Wired headphones to a cellphone, (like wired speakers to a stereo player) get the electric signal from the cable in an analog way, it contains both the energy and the signal.

That is enough to move the magnet&membranes in the speaker and reproduce the sound.

But for wireless speakers, the wireless signal does not transfert [enough] energy. And the headphone needs a source of electric power to : run the Bluetooth receiver/sender, and move the membrane to produce the sound.

[Edited to add remark]

[removed]

Wired ones are drawing power from the phone to work, wireless ones draw power from the battery inside the wireless buds themselves, when the wired earbuds are plugged in, that’s the only time you could use it, because that’s the only time it can draw power, it doesn’t matter if it’s not from a charger port, the charger port is where the phone gets its own power from

[removed]

Short answer is because they can. Apple has always used proprietary connectors to a degree, though they are by far the only computer company that did. Especially in the early days. It vendor locks peripherals, ensuring maximum compatibility, limits the type of devices, who can manufacture them, makes said manufacturers sign license agreements directly with them, and requires said manufacturers to pay royalties, again directly to Apple. Where as Apple would make no additional money using an open standard.

The Lightning port came about for a variety of reasons. Apple had been using the 30-pin Dock Connector, which was big and chunky. Designers wanted something more elegant, which would take up less internal volume inside the chassis. Remember this was at a time when people were demanding thinner devices, yet larger batteries. So more efficient use of internal space was key. (This is also allegedly why the headphone jack was removed, if you ignore that Apple had just bought Beats and was really pushing wireless cans.) The Dock Connector also had another problem. It could only be inserted one way. INELEGANT!.

The only alternative at the time was micro-USB, that most Android devices used. Which is an absolutely awful connector. It's fragile, would gum up with crud, and was non-reversable. So Apple decided they needed something similarly sized, that was both durable and reversable, so it didn't matter what orientation you plugged it in. Thus addressing one of the most common complaints about USB. The design would feature 8-pins, mirrored on both sides, for 16 in total. The socket would have the contacts along the outer ring, making for a solid, durable connection. Which was great for 2012. But things started to change that quickly rendered Lightning obsolete.

For one, Apple's specification used for Lightning only supported USB 2.0, which had a maximum speed of 480mbits/s. Which was fine for phones at the time. But USB 3.0 was already out, which ran up to 5,000mbits/s. So as time marched on, the port hamstrung certain devices like the iPad Pro. Then in around 2016, USB Type-C started becoming available. It largely addressed the same problems as the Lightning, being a durable, reversable connector. It also supported features like high current charging, and speeds up to 20gbits/s, later increased to 40. Which allowed mobile devices to be docked to high resolution displays, and used like a desktop, along with support for other high bandwidth peripherals. It was quickly adopted by the wider electronics industry into a universal data and charging standard. Even Apple was quick to incorporate it on their desktops and laptops. But curiously, they kept the proprietary connector for their mobile devices.

Over time, there has been increasing pressure for a universal charge standard, to limit e-waste and streamline things. Since people carry around a mix of devices, it makes little sense to have to lug around multiple charge cables. Apple stubbornly held onto Lightning for their phones, you know, due to those juicy royalties. But the EU has now forced their hand. Lightning was removed for USB-C from the last iPad last year, and will be from iPhones next. Though Apple is still talking about using software locks to limit peripherals these devices can use.

So why doesn't everyone use proprietary standards like Apple does? Well, over time there's been increasing pressure from consumers for universal ones. Plus for most other electronics manufacturers, the profits they'd get from selling accessories wouldn't be enough to justify the expenses of maintaining their own standard. So it's easier to use open ones. Apple only gets away with doing it in this day and age because they they're massive, and have an equally massive ecosystem surrounding their devices.

Of course. Micro USB is designed better vs mini-USB (of prior phones just after proprietary charger connectors), as effort was made to move the side with contacts most likely to be damaged out of the device. And of course USB-C connector solves the age-old complaint of orientation (and USB wasn't as bad as Firewire adopted early by Apple, where a wrong orientation could be forced into the connector to smoke the device).

Have you actually had a phone with micro USB, the 2012 port on virtually all phones? It may not have consolidated everything (yay real 1/8" audio), but it was super fragile and hard to use

Pedantic post here. It isn't "copy-written".

Most artistic and literary work is secured by copyrights.

Most products and innovations are protected by patents.

Copywriting is something that happens a lot in advertising.

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

• Rule #2 - Questions must seek objective explanations

• Questions about a business or a group's motivation are not allowed on ELI5. These are usually either straightforward, or known only to the organizations involved, leading to speculation (Rule 2).

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

[deleted]

Because Apple wanted to consolidate all the connectors into one cheap port, and then make you buy overpriced add-on dongles for features like headphone jacks or on-the-go devices that other phones support natively.

This. People love to act like Lightning wasn’t head and toes above micro usb that was in all the Android phones. iPhone switched connectors ONCE in 16 fucking years and my parents still complain about how they had to buy new cables that one time after their iPhone 4 bought the farm. And that was close to a decade ago.

That said, they’re due for USB C transition and they’ve been moving there with all their other devices so it’s clearly happening (EU ruling helps, I’m sure)

Because Apple wanted a smaller thinner connector and the industry was not able to produce one on the timeline Apple wanted. Lightning debut in 2012 and USB-C was not available until 2014.

Apple also prefers its own hardware designs for many reasons. Being able to control the full stack of hardware and corresponding software integrations has a wealth of advantages.

Because if everything to do with Apple technology is proprietary, a consumer is "locked in" to paying Apple for every piece of equipment they buy.

You cannot just got to Amazon and buy a $2.00 charging cable when the one your phone came with craps out, you have to buy the $8.00 one instead, because Apple makes one that is not universal. The "Apple cable" isn't any different or better, it just guarantees revenue for Apple.

Same with interfacing of different devices. Apple makes it so that it is less than seamless to connect your phone, tablet, etc. with non-Apple devices, so that consumers are more likely to expand their inventory of Apple devices and guarantee further revenues.

Some of them literally say to explain things that way to them.

Every accessory sold to use the lightning connector (including charging cables) is copy-written by Apple. This means every manufacturer to sell a cable has to give apple $4 PER item they sell using the connector.

Apple makes an enormous amount of money just licensing the lightning port.

Money and a lot of it is from selling their properitary hardware to you, and third party sellers. Basically forcing people to fork over money because you can't just use any old plug like other makers do.

Even with the EU forcing Apple to adopt USB-C, there is talk of Apple doing some sort of dongle for fast charging so they can get you yet again.

This was my go to in the early 2000’s. That and a reality anchor, something that I knew was real before we ate the mushrooms. If I got too far out I’d find Mike and repeat “Mike is real, everything else is just the drugs….” I’d come back to reality a bit, cool off, then start climbing the rollercoaster hill again

Again, you continue to confuse separate issues as one issue. Whether it is trivial or inexpensive or difficult is completely irrelevant to the discussion that spawned this comment chain.

The discussion that spawned this comment chain was simply hardware maintenance in the cloud. And the answer is there is none. You pay a premium to have someone do that for you. That's it.

Everything else is a completely different discussion

Converting mainframe stuff to cloud is... nontrivial at best. If it were easy, it'd be off the mainframe and on something cheaper, because MIPS are horrifyingly expensive on every mainframe I've used. I've worked a lot on really legacy hardware (everything from a VAX cluster that's still in production to this day through Tandem nonstops to relatively recent IBM Z series stuff) and shifting loads to standard x86 hardware is never straightforward.

No, they have not been the "least of your problems". It's actually a big problem especially for a lot of legacy applications running on ancient stuff like mainframes that companies often had to hire special staff to keep running.

Migrating to the cloud has solved so many of those problems.

Of course it has created new ones, but that's not the scope of this discussion. This discussion was about maintaining hardware only. Not cost.

Two reasons. Either they offer some benefit, or they cause no harm.

My mom had dark brown eyes. My dad had light brown eyes and siblings with blue or green eyes. I have brown eyes, my wife has green eyes.

We have a kid with brown eyes and one with blue eyes.

So...I inherited brown from my mom, and my dad must have been a carrier for blue and passed that on to me. It was recessive, but did neither me nor my dad any harm. My wife must have blue and green, with blue being recessive. It caused her no harm.

One kid inherited brown from me, which was dominant over whatever my wife gave her. The other must have inherited recessive blue from both of us. It has caused him no harm. His child has blue eyes.

So recessive blue has passed from one of my dad's parents down to my son and grandson, even though my dad and l had brown eyes, because there was no reason for it to die out - it caused no harm.

Whoops I totally misread your comment my bad!

yeah i was using the figures supplied by the person above. in most real situations, we usually have a broader dispersion of genetics than 99% vs 1%.

I had a crooked steering wheel for a while - there was a recall to replace some cable inside the wheel, and they put it back on slightly crooked. So it drove completely straight without needing any steering input, with a 5 degeee angle on the wheel. It was mostly unnoticeable on shorter drives requiring more manuvering, but very annoying on long highway drives.

It required an alignment to fix it.