this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2024
4 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59020 readers
4121 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It started with notebooks, but that wasn’t the master plan.

top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Before they do that, I kind of wish that they'd be a laptop company that makes laptops that have 100 Wh batteries.

It occurs to me: might Framework’s team need to focus on a few lingering laptop issues before moving on to new territory?

Yeah. Like, if you have only 60 employees, you should have a lot of room for growth in the laptop market. Does it make sense to start spreading out resources? I'd rather see them become successful in the laptop market than become a flash in the pan.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand why companies keep putting such small batteries in laptops. Especially in the 16" laptop, anything less than 90 is just not acceptable in something that actually costs real money and isn't an ultra thin device. Cheap garbage? Fine. You get what you pay for. Starting at $1700 pre built? No.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Anything with over 100WH batteries would need airline approval before you can fly with it. This is why laptop makers rarely exceed this limit.

https://www.faa.gov/hazmat/packsafe/portable-electronic-devices-with-batteries

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yeah, but that's not what I'm talking about. It's really hard to find laptops today that get up to 100 Wh. And the guy you were talking to wanted at least 90 Wh.

It ain't the FAA making laptops have 50 Wh or less batteries.

A current Thinkpad T14 with the largest battery option is 52 Wh.

The few laptops that you can get in 2024 with a 100 Wh battery are generally very-high-power gaming laptops with a relatively short usable battery life off one charge.

Tuxedo Computers out in Germany makes a non-gaming 14-inch InfinityBook with a 100 Wh battery.

There are some very expensive "ruggedized" laptops with large batteries intended for use away from civilization, like the Panasonic Toughbook (can take two batteries and do 136 Wh total).

It's really uncommon today.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Cool. How about a repairable phone with a headphone jack? I'll be a day one buyer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Why not just use type c headphones?

The 3.5mm thing has always baffled me, it feels like complaining your pc doesn't have a VGA port, except the thing you connect costs like a fiver

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

At the time, there weren’t really many good options for replacement devices.

Using the charging port means listening to music and charging at the same time wasn’t possible.

Now we have split-cable dongles for power banks, and we have wireless charging when possible. It’s better but it’s not great; both have downsides, and accessories are more $.

Do they make type C headphones with a powerbank in them? Do I want a lithium battery that large on my head?

There aren’t many upsides for the consumer or the environment. Still seems to me like this isn’t even a lateral move. Internal components have gotten smaller and more efficient since, so that space could be reclaimed. I really don’t need my phone to be that thin, a phono jack next to the charging port would be just fine. The only real downside might be waterproofing but if you can make it work for the type C port…

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Why not just use type c headphones?

I can think of several good reasons to use 1/8" TRS headphones (though as I point out in a lower comment, specifically for smartphones, space is at an extreme premium and I think that the majority of people probably don't want to spend the space on an integrated headphones jack; it'd be better to use a small external adapter there):

But for the general case, not on smartphones, places where I have the space to stick a 1/8" TRS port, I am not very enthusiastic about using USB as an audio port.

  • 1/8" TRS is a well-established standard. I mean, pretty much every device can handle it. USB for audio is in a number of places, but not even close to the level of 1/8" TRS.

  • 1/8" TRS has been around forever. It's electrically-compatible with 1/4" TRS, which has been around even longer.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_connector_(audio)

    The original 1⁄4 inch (6.35 mm) version descends from as early as 1877 in Boston when the first telephone switchboard was installed[9] or 1878, when an early switchboard was used for the first commercial manual telephone exchange[10][11] in New Haven created by George W. Coy.

    USB is a young pup and already, physical USB-A ports are being phased out in favor of USB-C ports. I very much doubt that USB-C is going to be around ~150 years down the road the way that TRS has been. I can use a pair of headphones from the 1970s just fine with the latest device, and I can use an elderly radio from the 1970s with a new pair of headphones.

  • USB is a lot more complicated than 1/8" TRS. It's got sleep states, trees, power consumption negotiation. That's all room for things to break in interesting ways. I have, for example, a USB hygrometer/thermometer that sporadically triggers kernel errors on my computer when plugged in. I have a mouse that, for some reason, when plugged into a USB hub, uses a lower polling rate if plugged in when the system boots up (albeit not if unplugged and replugged). I have a USB audio DAC/ADC that decided to cut out the other day, for God knows what reason, until it was restarted. My last computer's motherboard had a USB controller that supported a more-limited-than-required-by-protocol-USB tree size and had random devices not work if a sufficient number of devices were plugged in. None of this exists with 1/8" TRS.

  • Security. Same idea. I've got enough attack vectors into my devices as-is. People have definitely attacked bugs in USB stacks before; IIRC, that's historically been part of how they attacked DRM on some consoles. 1/8" TRS is a dumb protocol, but that makes it safe. Same issue with USB for charging, though at least there you can get a "power-only" cable. You can't have an "audio-only" cable.

  • USB sticks the DAC on the headphones. Why? Headphones don't last that long; they're disposable items. Put the non-disposable bits where they won't die. A DAC can last pretty much forever. I have gone through many headphones over the years. I have never had a sound card or on-motherboard DAC or dedicated DAC die. The closest I came was once ripping the 1/8" TRS output on a DAC loose, which I could solder back into place. I have two USB-to-1/8"-TRS DAC/ADCs sitting on the shelf by my desk. They'll probably be perfectly good twenty years from now.

  • Sampling rate issues. Can't come up on TRS, because the DAC/ADC is on the device side. One of my USB DACs (this intended for professional audio) only supports a fixed sampling rate, the one at which it does internal processing; that makes sense, as a pro doesn't want to have some device introducing resampling into their audio chain. Another, consumer one, can't support a sampling rate as high as the professional one; it relies on the computer to figure out and do resampling if resampling has to happen above that rate. You can have software that doesn't work with a given pair of USB headphones because it doesn't like the headphone DAC's supported sampling rates; I've seen that before. If I have a pair of 1/8" TRS headphones, they work everywhere. It doesn't matter whether whether they're new or old or intended for the professional market or consumer market. Plug 'em in, they work.

  • I have one wired audio-emitting device -- a pair of elderly Logitech USB speakers, not headphones -- that has an integrated DAC. For some reason, the engineers who did that appear to have decided to make the volume control on that linear in electrical power rather than in perceptual loudness, which means that the vast majority of the volume scale does very little and there's a tiny range that has a large impact. I don't want to deal with that kind of craziness on some cheap pair of headphones.

  • Latency. 1/8" TRS devices normally -- unless you're intentionally building something into the system -- have zero latency, because the DAC on the device is directly electrically driving the membrane on the speaker. Every time one sticks higher-level protocols in, it's an opportunity for some bright-eyed, bushy-tailed engineer to start cramming more shit into the pipeline that adds latency. TVs are a great example of this -- they used to have no latency, and then someone figured out that they could show ads and do other processing on the feed and that that'd be easier if they had a buffer of some video frames, and so they started inducing latency, unlike a computer monitor. Now you have "gaming modes" on TVs that try to mitigate the problem which had never originally been an actual issue with dumb TVs.

    There's an entirely-separate world of audio software and hardware for professionals who want to do real-time audio processing (on Linux, JACK; I have a USB ADC and some audio cards that permit direct passthrough of input audio to output) to try to avoid all the points in the pipeline that various consumer audio devices and software have inserted latency.

    That doesn't matter for some uses, like an MP3 player. It's not the end of the world for a phone call. But it's really obnoxious for some uses. With 1/8" TRS, I have no latency. With USB, I have God-knows-what latency.

  • Durability. 1/8" TRS is more-rugged than USB-C. I've damaged both before by pulling on cables at right angles, but micro-USB, mini-USB, and USB-C are more-fragile. That being said, I will give USB this: the damage tends to be worse on the cable side, as the plug is flimsy and will tend to give out before the socket on the device, whereas with TRS you can more-readily mess up the device. I would be open to the idea that having a standard magnetic breakaway connector would be more sane than either 1/8" TRS or any existing USB standard.

There are only three decent reasons that I can see to use USB headphones for the general case (like, not the extreme-space-constraint situation that smartphones see):

  • It provides power. Some people want active noise cancellation on their headsets. If you want to do ANC, you're gonna need power one way or another. 1/8" TRS doesn't have a standard for that (with XLR, for condenser mics, there's a 48 volt phantom power convention that was added, but TRS doesn't have it). AFAICT, devices that do this with a 1/8" TRS interface either rely on a second USB wire for power or use batteries.

  • When initially plugging in a 1/8" TRS plug, one shorts connectors and it can make a loud noise on the speaker membrane. Not an issue with USB, because the speaker membrane isn't in that pipeline.

  • 1/8" TRS doesn't specify a single impedance everywhere. You can get very-high-impedance headphones that a DAC with limited output power can't drive at a reasonable volume, even with the volume all the way up. That isn't usually an issue for most people, but USB avoids the issue.

EDIT: Apparently I lied on the phantom power argument for using USB; according to WP, there are 1/8" TRS devices that do take phantom power (or something comparable; sounds like it's not, strictly-speaking, "phantom power"):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_power

Plug-in-power (PiP) is the low-current 3–5 V supply provided at the microphone jack of some consumer equipment, such as portable recorders and computer sound cards. It is also defined in IEC 61938.[16] It is unlike phantom power since it is an unbalanced interface with a low voltage (around +5 volts) connected to the signal conductor with return through the sleeve; the DC power is in common with the audio signal from the microphone. A capacitor is used to block the DC from subsequent audio frequency circuits. It is often used for powering electret microphones, which will not function without power. It is suitable only for powering microphones specifically designed for use with this type of power supply. Damage may result if these microphones are connected to true (48 V) phantom power through a 3.5 mm to XLR adapter that connects the XLR shield to the 3.5 mm sleeve.[17] Plug-in-power is covered by Japanese standard CP-1203A:2007.[18]

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

You forgot that 3.5mm is a stupid connector that makes you pass charged metal pieces over the connector to plug it in. You can't power an anc chip or a dsp with it because it can't do power delivery. That's how you get headphones sounding different based on whether they are turned on

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Just replace my perfectly good $200 headphones that work in my (old) phone, my Switch, my 3DS, my laptop, my iPod, and my work phone.

It's so simple!

Seriously, even if you don't use it, why are you so against others having the choice? The headphone *jack was the standard for decades for a reason. If my phone is low on power, I'd like to be able to charge it without disconnecting my music/podcasts...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But like, 3.5 to usbc is a 10 buck conversion. Tbh i see merit in double usb c over usbc and headphone jack, might be more doable too, the DAC prolly takes more space than an additional usbc

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

A dongle is a workaround. The headphone jack just works.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago

It's not a work-around, a headphone requires a DAC and an amp. In fact, my phone has a crap DAC causing artifacts in the sound. It's actually not to my benefit to have the jack because I'd get better sound with the external DAC which is transparent.

So the jack works, but the DAC you get can be whatever the manufacturer considers good enough.

DACs I can hear issues in:

My phone, my tablet, my desktop PC

DACs that are transparent to me:

My laptop, my $12 external DAC

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Surely they are aiming for a repairable and modular smartphone eventually. That's going to be super hard to do. My guess is their next form factor will be a tablet.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Tablet is almost free, just don't have a hinge and have a touchscreen. Release as Chromebook, it will run Android applications

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

To run Android stuff on x86

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Linux can run Android apps since we have Waydroid too and it's universal, no need for single device - single OS nonsense.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

You can install Linux on their Chromebooks, so it would be good to have the choice. Some people will prefer a slightly more seamless Android experience and some people will prefer Waydroid

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

cool - but if their product lines are modular and they try to break out of their niche market. whats to stop someone with a lot more capital from snapping them up (Dell, Lenovo, etc)?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Nothing, but it'd still be a win for the consumer because then we'd have repairable/customizable laptops across the board?

We've also seen other brands aren't interested in it because it's harder to make smaller/thinner laptops when they need to be customizable. Also they make more money from having people throw out their old laptops and buying a new one.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

More likely not.

Microsoft is well known for buying software companies to shut them down.

Foldershare was a product in 2005 that enabled you to share windows folders across the internet just like sharing across a LAN. MS bought them.

Same with Ubiboot - it enabled you to move a windows install from one machine to any other hardware - on boot it would reconfigure the drivers. Worked brilliantly.

I've used countless products over the years which no longer exist after they were acquired by MS. Things which don't even exist within MS offerings. Clearly bought to be shut down.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This can't be right because capitalism breeds innovation like they said! Right? .....Right??

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It does. Those were both innovative products.

Not sure why you feel the need to derail the conversation with your ideology.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

Your conversation is about shelving products so other companies cannot compete.