What In The World Is Google Doing? (Headphone Jack, Pixel 2, Again)

[anthonium]

So the part that bugs me is.....your not going to include any ear buds in the box?? So I'm paying a higher premium than Apple, for half the storage (128 vs 256 $949) and your not going to include any kind of ear buds. I like the phone and would like to consider it, but I won't pay $949 for the 128GB which is what I want since there is no SD slot.

I completely agree with you. I am very bummed out about the lack of headphone jack and it's been the factor that has me undecided whether buying the Pixel 2. I love all the new features (I missed the front facing speakers from my HTC One M7) so the addition is fantastic but why remove the headphone jack? What is the reasoning? It's a shame Google has gone down this road and I'm supposing future Pixels will lack the headphone jack. It's an annoying move particularly because I often listen to music while having my phone plugged in charging.

 

[dsignori]

Can someone tell me what's so difficult about leaving a free dongle that comes with the phone always attached to the ear buds or headphones that you carry around? Or leave the dongle in your car? You could even buy a cheap dongle to leave in your car.

I have been advocating this for a long time.

However, it has come to light recently that the CHEAP adapters that just pass sound through, will likely not work for the Pixel 2. You'll need either the Google adapter (extras are $20 a piece) or something similar with some kind of circuitry inside that will allow your analog headphones to work. You could also buy USB-C headphones with a DAC in them, but those are not cheap either.

TL;DR : If you have a working adapter, yes, of course keep it attached to your preferred earphones. But working adapters may not be cheap ...

 

[dejanh]

Can someone tell me what's so difficult about leaving a free dongle that comes with the phone always attached to the ear buds or headphones that you carry around? Or leave the dongle in your car? You could even buy a cheap dongle to leave in your car.

It's like buying an extra charger for my living room and one for both of my cars. Maybe I'm just weird.

By the way, never using out of the box USB-C cables again. The braided ones last forever from Aukey!

I have 3 sets of corded headphones/earphones. I have one for general calling, one set of earbuds that I use if I am exercising, and a set of high-end headphones for general listening. All three require dongles. In Canada that will cost me $60 more on top of an already overpriced device, and that is assuming I never misplace a dongle (ever), which - having hands-on experience with the iPhone 7 Plus of yesteryear - is not exactly guaranteed.

Oh and, as a few folks above pointed out, the dongle has to include an embedded DAC, which means that cheap-o dongles won't work and even with dongles with embedded DACs, a lot of them are quite bad. With my iPhone 7 Plus I basically had to resort to using my Dragonfly Red all the time to get good quality audio. Even decent quality was no longer an option with the dongle-mounted DAC.

There is nothing, and I repeat, nothing good about getting rid of the internal DAC and headphone jack. This is not like the floppy, or CD drive, or anything similar because there is no replacement that is better. It's being removed to simplify the design and save on BOM costs, however minuscule, while at the same time monetizing pointless accessories that should never exist to begin with.

 

[Aquila]

There is nothing, and I repeat, nothing good about getting rid of the internal DAC and headphone jack. This is not like the floppy, or CD drive, or anything similar because there is no replacement that is better. It's being removed to simplify the design and save on BOM costs, however minuscule, while at the same time monetizing pointless accessories that should never exist to begin with.

Very much misconstrued representation of the engineering reasons for replacing redundant technology.

 

[dejanh]

Very much misconstrued representation of the engineering reasons for replacing redundant technology.

Hardly, but if you are privy to those engineering reasons and would like to share it with me and the rest of us here please do so, because without specific details your current rebuttal is a bit light.

Edit: You may want to avoid space saving arguments, waterproofing, or altruistic desires like advancement of wireless technology as the means of justifying your position. Also, convenience of cordless as that too falls into subjective measure of benefit in addition to coming with some clear SQ downsides.

 

[Aquila]

Hardly, but if you are privy to those engineering reasons and would like to share it with me and the rest of us here please do so, because without specific details your current rebuttal is a bit light.

Edit: You may want to avoid space saving arguments, waterproofing, or altruistic desires like advancement of wireless technology as the means of justifying your position. Also, convenience of cordless as that too falls into subjective measure of benefit in addition to coming with some clear SQ downsides.

Well Apple and Google have both independently explained their reasoning, I'm not sure if Moto did or not. Perhaps we could let them speak for themselves instead of making up psuedosinister reasons.

 

[Ry]

Well Apple and Google have both independently explained their reasoning, I'm not sure if Moto did or not. Perhaps we could let them speak for themselves instead of making up psuedosinister reasons.

Motorola used the thinness of the original Moto Z as a reason. But the Moto Z Force Droid was probably big enough to have one but didn't even though the Moto Z Play did.

 

[dejanh]

Well Apple and Google have both independently explained their reasoning, I'm not sure if Moto did or not. Perhaps we could let them speak for themselves instead of making up psuedosinister reasons.

There is no pseudosinister reason at all. It's market economics. If you think that you can remove a component or a feature, have minimal impact on sales, while saving on the cost of production and design, and on top of that monetize the removal then you do so. It's a user hostile move plain an simple, one rooted in desire for greater control and profit. As for the explanations, let me remind you that Apple said it was "courage" and later tried to sell an idea of wanting to advance the wireless industry (ahem, with their proprietary W1 chip, ahem...), followed by trying to justify it based on not having space, etc. Basically "courage". Google also provided a wonderful explanation, let's see how it went...ah yes "The primary reason [for dropping the jack] is establishing a mechanical design path for the future,” Google product chief Mario Queiroz told TechCrunch after the event. “We want the display to go closer and closer to the edge. Our team said, ‘if we’re going to make the shift, let’s make it sooner, rather than later.’ Last year may have been too early. Now there are more phones on the market." So they were courageous like Apple. Hey, at least I won't have to deal with that headphone jack protruding from my display any more.

I don't know why you have the need to try to defend the indefensible. This is a control and profit play. Nothing else. It's user hostile. It's dumb. And unfortunately, before we know it we will be in a position of having to deal with a multitude of incompatible, proprietary standards or, alternatively, crippled features unless you're locked in an ecosystem of a single company.

 

[Aquila]

There is no pseudosinister reason at all. It's market economics. If you think that you can remove a component or a feature, have minimal impact on sales, while saving on the cost of production and design, and on top of that monetize the removal then you do so. It's a user hostile move plain an simple, one rooted in desire for greater control and profit. As for the explanations, let me remind you that Apple said it was "courage" and later tried to sell an idea of wanting to advance the wireless industry (ahem, with their proprietary W1 chip, ahem...), followed by trying to justify it based on not having space, etc. Basically "courage". Google also provided a wonderful explanation, let's see how it went...ah yes "The primary reason [for dropping the jack] is establishing a mechanical design path for the future,” Google product chief Mario Queiroz told TechCrunch after the event. “We want the display to go closer and closer to the edge. Our team said, ‘if we’re going to make the shift, let’s make it sooner, rather than later.’ Last year may have been too early. Now there are more phones on the market." So they were courageous like Apple. Hey, at least I won't have to deal with that headphone jack protruding from my display any more.

I don't know why you have the need to try to defend the indefensible. This is a control and profit play. Nothing else. It's user hostile. It's dumb. And unfortunately, before we know it we will be in a position of having to deal with a multitude of incompatible, proprietary standards or, alternatively, crippled features unless you're locked in an ecosystem of a single company.

A) chill B) this rant makes the same mistakes of misunderstanding that the first one did.

 

[openwheelracing]

I don't have a problem removing 3.5mm. I am critical of music. I use pre pros and dedicated amp with Scandinavian woofers and tweeters. I use AKG, Vmoda, Erymotic and Sennheiser.

I have never been impressed with cellphone DACs. If one wanted great sound they wouldn't simply plug a set of headphones into phone 3.5mm, unless you buy LG V10 or V30.

They either go all out like V30, or remove it and let us rely on external headfi products. My previous S7 Edge sounded like *** with my Erymotic earbuds. Snapdragon has terrible DACs.

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

Handling it this way would likely conform better to USB specs since the adapters would (if the hypothesis proves true) work on any USB-C device and not just phones. This might not be so bad after all.

Honestly, this needs to be sorted out sooner rather than later.

If we’re gonna remove the 3.5mm headphone jack (which IMO is still pretty dumb as it’s still a widely used standard in the audio industry, and it will take a lot for anything else to replace it), then the replacement standard should be just plug-and-play and easy to operate.

Right now, with all this hooplah over different dongles and headphones not working with different phones and other USB-C devices, it’s an outright mess. Hopefully, Google can actually push for that one USB Audio standard that every single USB-C device must support.

 

[modifier]

Right now, with all this hooplah over different dongles and headphones not working with different phones and other USB-C devices, it’s an outright mess.

Which is exactly why the news of the BlackBerry Motion put a huge smile on my face yesterday. It has a 4000mAh battery and a headphone jack. I still use wired earbuds for calls and admittedly do miss an onboard jack. Perhaps with a few more companies keeping it alive, the top tier will learn the error of their ways and reverse course.

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

Which is exactly why the news of the BlackBerry Motion put a huge smile on my face yesterday. It has a 4000mAh battery and a headphone jack. I still use wired earbuds for calls and admittedly do miss an onboard jack. Perhaps with a few more companies keeping it alive, the top tier will learn the error of their ways and reverse course.

Well, honestly, the only way we know if the jack will truly be dead is if Samsung does so.

 

[dsignori]

Honestly, this needs to be sorted out sooner rather than later.

If we’re gonna remove the 3.5mm headphone jack (which IMO is still pretty dumb as it’s still a widely used standard in the audio industry, and it will take a lot for anything else to replace it), then the replacement standard should be just plug-and-play and easy to operate.

Right now, with all this hooplah over different dongles and headphones not working with different phones and other USB-C devices, it’s an outright mess. Hopefully, Google can actually push for that one USB Audio standard that every single USB-C device must support.

Bingo.

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

Bingo.

That’s really the biggest problem that needs to be solved.

In the case of Apple, while Lightning is proprietary, at least whatever Lightning headphones you have should work because it needs to be certified before it is given the pass to have a “Made for iPhone” label or something similar.

With the current state of USB-C audio, it’s like a Wild West. You get dongles that work with one phone but not others, and then you get buds which work just fine with the phone it’s designed for but is flaky with others. I think there’s a serious problem when the USB-C dongle that comes with my Moto Z works with that phone but doesn’t work at all with my Galaxy Note8 and laptop. Hopefully, Google pushes for that one standard.

 

[modifier]

Well, honestly, the only way we know if the jack will truly be dead is if Samsung does so.

LOL, that's probably true. Samsung might keep it to have a differentiating feature. BlackBerry will likely always keep it because it's a business phone.

 

[dsignori]

That’s really the biggest problem that needs to be solved.

In the case of Apple, while Lightning is proprietary, at least whatever Lightning headphones you have should work because it needs to be certified before it is given the pass to have a “Made for iPhone” label or something similar.

With the current state of USB-C audio, it’s like a Wild West. You get dongles that work with one phone but not others, and then you get buds which work just fine with the phone it’s designed for but is flaky with others. I think there’s a serious problem when the USB-C dongle that comes with my Moto Z works with that phone but doesn’t work at all with my Galaxy Note8 and laptop. Hopefully, Google pushes for that one standard.

Yup, that's it exactly. You've articulated the problem more concisely than I have seen yet. I've gotten over removal of the 3.5mm port. The issue isn't its removal, the issue is the accessory "lottery" that we have to play,hoping we have the right adapter/headset that will work now..

 

[D13H4RD2L1V3]

Yup, that's it exactly. You've articulated the problem more concisely than I have seen yet. I've gotten over removal of the 3.5mm port. The issue isn't its removal, the issue is the accessory "lottery" that we have to play,hoping we have the right adapter/headset that will work now..

I’m still not completely for the removal of the headphone jack because I still feel that it’s not completely redundant just yet.

But if Google wants to go for it, then they should push for that standard to put an end to this whole fragmentation issue. One thing about the headphone jack was that it just worked, no matter if you’re connecting audiophile-grade AKG headphones or $5 buds from Walmart.

Any replacement standard needs to have the same convenience. Everything made for a USB-C device needs to just work, plain and simple. Consumers don’t want to deal with the hassle of figuring out why a dongle made for a Motorola phone doesn’t work with a Samsung phone or their laptop even though it’s using the same port.

 

[dsignori]

I’m still not completely for the removal of the headphone jack because I still feel that it’s not completely redundant just yet.

But if Google wants to go for it, then they should push for that standard to put an end to this whole fragmentation issue. One thing about the headphone jack was that it just worked, no matter if you’re connecting audiophile-grade AKG headphones or $5 buds from Walmart.

Any replacement standard needs to have the same convenience. Everything made for a USB-C device needs to just work, plain and simple. Consumers don’t want to deal with the hassle of figuring out why a dongle made for a Motorola phone doesn’t work with a Samsung phone or their laptop even though it’s using the same port.

Amen.

 

[maverick7526]

ehh I just use Bluetooth. I've been using it since 2012 or 2013. I remember back in those days of Bluetooth, too much jostling and you would lose connection. It is nice to see the progression Bluetooth has made over the years