabook", actually); but what they did was still pretty neat, compared with the competition of the time.

Fast-forward to the present: Apple makes the best laptops, as opined by, well, most everyone, and does a pretty damned good job at their other product lines as well.

Curiously enough, though: The one thing that they have NEVER done is make a beige steel box. The PowerMac 9500/9600 are about as close as they got to that; but even those weren't just generic Wintel PCs.

Comment Re: funny and sad (Score 1) 384

That's two components, at least one of which is based on licensed block designs from ARM, who could simply stop licensing them for future use and BAM, no more A series chips can be made. Go on thinking Apple invented everything in the iPhone, really, go ahead, don't let those pesky facts get in the way. Don't get me wrong, I've got a number of apple products and I do love them, but i don't bullshit myself about what Apple actually does as a company. The AC you replied to is absolutely correct.

Actually, Apple has a "Soft Core" ARM license that actually lets them design their own CPUs (and they do), rather than just licensing IP from ARM. Being a founding member in ARM doesn't hurt, either. There are a few other companies that have such a license (Samsung and Qualcomm being two of them, IIRC); but Apple actually does design A-series chips from the CPU-on out.

Comment Re:Bullshit (Score 1) 384

This would mean a DAC, headphone amp, and batteries in every headphone.

So, IOW, a single, fairly simple ARM microcontroller to negotiate the Lightning protocol and do the D/A conversion, likely sub-dollar at Apple's quantities, with possibly a 5 cent amplifier chip and a few passive components. No batteries, since Lightning has power pins. The most expensive thing would be the connector.

Apple could sell it at $20 and still make a handy profit.

If you're talking about bluetooth, I am less sure what would be required; but yes, that would obviously require batteries and a bit more guts to deal with the RF stuff.

Comment Re:converter (Score 1) 384 audio to the speaker is the future, and then it might as well be wireless.

I've wanted that for the past 25 years. No reason that it can't happen.

Most subwoofers are "powered"; why not the "main" speakers? LOTS of nice things can happen when speakers and amplifiers are "matched". For one thing, passive crossovers (which are responsible for a LOT of bad things in a LOT of speaker systems) become a thing of the past. Another is "tuning" the amplifier's response to "flatten" the system. For another, A/V Receivers stop having to be behemoths, and can actually start being modular control systems, where consumers can easily choose their particular needs for number and type of audio in/outs, virtual tape/processing loops, EQ "plugins", etc. In fact, your entire A/V control system can become an App, with faceless boxes that do your bidding, and can distribute the signals to wherever. Yes, they have these things to some extent already; but to really do it right still costs quite a bit, and is really fairly limited.

I disagree to some extent on the wireless part for phase-coherence reasons; but I suppose the same signal that can carry the audio information can also carry a syncronization/timestamp so that samples are presented for conversion at the "same" time. And wireless SURE makes doing surround-sound setups easier in a LOT of homes (including my own).

Comment Re:converter (Score 1) 384

As with virtually any apple device, there will be a $75 piece manufactured for 85 cents that will be a lightning to headphone jack connection.

As with the other lightning connectors, if you plug it into your mac it will crash when it wakes on sleep.

Excuse me. How do you plug a Lightning connector into a Mac? Are you talking about trying to plug one into a Thunderbolt socket?

Comment Re:3.5mm? (Score 1) 384

yep, I have a headset with a 2.5mm connector that includes stereo and microphone channels. I use it with a breakout splitter to separate 3.5mm jacks nowadays. But that kind of stuff is too cheap... I buy handfuls of earbuds for my kids' devices from Daiso, and they're happy with them. There's no way for big companies to make money off them anymore.

But this is fine, unbalanced analog signal wires suck. It's about time for Bluetooth audio to finally catch on or something, despite the annoyances.

You obviously don't understand what Balanced audio lines are for. Balanced (differential) audio inputs are GREAT for the teeny-tiny signals from microphones, especially when they are carried long distances (like from a stage to a soundboard a hundred feet away). But they are essentially useless when talking about "line-level" (or above) signals. And when you are talking about speaker outputs, at the current levels that are sent to headphones/earbuds, the amount of possible intermodulation distortion reduction that could possibly be gained could be much easier accomplished by simply making headphone cables a little thicker than a human hair.

There's a reason that NO headphones, even high-end ones, have EVER had "balanced" inputs (except perhaps the speaker-powered electrostats): It just isn't necessary.

Comment Re: 3.5mm? (Score 1) 384


Clickable link for the lazy

Executive summary: It's a regular connector, with one side flattened so that it's slightly thinner. Means you have to insert the plug the right way around, which is a terrible idea. My vote: They won't do it. But then, I thought they wouldn't get rid of the magsafe connectors, and they have. In their defence, magsafe connectors are rather prone to dirt on the contacts preventing them from working

Since when have they gotten rid of Magsafe connectors (except on the low-end MacBook). The most recent refresh of the MacBook Pro which just happened about a month ago, sports a Magsafe 2 Connector.

Comment Re:3.5mm? (Score 1) 384

"After all, why can't they just redesign the audio socket so it's a couple of millimeters thinner?"

They probably can but then, what would you call an object 1.5mm width and ending on a point? That's a connector no more but a needle. And a needle has two problems: it's fragile and it can hurt. Not such a wise decision for a connector.

Back when we used to call them 1/8" phone plugs, there was another standard (usually only 2 conductors, but could easily be modified for 3 or even 4) that was about 1/2 the diameter of what we now call a 3.5mm plug. They were very common as the "pause" control on old cassette recorders.

So, since a smaller diameter barrel means a smaller diameter socket, why can't Apple just adopt that connector, then it would be a simple adapter (or headphones/earbuds manufactured with that connector already) to allow for a slimmer phone/tablet?

Comment Re:Windows 7 (Score 1) 359

Developers making money is not a problem. Companies selling their computing infrastructure products with inscrutable software is.

There is NOTHING "inscrutable" about pf.

1. I didn't say pf is inscrutable. 2. pf is not the only software shipped on computing infrastructure products sold by some companies.

You just want to argue. Go away.

Comment Re:Windows 7 (Score 1) 359

Developers making money is not a problem. Companies selling their computing infrastructure products with inscrutable software is.

LOL! Let me ask you: Just how far are you going to move those goalposts?

There is NOTHING "inscrutable" about pf. Not only is it a standard FreeBSD package, but Apple also provides ample documentation of the pf.conf file. This is, IIRC, all of the typical documentation that any "computing infrastructure product" is provided with in Linux, right? Apple just chose to only expose some of the many capabilities of pf, most of which the vast majority of users wouldn't have an interest in, in their standard GUI for pf.conf.

Nothing "inscrutable" here. Just the typical design decisions when a GUI is overlaid on a sophisticated OS, whether we're talking about OS X, Windows or Linux. And you very well know that; so do the Internets a favor and STFU.

"Everybody is talking about the weather but nobody does anything about it." -- Mark Twain