Apple ditches analog line-out from Sept 2012

A Update: AFAIK the adapter does after all allow analog-out. So much wasted breath for nothing, folks!
 
It does a lot of things, but what exactly and how well we don't yet know. I tried to get a Lightning to 30-pin cable tonight but the store was sold out. When I get one I will test the analog out against the 30-pin devices. Digital is also an unknown.
 
All other things I've seen have been positive, I don't know why you'd use a case with such a nice phone anyway, but that's just me. I've learned not to use a screen protector with my iPad, only the smart case. The protector got dirty and ruined the feel of the screen of the iPad.


Ben aka MacKat
 
One of the common uses is connecting a portable headphone amp. In my personal opinion, Apple cannot have an excuse for this - and I don't mean greed either. If they don't have anything for these people at any price, they are just out of touch with their customers. Actually, I guess that is greed after all.
 
mackat said:
A Update: AFAIK the adapter does after all allow analog-out. So much wasted breath for nothing, folks!
Click to expand...

I disagree re 'wasted breath' - a lot of the speculation has proven to be correct, even if there IS now a mechanism to hook the lightning-equipped iDevices to legacy docks. This link is ourtesy of a HF member:

http://www.macworld.com/article/2012137/hands-on-with-apples-lightning-to-30-pin-adapters.html

As many had speculated, the adapter has a DAC to do the conversion:

The solution (and likely part of the reason that Apple’s adapters aren’t cheap) is an actual DAC built into each adapter. In other words, the adapter is converting the iPhone or iPod’s digital-audio output to an analog signal and then sending that analog signal to the appropriate pins in the 30-pin connector

Those who complain about the quality of the DAC in a standard iDevice need to ask themselves how good the sliver of silicon in a $29 adapter can be. The article goes on to confirm some of the earlier concerns re vendor lock-in:

Unfortunately, Apple’s $29 and $39 adapters are currently your only options—there are no budget knock-offs as there are with 30-pin-to-USB cables, which can be found for a fraction of Apple’s asking prices. That’s because Lightning cables and adapters include special circuitry that Apple licenses to third-parties, and vendors claim Apple has been slow to approve such licenses. (The only alternative we’ve seen so far is CableJive’s $30 DockBoss+, which uses your device’s bundled Lightning-to-USB cable.) That said, MacRumors.com reports that at least one vendor has “cracked” Apple’s authentication chips, paving the way for inexpensive (but unauthorized) knock-offs.

No question that the analog signal was never a 'hi fidelity' option, but from a consumer POV I still believe Apple burnt some bridges here. Probably not a great deal more to say - the analog issue has been resolved and that was the main point of this thread. Thanks to all who participated.
 
Last edited:
i-device update: I still don't have the iPhone 5 (may wait for the 5s), but got another step closer today with other items. Previously, I was able to test the new iPod Nano against the old iPod Touch and iPhone 4s which use the 30-pin connector, and found that the Nano's analog out to a headphone amp via the LOD (which bypasses the i-device volume control) is louder than the older i-devices by perhaps 3 decibels. Plugging the headphone directly into the headphone jack of these i-devices, the Nano's maximum volume that way was also greater than the old iPod Touch and iPhone 4s, by about the same amount (~3 db). Today's tests with the new iPod Touch had the same result. All tests were with the 18-ohm Sennheiser Amperior and the PA2V2 headphone amp, except when the headphone was plugged directly into the i-device headphone jacks. EQ and other optional settings that affect music and video sound were turned off. The interesting thing for me are the reports that the iPhone 5's maximum volume output is less than the iPhone 4/4s (and presumably the iPods), yet the other new i-devices that share the Lightning connector with the iPhone 5 have greater maximum volume, not less.
 
Ugh! To me, it's crazy how apple changes things like gears in a racing sports car. I hate how Apple products get obsolete after only a year or two. The thing I find crazy is how those idock and ihome audio systems and clock radios etc. are going to be useless with future "i" devices.
 
I would definitely recommend waiting a while before buying a new Apple item, to see how it's going to fit in the scheme of things. Just today looking at the new $1700 USD Macbook Pro 13" -- it's only a 128 gb SSD, and getting 256 gb is $300 more! Personally, I think $300 is terrible for just 128 gb of flash. I checked all the other specs - identical.
 
dalethorn said:
I would definitely recommend waiting a while before buying a new Apple item, to see how it's going to fit in the scheme of things. Just today looking at the new $1700 USD Macbook Pro 13" -- it's only a 128 gb SSD, and getting 256 gb is $300 more! Personally, I think $300 is terrible for just 128 gb of flash. I checked all the other specs - identical.
Click to expand...

Warranty issues aside, I would just upgrade the hard drive myself. Unless Apple have something in place to stop you 'ghosting' the drive onto a new one, it should a relatively trivial exercise.
 
estreeter said:
Warranty issues aside, I would just upgrade the hard drive myself. Unless Apple have something in place to stop you 'ghosting' the drive onto a new one, it should a relatively trivial exercise.
Click to expand...

If you can get the hard drive version that might work. But the $1700 price gets you only the 128 gb SSD, and prob. 20 gb is already taken by the O/S and standard apps.
 
JohnVF said:
If the plug was changed to something nearly the same size, the argument against them would hold more water. It's significantly smaller, and doesn't leave a big hole in the bottom of the phone to get clogged with dust and dirty from my pockets.
Click to expand...

Big hole, small hole. Try cleaner pockets. :D
 
shelly_d said:
#148 No, but a socially conscious company would.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it's the responsibility of a company to have a social conscience unless it is involved in charity or welfare work. The primary requirement of a company is to be profitable. All other considerations run secondary.

I have reached this conclusion watching the behavior of internationals, many of which started small and have grown into world-spanning conglomerates. There can never be enough profit and while that is a company's ethos it is hard to see how a social conscience can spontaneously develop.

Bill Gates, using his vast personal wealth is making a big difference in parts of the third world, relieving endemic social and medical issues. But that is Bill's personal endeavor, Microsoft as a company continues to grow and increase its profitability but has yet to show signs of developing a social conscience.
 
Last edited:
GeoffCee said:
I don't believe it's the responsibility of a company to have a social conscience unless it is involved in charity or welfare work. The primary requirement of a company is to be profitable. All other considerations run secondary.

I have reached this conclusion watching the behavior of internationals, many of which started small and have grown into world-spanning conglomerates. There can never be enough profit and while that is a company's ethos it is hard to see how a social conscience can spontaneously develop.

Bill Gates, using his vast personal wealth is making a big difference in parts of the third world, relieving endemic social and medical issues. But that is Bill's personal endeavor, Microsoft as a company continues to grow and increase its profitability but has yet to show signs of developing a social conscience.
Click to expand...


The biggest shareholders of the internationals are the pension funds demanding the higher profits you speak of.

So the internationals are paying most of our pensions.

Are they making a difference for our seniors?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom