• Panties@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s really a small inconvenience, but using an adapter would mean I’d be prone to misplace it when I use my headphones on anything else, so it hardly makes anything better

    • Laser@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The reason for not using a headphone jack is making it simpler for the manufacturer, one less connector to handle which also limits how slim a phone can be.

      I’m not saying this is good for the consumer, but there are reasons for integrating the functionality into the USB-C port.

      • hexonxonx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        These points were all disproved long ago. The jack is a the same thickness as the display.

        The reason is because BT headphones have a much higher margin, and need to be replaced every few years because of the battery (if not already replaced because they were lost or damaged).

        It’s just a dumb cash grab.

        • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          This would make sense if the only Bluetooth headphones that worked with the phone were made by the same company, but alas, that’s not how it works.

          The reason they don’t have a headphone jack anymore is because it’s easier to make without it, saves money, has a built in replacement in BT, and people overwhelmingly love BT headphones due to being wireless.