Dateline today...
o These goofy looking horribly expensive AirPods lack basic functionality.
Verbatim because apologists deny whatever facts they _hate_ about Apple, where apologists blame everyone but Apple for Apple's own decisions.
o Apple always _removes_ functionality so they can sell it back to you!
"One thing you will not find: a 3.5mm or 2.5mm analog audio input,
which is standard issue on noise-canceling headphones at this price
point - that's how you plug into an airplane seat-back entertainment
system to watch the movie.
Apple knows this is a common use case, because it is selling a $35
3.5mm-to-Lightning cable for exactly that purpose.
That brings you to $585 for the AirPods Max, which is just $15 less
than an entire iPhone 11."
1. Apple doesn't sell a $35 Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cable. It's $9USD.
Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just isn't going to work.
Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.
1. Apple doesn't sell a $35 Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cable. It's $9USD.
Not to start an argument but the adapter is $9, the cable (1.2m) is in fact $35.
In comp.sys.mac.system bje@ripco.com wrote:
Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the
headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just >> isn't going to work.
Never mind, this is wrong on my part.
I'm not sure what that adapter and/or cable could be used for except to use with a home stereo. 1/4" to 1/8" adapter, a 1/8" extention cable to the adapter, adapter into the phone.
Seems messy.
But can they really be used that way?
Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.
I know that adapter is used to connect wired headphones to the lightning
port on phones without the headphone jack, but does it work in reverse?
On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:21:16 -0000 (UTC), bje@ripco.com wrote:
Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.
This is more evidence Apple removes functionality so you can buy it back.
I think it's interesting that headphones that ungodly expensive don't even have the most basic of the most common of the most useful functionality.
It's more evidence of why I claim Apple's ungodly profits are due solely to their brilliant MARKETING which caters to an extremely gullible customer.
You just can't make those ungodly profits off an intelligent customer.
o You just can't.
Are you sure you can sit back in an airplane seat & listen while plugged in
o For _less_ than the $35 for the "audio" cable Apple is promoting
Do you have a cite for your proof that it does _not_ cost that 35 bucks
o Just to get back the basic functionality that Apple removed on purpose
On Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:59:28 -0000 (UTC), bje@ripco.com wrote:
1. Apple doesn't sell a $35 Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cable. It's $9USD. >>Not to start an argument but the adapter is $9, the cable (1.2m) is in fact >> $35.
Hi BJE,
I saw your retraction which came after this post, but are you sure of that?
o Alan Baker brazenly denies _all_ facts he simply doesn't like about Apple
So his credibility (as with all the apologists), is utterly worthless
o People that wrong that often couldn't last a week in the Silicon Valley
This is yet another example of apologists brazenly denying reliable cites:
o Review: Apple's "goofy looking" horribly expensive $550 AirPods don't
even have the most basic of functionality <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/REJLJ4fYTfU>
I don't see any of Alan Baker's idiotic (always wrong) posts unless/until someone responds, where it's always these Type III apologists who can't
even click on links before they brazenly deny Apple does what Apple clearly does.
This was published 2 days ago, which seems to confirm a $35 "audio" cable:
o Apple releases $35 bi-directional Lightning to 3.5mm Audio Cable <https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/12/08/apple-releases-35-bi-directional-lightning-to-35mm-audio-cable>
"Apple has quietly added a Lightning to 3.5mm bi-directional audio
cable to its online Apple Store, a $35 accessory that can be used
with the just-launched AirPods Max"
It used to shock me how incredibly stupid (in different ways) apologists
are, but as always, it proves the problem with this newsgroup is simply
that the apologists exist (there are fewer than a half dozen adults).
o Type I (nospam) will defend MARKETING decisions to the death
o Type II (Alan Browne) never seem to be able to doublecheck facts
o Type III (Alan Baker) don't even _click_ on cites before denying them
"Surfacing in the online Apple Store on Tuesday and appearing as a
recommended item when ordering the AirPods Max, the Lightning to
3.5mm Audio Cable is a fairly straightforward product.
Measuring 1.2 meters (3.9 foot) in length, the cable has a 3.5mm
headphone jack on one end, and a Lightning connector on the other.
Apple advises it can be used to connect the AirPods Max and
Beats Solo Pro headphones to 3.5mm audio sources, which would enable the
personal audio accessories to work with hardware that doesn't offer
wireless connectivity.
It would also make the AirPods Max usable with the headphone jacks
supplied in modern airplane seats, an industry that doesn't like
passengers using wireless connectivity in general."
In comp.sys.mac.system bje@ripco.com wrote:
Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the
headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just >> isn't going to work.
Never mind, this is wrong on my part.
I'm not sure what that adapter and/or cable could be used for except to use with a home stereo. 1/4" to 1/8" adapter, a 1/8" extention cable to the adapter, adapter into the phone.
Seems messy.
But can they really be used that way?
Apple seems to say connectivity is only Bluetooth 5.0.
I know that adapter is used to connect wired headphones to the lightning
port on phones without the headphone jack, but does it work in reverse?
"Whether Apple has actually done enough here to justify the staggering
premium over the competition is an open question"
On 12/10/20 10:48 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
"Whether Apple has actually done enough here to justify the staggering
premium over the competition is an open question"
(sigh)
I guess it's sumthin' about Apple mystique, or whatever.
For myself, I do fine with a pair of these: https://www.amazon.com/Koss-KTXPRO1-Titanium-Portable-Headphones/dp/B00007056H
Dateline today...
o These goofy looking horribly expensive AirPods lack basic functionality.
Verbatim because apologists deny whatever facts they _hate_ about Apple, where apologists blame everyone but Apple for Apple's own decisions.
o Apple always _removes_ functionality so they can sell it back to you!
"One thing you will not find: a 3.5mm or 2.5mm analog audio input,
which is standard issue on noise-canceling headphones at this price
point - that's how you plug into an airplane seat-back entertainment
system to watch the movie.
Apple knows this is a common use case, because it is selling a $35
3.5mm-to-Lightning cable for exactly that purpose.
That brings you to $585 for the AirPods Max, which is just $15 less
than an entire iPhone 11."
o At $549, they need to deliver more than just good sound <https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/10/22166888/apple-airpods-max-design-comfort-price-features>
"I have no idea what's going on with the AirPods Max case,
which is a goofy one-piece contraption that's folded
and glued over on itself to form a case."
"It is one of the cheaper-feeling things Apple has ever made,
in my estimation - the second in a trend that started with the
MagSafe Duo Charger. I hope there is not a third thing."
"Whether Apple has actually done enough here to justify the staggering
premium over the competition is an open question"
In comp.sys.mac.system Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
1. Apple doesn't sell a $35 Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cable. It's $9USD.
Not to start an argument but the adapter is $9, the cable (1.2m) is in fact $35.
Unless you are planning to crazy glue the phone to the side of the headphones, that adapter which only seems to be a couple inches long, just isn't going to work.
I don't think anyone would use the wired connection when using the headphones with their phone.
The wired connection is mainly for use on
airplanes.
Though they were high priced my new Airpods Max
Sure the case is bullshit.
But with the sound quality nothing else matters.
On 12/10/20 10:48 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
"Whether Apple has actually done enough here to justify the staggering
premium over the competition is an open question"
(sigh)
I guess it's sumthin' about Apple mystique, or whatever.
Given the numerous evaluations comparing them to the Bose and Sony offerings, with the sound quality of the Airpods Max being excellent,
but not quite to the level of the competing products,
the price will
likely come down to something more reasonable after the holidays, say $399.
In article<rrm170$qrs$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
Given the numerous evaluations comparing them to the Bose and Sony offerings, with the sound quality of the Airpods Max being excellent,
but not quite to the level of the competing products,
although sound quality is subjective, many people say it's better.
the price will
likely come down to something more reasonable after the holidays, say $399.
no, especially since they're currently backordered for 2-3 months.
the price will
likely come down to something more reasonable after the holidays, say $399.
no, especially since they're currently backordered for 2-3 months.
Current orders will deliver February 17-23.
In article<0001HW.258EC8BA0334856870000C99538F@news.giganews.com>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
the price will
likely come down to something more reasonable after the holidays, say $399.
no, especially since they're currently backordered for 2-3 months.
Current orders will deliver February 17-23.
that's 2 months, and only for grey & silver.
for green, blue and pink, it's 12-14 weeks, or 3-3.5 months.
Current orders will deliver February 17-23.
Current orders will deliver February 17-23.
Ah, then the price cuts will be delayed until the early adopters have
all made their purchases.
This is just so strange. It would be understandable if it were a much
better product than the Bose or Sony, in order to justify the much
higher price, but it's not. It's less capable and the sound quality is
not quite as good. I guess the fact that they're available in a choice
of colors is one plus. The free engraving is another plus.
In article <rrm170$qrs$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
Given the numerous evaluations comparing them to the Bose and Sony
offerings, with the sound quality of the Airpods Max being excellent,
but not quite to the level of the competing products,
although sound quality is subjective, many people say it's better.
I miss the old days. I haven't killed anyone in years.
This is just so strange. It would be understandable if it were a much
better product than the Bose or Sony,
in order to justify the much higher price, but it's not.
It's less capable and the sound quality is not quite as good. I guess
the fact that they're available in a choice of colors is one plus. The
free engraving is another plus.
It's pretty amazing that at $549 they don't include the necessary cable
to use them on an airplane, or with other devices, and the case is not nearly as nice as what you get with the Sony.
Finally, one thing to take with you on international travel is one of
these: <https://www.adorama.com/hoymm492.html>. Surprisingly, there are still some older airplanes that use the dual mono (left + right)
headphone jacks in the armrest. I ran into this in 2019 on a flight to Italy. A lot of the older, wired, noise-cancelling headphones included
one of these adapters.
In message <191220201826009792%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
In article <rrm170$qrs$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
Given the numerous evaluations comparing them to the Bose and Sony
offerings, with the sound quality of the Airpods Max being excellent,
but not quite to the level of the competing products,
although sound quality is subjective, many people say it's better.
Certainly their is not question that they are significantly better at
high volumes, where the Sony products are well know for turning the
sound into a mush.
Early comments from audidweebs were that Apple's claims of <%1
disruption were impossible in headphones so cheap, but when they
On Dec 19, 2020, nospam wrote
(in article<191220201854000568%nospam@nospam.invalid>):
In article<0001HW.258EC8BA0334856870000C99538F@news.giganews.com>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
the price will likely come down to something more reasonable
after the holidays, say $399.
no, especially since they're currently backordered for 2-3
months.
Current orders will deliver February 17-23.
that's 2 months, and only for grey & silver.
for green, blue and pink, it's 12-14 weeks, or 3-3.5 months.
Damn! What will I do without pink?
Early comments from audidweebs were that Apple's claims of <%1
disruption were impossible in headphones so cheap, but when they
...tested, they were forced to eat their words.
On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:14 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:
Early comments from audidweebs were that Apple's claims of <%1
disruption were impossible in headphones so cheap, but when they
...tested, they were forced to eat their words.
Why is it that Type III apologists, which Lewis clearly is...
o Never seem to have even a single cite of fact
| Sysop: | Gate Keeper |
|---|---|
| Location: | Shelby, NC |
| Users: | 717 |
| Nodes: | 20 (1 / 19) |
| Uptime: | 62:08:33 |
| Calls: | 9,199 |
| Calls today: | 20 |
| Files: | 5,288 |
| D/L today: |
232 files (166M bytes) |
| Messages: | 466,139 |
| Posted today: | 4 |