[lanestp]

I completely disagree with this. The headphone jack is archaic and needed to go long ago. The fact that my headphones need a AAA battery AND have to be plugged into a device is insane. These same arguments have come with every port and input removal. I remember being bitter when I couldn't get a computer with a parallel port!

[tw04]

They don't. They make countless headphones that don't require batteries. They make countless headphone that are wireless. I switched to bluetooth noise cancelling headphones a few years ago and haven't looked back... but eliminating the jack seems rather silly to me. There are still AMAZINGLY good headphones that are always going to require a cord.

To me this is as stupid as Intel refusing to support USB3 for the sake of "moving on". That worked out well...

[robinson7d]

For context, the parent said:

> The fact that my headphones need a AAA battery

Just because some headphones do not need batteries says nothing about these specific headphones being talked about. Both can exist at the same time (a pair that requires batteries, and many that do not.)

For example, Bose Noise-Cancelling Headphones, which are quite popular, require AAA batteries:

http://worldwide.bose.com/productsupport/en_us/web/qc15/page...

[tw04]

Right - by his own choice as justification to eliminate the 3.5mm port.

That's a ridiculous reason to claim we should get rid of one of the most widely used ports in existence. If he didn't want to have a cord and a battery he should've bought different headphones... Nobody forced him into having both. Nothing apple is doing will change the fact that some headphones will require both a cord and a battery either. So it's a borderline irrelevant comment.