The EFF on Apple’s removal of the 3.5mm jack:
The reasons for Apple abandoning the analog jack may be innocuous. Apple is obsessed with simple, clean design, and this move lets the company remove one more piece of clutter from the phone’s body. It advertises that the move helps make the phone more water-resistant. And certainly, many people prefer a wireless listening experience. But intentionally or not, by removing the analog port, Apple is giving itself more control than ever over what people can do with music or other audio content on an iPhone. It’s also opening the door to new pressures to take advantage of that power.
Meanwhile, over at BuzzFeed, Apple’s Phil Shiller addresses the DRM and vendor lock-in concerns (bookmark the following quote for future reference):
Schiller thinks it’s a silly argument. “The idea that there’s some ulterior motive behind this move, or that it will usher in some new form of content management, it simply isn’t true,” he says. “We are removing the audio jack because we have developed a better way to deliver audio. It has nothing to do with content management or DRM – that’s pure, paranoid conspiracy theory.”
Thankfully, I don’t have to write a reply to Schiller, because Nilay Patel already did so – and eloquently to boot, outlining exactly why the worries over DRM and vendor lock-in are more than warranted. After listing seven pieces of evidence of current and possible upcoming cases of vendor lock-in and DRM, he concludes:
Now, these are all just dots – there’s no line connecting them yet. But they are dots that Apple has put into the world, and when the most powerful company in technology creates as many dots around a single subject, it’s not a conspiracy theory to suggest that they might one day be connected into the shape of a DRM audio scheme. It’s simply pointing out the obvious.
Phil Schiller and Tim Cook want us to believe them on their blue eyes. I obviously don’t – if you can blatantly lie several times over in open letters and press interviews about your illegal tax evasion, how on earth am I supposed to believe them on this?
If they get overly aggressive with the DRM, people will just go back to pirating like they used to, and then what? Will Apple simply not allow the playback of non-DRM music files on iOS devices?
I remember people were saying that Microsoft was going to do that in Windows Vista, and it never came to pass. I don’t think it will here either, esp. since Apple is still selling said music files on iTunes.
Edited 2016-09-08 21:28 UTC
There is more to it then that. Removing the headphone jack means they can force you in to headphones they allow as well. They had chance to go with the standard micro usb but they went with their required DRM chipped cable lighting connector option. Apple could force you in to use only their headphones which well drive up costs since anyone that wants to make a pair will have to pay an Apple tax to get the drm chip for them to work.
“I remember people were saying that Microsoft was going to do that in Windows Vista, and it never came to pass. I don’t think it will here either, esp. since Apple is still selling said music files on iTunes. ”
If MS did it, it would be anti-trust lawsuit and privacy violations. Apple been allowed to do pretty much anything they want with 0 fines or charges.
Edited 2016-09-08 21:44 UTC
Here. Have some tinfoil.
See, here’s the difference between tax evasion and DRM-locked headsets:
One of these things doesn’t affect a customer’s ability to enjoy their phone. The other will drive up Android handset sales by the bazillion, and will put Apple out of business.
Frankly, if they’re that stupid, LET THEM COMMIT SUICIDE.
In the meantime, buy some decent bluetooth headphones that don’t look like a sextoy sticking out of your ears, and enjoy not having a damned wire strangling you when you move around.
I’ve used them for years. The audio quality is better than the MP3 that’s being played, by and large, and BT 4.0 will handle high bitrate mp3 and aac files natively.
Actually much of the Audio and Video subsystems were re-designed in Vista to allow for the DRM required by Blu-Ray (BD) devices in order to make the MPAA happy that someone would not be able to easily pirate the movies from a BD device running Windows.
Same for HDMI vs HCMI – HCMI has DRM built-in and it’ll only let audio/video traverse to other HCMI compliant devices.
Why are there no fines? b/c it’s in the framework but not pushed. IOW, Microsoft built in the functionality but it’s the content owner of the BD device; they’re just enabling the BD device to be used. Now, if MS said “no” then that would have been quite a set back for BD but MS likes the MPAA and RIAA.
So for now, Apple isn’t putting any DRM in there. But just wait – once it’s “standard” then RIAA and MPAA will come and say “you need to put this DRM in to support our content and keep pirates out” and Apple will oblige.
Sure, but there were doomsday prophets trying to convince us that we wouldn’t be able to play unprotected files anymore. Of course, none of this ever happened. And it won’t on iPhones either.
Freedom is lost when you’re not looking; but only gained by immense sacrifice.
That is, it’s a baby-step process to taking away freedoms – one little thing at a time, each seemingly innocuous.
So yes, it may not today; but what will the next step do tomorrow? Once the lock down capability is there, what then will the MPAA, RIAA, and other associations demand?
Sorry, I don’t live my life in fear like that. And even if it did happen in such a way that physical/unprotected media was unplayable on newer devices and nobody was able to crack it, it’s not like my quality of life will be severely impacted. I could either use older hardware to consume media, or assuming that weren’t possible, there’s enough physical books out there to keep me busy for the rest of my life.
In other words, this shit isn’t air. I don’t have to have it, and I’m not going to keep myself awake at night worried about losing it. It is a luxury item. Nothing more, nothing less.
Edited 2016-09-12 16:27 UTC
WorknMan,
You could say the same thing about most other freedoms too – they are just unnecessary “perks” or “conveniences”, that individually don’t amount to much, but they will erode gradually if we don’t protect them. I think TemporalBeing made an excellent point and I have no hesitation in backing his words in a broader context: it’s a baby-step process to taking away freedoms – one little thing at a time, each seemingly innocuous.
Edited 2016-09-13 01:18 UTC
This thing you’re talking about (permanently closing the analog hole) hasn’t even happened yet, but you’re talking about it as if it were a past event.
Edited 2016-09-13 01:42 UTC
WorknMan,
I personally don’t directly care that much about the analog hole either, but there are two aspects that I do find potentially troubling:
1. Whatever we have to say about analog, one thing is clear, it was non-discriminatory. The transition to digital is at risk of moving the industry towards proprietary technologies, if companies like apple are able to pull it off.
2. The elimination of fair use rights. I’m always wary about this one. The DMCA already did a great deal of harm, and digital technology continues to slice this away, slowly.
Consider the mandatory transition to digital TV over the air as well as many cable subscribers who were forced to get new digital set top boxes. Unfortunately for some consumers who had been legally time shifting programs, the new digital copy protection introduced problems. On the one hand the new digital streaming is nice, but on the other hand they disable crucial features like FF for the entire movie (at least our cable company does).
I don’t have a particular affinity for the old analog ways. I don’t deny there are clear improvements to be had, but with crappy experience and the loss of fair use rights, the digital solutions can be worse than whatever analog problems we originally had.
One could say this is just the cost of progress, but it isn’t actually; it’s a gradual but systematic attack on consumer rights.
Micro USB? That doesn’t do Audio the same (maybe USB C) here is the funny part other company’s have done this no big deal.
And the illegal tax evasion comment is hogwash. That’s why Ireland is appealing the EUs stupid order. This is Ireland’s business model! Though they lose tax dollars, the country gains thousands of jobs from foreign companies. The EU just wants their cut and that’s why the British left. (Ireland won’t be far behind at this rate)
Windows Sucks,
There is no difference in capabilities between a standard USB port and a proprietary Lightning one because Lightning -is- USB with respect to signaling. Apple opted for a proprietary connector, and also the addition of an authentication chip designed to block unauthorized 3rd party aftermarket accessories.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/09/21/authentication_chips_disc…
Regarding DRM, the elements for it are definitely there, but it’s unclear whether a company would switch it on given the stigma attached. This article covers the topic pretty well.
https://www.fastcompany.com/3061311/what-the-next-iphone-really-mean…
The British voted for Brexit mainly because of the free movement of EU citizens. Nothing to do with tax. It was all to do with ‘taking control’ of its borders.
Ireland is still a net recipient of EU money. No way is it ever going to leave the EU. The EU does not get a penny of Ireland’s tax money. That is all going to Ireland.
So far 0 out of 2.
Maybe you should read a little:
http://campaignforanindependentbritain.org.uk/the-economy/
Also EVERY EU country pays up to the EU central government a percentage of their GDP! More tax dollars you bring in more the percentage.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/nov/22/eu-budget-spen…
You believe the fear mongering of closing open boarders they gonna be stuck with anyway. Lol. Just like other non EU countries that trade with the EU. But they sold that line of garbage to regular folk to scare them! The Muslims are coming oh my God we better leave the EU to fix it! Lol. Fell for it hook line and sinker.
Edited 2016-09-11 01:56 UTC
Couple of points
There’s a wireless standard- Bluetooth- which almost all phones support. No DRM. Surely Apple will just use that. If they don’t- don’t use an iPhone.
As to water proofing- Sony Z5 has a headphone port and micro USB port which don’t need covering and is still waterproof.
Once again Stallman is correct. Libre software becomes more relevant with each day.
Yes.. because having a 3.5mm headphone jack added a ‘libre software’ dimension to the iPhone.
Well, if it didn’t “add”, going from a “free” analog connector to a drm-capable one certainly did “remove”.
I don’t buy the DRM argument, even with the DRM-encumbered Apple Music service, simply because the iTunes store sells songs unencumbered by DRM. It didn’t start this way. Apple first sold encumbered audio files, but pressured music companies to sell their songs DRM-free. I don’t see Apple giving up ground. I don’t see Apple Music being DRM free ever, either, as that defeats the point of the iTunes music store.
As for the slippery slope argument, (Small step from bluetooth support to requiring the W1) strategically, if they wanted to do that, they would’ve started out that way. As the next point said, they likely won’t lose many customers to Android due to removing the headphone jack, but after removing the jack, it requires a number of people to eventually buy head phonese again. If they forced a switch a second time, and on even more people, that could be enough.
Besides, requiring the W1 would make your phone incompatible with the hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of cars with Bluetooth support that can’t be replaced. For many of those car owners, that is a non-starter.
Now, as for the other points – Yeah, I can see that happening, but the 1/8″ jack isn’t going anywhere for everybody else.
Competition and other sources of music made them have to do it. Apple did not exactly willingly give up the DRM on its AACS files. Other on-line music vendors were using the more common MP3 which didn’t have any DRM in it so they had to get with it or lose the market.
Apple controls the Apple hardware market sufficiently that that will not be a concern for them. And Microsoft would probably be happy to oblige as well in the Windows market – well, it’s already there if device vendors dropped the 3.5MM RCA in favor of USB-C Headphones since the Audio system in Windows has supported end-to-end encryption since Vista (for HDCMI and BD).
Vote with your wallet.
As someone who remembers the error message when starting windows 3.1 under DR-DOS, I’ve seen real-world anti-competitive practices. I know that Netware 4.x is *still* a better file/print platform than Windows Server, and OS/2 was a better desktop (BeOS might have been, if they’d launched it on x86 hardware, but that’s another story).
But I’ve also seen claims that TPM would lead to the elimination of linux, that UEFI would prevent home-built PC’s from existing, that DIVX spelled the end of the home entertainment industry, and a number of other conspiracies that would doom technology as we know it.
Apple has done much to dumb down operating systems, and perpetuate the old adage that if you build something idiot proof, only an idiot would want to use it– iOS and The Apple App store has done more harm to software development and desktop innovation than the removal of an analog port that was always under control of the on-board electronics and software anyway.
Yes, it is slightly easier for Apple to restrict what headsets you listen to music on with the iPhone 7… but only slightly. The fact that they’re dancing around the issue already tells me they’re very much aware of what an economic and legal minefield it could be, and just how much damage it could do to their business.
If they want to go that route, HTC, Samsung, LG and others will be *more* than happy to sell you a phone.
grat,
Yea that’s been the case for as long as I can remember. The media industry keeps demanding DRMesque technology, consumers keep rejecting it and bypassing it. It’s just too bad the industry can’t stop wasting resources on this futile war.
“…the removal of an analog port that was always under control of the on-board electronics and software anyway.”
If well remembering, optical units use to come with analogical outputs. Consortium aggregates, as a rule, tend to be bolder on pondering egoist variables.
DVD-RW units with TV capability [a la Tivo, without Tivo Inc.] were killed for same reason.
I believe they did it for more room.
But it eliminates generic accessories. I have 30 pin cables for my iPod that are cheap and durable.
Apple’s lightning cable is notoriously fragile. More so than my $2 30 pin cable. Or $7 headphones.
For a long time, there were no 3rd party lightning cables. Now there are, but they all had to pay a fee to get certified. If it’s not, it might stop working when iOS updates.
My android cables are cheap, working and they last.
This isn’t about DRM at all. First of all Steve Jobs wanted DRM-less iTunes when the record labels wanted DRM.
http://betanews.com/2007/02/06/apple-s-steve-jobs-calls-for-end-of-…
I believe him.
This is about protecting revenue not about DRM.
The competition is passing Apple left, right and centre. Apple has problems charging shitloads of money for a phone. So what they do is making the basic phone cheaper (no choice) but offering Airpods (159 USD, I AM NOT KIDDING YOU, MY PHONE + WIRED EAR BUDS WERE CHEAPER Xiaomi Redmi 3, 6 months ago)
Apple is just trying to keep their revenue up by suggesting you should spend 159 USD on some shitty earbuds.
I have been surprised before about the fandom for Apple but breaking point must be near.
Apple is caught by their high stock price, they have no choice but charge a lot of nothing based on image.
The iPhone 7 is actually more expensive than before, not cheaper.
I just checked the iphone 6S and iphone 7 prices but they seem to be the same or at least similar:
Apple website: Jan 2016
‘https://web.archive.org/web/20160114175607/http:/www.apple.com/shop/…‘
Prices now:
http://www.cnet.com/products/apple-iphone-7/preview/
sorry link seems not to work, would need to paste into browser
Edited 2016-09-09 08:46 UTC
Well I thought the price would be the same as last time but really this isn’t about DRM.
Apple sells relatively few phones directly without subsidy from the carrier (i’d be surprised if it is more than 20 percent.
The problem is that we have reached peak Apple, the market expects Apple to make more money but iPhone sales and everything else Apple produces have stalled.
So what do you do as a company that has a fairly stable fandom?
You keep the price of the phone the same and try to find new markets, like suggesting you need to buy 159 USD wireless airpods. Sure you can use some converter (inelegant anyway?) but it takes the charger away and you aren’t a cool Apple person if do that (behind the times, yadayda)
it’s economics, DRM area is long over even if we have no wired headphone plug.
EDIT: sorry meant to reply to Thom
Edited 2016-09-08 23:59 UTC
Wondercool,
I agree with you about apple, but the DRM-war isn’t exactly over. DRM will be officially over when our movie services and physical cabling stops requiring the use of DRM encryption.
I’m hoping it will end, but I don’t know that it ever will.
The real figure for outright sales is estimated to be as low as 5-15%. Carrier subsidies average ~USD400/phone (USD300Bn/year). This fact largely explains why Apple is so “profitable” and why iPhone sales are so low in unsubsidised markets. These carrier subsidies account for over 1/3rd of revenue and roughly 3/4 of Apple’s profit.
The confusion about the issue of Apple’s tax in Ireland, what is at stake, who the protagonists are and what is actually going on seems very deep. The entire issue is about EU politics.
At the moment the setting of corporate tax levels is an entirely member state prerogative, that is to say the EU has no legal competence or powers in relation to corporation tax rates.
Within the EU system there is constant tension, inevitably, between different levels of governance, bureaucratic turf wars, and struggles to impose difference visions of how integrated (and hence powerful) EU levels institutions should be compared to national level governments. This is especially true now because the EU is in such deep crisis, seemingly stuck in an unsustainable half way house between deeper and shallower integration, and lumbered with a monetary system that has led to prolonged and painful stagnation. The tensions inside the EU system are very intense.
In this context the practice of the Irish government of setting very, very low levels of corporation tax in order to attract foreign companies to set up their businesses in Ireland causes a great deal of resentment. The problem is that there is zero chance that the powers of the EU will be expanded anytime soon in a new treaty that would pass the power to set corporation tax to the EU and take away tax setting powers from member states.
So in order to de facto shift such tax setting power upwards to the EU a different area of EU is being deployed, the law banning state aid to industry. This law is powerful, widely applicable but its limits and area of remit is not clear. It is thus a perfect mechanism for Brussels to use in order to take control (at least in a boundary setting sense) of national corporation tax levels.
Even though some member states are pissed off with the Irish for really under cutting them on corporation tax rates they will be very uneasy about just handing over yet another important piece of public policy to Brussels. The whole issue will take several years to work out and it will all depend on how the political situation in the EU unfolds over the coming years.
Apple obeyed the laws in Ireland, whether one likes those laws or not. Whether one thinks it is reprehensible for large and very profitable corporations to seek the most advantageous legal tax arrangements (something their directors are probably legally obliged to do) is not really what this episode is about. What is at stake is power within the EU and the relationship of the tax setting powers of directly elected national governments and not particularly democratically controlled EU institutions.
The entire EU project has got itself in to a very big mess and nobody seems to be able to chart a way out of that mess, and the Irish tax issue is just part of that mess.
Thanks a lot for your very ‘reality weighted’ evaluation of actual Status Quo, Tony. Can’t less than generally agree with you.
Which at the end talks of the huge fiscal task EU is confronting right now. I can’t even think of a [shared] economy, without [sharing] taxes.
EU is not going away. A lot less probable today than at past crisis.
Well those AirPods seem to be unusually poorly thought out by Apple. Unless of course the conspiracy theorists are correct and Apple has alterior motives.
But I wouldn’t want to be an Apple investor the first time a baby chokes on one of those AirPods. I’m sure the Apple legal team will do their best to write some restrictive clause in the terms that you ignorantly agree to at the time you purchase or unwrap your new toys.
Finally, lets make more devices that unnecessarily waste power and consume rare earth minerals. After all we have a whole planet left to consume and AirPods seem to be the ideal way to kick off the process! I suppose Apple will argue they are using less copper!
Edited 2016-09-09 00:52 UTC
The Airpods are obviously designed so commuters will lose at least one every couple of weeks. Replacements will be nice source of revenue IMHO.
It’s so crazy how when Apple does something then Apple haters act like the world is coming to an end.
Samsung put our similar more expensive set of wireless headphones a couple of weeks ago! Smaller then Apples so they could really choak a baby, or even more easily get lost and even more expensive and no one said anything.
http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=b…
Apple makes a pair and oh my god they are destroying the earth, choking babies and conspiring to hope you lose them!
Just plain crazy!
It’s an industry trend of going wireless, just like apple was not the first to remove the headphone jack.
Samsung doesn’t try and lock you into their own proprietary ecosystem.
So Samsung pay? Milk Music, Samsung Video etc are not Proprietary?
Ok.
Edited 2016-09-12 12:45 UTC
Windows Sucks,
I don’t think that’s a good rebuttal because it is not the availability of something that’s the problem, but the coerced use of it. Is anyone forced to use any of Samsung’s services or accessories? If so, please explain because it isn’t something I’m aware of.
In Apple’s case, they use proprietary technology and authentication chips as a means of consolidating their control and eliminating other options. Even things like NFC, apple has taken steps to force all users to use it’s own service.
A better example of a restrictive android device might be the amazon fire, and I dislike it for that reason. But even they haven’t gone to the point of forcing users to use proprietary accessories.
Edited 2016-09-12 13:42 UTC
So I gather from your username you believe on Apple’s behalf that two wrongs make a right.
Samsung shouldn’t have been so irresponsible either!
Oh and Motorola.
The industry is going in that direction. So I guess the whole industry is wrong but Apple gets the blame.
Edited 2016-09-12 12:49 UTC
People are missing the point on the EFF’s article about the headphone jack – which is that, thanks to how broken the DMCA is, Apple has possibly just handed media companies an incredibly powerful DRM tool.
Situation as it is now: media company releases application to playback files, costumer listens to files using any headphones/speaker combo he/she wants. (Say, recording it on cassette to play back onn a vintage walkman)
Nightmare scenario: media company releases application which only allows playback via approved headsets. Someone posts video on youtube on how he/she circumvented the drm, to most conveniently do the above, gets sued by media company.
Edited 2016-09-09 02:03 UTC
We don’t know if the tax issue is illegal. It’s a real stretch.
I liked the article, however he seems to think (in his wording) that all conspiracies are not what they seem. The conspiracy to kill the Tsar succeeded, and was perhaps the biggest event during the 1900’s. In more modern days and in technology was the phoebus conspiracy where the lightbulb companies limited the amount of burn hours to sell more. (there is still in california a pre phoebus burning about 100 years longer than a normal lightbulb.
That’s an oversimplification:
1. To this day, that ~1000 hour figure represents a peak on the “light per watt” curve. Yes, you can buy
2500 hour lightbulbs now, but they waste more energy as heat.
2. That centennial lightbulb isn’t being turned off and on. Turning lightbulbs off and on is the simplest and easiest method people use in accelerated ageing tests because most of the wear and tear comes from the shock of the filament being forced up to its glow point.
(Mythbusters also found that the power-on current spike is equivalent to 23 seconds worth of steady glow energy so, if you know you’re going to leave a room for less than 23 seconds, leave the light on to save power.)
3. Modern lightbulbs are essentially overvolted by convention. Just like a CPU, overvolting a lightbulb allows you to trade lifetime for performance. That centennial bulb is dim and the filament is massive.
Including an adapter for regular earphones, with the iPhone 7, makes it seem like they’re not 100% confident in their decision, if they’re needing to make compromises.
I don’t think it has anything to do with confidence. It’s simple practicality. E.g., you can’t expect people to use those (or other) BT headsets on long haul flights (*), battery life of BT plugs is still not very good, music quality of BT plugs are still generally, etc.
(*) well, there’s the other issue, since if you charge you either have to use BT, or a lightning dock in which you can connect a 3.5 plug
funny that
Is that the ‘it’s needed for water proofing’ argument is absolutely false. I have had water proof phones (including ones rated for 30 minutes under 10 meters of water) before, and most of my friends have them, and none of them have some special covering for any of the ports, they just have properly internally sealed and isolated ports which use mechanical interlocks to electrically disconnect them when they’re not in use. You can buy watertight headphone jacks for only a few percent more than a normal one of the same size. The fact that the lightning connector is waterproof shows that Apple understands what’s needed to make a water proof connector.
This isn’t a design choice, it’s a marketing gambit to try and get more money by forcing people to buy accessories. While I’d be kind of surprised if Apple willingly used this to enforce DRM, it would not surprise me at all given that the adapter is active not passive if they blacklist any unofficial adapters so you have to buy licensed hardware.
The other reason that I’ve heard quoted from them that I do believe is that this is to make the phone thinner. This in and of itself is something else I take issue with. iPhones are getting thinner faster than the materials they’re made of are getting stiffer and stronger. I have a friend who doesn’t buy iPhones anymore partly because he stepped on one of his by accident and literally snapped it in half (and this wasn’t even an iPhone 6). Thinner isn’t better in this case, and what most people really want is lighter, which is fully possible with good design without making the device thinner.
Cow is running dry and there’s no “next big thing” for Apple in the horizon. Gotta milk the cow for as long as they can.
When Motorola did this a few months ago? In general, I’m a fan of the EFF. However, their rampant hypocrisy in cases like this where they go after one entity and not the one who started the trend, does get to me.
Indeed, Motorola was the first big Actor trashing the last analog I/O on smart-phones.
Thanks a lot, Thom. Fortunately those Souls are not -still- DRM filtered out.
So ..this… year is finally “the rise of DRM”? Not last year when people made that claim, or the year before that. Or before that, or before that, or before that, or….. Sure, whatever you say. Boy, that’s one powerful little 50 year old 3.5mm audio jack!
“… Phil Schiller and Tim Cook want us to believe them on their blue eyes.”
Here we have a [philosophic] approach to ultimate motivations on the EC move.
http://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/vestager/announcements/why…
As Tony Swash pointed [http://www.osnews.com/thread?634126], the issue is several years from redirection.
[via ElReg http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/09/09/senate_ratted_out_apple_for…]
…..
Your comment is a veiled [but strong] allusion to colonial times [white daemons and the like]; don’t stand by those being still actuality.
While the default headphones will be lightning port cable connected, which is not really a standard anyone but apple uses due to them owning it, as long as they continue to use standard bluetooth for the standard communication for wireless headphones, that’s alright. But everyone would be wise to be apprehensive since they love their proprietary connectors and standards.
They have a long history of making proprietary everything and then when people accuse them of being hypocrites for building their stuff on the backs of open source, they just open source the standard much later (like for example, apple lossless audio).
Now that being said, they’d be insane not to continue using the bluetooth standard. While I have half of my headphones with bluetooth (for working out), my best ones are actually corded, and not being able to use them with future apple devices is… annoying to say the least. While there’s a workaround in the form of a bluetooth dongle, it is still very, very, very annoying, until we’ve all transitioned to wireless.
The only reason I bought them cabled was that Bluetooth 4.2 has not been adopted by almost anyone in hardware. Heck, 4.0 is hard to find, and that’s a pretty old standard.