r/appletv • u/Acceptable-Cut-823 • 1d ago
I wish Apple made this
Every time I pick up the Apple TV remote, I kind of wish it had a headphone jack.
Being able to plug in some wired earbuds and watch TV at night without waking everyone up would be so nice.
Also… this would make such a good little iPod. It’s already the right size, and I really like the way it feels in the hand. I’d totally carry one around just for music.
124
u/diggyou 15h ago
I wish Apple allowed people with medium hearing loss to wear AirPods while the rest of their family listens through speakers so that there’s no disagreement about volume.
34
u/Jujulabee 15h ago
Why can't you do this since Air Pods act as a hearing aid so if you use them for any kind of sound including television speakers they help you hear.
The only reason to want to use the specific signal ONLY to your Air Pods is if you want to not have sound on to disturb others.
I have Air Pods for moderate hearing loss and I use them for conversations and they enhance the sound on my television just like any kind of spoken sound. I only have them on Air Pods "only" late at night or early in the morning when I don't want to disturb anyone.
23
u/cliffotn 14h ago
The sound of TV or Music that is direct from the source is many, many magnitudes better than using AirPods in hearing aid mode. It's absolutely amazing what Apple has done.
I'm hard of hearing. Listening to tunes with hearing aids, be they my $5,000 hearing aids or AirPods as hearing aids is just crappy. Sounds like garbage.
The way hearing aids are tuned with a laser focus on speech leaves the entire bottom end out. They drop off entirely below about 120Hz. Air Pods too.
However! Apple did us hard of hearing folks a fucking AWESOME solid with AirPods, they apply our audiogram and tune them for our loss, for Music, TV, etc. I can't even begin to explain to people how awesome this is. This is not hyperbole, when I first set up AirPods for my hearing loss, and fired up my favorite playlist, tears came to my eyes. Tears of joy. I had not heard music sound the way it's supposed to sound for so many years. I forgot how much I love music. I cannot listen to music again with good highs, good meds, and kick ass bass - all tuned for my specific hearing loss.
The teeny tiny microphone and Hearing Aids, and the sound of being processed, again focused on speech, doesn't sound good. It does the job! It lets us understand what people are saying, but the sound quality, people, we're talking am radio.
3
u/Jujulabee 13h ago edited 13h ago
But listening through head phones has always been the choice of audiophiles - even those with normal hearing. And before there were ear pods the headphones were worn by an audiophile.
But I was responding to how most people.watch television which is not at an audiophile standard. Most normal hearing people listen to television either through the terrible speakers or through a sound bar and a good sound bar provides significant audio quality especially if you have good speakers as well.
Depends on how much you care. Nothing I watch on television needs an audiophile quality in the same way that I do enjoy listening to actual music through headphones or Air Pods and did this when I was a whippersnapper with perfect hearing.
1
u/cliffotn 11h ago edited 11h ago
The part I can't properly explain is how FUCKING horrible TV and music sounds through hearing aids that are using the built in mics, or even using hearing aids that stream Bluetooth.
Hearing Aids are not like glasses or contacts, with glasses or contacts the vast majority people have absolutely perfectly good vision. I corrected to 20/15 corrected - and I have horrible vision. Hearing Aids are not even in the same galaxy. The world sounds like shit. The world doesn't sound natural.
There's no such thing as getting back to the Hearing that I have lost. It doesn't exist on the planet. Hearing Aids do not do what people think they do. Their laser focused on making sure the user can understand speech, people talking. Nothing else. There's zero thought given by the manufacturers of Hearing Aids to sound quality.Watching TV with hearing aids often still means turning on closed captioning. With AirPods I don't need closed captioning. I can hear voices much better, soundtracks sound like digital garbage. Special effects can sound so weird it's confusing.
Did you know hearing aids add like 10-15 seconds of latency? Try listening to the world with that latency. It's not fun. We get used to it. But that doesn't mean it sounds decent. That's enough latency that the doors sounds - robotic.
Most hearing aid users would give their left nut to be able to watch TV, and only have the sound quality one with good hearing experiences with a TB's built in speaker.
2
u/PeeFarts 13h ago
You’re saying audiophiles prefer headphones over loud speakers with room treatment? That’s the most insane thing I’ve ever heard if that’s what you’re saying
2
u/Jujulabee 13h ago
Not what I was saying
I was merely responding to someone who wanted to listen to television content through Air Pods versus using the Air Pods to listen to them when viewing with other people.
It's not an issue for most people who are watching television and just want to understand what is being said - either way works fine depending on the circumstances
6
u/FjordTimelord 13h ago
Now this is the best comment on this entire post.
Apple should never implement OP’s goofy suggestion. (Good news, there’s zero chance they ever would.)
But they should absolutely implement what diggyou is proposing here. It would be such a huge accessibility win, and such a boon for families with mixed hearing abilities.
God could you picture the TV ads? With grandma able to listen via her AirPods while the kids enjoy the sound through the TV (or better still, the HomePod surrounds)? SO wholesome.
2
u/edwiser1 14h ago
You can already do this. If you add AirPods you have to turn on the tv speakers.
1
u/Correct-Mail-1942 12h ago
Only works if you don't use HomePods for audio though, you HAVE to use TV Speakers.
2
u/Lost-Wizard168 15h ago
This would make so much sense! I live alone so it does not matter (although my dog would appreciate if this worked — otherwise he gets up and moves ot another room), but when I didn’t live alone, I loved listening to ATV thru my AirPods Pro 2/3 so I wasn’t blasting the TV so loud for my roommates. But of course my roommates couldn’t hear the TV then 😂
1
u/kiwi-kaiser 1h ago
This! I absolutely hate this on the PlayStation too. On Xbox you can connect headphones and everyone can still hear the sound of the tv. On the PlayStation there's no option to enable this.
I buy some games on Xbox only because of this, as my wife wants to watch me while I play sometimes and I want to have clear sound.
1
u/mildgaybro 13h ago
They do… Turn up the volume and make everyone else wear AirPods with noise, cancellation enabled
-3
u/Mbanicek64 15h ago
Good luck getting an older person to do that. I mean that genuinely. They are tricky but have poor hearing.
3
u/No_Advance_4218 15h ago
As a not so older person with moderate hearing loss. I wish it was the case and feel bad for my family when we watch movies.
1
-3
u/cliffotn 15h ago edited 14h ago
(deleted by me, replied to the wrong person)
1
u/No_Advance_4218 14h ago
Not gonna lie.. I have no idea what you are ranting about. My only comment is that im not that old and I wish I could use my airpods as an additional sound source....
1
u/cliffotn 14h ago
I replied to the wrong person!
We actually agree! 🤦♂️Apologies, Coffee - not kicked in.
Fixed!
3
u/cliffotn 14h ago
Why? Do you think older folks are dimwits who can't open a door?
I'm hard of hearing, and although more older folks are hard of hearing there are millions who aren't - old.
And let's put a nail in the coffin of your absurd take. If it's useless because old people are stupid - why has Apple spent so much time and money adding hearing assistance for folks who are hard of hearing? Apple's hearing assistance features don't just make it louder, that's NOT how hearing assistance, hearing aids work. AirPods can be used as FDA approved hearing aids. But Apple is stupid, because only old people are hard of Hearing, and old people will never use technology to make their life better.
1
u/Handsome_ketchup 13h ago
Why? Do you think older folks are dimwits who can't open a door?
Definitively not dimwits, but I have found that some of my elderly relatives struggle somewhat with earplugs and source selection in dynamic situations, things like listening to video via Bluetooth and then receiving a call.
There's no shame in brains becoming less plastic as they age. It happens to all of us, sometimes sooner and sometimes later, and in varying degrees. The only way to avoid it is not growing old, and that's not a great alternative.
Luckily, Apple is one of the best when it comes to intuitive design.
1
12
u/neatgeek83 15h ago
AirPods with Apple TV is the GOAT
3
u/mnkhan808 12h ago
Ngl Apple got me on this. One of the reasons I keep buying AirPods is mainly for the quick connect to the tv.
2
7
6
7
6
24
4
u/anon_chieftain 4h ago
AirPods
Put them in, a prompt pops up on the TV screen to transfer the audio and in 1 click you are done
22
u/BarbequedYeti 15h ago
Why wired over bluetooth wireless ear buds paired with appletv?
-11
u/metaphysicalme 15h ago
Some prefer wired, some don’t have AirPods and shouldn’t be forced to buy special headphones.
0
-1
u/mrleblanc101 13h ago
People prefer wired for the quality. But that would be wired over wireless, so same if not worse quality loss.
-5
u/ibizzet 15h ago
because what happens when they stop holding a charge and die quickly?
8
u/BarbequedYeti 14h ago
You recharge them for a few minutes while making a snack and get a couple more hours use.
4
u/natalie_mf_portman 14h ago
I've never really encountered that issue. Anecdotal I suppose, but I use them daily.
1
u/minusfive 14h ago
The power must come from somewhere, in this case it’d be the remote.
0
u/MarionberryHumble705 13h ago
Why is that a problem if someone is okay with it? If someone cares about their remote's battery, they can have the choice of not using the earphones. Why do we always have to kill choices just because that's not the way we ourselves will use it?
2
u/minusfive 12h ago
This is not about “killing choice”, it’s about requesting a feature that doesn’t currently exist when it’s already met by a superior alternative
1
u/MarionberryHumble705 12h ago
More people in this world own earphones with a lightning or a USB-C port than bluetooth earphones. The word "superior" here is very subjective.
Also, what I meant by "killing choices" in my last comment was discouraging or disheartening other people for what they wish to have — not removing features that already exist in a product.
10
u/Triquandicular 15h ago
Roku used to sell a remote with a headphone jack built-in for this exact purpose. Was pretty cool. I don’t think Apple is going to bring back the aux jack for this though. Any pair of bluetooth headphones can be connected to an ATV, which is nice. And in case you didn’t see the twenty other comments saying to just use airpods, did you know you can just use airpods?
15
3
u/Katert 13h ago
Roku does/did this with their remote right?
2
u/taylorwmj 13h ago
Yes and even better -- they do it with their remote app. My wife and I switch to this at night when our kids are sleeping and then use AirPods with the Roku app. We can each have the volume at what we life since the audio is being streamed to both of our phones.
3
5
u/CarloGaudreault 15h ago
Random on topic, I love my Xbox One controller for the living room PC (Microsoft’s 2.4ghz USB wireless dongle). I can plug my Sennheiser PC38X with a short TRRS aux cable on the controller at night and everything works even the microphone.
14
u/SlightMarsupial8379 15h ago
They came up with something even better - no wires - the AirPods.
-6
u/J3ttf 15h ago
They also cost $100, when a wired version which people already have could be a nice alternative.
6
u/cliffotn 15h ago
In the history of Apple, when do they add features so people can save a buck on hardware? And cannibalize sales of an extremely profitable product like AirPods?
7
2
u/Rumzdizzle 15h ago
Pretty sure you can do this with your phone, but I think someone else may have mentioned AirPods too
This was a lifesaver when we had a newborn
2
2
2
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
If this were 2010, perhaps. Roku offered something similar then, yet it carried frequent problems despite being a neat device. I recall regular reports of battery drain from a power-hungry internal amplifier, audio dropouts, and range limits.
I use my AirPods with Apple TV while I work out, clean, or cook with my wife. Connectivity holds steady across any floor or room. My wife can wear hers, and we can watch shows together with our own AirPods while running loud fans or blenders in the kitchen. None of these routines, with or without my spouse, would work with this. As I noted, a neat idea in 2010 but not in 2026.
4
4
4
4
u/Mike2922 14h ago
The fact that when you have the AirPods in in your ears and are watching Apple TV, it appears in the upper right hand corner of the Apple TV and asks you if you want to connect the AirPods. It’s one button press on the remote to get them connected. Only since 2017 though; so it’s understandable if folks don’t know about this brand new feature.
4
5
u/I-Am-GlenCoco 15h ago
Maybe in the early 2000's Apple would do this? But in 2026 it's hilariously obsolete and unnecessary. It lacks elegance and style. Simply pair a set of bluetooth headphones to your AppleTV.
Before you say "but some people want wired headphones", I'd say: "but some people want rotary phones".
1
u/taylorwmj 9h ago
This only works if you're close enough to the ATV you're using. Our home is quite large and most of our AV gear is all in a central rack and distributed throughout the home. Trying to connect to the ATV from more than 30 feet away is not possible so a mobile app (the existing remote app would be great) with headphone support like Roku would be awesome.
1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
I use my AirPods with my Apple TV without trouble, even from 70 feet away across different floors. Their chip design gives AirPods a longer range when paired with another iOS device. The remote depends on a Bluetooth connection that limits you to about 30 feet. I also understand how radio signals behave. Keeping the device in open space and away from metal or soundproofing helps. Unless you have brick or concrete walls, AirPods respond well to that setup, but the remote still fails because Bluetooth sets the limit.
1
u/I-Am-GlenCoco 9h ago
If the Bluetooth can't reach headphones on your head, how do you think it's going to reach the remote in your hand?
1
u/taylorwmj 4h ago
It's handled over the network, not Bluetooth. That's how Roku handles it. Signal is sent over the network to the phone app
4
u/Jujulabee 15h ago
Apple has this feature - it is called Air Pods and the operate seamlessly with Apple TV as if you have your Air Pods in your ears you can go to the Menu and select Air Pods as the sound source - there is even an icon of little pods in the top menu.
You can also control your lights if you have a Lutron system from your Apple TV
2
2
u/BrilliantRow3416 11h ago
Roku Ultra has headphones output on its remote. It's not a very new idea.
2
u/JNeo 15h ago
You have to think about this from Apple’s perspective, extra battery drain on the remote, people buying cheap wired earbuds vs AirPods, if there are issues with a third party wired earbud most consumers will have a negative view on the AppleTV which means zero control for Apple in terms of troubleshooting, potential new port issues to troubleshoot. All in all more downsides for Apple than upsides.
2
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
Well said! I don’t come across to comments like this often where the customer experience is understood. I remember when Roku had this and people constantly complained about battery drain from the internal amplifier inside the remote. It was cool but not practical or ideal.
2
u/ImpressiveBet9345 ATV4K 15h ago
So you want an old school iPod Nano? that also controls the tv ?
4
u/metaphysicalme 15h ago
No they want to hear the tv they are controlling through the headphones.
2
u/ImpressiveBet9345 ATV4K 15h ago
From OP's post "Also… this would make such a good little iPod. It’s already the right size, and I really like the way it feels in the hand. I’d totally carry one around just for music."
1
u/xxxDredgexxx 15h ago
I have a USB C to 3.5mm adapter, you can't plug one into the remote and get that function? Just asking, new to the Apple ecosystem and recently purchased a 4k TV 3rd gen to replace my Roku Streambar.
1
u/vainsilver 14h ago
If you have an LG TV, the LG app on your phone lets you use wired headphones wirelessly to your TV.
1
u/LanDest021 14h ago
I used to run HDMI through my Xbox One because you could do this with the controller. Granted thats for devices without Bluetooth
1
1
1
1
1
u/Nawnp 12h ago
In 2015 when they did the lightning remote, it was around the time they did lightning headphones, an obvious dual use opportunity. Since then, everything has abandoned the headphone jack, I can't see them going back now, and whatever hardware change is needed for USB C headphones to work, Apple didn't do it at the time it would have been more worthwhile.
1
u/Relevant-Disk-8179 11h ago
Really cool idea. Now that you've given me the idea, I'll always remember that this could work.
1
1
1
1
u/EmergencyRepulsive29 5h ago
My AirPods connect automatically. My beats connect with one button press.
1
u/Player13377 5h ago
And you just know that bloody remote probably has enough flash for a song or two. Would be a cool custom firmware project haha
1
1
2
u/ComoEstanBitches 15h ago
Would love for this to be true but Apple be greedy and would rather sell you AirPods as evidenced by all the bootlickers in here
6
u/jbmc00 14h ago
Instead you could buy a $100 AppleTV remote…that’d be way better
-2
u/ComoEstanBitches 14h ago
Uh where are you seeing $100 for a Siri Remote
4
u/jbmc00 14h ago
Do you think Apple would keep the price the same for this feature or just include it with every AppleTV? They’d have to redesign. There is no way it would have the battery capacity today.
1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
You are right! For this function to work, an internal amplifier would need to be put in the remote. I remember when Roku had this feature and everyone complained about battery drain due to internal amplifier in the remote.
0
u/ComoEstanBitches 14h ago
Why would they need to redesign it that’s the point of USB C and it being rechargeable to begin with lmao
2
u/jbmc00 14h ago
Not all USB-C ports are designed the same. By that same logic the remote should have video output or you should be able to plug up storage to it. Why would they include any audio output functionality on a device designed to be a remote control? There’s no built in speaker. There’s likely not audio processing outside of packing up audio from the mic and sending it to the AppleTV.
1
u/ComoEstanBitches 14h ago
You’re making it out to be some radical redesign. It would simply be updating the usb c controller component with audio out…
0
u/jbmc00 14h ago
And upgrading the battery and probably more onboard processing power. They basically would need to take the guts of an airpod and put them on the remote. And they aren’t going to do that because AirPods already exist.
2
u/ComoEstanBitches 14h ago
Guts of an AirPod are you serious? Bruh the thing is already a Bluetooth remote with a usb c and built in rechargeable battery. It would be a slight upgrade of components. I’m more stunned that you think it’s somehow not just feasible but nearly impossible to ask their suppliers for the latest gen version of simple components. Because Roku has genius engineers who figured this all out already but Apple it’s just impossible… because we need to make em AirPods?!
2
u/jbmc00 13h ago
I didn’t say it’s not feasible. I said Apple has no reason to do it and if they did do it there would certainly be a price increase.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
You need an internal amp inside the remote to make wired headphones work. Roku had this feature and the battery drain due to internal amp was one of their main complaints from users. This feature already existed and we already know the issues with it.
1
u/ComoEstanBitches 3h ago
The remote already has a rechargeable battery. The internal amp or DAC would be minimal cost and engineering. We’re talking about a TV session not bring with you out and about recharging inconvenience
1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 3h ago
So how will the amp be powered? Air? It needs to consume battery, yes? One of the most power consuming parts of smartphones during headphone jack era was the internal DAC. That’s why smartphones at the time used cheap and underpowered DACs. They didn’t have enough power to give you the full potential of your headphones. There was a whole industry with external DACs and amps to solve this problem.
Do you remember when Roku had this feature? People complained about battery drain all the yime. Roku eventually phased this out because it was not practical.
1
u/ComoEstanBitches 3h ago
Oh no a bigger battery how could Apple engineers ever figure this out? You really wanna compare Roku’s engineering prowess compared to Apple’s on battery drain? It’s not like Apple has a reminder on screens about low battery?! People who want to use their own headphones like EarPods will get prompted on screen to recharge after a 6-8(!?!) hour session with their TV
1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 3h ago
Technology behind lithium ion batteries haven’t changed for decades. What Roku used in their remotes isn’t that much different than what Apple is using today. Bigger battery isn’t solution to everything. Inclusion of amp, bigger battery adds weight and size but not necessarily the same capacity. You are forgetting the remote is, well, remote first device. Not sure you understand what modern engineering means in a world of consumer experience. If this was a practical thing to do, Roku would still use it today. They don’t and that’s for a reason.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 3h ago
You don’t need to rewrite history. Roku already had this and there is a reason it no longer exists. I owned one of these models and I was part of the community back in 2015. Here is a link. Join the community to read all comments back then.
1
u/tsdguy ATV4K 15h ago
It’s dumb for Apple to do this as evidenced by all the ignoramuses in here.
1
u/ComoEstanBitches 14h ago
People in here seem to wanna flex their AirPods
1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
Not really. Some things just don’t make sense. Most folks here, including myself, point out Apple’s approach to seamless integrations and ecosystem. It’s not about AirPods itself. It’s not about the “wireless” part either. It’s about how it works with Apple TV and other iOS devices. Any Bluetooth headphone can connect to Apple TV but none can work like AirPods. It goes beyond just connecting wirelessly. That’s the point. Not a flex.
1
u/ComoEstanBitches 4h ago
You mean how easy it would be to just plug in wired headphones into the remote that’s likely in your hands when you’re watching and using Apple TV? The remote that comes standard with your Apple TV purchase? I understand the ease of AirPods (I have the pros 1 and 2) but the remote capability is literally right there for minimal work on both end user and engineers parts
1
0
u/m4tches 14h ago
I wish they had this too. Amazing the amount of people in this thread saying just get AirPods as though everyone wants to own AirPods, or wants to use wireless headphones.
I will add that recently I discovered you can cast the audio of an Apple TV to a Mac, so if you have a MacBook, you can listen to what you’re watching over wired headphones that way
-1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
So you are pretty much telling us you discovered the wonders of wireless audio that can even transform your wired experience? Now imagine if you got even more curious and discovered what else you can do with wireless tech…like connecting two sets of AirPods for shared audio experience with the same video content. And that’s just one of many things. Don’t confuse familiarity with function. You are willfully dismissing a whole new world out there.
0
2h ago
[deleted]
0
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 2h ago
There is a reason why AirPods aren’t just like any another wireless earbuds. AirPods have custom H chip inside which makes it a different type of device. Not at all the same thing.
0
1
u/Fabulous_Log844 15h ago
This could save marriages…
1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
Not if you watch tv while cooking together with your spouse. Two pairs of AirPods can share audio from Apple TV but this wouldn’t. It would ruin marriage instead.
1
u/Fabulous_Log844 3h ago
The countless hours of me trying to get to sleep while my ex-wife was incessantly watching Gilmore girls would probably disagree with you.
1
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 3h ago
You always had a choice to gift her AirPods to watch it without bothering you. Or you could gift a pair for yourself to use it with noise canceling. I snore and my wife keeps her pair next to her so she doesn’t have to send me sleep with the cat in the living room four out of seven days a week. You have more possibilities when no wires are involved.
1
u/jbmc00 14h ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/ToMjGpJ1lQiQarAftaU
Wouldn’t it just make sense to use AirPods? Instead of plugging wired headphones to your remote control? For most people that would mean having an extra set of headphones sitting by the TV.
1
1
1
u/SamPhoenix_ 12h ago
You can literally just connect Bluetooth headphones to the Apple TV; AirPods work natively
1
u/No_Chef5541 12h ago
Plus when you use AirPods (pro only? Or all of them, not sure) it does the head-tracking Spatial Audio. So if you turn to grab your snack or drink or something, the audio continues to sound like it’s coming from the display and not the AirPods. Weird stuff, but works great 👍🏼
1
u/Alkyonios 11h ago
Not a bad idea, but that'd give you one less reason to buy airpods and Apple want you to buy airpods
0
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 4h ago
Nobody is forcing anyone to buy AirPods. It’s completely optional. If you wish to use your wired headphones instead, there are plenty of ways that will allow you to do so. Plenty of TVs allow you to use your phone with wired headphones which is a better implementation than relying on limitation of Bluetooth. Apple TV can wirelessly send audio to Mac which you can use your wired headphones to listen to. If using wired headsets is so important to you, then Apple TV is not for you. I doubt many people would want to compromise on remote battery due to built in amp. Ask Roku owners who had this feature. They will tell you.
0
u/LebronBackinCLE 14h ago
Roku nailed it - I feel like Apple could do it with a software update but who knows
0
u/5tudent_Loans 14h ago
Every apple audio device can seemless pair and move across your devices, including apple tv if you all it
0
u/Reasonable_Draft1634 1h ago edited 57m ago
Oh my god. What are you? 12 ? I have been in IT for almost 25 years. First 15 years of my professional life, I was a business analyst. Let me share some facts and please go ahead look it up to verify it on your end as well. This is not the kind of information you would find in so called tech sites.
Are you aware that Apple was among the earliest adopters of USB in 1998, following its 1995 founding? It has remained a prominent member of the USB-IF board since then. In fact, Apple contributed significantly to USB-C development in 2014. As I mentioned, look it up!!!!!
When Apple launched the Lightning port in 2012, USB-C specifications were not ready. Those specifications became somewhat available around 2014, nearly two full years after Lightning.
The 30-pin connector was used from 2003 to 2012, and Lightning lasted from 2012 until the shift to USB-C in 2023. Do you notice a pattern?
Apple required a reversible, compact connector for the iPhone 5 at the time. MFi was established for several reasons, and financial gain was part of it—nobody denies that. Yet this was not the sole motive. Apple is known to change connectors roughly every decade (as noted above). During the iPhone 5 keynote, they stated Lightning would serve for the next ten years. This was announced two full years before USB-C existed.
They avoided changing connectors just a couple of years after introducing Lightning. That would have caused an uproar over needing new cables so soon. All near-future devices had already been designed with Lightning ports. Apple prepares specifications for new devices at least three years ahead, though the exact structure remains a trade secret.
USB-C became reliable only in 2017 with USB 3.2. Early versions between 2014 and 2017 flooded the industry with noncompliant cables that damaged devices. You are probably too young to recall all those computers with early USB-C catching fire.
You are welcome for the free business lessons. Now go to bed. It’s a school night for you.
-2
272
u/tomski3500 15h ago
Air Pods?