I use only jack and I know only people who use jack and even people who have therefore returned their smartphone back or extremely excited about it.
The new Huawei p20 has z.b. No latches but any adapters are included lol. And then you can charge at the same time? Seriously?
What is the better alternative to jack headphones? Apparently the last few years passed me by.
No one needs more jack on the smartphone.
Who but gets an adapter. Whether there's an adapter in addition to a cable with plug tuned or not matter.
Bluetooth works great.
What is that for a statement "No man"?
This is not correct, I've looked around in my environment and listened around and easily get over 10 people all use the phone jackets. Only one person has bluetooth headphones and I talked to him and he was forced to get the new smartphone… His old ones are lying around now
No one needs a handle. Whether he uses them is another matter. It is not necessary.
Since jack requires more space and there are much better alternatives, it is only too understandable that some manufacturers do without it.
If you really want to have a handle, you buy the right device. It's not that you can't first check which specifications a smartphone has.
There are several reasons. For one thing, it is being used less and less as manufacturers switch to Bluetooth. On the other hand, it bothers, according to manufacturers, the design of smartphones. It also takes away space at the top or bottom, which can be used for other things.
But there will continue to be manufacturers who block a headphone jack.
I hope I could help you For further questions like to ask.
A good, high-quality jack costs money and if you have a cheap built-in you then have problems because the customers complain about problems with it.
An analogue signal is present at the jack socket for the headphones. The digital signal that the smartphone uses must first be translated from a converter to an analogue signal. In turn, a good digital-to-analog converter (DAC) costs money, and inferior components provide a modest sound.
This analog signal must now be amplified accordingly. A good headphone amplifier is again an assembly that costs money.
Of course, the speaker on the smartphone also requires an analogue signal - but in the usual quality of these speakers you can rely on much simpler components - Since many customers, the difference, unlike the headphones, probably not notice.
If you omit the jack socket, you will not only save this one component.
In these adapters, the assembly for the analog sound is outsourced. The fact that it is "any adapter", the customer's claim to the quality of it, is kept within limits. Ultimately, the addition of these adapters is probably only intended for a transitional period, until the customers have got used to it and have purchased Bluetooth devices.
With a Bluetooth device, you outsource the assembly for the analog sound and makes the playback quality of these devices dependent - So the manufacturer of the smartphone is well out or may have opened yet another business segment.
Of course, Bluetooth is susceptible to faults and the output device in turn needs a power supply. The quality of the sound in turn depends on the converter and the amplifier. The digital Bluetooth signal itself is no guarantee for a good sound.
The latch is still state of the art. Although other types of connectors in the jack are superior in some aspects, this has never been successful for a variety of reasons. One point is probably that a pawl usually not locked and so at high tensile forces (accidentally stepped on the cable) does not break something immediately, but only the cable is pulled out of the socket.
If the latch were so outdated they would certainly not be found in professional recording studios. You can buy headphones well over 1000 euro which are also equipped with a jack.
P.S.: The jack has no modest Latzenprobleme in contrast to Bluetooth.
P.P.S.: I consider the design argument advanced. Of course, the manufacturers are concerned with the vile Mammon.
There's nothing better than a cable with as few adapters between.
Adapter = potential source of error
Wireless = latency
Sorry, but with smartphones, I do not need to come up with latency when listening to music.
If the manufacturers save 50 cents on each mobile phone, then lapses together.
The consumer is clearly the weakest link in the chain, he does not resist, buys expensive things that are extremely expensive. For example, one expert stated that the Apple could or should only cost 350 for 1,000. Where the billion-dollar profits of the manufacturers are justified, one can imagine that easily: in the stupidity of the buyers, which are not consistent and such things do not punish immediately by emigration to competitors.
Finally, a reasonable and well-explained answer. Saving and the money in the first place and then be technically fine and then creepingly miss the customer. I also know people for whom headphones belong to work, as Bluetooth is sometimes the best way because of mobility sometimes but also terrible because the latches are just 10 times better with good quality.
As always you will have to manage yourself or go with the trend. I'm not saying that Bluetooth is bad, it just has other options. I definitely do not want to throw away my beautiful Sony in ear and beyerdynamic overear.
You are the perfect consumer, the economy and politicians will love you (er)
Absolute! Why the good and cheap if synonymous more expensive and worse!
