Thread: Thin is in
View Single Post
Old 10-09-2020, 05:44 PM   #39
John F
Grand Sorcerer
John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,964
Karma: 71261339
Join Date: Feb 2009
Device: Kobo Clara 2E
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quoth View Post
No, purely marketing is why audio jack went on BT enabled devices. Also in Apple's case to make much more profit.

BT inherently costs more and is poorer quality than a decent onboard DAC and a 20c 3.5mm socket. An extra thing to charge and an extra battery (often now not replaceable) to wear out.

I'll only ever buy a phone or tablet or laptop without a real jack socket if none with jack sockets exist.

The Kobo H2O original was waterproofed with a bung. The Kobo Libra micro USB is totally exposed but PCB is coated.

Lack of an audio socket is nothing to do with waterproofing. I've two-way radios that are waterproof, but have power and headset sockets.
But the phones already have BT, so there is no extra cost for the hardware? And are we sure that licensing is more? Doing a quick Google for BT licensing, it cost Apple $4000 for each model (although I would guess that there may be more licensing costs for some of the codecs.). Let's say they sell 500,000 of a model, so that comes out to $100,000 for the audio jack.
John F is offline   Reply With Quote