That's not really how that works. But, sure, I wouldn't mind them including the new Apple Watch Series 2 either.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Are the new AirPods coming with the new iPhone, how is the sound quality, and are they safe to use?
- Thread starter Hieveryone
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, that's why it's very reasonable to pay a premium for them. Premium wireless headphones are a luxury (a very small percentage of people own them) and relatively expensive regardless of manufacturer. I actually found the $159 price point much cheaper than expected. They're not going to include the latest tech headphones with every phone. No other smartphone comes with wireless headphones bundled. Your expectations are unreasonable.
They can't they aren't ready yet and they would bump up the price of the phone by $159 which not everyone wants to pay.
What unreasonable is not giving the customer your best.
[doublepost=1473288654][/doublepost]
Next thing you know you'll be asking them to include a helicopter.
This Apple W1 chip is a R&D project that Apple has been working on for years ... I bet they spent a lot of money on researching how to make bluetooth playback efficient with small batteries like in the AirPods . So yea they would like to profit from years of research . For the consumer its looks pricey and ridiculous its not included in the box but for Apple its a loss in revenue
Are you getting the best by default from just purchasing most things out there? When you get a car aren't there usually lots of add-ons you can get to make things better on top of the price you are paying? When you are getting a compute aren't there some better accessories out there for some included ones, and that's assuming any are included to begin with? I mean what seems to be unreasonable is this unrealistic expectation given that reality doesn't really work that way and hasn't really worked that way before.
[doublepost=1473288838][/doublepost]
Seems like you likely would find it unreasonable that one isn't being included since by not including one it means the customer isn't given their best.
So are you saying you would prefer headphones that aren't as good over headphones that are better?
[doublepost=1473289064][/doublepost]
Yea but iPhone already costs like 650
I don't think there is any way for anyone to make any objective statements about the sound quality. In sure there will be technical reviews and all that jazz. I wouldn't expect them to sound overly amazing, but I expect them to be better than stock EarPods.
So you want more expensive things but without really paying for them and just paying for cheaper stuff? Again, how does that fit in with the real world?
What happened to going for supposedly expensive things and supposedly understanding what expensive things mean?
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/marriage-money-life-and-1500-dollars-a-week.1981034/
Or how supposedly expensive cars work?
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-to-want-to-read-this-about-eco-mode.1978859/
The only thing out of the real world is the idea that someone would actually want bad headphones over good ones...
Beats, probably. I don't find beats to be all gay great though I don't bash them to no end like some folks around here do. I do think they're overpriced for what you get. There are plenty of sub $50 buds that outperform beats that are more than twice their price.
We aren't talking about wants here, we are talking about what's real. I want to travel to the moon, but I'm not going to call it outrageous or unreasonable that somehow I'm only able to travel to another place on this planet and not off planet. Seems like you are mixing up some things.
I think maybe you're confusing the argument. Nobody is saying people would actively choose the wired buds over the wireless ones. What's being said here is that Apple isn't technically giving the consumer less than they did before. I mean technically they're even giving us a 3.5mm jack, albeit an external one.
Sure, if the option was Bluetooth or not I would pick the former. But what if Apple just tacked on, lets say, $100 to all devices in order to package their air pods? Would you want that? I'd be more against that than the loss of the jack lol.
what's real is that AirPods aren't even being shipped with iPhone 7 even after charging 650
And if you charge $159 more they will be. Just like if you charge $1200 for 19" wheels instead of 17" wheels on a car when you are buying it.
Headphones are included, once again, just like wheels. If you want better ones then you pay more, also like wheels, or many many other things in life. That's just basic reality for you.
I think its kind of ridiculous that these aren't just included (or significantly cheaper) considering no one asked for the headphone jack removed. I would think as a consolation prize they would make some attempt to make up for it. And no, the adapter doesn't cut it. They want to push a standard without fully committing to the idea.
The only thing that's basic is those headphones they're giving you. Why would you prefer those in box over the AirPods?
[doublepost=1473291135][/doublepost]
Exactly. Many people are going to be so mad about this.
What phone maker do you know of that gives bluetooth headphones with their phones at no cost?
Thinking Apple WOULD do this is what is ridiculous.
Ummm the AirPods don't have blue tooth FYI
[doublepost=1473291310][/doublepost]
Exactly! Apple had their chance but missed it. They're already charging 650.
What's the reason for the 650? New colors?
Please.
Not a lot of phone makers have the gull to remove a stadard port like this. That alone should be their incentive to include them. You want the consumer to get onboard with this, show us why in the box.