Skip to main content

Poll: Do you want a thinner iPhone 7 at the expense of the 3.5mm headphone jack?

iPhone-7-Lightning

If all the recent reports turn out to be true, it looks like Apple might actually ditch the 3.5mm headphone jack for the next-generation iPhone later this year. It’s been a long-time coming, not just since Apple started preparing for the transition with audio over Lightning for headphone makers a couple years back, but also since wireless Bluetooth headphones have become good enough in recent years to replace wired solutions that rely on the 3.5mm jack we’ve used for the last century or so.

Apple is no stranger to being first to ditch old technologies while ushering in the new (think floppy drive, optical drives, and everything on the new 12-inch MacBook, as a few examples), but how do you feel about this particular transition? 

Removing the headphone jack is thought to allow for an overall thinner profile for the device, but it’s unclear exactly how Apple plans on presenting the change that will inevitably be a big topic of conversation if an iPhone without a headphone jack ultimately launches. In fact, Apple fans are already voicing their concern with a new petition gathering over 200,000 signatures from those against Apple’s reported plans.

It’s likely Apple will have a few partners showing off some slick new Lightning/Bluetooth headphones if it does introduce an iPhone without a headphone jack. It’s already been working with partners over the last year through its MFi program and adding products to its retail channels. We also reported this week that Apple is developing revamped, cord-free Beats with a charging case, and Apple will likely bundle some new Bluetooth and/or Lightning EarPods (or AirPods) to get you started.

But, really, will a thinner iPhone 7 be worth having to upgrade your headphones or buy an adapter to use over Lightning? 

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. John Gleavy (@jgleavy) - 8 years ago

    I’d rather have no headphone jack, but a larger capacity battery.

  2. Only if it’s not bendy.

  3. doctrsnoop - 8 years ago

    There’s a missing option: At the expense of the jack, but the addition of true waterproof. That’s the option I choose.

    • Doug Aalseth - 8 years ago

      Exactly. I have a bunch of wired headphones that I’d hate to lose, but waterproof and an adaptor jack would be a net gain, for me at least.

    • David Wei - 8 years ago

      There are waterproof 3.5mm jacks.

  4. Shane Clouthier - 8 years ago

    Only if they ship the phone with a pair of headphones that will work with it.

    • applegetridofsimandjack - 8 years ago

      They will, but the iPhone 7 will cost 50$ more, I’m dead certain. Don’t expect Apple to give this away for nothing. Greedy as they are.

      • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

        The phone won’t cost more for new lightning earphones that are in the box.

  5. applegetridofsimandjack - 8 years ago

    Yup! Please kill the jack and sim card tray that take up 90% of the space inside the phone.
    (I know it’s not 90%, just want to say it takes way too much space inside the phone).

  6. presslee - 8 years ago

    The no 3.5 rumors are better then apples “d jack” idea. But i think the iphone 5 was thin enough, but then again, i now think my ipod touch is thin enough too.

  7. awkward001 - 8 years ago

    I am all for this development but not because it will make the phone thinner… for the actual purpose of getting rid of useless cables we do not need any longer in our wireless world.

  8. fatherleenelson - 8 years ago

    The most simple solution would be a headphone amp which is powered from the lightning port to 3.5 mm. The 3.5 jack alone provides less-than-stellar quality.

  9. Ilari Scheinin - 8 years ago

    I see no problem whatsoever in giving up the headphone jack. However, I don’t care about making the phone thinner. What matters more is to help make it waterproof. And the freed space I’d rather see go for more battery. In fact, what I’d like is a waterproof but thicker phone with longer battery life.

  10. Casey Royals - 8 years ago

    I wouldn’t mind a fatter phone if the battery was bigger / lasted longer

  11. andredewaard1991 - 8 years ago

    I don’t want it to be thinner. But i don’t mind if they remove the 3.5 mm jack. If they give a lightning or bluetooth headset with it.

  12. David - 8 years ago

    I don’t feel like the question’s two points are mutually exclusive. Do I want a thinner iPhone? Don’t really care either way. Do I need it to be thinner? Definitely not. Do I care about losing the 3.5mm jack? Absolutely not. Couldn’t care less.

  13. Thinner is not so important. The headphone jack has no function for me, using the space freed by the jack for something that I care about would be nice.

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      Sorry Jordan doesn’t know that removing the headphone jack allows Apple to do far more important things inside the device.

  14. franec (@franec) - 8 years ago

    what happened to usb-c connector?

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      It’s too big for an iPhone, thus, it’s worthless for an iPhone.

      • USB-C is nearly the same size a lightning. Sizewise a socket that could do both is thinkable. Making that sturdy, durable and mass-producable might be too hard though.

      • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

        It’s decently bigger and that’s just the port size, I don’t even know how much bigger it is inside the device in height width and depth, which are extremely important. Apple should be striving for the smart connector or another no internal space taking connector, not USB C that takes up more space.

      • pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

        I don’t think it’s that much bigger, it certainly would be an option and allow the phone to do more BUT i have a feel apple want to keep a tighter leash on it’s ipod/ipad/iphone products and limit what third party products can interac with it — on a laptop it is already using USB, card slots, etc. that are all universal – so swapping to a USB-C was more doable.

        Don’t forget Apple makes money by licensing the rights to the lightning port.

  15. Robby Glasco (@h00pak) - 8 years ago

    No! Losing the headphone jack means more dependence on the phone’s incredibly underpowered battery. I have to keep my phone plugged in most of the day just to make it from 6AM to 10PM. Losing the headphone jack means losing the ability to listen to anything on headphones during the day. Yes, I could keep power plugged in and use bluetooth headphones but that’s just something else with which I have to worry about battery life. Please don’t take the headphone jack. Give me a thicker iPhone with a battery that will last two days. Business trips often involve long days when my phone is my primary computer. It’s already pretty easy to kill my iPhone 6 in 4 hours. A solid two-day battery would make my phone rock solid instead of something I’m afraid to use.

    • Sam Lesser - 8 years ago

      Give me a break. If I was a heavy user like you, I would buy a Mophie or similar battery case.

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      Hahah kill your phone in 4 hours? You’d have to be on it for 4 hours straight, and have background app refreshing Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter, as well as watching movies, listening to music, and making a lot of phone calls. And if your battery only lasts that long you need to invest in huge battery cases and external battery packs. More importantly though, you need to delete Facebook and your other social media apps.

    • jerjuan (@jerjuan) - 8 years ago

      You people are jerks…. No for $650 to $950 and from APPLE, I might add… No one should have to add a battery case just to get through their day! So it’s you and Apple who need to give it’s loyal customers a break!

      But as far as the headphone jack, blocking the lightning charging port or requiring another freaking adapter to charge and listen to wired headphones at the same time is a horrible idea! Now, if they want to go that route and offer wireless headphones with the phone, then fine.

      But thinner, just to be thinner, no thanks. Give us 16hrs internet usage battery life and 64GB minimum storage. Then I would truly believe that Apple is truly grateful for it’s loyal user base and interested in continuing to grow it.

      • jerjuan (@jerjuan) - 8 years ago

        Continuation on the thinner iPhone…. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I really don’t need a lipo exploding into flames in my pocket because I bent my phone on accident! That is an experience I care to avoid and never ever see anywhere!

    • pcl8r - 8 years ago

      I have an iPhone 6S connected to my  Watch… I start my day at 4am, go for a run with my iPhone, throughout the day I deal with emails, browse the web, shop online, search craigslist, listen to podcasts, stream music, and read articles from the News app. Here I am at 9:20 pm getting ready for bed with 7% battery. I’d say that’s damn near perfect. Great phone!!

  16. triankar - 8 years ago

    Other: I’ll strangle Jony Ive with any cable available IF the BATTERY LIFE remains the SAME or gets WORSE.

    I use bluetooth headphones anyway (Plantronics backbeat go 2), and I only keep the corded ones as backup in my bag, in case the former run out of juice

  17. Asbjørn Ulsberg - 8 years ago

    I don’t care about a thinner iPhone, but if they could jam a bigger battery into it and make it water proof, I wouldn’t mind the loss of a headphone jack at all. If all they do is make the phone thinner, I’m going to be very disappointed.

  18. rogifan - 8 years ago

    I reject the premise of the question. How do we know the only reason Apple might be removing the headphone jack is to make the phone thinner? The iPod touch is already thinner than the iPhone and it still uses the headphone jack.

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      Some people read an article about removing the headphone jack making the device thinner and automatically think that’s true and that’s exactly why Apple is doing it. The reality of course is that they can get a lot of internal space savings from that change, and increase battery, or reduce bezels, among other possibilities.

      • Ron Cardi (@ROYG_B) - 8 years ago

        I don’t think more internal space is a good enough reason to remove the headphone jack. I remember having to use an adapter for one of my old phones and it was a total inconvenience. Now I either have to have separate headphones or use an adaptor just to switch between my MacBook and iPhone. Whats next? Are they going to make the camera an external attachment or bluetooth compatible in efforts to improve internal space as well?

        I do have Bluetooth headphones, but I prefer using the cable just so I’m never left stranded if the headphones run out of battery. If I have to carry a portable battery w/ a USB cable or a backup auxiliary cable + adapter everywhere I go just in case my Bluetooth headphones run low, then I might as well have used wired earphones in the first place.

      • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

        Ron you’re argument about them removing obviously vital things for internal space is illogical. The headphone jack is an old and dated technology that can easily be replaced with superior technology now, and so it will. Is it an inconvenience? Sure, to some it is, but you have to look at the benefits and you have to understand that if you never wanted anything to change, there wouldn’t be an iPhone to begin with. The iPhone is the essence of the changing of technology. Wireless is the future, but it’s still not great yet, which is why there will be lightning headphones and lightning adapters. In several years there won’t be lightning either, it will be replaced by completely wireless.

  19. Please no larger battery, unless it’s not heavier than the current one.

  20. rwanderman - 8 years ago

    It’s an odd poll. I don’t care about a thinner iPhone nor do I care about the change to a lightning connector with or without Apple supplying the adaptor. If the change is made, there will be adaptors from Apple and from third parties.

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      It’s an odd poll because the writer doesn’t know that removing the insanely large headphone jack gets you a lot more space inside the phone, which Apple could use to reduce the bezels or increase the battery.

  21. RP - 8 years ago

    get rid of it and move forward. Anyone who doesn’t like it, cool, no one will take your old phone away. Keep it forever.

  22. Alex_dlc - 8 years ago

    I just don’t want them to force us to buy a 30$ Lightning-3.5m adapter.

    • Stop whining, I’ve been forced to pay for the useless earbuds and the jack socket for years! All because luddites like you like ancient plugs, Did I complain? No!
      I hope they don’t include a lightning to jack-plug adapter, I hate paying for stuff I don’t need.

    • RP - 8 years ago

      …they’ll do it at gunpoint.

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      They don’t force you to do anything. You make an informed decision after you see the product they release. It will include lightning EarPods most likely, and it will not include an adaptor. It won’t include an adaptor because probably 95% of users will be using the lightning equipped EarPods, so including an adaptor in every box would be an enormous waste.

      • Bret Miedema - 8 years ago

        my issue is I won’t be able to charge and listen to audio at the same time. I have a not terribly old car (2010)that doesn’t have bluetooth. I use both ports at the same time on a nearly daily basis. One for charging, another for audio. Unless they make a cable that has lightning on one end and aux and car charger on the other, I am going to be frustrated… phone is already f’ing light enough and thin enough. Nobody ever complains the phone is too thick since the iphone 4. Give us more battery and a headphone jack for my brand new Bose QC25 headphones..

  23. DAVID - 8 years ago

    It’s not _thinner_ that they’re aiming for, it’s _lighter_. They can’t reduce the size of the screen to lose weight, so they reduce the thickness.

  24. o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

    Haha 9to5mac writers aren’t even aware that removing the headphone jack gets you important things that have nothing to do with thinness. That’s sad.

  25. trevnics - 8 years ago

    Kill it off. Only a matter of time till every phone company makes the headphone jack obsolete. The future is wireless

  26. The Gnome (@gnomehole) - 8 years ago

    Not thinner, better battery, and push old headphone technology forward by making a change.

  27. The 3.5mm audio jack, being an analog I/O port, certainly holds digital and 3D audio back. That’s why it should go, not just because of phone size. Existing investment in headsets? Nothing an adapter can’t fix.

  28. Dave Hagan - 8 years ago

    I would be OK with the elimination of the headphone jack if — and only if — the iPhone 7 replaces lighting with USB C.

    • gymnastboatman - 8 years ago

      You obviously don’t understand marketing at all.

      A.) Apple already endured outlash for changing 30-pin to lightning (a change much needed, but not immediately well received by critics).
      B.) Lightning is not outdated by ANY means. It is capable of USB 3 speeds (which the iPad Pro can take advantage of, as well as future models of iPads, maybe even iPhone 7.
      C.) Lightning is thinner. USB-C is about twice as thick as lightning, requiring a female port rig thicker than the current iPhone. Now, for those of you that don’t understand that thinner equates to lighter, let me explain. To make a device lighter, you have three dimensions to decrease: height, width, and thickness. Well wait: the screen size is locked at 4.7″ diagonal. So height and width are locked, save for bezels that contribute to iconic iPhone design. So you reduce the remaining dimension: thickness.
      D.) Apple does their thing. They use the formats they believe are the best for the device they are in. And they make and sell adapters for those that don’t want to adapt to their standards. Join the ecosystem, or buy adapters. You’re not forced to use lightning, or own an iPhone. If you HAVE to have USB-C, buy a Nexus 6P. You won’t hurt Apple’s feelings.

      • Robert - 8 years ago

        Thinner would only equate to lighter if density remains constant.

      • jerjuan (@jerjuan) - 8 years ago

        @Robert. I was thinking along those same lines. Materials don’t automatically have the same weight because they are the same size.

  29. The phrasing is misleading.
    Everyone know it’s not just a question of thinness.

      • Robert - 8 years ago

        We can reasonably say we “know” this because there are so many logical advantages to removing the jack that have nothing to do with thinness. Apple must consider many factors. Waterproofing, internal space, battery load etc

        Also, we can prove that the current headphone jack is NOT presently a limit to thinness – since the iPod touch has the jack and it is thinner!

        The jack is however, a barrier to thinness if we want the screen to extend down to the bottom of the phone.

  30. uniszuurmond - 8 years ago

    I don’t care about thinner. But I would like the audio jack (and SIM tray) dropped in favour of more battery, flush camera and waterproofing.

  31. Scott (@ScooterComputer) - 8 years ago

    I wish 9to5 would do a better job educating the public on this, rather that CONTINUING to stoke this fire. So many media outlets are just COMPLETELY ignorant of the issues involved with this, so many click-bait headlines, it is astounding.

    It basically comes down to three scenarios as to how pissed consumers should be, and that can be broken into two fairly simple scenarios:
    A: Apple includes a DAC and headphone-driver amp in the iPhone
    Z: Apple doesn’t include the hardware to drive analog headphones in the iPhone

    Even if they remove the 3.5mm jack, if Apple keeps the hardware necessary in the iPhone to drive headphones, given that the Lightning connector is a “programmable” connector, they could pretty easily make an electrically passive Lightning-to-3.5mm “dongle” for VERY cheap. Include it in the box with EVERY iPhone/iPad/iPod/MacBook cheap. Basically, 4 pins of the 9-pin Lightning cable would DEFAULT to L, R, Mic, Gnd for headphones. The dongle wouldn’t even need the Lightning “special” IC so it could be cranked out by anybody and their cousin in China for pennies. Even if they DID require the chip, it could still be inexpensive if Apple doesn’t collect the licensing fees on THAT specific kind of dongle. It might raise the price of it, but should still be inexpensive enough for APPLE to put in every box.

    So that covers TWO of the THREE scenarios about how pissed consumers should be:
    #1 Apple removes the 3.5mm jack, but makes it so electrically simple to “dongle”, or includes the dongle in the box, that you’re a jerk to complain
    #2 Apple removes the 3.5mm jack and doesn’t include a dongle making it somewhat “Apple-tax” expensive — Yeah…consumers should be upset

    The third/second scenario is that Apple goes and rips the headphone driver circuitry out of the iPhone entirely. This would require Lightning dongles to not only have the ID chip but also a DAC and driver amp. This would CONSIDERABLY raise the price, to the point it would be more likely Apple would integrate all of that into their headphones. Now that they own Beats, a headphone company, why are they giving you FREE headphones? I could absolutely see Apple doing this. (On the other hand, the cost of a “dongle” in the box would likely be less than a pair of headphones, certainly much cheaper to manufacture.) Apple still will be putting speakers in the iPhone, so it is less likely for them to get rid of the DAC. However, they could integrate a much more basic DAC into the SoC and forego a more advance, 3rd party part to drive the teeny speakers on the iPhone. iPad, perhaps different story.

    #3 Apple removes the 3.5mm jack and the DAC/headphone-driver amp from the iPhone entirely and doesn’t include the now-$19.95 “dongle” in the box — Consumers should rightly be pissed off. Not “upset”, but BENT.

    Of course it would be smarter for Apple to do a #1 or #2 now, and eventually phase into #3. But hey, we’re talking about Apple here. But please KNOW what you’re railing against. Extending the length of your headphones’ cord by 3″ should NOT be throwing the Internet into a pitchfork-buying frenzy. FFS.

    Since I fully expect that with the new 18-pin Lightning connector (“wait, what??” you say) Apple has bigger plans, like competing more directly with USB Type-C, I’m hedging towards the move to #3 being sooner than later. I fully expect to see the 3.5mm headphone jack gone from the MacBook in lieu of a Lightning port in a future rev…if they pull the 3.5mm from the iPhone, they certainly should from the MacBook. Apple clearly wants to create a “Lightning Ecosystem” to sell its locked-in customers. (As a way to “compete” against the ubiquity of USB Type-C.)

    • Peter Rosa - 8 years ago

      If I have the option to connect a 3.5mm via dongle I’m ok with that option. I am a runner and when I go long distance running ( anything over an hour), my bluetooth in conjunction with gps kills my battery. I have blue tooth speakers but I opt to try not to use them unless I’m running short distance.

      Also because of sweat it degrades the headphones (meaning I have to purchase multiple headphones). So I generally prefer cheap decent headphones I can replace.

      If they don’t provide this option, means I may have to have a android device (or previous phone) to track my runs and listen to music. Which I wouldn’t mind. And just use my phone as my phone. :P

  32. I know it is a personal matter. For me I don’t mind Apple getting rid of the 3,5mm headphone jack. I listen to my iPhone through a Bluetooth adapter most of the time anyway. Plugging my headphones (IEMs) directly into the jack doesn’t make any significant difference = i.e. this output isn’t any special in iPhone = it cannot match better quality headphones such as Etymotic ER-4 PT (not even mentioning better ones) + and even more importantly Apple doesn’t support Hi-Res formats (such as 24bit/96kHz or better, DSD,…) anyway. It’s not Apple’s priority and I get it and accept it. Though If Apple decided to revive its slowly dying iPod and turn it into a Hi-Res player with a quality audio output (say a Lightning headphone output, why not) and man, they do have resources to make one hell of a player if they cared to, then such an iPod would be back on my hot shopping list again. :-)

  33. gndolfo (@gndolfo) - 8 years ago

    It’s not about being thinner or not. It’s about remove components. 3,5″ jack is a big hole in your iPhone. A very good place for fluff specially. Internally is a big component, more space for battery or other useful components is better than that old hole.

  34. Nate R (@nater903) - 8 years ago

    i would rather have more battery life than a headphone jack

  35. Dave Nelson - 8 years ago

    I will give up the headphone jack for a waterproof phone.

  36. bellevueboy - 8 years ago

    In July of 2005 Susan Benette did voice over recordings for 4 hours each day which would be revealed in 2011 as Siri. The iPhone was announced in Jan 2007 and went on sale in June. Who knows what’s planned for this year or being worked on this year. On the question about earphones I haven’t even opened apples EarPods for the last few models, I moved to Bluetooth long time ago. Btw when the first iPhone came out I had to buy an adapter to use other 35mm earphones.

  37. Before removing the headphone jack can we please move to wireless/inductive charging. Johnny, the apple watch has it and it is great. Super simple in the dark room when my wife is sleeping to set on the charger. Can we please do the same for the iPhone…

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      It’s useless, and space wasting. This is the convenience: plug phone in, in 1-2 seconds or lay phone on a spot where you cannot use it while it is charging, the charging is slower, and cords are still all tethered to the base.

      Wireless charging will be good once it can be done at a distance of 1 meter+ from the charging base.

      • dailycardoodle - 8 years ago

        Totally agree – current inductive charging is pointless on a smartphone. If they have to introduce it as part of waterproofing then that’s fine. Just not as some ‘futuristic’ feature.

  38. Steve Cunningham - 8 years ago

    Christ. Some of us have pre-bluetooth cars and still live by our aux-inputs. And headphones we really like. (I highly recommend the Grado SR80’s for portable audio. Beats headphones are terrible at everything except marketing) And some of those cars are Hondas, which means we’ll be driving them for another 10 years, most likely. I need a way to charge the phone and get the audio out at the same time, unless this phone is also magically going to come with a battery that never dies, which seems unlikely. Terrible, terrible idea.

  39. Drew (@gettysburg11s) - 8 years ago

    Personally, I use Bluetooth, so if they make the lightning port the headphone port, that’s fine. I am sure a small adapter will be available for people who want to continue with the old headphones. Grow up people. The 3.5 mm headphone jack has roots that go back 100 years. its probably time for an upgrade.

  40. I am definitely ok with the removal of the headphone jack. My main headphones are beats bluetooth, and if apple adds a set of lightning earpods, that will suit my needs. That being said, Apple can get the best of both worlds (the removal of the port, and the happiness of its customers) by including a lightning to 3.5 adapter for existing headphones that is just as small as a headphone cable. This should not be an extra charge to the customer if they buy an expensive new phone.

  41. epribs - 8 years ago

    I wouldn’t mind losing the headphone jack, but there better not be another camera bump. This flaw is so egregious to Apple’s design standard.

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      It may come with dual-array camera system which is much thinner than the current single sensor, and therefore it will likely not have a protruding camera any longer. My complete speculation is that they’ll use 2, 6MP image sensors which rest side by side under a sideways egg-shaped lens, which does not protrude, and uses 6 element lens, up from 5.

  42. taoprophet420 - 8 years ago

    Remove the jack and reduce the top and bottom bezel. I don’t want the phone any thinner and would like an embedded SIM and no phone jack.The phone jack is a technology from 1800’s to switch phone calls for operators.Its time for digital audio on iPhones and digital headphones.

    I still prefer USB-C because the MFI program gives me little hope that good headphones will be released steadily and quickly from other companies.

    • Agree with “Remove the jack and reduce the top and bottom bezel.” I don’t need the jack, and don’t need the iPhone any thinner, but would like better battery capacity, without having to add a battery case

  43. dailycardoodle - 8 years ago

    Get rid. Apple are at their amazing, delightful, frustrating, exciting best when they’re pushing boundaries. When they’re ahead of the industry. A push toward waterproof, fully enclosed devices – no sockets, no seams, so thin it’s shocking. Also, less sockets/jacks, more room for battery.

  44. rettun1 - 8 years ago

    Thinner is fine with me, I got a pair of wireless beats which rock. I don’t care so much about battery, as the current amount does fine for my needs. I think it will be silly though if they they ditch it mainly for thinness, but still have a protruding camera

  45. Robert - 8 years ago

    Why do you keep pushing this unintelligent idea that the 3.5mm Jack will be dropped for the purpose of making the phone thinner?

    There are many advantages to removing the Jack that have nothing to do with making the phone thinner! You know this.

    I guess you keep repeating this ‘removing the Jack just to make the phone thinner’ notion, just because it stokes controversy and generates clicks on your site.

    • Inaba-kun (@Inaba_kun) - 8 years ago

      What reasons? To increase battery size? I’ll eat my hat if the iPhone7 has a larger battery than the 6. It will be smaller, and the battery life, which is already terrible, will be even worse. Some will say they could water proof it, well wow, what a fantastically niche interest they’re targeting there. How many people listen to podcasts, books and music on their phones using headphones? How many go diving with their phones?

      The headphone jack is a) better quality than bluetooth, b) compatible with pretty much every pair of headphones ever made in the last 10 years+, and c) already fits just fine in phones which are thinner than the iPhone.

      If this happens, and it will absolutely DOMINATE the reviews of this thing if it does, then it will have been done through pig headed ideology and nothing more. Utility should win 100% of the time, all other considerations are trivial.

      • dailycardoodle - 8 years ago

        If Apple only cared about utility, all their laptops would have tons of sockets of every type including ethernet, and the Retina MacBook would not exist. People that appreciate how Apple like to push the industry forward will be happy.

      • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

        @Inaba-kun

        Go here and look at the ifixit teardown of the iPhone 6S
        https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/gVLQEpWGf6Zd521H.huge

        Go here and look at the ifixit teardown of the iPhone 6S Plus
        https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/FCiYOEvKTZi1HJV5.huge

        As you can see the headphone jack takes ample space inside the bottom left of the device. It is much taller than the lightning port, and as you can see in the iPhone 6S Plus picture, they made that Taptic Engine thicker, and much narrower to fit as much battery as they possibly could, into the device.

        Now, look at the iPhone 6S picture, and imagine they removed the headphone jack, and made the Taptic Engine exactly like it is in the iPhone 6S Plus. They could move it down to where the headphone jack currently rests, beside the lightning port, and get what looks to be about 1/2″ or more of extra space to do one of two things; make the battery a half inch longer which would result in an absolutely enormous capacity increase; or reduce the top and bottom bezels of the device 1/4″ or more, respectively.

        Either way, it can result in a dramatically beneficial upgrade to the device. That’s ignoring the inherent water resistance increase which is of course not the main benefit, but great none the less.

  46. Paul Schram - 8 years ago

    I also don’t care about a thinner phone. I put it in a case anyway. Plus to save 1mm. Do you know how small a millimeter is? What I care about are the $400 headphones I just bought. Remove the jack and I’m screwed unless they also create an adapter, which they’d better include. And I’ve tried bluetooth headphones. The sound is terrible. As is the sound from cordless, at least the few I’ve tried. I hope they don’t lose the jack.

    • o0smoothies0o - 8 years ago

      Question regarding you putting your phone in a case and therefore thickness of the phone doesn’t matter. How are you avoiding physics? Case thickness + phone thickness = total thickness, so if the phone was 1″ thick and the case was .5″ thick, the object held would be 1.5″ thick. If the phone was .5″ thick and the case was .5″ thick then the object held would be 1″ thick. Which is more comfortable to hold?

  47. Douglas Brace - 8 years ago

    I do not need a 3.5 mm headphone jack but keep the phone at the same thickness so here is a bigger battery.

  48. DanG (@Ingila_Bear) - 8 years ago

    I don’t use the jack as often as I used to, so it’s not important to me. But it’s extremely important to me that Apple would not make iPhone 7 thinner at the expense of battery size. If Apple shrinks the battery size further, my next phone would be Galaxy S7 which rumored to feature 3000mAh battery.

  49. Bret Miedema - 8 years ago

    Gosh….I quit making the damn things thinner. You ask anyone, techie or non what they want…thinner or more battery. They all say more battery. Leave it as is or make it thicker and leave the headphone jack

  50. TfT_02 - 8 years ago

    I use my pair of Beats Studio Wireless for listening. Won’t miss the headphone jack.

  51. Robert - 8 years ago

    Question: Is there some kind of cookie attached to the poll click? Perhaps to learn how individual users answer in different polls?

    With the Focus app turned on, the poll gets blocked.

  52. pavoldonko - 8 years ago

    Only if the battery will be bigger.
    But wireless headphones will drain that small iPhone battery faster anyway.

  53. calisurfboy - 8 years ago

    How about apple makes the phone thicker to put in a bigger battery for longer life and hide the portion of the camera that sticks out the backside.

  54. Inaba-kun (@Inaba_kun) - 8 years ago

    The phone is already far too thin to be comfortable to hold. Apple’s obsession with thinness over ergonomics is increasingly annoying. Take for example the Apple TV remote. No human hand can hold something so thin comfortably. Look at every other remote control ever made – they’re thicker and have rounded undersides so they fit the hand. It’s as if everyone at Apple never actually uses the devices they create, they’re just driven by some perverse ideology to make everything stupidly thin “just because”.

    As for losing the headphone jack, well if Apple want to buy everyone with an expensive pair of noise cancelling headphones a like for like bluetooth equivalent then go ahead, but I suspect that isn’t going to happen. Instead we’ll be stuck with over priced and easily lost dongles and the inability to charge the phone whilst listening to anything. Great news for car GPS – your choice – audible directions or a flat battery? Decisions decisions…

  55. Neil (@NeilParkerTX) - 8 years ago

    I’m 50/50. They’d have to include an adapter if they do it. How much thinner does the phone need to be?

  56. Why frame the question this way? It sounds like Apple may have many strategic reasons to eliminate the jack, not just an obsessive focus on making the phone thinner. They could drop the jack, make the phone no thinner than it is today, and use the salvaged space for bigger battery, second camera, etc. etc.

  57. Chris McCready - 8 years ago

    I’d actually like a slightly thicker iPhone with a larger battery.

    • dailycardoodle - 8 years ago

      Fine, but you know they’re not going to do that right? Look at the trajectory – iPhones (and Apple laptops) are getting thinner, Apple aiming for a thin as pos / all day battery life. They may not quite hit that sweetspot, but that’s the target.

  58. cdm283813 - 8 years ago

    It does not matter what I think. What really matters will people buy the phone and continue to be satisfied with it.

  59. leehardacre - 8 years ago

    Apple surely need to stop focusing on slimming down the iPhone now?! More emphasis on better battery life must now be priority.

  60. Sultan Nabulsi - 8 years ago

    Less holes stronger body structure and less exposure to dirt, water and humidity yes please!
    lightening port needs to evolve to be fully sealed and Mac needs to have lighting port for the compatible headphones with this move.

    it’s interesting how people won’t let go of things the old era has left us with, CD slot, ethernet, firewire, 100 USB port, 3.5 port and next the circle dependent button it’s about time!

  61. fredrikseglem - 8 years ago

    No headphone jack but a bigger battery

  62. I have never heard anyone complain about their phone being too thick.

    • The thickness in the 5s was good enough. Didn’t need to get thinner. Apple should have kept the same thickness in the new iPhone 6 series and used the extra room for a larger battery.

      • Doug Aalseth - 8 years ago

        What about the Square card reader or other non headphone devices that use the headphone jack for other purposes? If Apple drops the headphone jack those companies will be in big trouble. Their old devices won’t work with newer phones and over time will become unusable. Any new device would have to use the Lightning jack, which has to be licensed from Apple. I think this would drive a lot of business customers to Android.

  63. Peter Rosa - 8 years ago

    As long as I have a dongle for a 3.5mm jack I’d be fine. I’m a runner and bluetooth doesn’t work out for me. I have blue tooth headphones and it kills my battery on long runs with gps. Also do to rain sweat, I tend thru go thru headphones pretty quickly. 3.5mm headphones are cheap.

    I’d be bummed if no option comes out. So either a dongle or decently priced cheap lighting cables and I’m good. Otherwise I’d have to look at other options when I go running. I’m sure I’m a small minority, but lotsa of us runners still use cheap headphone alternatives.

  64. Ken doll (@KendalDevon) - 8 years ago

    Only if I’m getting a larger battery. If they can add waterproofing then by all means please, but definitely more battery.

  65. I’d give up the 3.5mm jack for a better batter or a thinner iPhone. I don’t think it would be a popular move though.

  66. Marcel Veldhuizen - 8 years ago

    No headphone cable is a deal breaker for me. I’ve been using iPhones since 2008 and I’m not looking forward to switching ecosystems, but so be it.
    I simply have no desire for more converter cables and I’m sure as hell not going to use the standard headphones. Bluetooth audio still has its problems in general and as far as I know there is no AptX codec support yet either, so definitely out.

    If there’s so much space left, put in a decent sized battery so it lasts more than 2 days :)

  67. David Wei - 8 years ago

    How much thinner do you need? Shave 1 more mm of the case?

  68. ethanhawaii - 8 years ago

    Why would they do this? I’m going to Samsung.

  69. Toro Volt (@torovolt) - 8 years ago

    Only if the connector change to the future industry standard USB-C.
    I would feel like an idiot getting locked into any particular brand.
    USB-C will always have greater choices of headphones.

  70. Alex (@AlexBC997) - 8 years ago

    Absolutely NOT! iPhone is already TOO THIN, making it very hard to handle. iPhone 5S was the BEST form factor, great balance, material, quality and weight/size. GIVE US A LARGER BATTERY INSTEAD… I find it ABSOLUTELY RIDICOLOUS they ignore battery life over and over and over again… I want FULL DAY battery life with heavy use, PERIOD! Nothing less is not acceptable anymore.

    Also, Millions have invested heavily in HiFi Hi-Res and very expensive headphones/earphones. I do NOT want to carry a ridicolous adapter JUST to use my earphone. Leave the same 3.5mm alone, and if they wanna bundle a wireless headset, GREAT! Don’t touch the standard port PLEASE!

  71. pecospeet - 8 years ago

    I guess I must be one of the few people who does not have any problem with battery life. Maybe that’s because I refuse to use twitter and only check facebook every other day. Personally, I don’t care about a better battery, but I would like something done so the number of people whining about battery life gets drastically reduced. That might need a bigger battery or it might mean cleaning up some of the battery draining apps so they behave nicely.

    I’d be very happy with a thinner phone. I’d be happy with no 3.5mm jack, but I am assuming there would be an adaptor so I could keep using my two high-end headphones. To date, I have been very pleased with all of the innovations Apple introduced that I had previously not realised I could do without!

  72. I prefer it for more battery and waterproof :) . Also using Bt headphones for long now since I don’t listen to any flac audio.. And most high end headphones come with separated wired. Hope they provided cable with 3.5 mm to lighting

  73. usmansaghir - 8 years ago

    Since rumours are pointing to iPhone 7 having no earphone jack. I went and bought myself Bluetooth earphones . Only cost me £20 from amazon. I must say i was upset and annoyed at Apple rumoured to remove the jack but having used them at the gym and a nice walk home for over a week . I honestly do wish Apple do remove the earphone jack, only if Apple provide Bluetooth EarPods. Making millions of customers buy Bluetooth earphones would be a massive mistake.

  74. yojimbo007 - 8 years ago

    Yes i do… Big time… As long as there is a nice/small adaptor availible for those who choose to not change their headphones..
    Or have one headphone that can work on multiple none apple devices.etc.
    I wont mind paying for the adaptor at a reasonable price… Its a one time deal !
    But Make it exclusively lightning only.. And its a huge marketing blow.

  75. Who cares for a thinner iPhone!
    I want a larger battery, and don’t even care if it has to be thicker!

  76. Ricky Heckbert - 8 years ago

    I do not think a thinner phone is necessary right now. The iPhone 6s is very thin. I have been saying this for a long time but I wouldn’t mind if the phone got a little thinker and heavier to accommodate a slightly bigger battery. An iPhone that lasts atleast a full day every day without worrying about the battery would be great!

    • djbabybuster - 8 years ago

      If you’re alright with a large device, the 6Plus battery easily lasts me a couple of days. Got it mainly for the bigger battery thinking I’d live with the screen, and now I’ll never go back to tiny phones.

  77. pdixon1986 - 8 years ago

    I think this is one of those things that needs to be changed if technology is to advance…granted many people have headphones with the 3.5mm jack, but i am sure there will be an adaptor — for laptops you can plug in a usb adaptor… apple also released a 15pin to lightning adaptor… so whether it’s apple or another company, someone will make adaptors…

    But I don’t agree on a thinner phone – personally i find it too thin, and i have small hands… still after a year of owning the iphone 6 plus i feel i could easily drop it without a case…i use their silicon case that make me feel like i have a better grip… i still prefer the thickness of the iphone 5… i love the iphone 7 to be that thick, with rounded edges, and a big juicy battery :-) … i’m not too fussed about the weight, i rarely use for calling, and it is nice to have some weight so that you can feel it is still there :-)

  78. DenkInWorten - 8 years ago

    I still don’t get why nobody heard about the 2.5mm headphone jack before. Or would consider building an even thinner one. The adaptor would be small, and cost 5$. I’m sure lightning to 3.5mm audio would be like 20$.

  79. I don’t need (or want) a thinner iPhone than the 6, which is already so thin it’s easily dropped when not in a case. But removing the socket will create more internal space for battery and help with waterproofing and dustproofing.

    There are probably other possibilities too like “digital” headphones, where the DAC and amp is in the headphones right next to the driver, and is of a very high quality. I think these exist already, but there will be more focus on them if the Lighting connector is the only way.

    It doesn’t bother me personally but I didn’t invest a lot of money in my earphones. If I’d spent hundreds on high-end buds I’d be a bit upset.

  80. Other: I don’t want/need a thinner phone (I want/need a longer lasting battery), but I also don’t care in the slightest if the legacy headphone port is dumped… in fact I look forward to the day phones have no ports at all, with everything wireless…. sealed from the elements.

  81. mytawalbeh - 8 years ago

    I really care about the thinness of my iPhone, but I don’t have any problems with 3.5mm, Lightning or wireless headphone, they all work for me.

  82. Greg Buser - 8 years ago

    Why does everyone assume that the reason for moving to the lightning cable is just to make the devices thinner? I can imagine how using the lightning connector could add many features and functionalities to the headphones making for a better overall experience.

  83. harrydevlin - 8 years ago

    It’s a very smart move for Apple. They save on manufacturing cost. The number of iPhone sales they lose because of the loss of the headphone jack will be minimal since few iPhone users would move to Android over this. There is tremendous upside potential for revenue. It’s brilliant. But of course the removal of the headphone jack has absolutely nothing to do with thickness. No one has complained that the present iPhones are too thick.

    It’s all about licensing fees. There are no licensing fees paid to Apple for a set of ear-buds, headphones, or any other device that uses a 3.5mm plug to plug into the iPhone. Think about how many sets of ear-buds are sold annually to iPhone owners. Apple currently gets very little of that money.

    To build headphones that operate through the Lightning port would require the payment of a licensing fee to Apple. If the headphones includes a pass-through connector, so you could charge the phone while using the headphones (a common scenario) then that doubles the licensing fee since it’s charged per connector. The fee is not a token amount, it’s about $4 per connector. You can currently buy a set of crappy ear-buds for $1, and a set of good ones for about $8. With the licensing fees, and the extra electronics (DAC and amplifier), new ear-buds would probably start at around $15. Would the increase in the retail cost of replacement ear-buds cause a significant loss of iPhone sales? There have been attempts to compare this to Apple’s removal of the optical drive from Macbooks, or the removal of the floppy drive from Macs, but this is a little different since those devices were not heavily used like analog ear-buds and headphones.

    There are other accessories besides headphones that use the ubiquitous 3.5mm jack. The Square credit card reader, IR blasters, AUX cables, external speakers, docks, thermometers, etc. Some of these won’t work through the Lightning port with a converter and the manufacturer would have to redesign them to use Bluetooth or the Lightning port (both of which would require payment to a third party).

    iPhone users are much less concerned about missing functionality than Android users. We have both Android and iPhones in my house. The user interface and the design elegance of the iPhone are unmatched by any Android device. But the Android device is far more full-featured in terms of both the hardware and the operating system. In some cases I could buy after-market add-ons to add equivalent functionality to the iPhone, but I won’t do that because the iPhone is supposed to be simple, it’s not supposed to have all these extra devices plugged into it. In some cases there is no way to add the functionality, i.e. fast charging (though the iPhone 7 is rumored to add this), and there are some apps that simply can’t be written for the iOS because of operating system limitations.

    Finally, it’s possible that the rumor of the removal of the headphone jack was started to try to jump-start lagging iPhone 6s sales.

  84. Let’s face it: current Apple’s power connector (whatever it is called now?) is not durable enough even for charging purposes. It is broken very fast even if used with care. Mine lasted for 6 months. Now imagine this connector in a pocket, constantly shaking. There is no way it is going to last for more than 2-3 months.

  85. Michael (@digitalpics) - 8 years ago

    I have Bose Quiet Comfort (Noise canceling) headphones and Bose QC20 earphones. It would cost me as much to update those as buy the new iPhone 7. Effectively doubling the cost of the upgrade. Guess I would holdout as long as I could with my 6+ … to at least get more than 2yrs use out of the Bose.

  86. brycedoesroblox - 8 years ago

    I want the 3.5mm headphone jack to stay on the iPhone 7

  87. Graham J - 8 years ago

    I don’t have a huge problem with losing the 3.5 as I don’t use it much, but I do have a problem with lesser battery life. The form factor is now perfect, focus on fitting a larger screen and battery into the same chassis.

  88. chopingman - 8 years ago

    Really? The 6 Plus is bending and breaking now. I don’t ned a thinner phone. What I do need is a head phone jack. This is another Apple scam to get me to spend even more money on head phones. Like the new AppleTV that doesn’t support 4k, I’ll just stick with the 6 till something alas makes more sense. Good luck with it Apple.

  89. Kent VandenBerg - 8 years ago

    3 of the above. no, thinner is NOT necessary, yes, but only if apple includes a FREE adapter for my 2yo Klipsch earbuds, and yes, i would like to strangle jony ive for this idiotic idea.

  90. Adam Charters - 8 years ago

    Only if Apple shipped an adapter in-box with the iPhone.

  91. Debbie Ross - 8 years ago

    Anything slimmer than the iphone 5S will be hard to hold on to! I switched from a Samsung to the iphone 5S specifically for the body style. In my opinion the iphone 5S body style is perfect!

  92. Scott Rogers - 8 years ago

    I DO NOT want thinner. I want to still be able to connect to my car stereo that doesn’t have bluetooth, and I want a bigger battery that will keep the phone running longer.
    Apple definitely is missing the point.

  93. Jerry Stephani - 8 years ago

    Apparently no one has polled users of the device to discover the ways that audio output is used. Headphones may dominate but a substantial undermarket uses the audio jack output hardwired. Start polling iOS music designers. No audio jack/no iPhone-iPod iOS users. Stupidest move ever.

Author

Avatar for Jordan Kahn Jordan Kahn

Jordan writes about all things Apple as Senior Editor of 9to5Mac, & contributes to 9to5Google, 9to5Toys, & Electrek.co. He also co-authors 9to5Mac’s Logic Pros series.