Trump's wishy washy support of NATO is far more likely result in war in Europe than strong support for NATO would.

That is inevitable at this point anyway because Russia has not been countered for eight years. They will take back what they have lost.

But regardless it wouldn't be AMERICA starting the war, as it would be under Hillary.

Even Regan didn't attack Libya, and that was when Libya was still sponsoring terrorism.. That should tell you everything you need to know about war and Hillary's relation to it, right there.

Hillary talked a lot about "resetting" relations with Russia, and not only are they running wild but potentially influencing elections.

Doesn't this show Trump is vasty better at foreign relations than Hillary? He's met with the president of Mexico more often than Hilary has even talked to US reporters. And now according to you he's such a master statesman he managed to get Russia working with him. That's what Hillary promised but could never deliver!

If Russia is with Trump, then electing Trump will mean we will not go to war with Russia, and we almost certainly will if we elect Hillary (which she is already inclined to anyway because of the DNC and email leaks).

The media try to paint Trump as some kind of warmonger, but he's not even sure about backing all NATO countries! Meanwhile Hillary is no stranger to war, having started the war in Libya from scratch for no good reason, and with even flimsier pretext than Iraq... Libya was slowly opening to the west under Gaddafi, there was no need to take him out and now that country is utterly screwed.

And yet come November you'll be voting for the ultimate 1%er.

How funny!

For the few people for whom the stock earbuds do not work, you just attach the adaptor to the pair of headphones you prefer and you are done. That's why I'm mystified the people think it's such a big deal, most people just use one listening device.

For one, wireless *anything* is less reliable than its wired equivalent. In any sort of crowded environment, quality is going to go down as everyone's wireless headphones are competing with each other in limited radio spectrum. Bluetooth itself...

It's interesting you think Apple's wireless headphones will use Bluetooth, or that they have not considered the aspect of many people using the headphones at once.

That is to say, if the iPhone doesn't have to support an analog audio plug, and everything is digital, expect everything to be DRM'd to hell and gone right away.

Even more interesting you don't think there will be an analog adaptor that opens up the same hole for recording.

Flying cars, at long last!

Sorry I missed your neutrality on the issue, but I still can't see how it brings any more light on the issue... there have already been a billion articles on this, so I honestly do not see how it can possibly gain more exposure through a few more users of the phone. Even my wife, who does not care about technology or follow technology news at all, has mentioned it already... if she has heard about this there is literally no-one left on earth who is not aware.

did you notice that Lightning docks are far less common than the old-style docks that used to be everywhere?

But it didn't matter to users. The docks are not around as much as they used to be, but people use them less as wireless technologies became more prevalent... exactly the reason the headphone jack is also going away.

The sole benefit of removing the headphone jack is a slightly slimmer phone,

Technically there are benefits to having the headphone connector being wholly digital also, and it removes amplification hardware taking up space in the phone.

USB headphones have been tried before.

Because those are just another form of wired headphone, only less convenient. Apple is (seemingly) not moving to a different wired headphone standard.

I think I says a lot that I have not heard of the single item from that list, yet they were the best things at the shows... I stopped going to CES a few years ago and I really don't feel like I'm missing anything.

The number of extra iPhones sold because of Samsung shortages will be a tiny percentage of the total number of iPhones sold. It will in no way make it a "broader issue" - that would also imply there is even an issue, which the technorati will too discover to their dismay there is not.

They same fainting couch was fallen upon with great false tears back with the Lightning connector change, and absolutely nothing came of that. I fall to see how this will be ay different, in fact it's a far smaller change.

You may want to get out from under your rock and look at the number of people that use either Bluetooth audio gear, or just use earbuds that ship with the phone.

Apple pays taxes for everything sold in the U.S., in fact they pay a lot more than other companies do. Apple also doesn't play the online sales tax game other online companies used to (and some still do), so for many years communities have been making a TON of money of sales tax from Apple. But I guess you stupid Apple Haters never thought about that now, did you?

So in fact if I buy from Apple I will be supporting my local community through sales taxes, if I buy a Samsung online somewhere to avoid sales tax I will not. It's just that simple, Android is the real tax holdout.

Why should my community get money from Apple for things they sell overseas? That makes no sense whatsoever.

One hand, posible dongle for wired headphones I almost never use... on the other hand, exploding phone. Hmm.

It's pretty obvious if they ship with no headphone jack it also means they ship with wireless earbuds. So why is it even a problem, much less the gigantic issue you seem to think it is?

Bats also eat thousands and thousands of tons of insects that otherwise would wipe out our crops.

So then bats without any mosquitos to catch would simply catch more of the crop-destroying insects, right?

Bats are still around.

More crop pests are eaten.

Mosquitos are gone.

Sounds like a win/win/win.