“A report from Japanese blog Mac Otakara sums up the latest scuttlebutt surrounding Apple’s so-called ‘iPhone 7,’ saying the handset’s height and width mirror that of the iPhone 6s,” AppleInsider reports. “However, as KGI analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicted prior to last year’s iPhone debut, the upcoming model will be slimmer thanks to an LCD array that is 1-millimeter thinner than current components, the report said.”
“The publication says whispers that Apple would introduce a new waterproof composite material for iPhone 7 are false,” AppleInsider reports. “Instead, the device is expected to carry over the same levels of water resistance offered by the existing metal chassis design.”
“Mac Otakara reiterates claims that the future iPhone’s rear-facing camera is to be flush with the phone’s metal casing,” AppleInsider reports. “the report echoes rumors that Apple is looking to do away with the 3.5mm jack… [for] a thinner Lightning port design.”
If that’s the case, my wife and I will just upgrade to 6Ses in September when our contracts expire; as I still use my headphone jack, and I’m also sick and tired of being gouged by Cook and his adapters!
Don’t expect huge lines to upgrade… once again, not compelling enough. Thanks for continuing to uninspire Mr.Cook.
It is a big deal. The adapter will require a built in DAC to work at all, and Apple’s tendency to overcharge for simple adapters tells me it will be about $50.
Why scrap them? Just plug them into the adapter. Knowing Apple, they won’t include this in the box, which I think is a mistake… dumping the 3.5mm jack is a big deal and anything to ease the transition would be welcome.
Many people’s view of “waterproofing” is shallow.
You might make a phone kinda water proof, but you can’t make any phone corrosion proof. That’s why a razor gets dull…corrosion. It may survive your temp-toilet splash, but how long until the corrosion takes over?
While I respect everyone’s choice regarding the phone they buy and headphones they attach to it, I’d like to point out one little thing. iPhone is a mobile device, therefore for vast majority of users, most of the time, it is used in public spaces, with ambient noise. More importantly, its analog audio circuitry, as well as D/A conversion, are of fairly modest quality. I question the value of $200 headphones connected to an iPhone, listened to in public spaces with a lot of ambient noise. Any qualitative difference between a $20 Sony MDR ZX100 headphones and a $300 AKG K-701 studio reference headphones is completely lost on the listener. The qualitative bottleneck is the ambient noise and the quality of D/A conversion in the iPhone. More importantly, quite many of those who own $200 Beats headphones listen to 128kbps AAC streams on them, rendering the result no better than the free EarPods included with the iPhone.
For those who are determined to use their $200+ headphones with an iPhone, I’m sure there will be cheap Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cables.
Look, I don’t care about the camera, the headphone jack, the battery life or any of that BS. I want the dang phone to be thinner! The iPhone has been too thick for too long. It’s like freaking brick.
I agree with MacDailyNews: “Can we have an edge-to-edge display, pretty please, Apple?”
I already use JayBird X2 headphones (wear them practically 234/7) so removing the headphone jack is OK with me… though I would prefer less focus on thinness and instead keeping those few microns for improved battery life.
Thank God! Now they can make lightning headphones that possibly could do more than just send and receive audio data. At least, they better make lightning headphones. If you love bluetooth, try using Apple’s voiceover accessibility option with them. Laggy as crap. >
That’s nothing like enough new features to drive massive upgrades. Garbage report.
If that’s the case, my wife and I will just upgrade to 6Ses in September when our contracts expire; as I still use my headphone jack, and I’m also sick and tired of being gouged by Cook and his adapters!
Don’t expect huge lines to upgrade… once again, not compelling enough. Thanks for continuing to uninspire Mr.Cook.
Get rid of the darn antenna lines. Flush camera. Thats all I want!!!
more more 😉
I have no problem with antenna lines. After all, it is a cellular (radio) phone.
Nothing more irritating than for people who buy expensive headphones than have to scrap them if they want to upgrade.
Any pair of headphones that does not have a changeable cord is not a expensive pair of headphones.
Any pair of headphones that relies on bluetooth is not a good set of headphones either.
There will no doubt be a simple converter for 3.5mm to Lightning for those that need it. It’s not a big deal.
It is a big deal. The adapter will require a built in DAC to work at all, and Apple’s tendency to overcharge for simple adapters tells me it will be about $50.
Why scrap them? Just plug them into the adapter. Knowing Apple, they won’t include this in the box, which I think is a mistake… dumping the 3.5mm jack is a big deal and anything to ease the transition would be welcome.
Many people’s view of “waterproofing” is shallow.
You might make a phone kinda water proof, but you can’t make any phone corrosion proof. That’s why a razor gets dull…corrosion. It may survive your temp-toilet splash, but how long until the corrosion takes over?
That’s the point of waterproofing; so that water can’t get in and let corrosion take over.
While I respect everyone’s choice regarding the phone they buy and headphones they attach to it, I’d like to point out one little thing. iPhone is a mobile device, therefore for vast majority of users, most of the time, it is used in public spaces, with ambient noise. More importantly, its analog audio circuitry, as well as D/A conversion, are of fairly modest quality. I question the value of $200 headphones connected to an iPhone, listened to in public spaces with a lot of ambient noise. Any qualitative difference between a $20 Sony MDR ZX100 headphones and a $300 AKG K-701 studio reference headphones is completely lost on the listener. The qualitative bottleneck is the ambient noise and the quality of D/A conversion in the iPhone. More importantly, quite many of those who own $200 Beats headphones listen to 128kbps AAC streams on them, rendering the result no better than the free EarPods included with the iPhone.
For those who are determined to use their $200+ headphones with an iPhone, I’m sure there will be cheap Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter cables.
This tells me you don’t understand the difference between digital and analog audio.
If the analog audio port is removed from the iPhone, then Apple will lose sales. iCal it.
No antenna lines, edge to edge screen, virtual home button, waterproof. Unbendable since it will be thinner.
Look, I don’t care about the camera, the headphone jack, the battery life or any of that BS. I want the dang phone to be thinner! The iPhone has been too thick for too long. It’s like freaking brick.
Make it thinner of I’m switching to dang LG!
4″ form factor, glass back and sides, holding it wrong antenna lines, easily broken. Those are the features I want.
I wonder what the reviews would say if the iPhone increased in thickness ~1mm and added ~3 hours of battery life per charge?
Anyone?
No virtual home button til 2017 earliest.
I agree with MacDailyNews: “Can we have an edge-to-edge display, pretty please, Apple?”
I already use JayBird X2 headphones (wear them practically 234/7) so removing the headphone jack is OK with me… though I would prefer less focus on thinness and instead keeping those few microns for improved battery life.
Thank God! Now they can make lightning headphones that possibly could do more than just send and receive audio data. At least, they better make lightning headphones. If you love bluetooth, try using Apple’s voiceover accessibility option with them. Laggy as crap. >