You know what makes his whole argument BS? Exactly the "nudge" he's talking about.<p>If Apple was really pushing for "a better technology" then they should have just included the airpods.<p>What they've done instead is compromising the experience and pushing the user to drop an additional $170+ on any of their headphones.<p>When they got rid of Flash, they didn't ask for more money to use the alternative nor did they provide a subpar flash player "as a nudge"<p>Also, while dropping Flash made the battery last longer, dropping the port only forces me to charge an additional battery.
I don't think these two situations are comparable.<p>For one, I own multiple devices that are somewhat obsolete now. This wasn't a case with Flash, since I doubt anyone cared for technology the video was using — it's fine either way if you see same pixels on the screen. Apple also wasn't making money from every website that didn't include Flash, but I bet that's the case for each Lightning device produced, and the major reason jack is removed.<p>It's not even headphones-only either, there are multiple devices using 3.5mm for extedning iPhone's functionality that Apple don't get a cut from. I'm interested whether those will be supported via adapter.<p>I'm also not sure that 3.5mm is objectively worse than wireless. If anything, both have advantages and disatvantages.
> There was outrage over Apple’s refusal to support Flash on iOS. Genuine controversy in the mainstream media. Most people saw it as competitive spite against Adobe, not a principled stand for a superior technology, superior experience, and open standards. There was outrage over Apple’s refusal to support Flash on iOS. Genuine controversy in the mainstream media. Most people saw it as competitive spite against Adobe, not a principled stand for a superior technology, superior experience, and open standards.<p>>open standards<p>Like the headphone jack. Oh the irony.