The headphone jack is only one example of many, but it is a good one considering that it’s relevant at this point in time.
I’d be supportive of the notion of using Bluetooth headphones if energy storage technologies were better. I look at simplicity above all else, and from a circuit engineering and electronics perspective moving to wireless headsets means replacing a passive device (as in, does not require its own power source) like wired headphones with a component that requires multiple embedded lithium rechargeable batteries, wireless radios, digital-analog converters, bluetooth comms hardware and antennas in addition to the speaker drivers themselves.
From a usability perspective, it means the headphones require regular recharging in addition to the device itself. The headphones won’t necessarily be always-ready (a low battery means no music listening) and the headphones will wear out prematurely when the lithium battery degrades to the point of being useless. Not to mention the phone battery life will take a hit from having the Bluetooth hardware constantly active and communicating.
All so we don’t have to be tethered to a cable connected to a device that’s kept on our person anyway.
This seems like a complex solution to a problem we don’t have, and that’s where the confusion on my part comes from. I’m not sure modern day consumers understand really how good we have it with the kind of technologies we already have. The standard headphone jack is over 100 years old. That doesn’t mean it needs to be replaced, it just means it’s served its purpose well, tried and true, tested and refined with few drawbacks. “Old” should not be synonymous with “bad”, but the attitude from some customers suggests that they believe this to be the case.
Progress is great, but a new solution that solves one problem while introducing even more (e-Waste comes to mind, if all of these earbuds have lithium batteries in them, not to mention reliability) is a backwards step. Until such issues are resolved the wired headphone jack is still the best option we have, and until last month or so nobody disputed that fact.
It wasn’t until the rumour started to circulate that Apple intended to remove it that anyone really started to become critical of it. Therein lies the second logical fallacy. Just because Apple believes it to be right as an industry authority doesn’t necessarily make it so. Or the belief that the removal of the established technology is for the benefit of the users. The only one set to truly benefit from this move is Apple themselves, especially as the sole license holder for what could become the only wired interface on the iPhone - the Lightning connector.
Ultimately though, their intentions will become clear if or when this rumour comes to fruition.
