Everybody is hating on the new wireless AirPods Apple introduced yesterday because of their $159 price tag, but let me clue you in on a little secret: AirPods are cheap as f**k!
Seriously. Have you ever looked at how much truly wireless earbuds with a charging case cost?
Think AirPods are too expensive and easy to lose? Try these big-ass $200 Samsung IconX buds:
If those Samsung earbuds are too small for your lobes, maybe this set of wireless buds from Bose will fit you. They come in at $250:
Motorola’s giant wireless earbuds are the same price as the BOSE version. They’re truly wireless, but a lot uglier:
Earin’s new buds were all the rage at CES 2016. They’ll set you back $280:
Dash earbuds come with health sensors, but they cost $300:
Those $160 set of Apple AirPods with high-quality AAC audio, dual-beam forming microphones, a charging case and background noise filtering don’t seem like such a bad deal now, right?
Buster Hein is a freelance writer who lives in Phoenix, Arizona. Twitter: @bst3r.
70 responses to “Quit yer whining — AirPods are cheap AF!”
I just wish the shape did not hurt my ears. I would totally buy these if the new pod design they’ve been using did not cause me so much pain. I must have oddly shaped ear holes or something. I can only use the squishy gel tip type headphones. The beatsx ones look nice.
Ah, that’s too bad. Your ears are probably not oddly shaped, the design is simply based on a plethora of ears. Basically an average design, likely made a little larger so it fits most ears fittingly. I couldn’t stand wearing the ol’ regular (Apple) EarBuds without one of those soft fabric things around each bud. To be honest I still miss those, they were soft, helped hold the buds tightly in place and kept the buds clean.
I found some covers/fitters for ten bucks on amazon – Earhoox – figured for the money couldn’t hurt to try. I love the sound from the Earpods, but they do not fit my ears and hurt them as well.
I agree. The Apple EarPods do not fit my ear properly also. It falls out easily. Need silicone wings like Jaybird’s to sit securely.
Alternatives are any bluetooth earphones/headphones that support the AAC codec via A2DP.
Not easy to know because this is rarely stated on the manufacturer specifications and websites. Examples are Bose QuietComfort 35 (supports AAC not stated ANYWHERE, proven YES on a MAC this can be seen and forced via Bluetooth Explorer of Xcode), Sony H.Ear line (Supports AAC, APT-X, HighRes Wireless stated-somewhere). The only way to know is do a search if someone has tested the earphones/headphone to see if it supports AAC codec via A2DP Bluetooth.
How do you know these hurt your ears? You haven’t even tried them yet. I’m guessing you are judging based on the standard iPod/iPhone headphones, which would be a mistake, since these are clearly quite differently-shaped.
“clearly quite differently-shaped”? They look almost exactly like EarPods, without the cord.
Assuming AirPods have the same geometry as the most recent EarPods, they will be comfortable and function perfectly for me. I often go to sleep listening to podcasts with my EarPods in, and wake up in the morning with the EarPods still in place!
That’s another thing that looks good about the AirPods, they sit flush to the head – should be very lie-on-able. My BT ones stick out so far; a tug on the joining cable pops them straight out.
I like apple ear buds, fit my ears well.
Also, all the great reviews of squishy, in-canal type headphones; do people actually move when testing? I’ve had some Etymotics that sounded great and some BT cheap ones that sound ok… when stationary. As soon as I moved, the ‘internal’ noises (footsteps, chewing!) and cable noises completely overwhelm the headphones.
To me the Apple ones sound pretty good in any situation, outdoors etc. Even running.
Good point Buster, you pretty much made your point :)
Thanks for that.
No one cares. No one wants them. No one needs them. I don’t care that others are slightly more expensive with what looks like better designs compared to the Apple q-tips. I don’t want wireless headphones as my only option. I want my cheap, normal headphones and if I so CHOOSE to upgrade to wireless I’ll do it. You know what I really wanted though, a charger that doesn’t break every month. Or wireless charging. Or how about a longer lasting battery? I’ll CHOOSE with my wallet now. By the way Apple stock down 2 percent the day after the launch. I guess all that whining does have an impact ;)
(1) You’re wrong – I want them. And I care. (So it’s not “nobody”)
(2) Apple stock traditionally looses after a product announcement. Business as usual.
(3) You can still have your cheap, normal headphones. They ship with wired Lightning headphones AND a audio jack to lightning adapter.
(4) Wireless charging would be awesome (I don’t particularly care if it’s slower, since most charging is done overnight, and as long as I still have an option to charge via lightning).
They literally talked about the fact that there are better batteries, yet you still need to mention that they didn’t improve the battery? Troll harder.
“no” one???? Hyperbolic much?
When the rumors first started, it seemed like a dumb idea to me–taking away the headphone jack. But then I thought about the benefits. How many people have dumped their phones in some kind of liquid? Would those people wish their phones were more water-resistant? What if they had to get rid of the headphone jack to make that happen?
But the real revelation is in seeing how people use their phones. More often, they are streaming music through the phone speaker or through a bluetooth speaker. If the situation calls for consideration for others, then headphones are used. But, corded headphones suck when working at a desk. Don’t tell me you’ve never yanked headphone right out of your ears or pulled your phone onto the floor if you listen at a desk. Then there’s the spaghetti mess that is the cords no matter how nicely you make them when you put them away.
But the good news is that for the few that still prefer a wired option, that’s still possible. As well as using *any* other bluetooth headphones. So, the only thing lost is that an adapter is needed. But that’s traded for water resistance, among other advantages.
Cheap AF…only compared to other wireless earbuds. But compared to the wired, microphoned, traditional EarPods that came before them and were fine for most people, they’re expensive AF.
$29 for the old headphones, which worked without a battery and let you charge your phone at the same time. The new phone requires either $159 AirPods (You could buy FIVE sets of EarPods for that) or the same $29 EarPods plus a $9 adapter. Or any other wired headphones, plus an adapter. And then you still can’t charge your phone at the same time!
No matter how you look at it, this change means you’re spending more money for the functionality that was included in the old phones. It’s not a great deal, and people can rightly complain.
Except for the fact that the new EarPods are lightning EarPods and dont need an adapter at all effectively making them the same price. Not to mention the fact that the new phone comes with an adapter so you can use whatever headphones you would like for no extra charge. So your whole argument is invalid.
What about the many, many people who own non-Lightning headphones, or people who tend to buy multiple pairs and leave them at work, home, in the car, etc? They now need to buy multiple adapters for those situations, and they STILL can’t charge their phone and listen at the same time. Valid complaints that “we included one adapter in the box” doesn’t address.
Clearly you’re mad about this WiscoNative, and that’s cool. If the headphone jack is causing you that much angst then you do have options. I personally think that the average user (people who don’t care enough about their tech to read tech blogs like this) wont care and will just use the new lightning headphones without a thought. The purpose of Buster’s fine article, at its core anyway, simply demonstrates that people really need to think critically about an issue before they lose their $h1t on the Internet.give it a year or two, Samsung will ditch the jack soon ;)
I appreciate that you’re being respectful about our disagreements on this, which isn’t all that common on tech blogs. Thank you for that. =]
My main problem is the average user might not like Apple’s headphone options – my parents certainly don’t like how they feel – so they buy third-party, cheap earbuds that are comfortable for them. Now, people like that who upgrade and don’t realize the change will have to remember “I need to carry this adapter all the time, maybe buy extras, and I’ll probably lost at least one.” It’s going to be annoying to many people, for no tangible benefit except to audiophiles (listening to compressed audio anyway!).
I don’t see any reason for Samsung to ditch the headphone jack. They’ve already achieved IP68 dust/water resistance in the S7, and they’ve managed to keep the clicky home button and headphone jacks in the design. They’ve also shown, from the revival of the microSD slot, that they’re willing to admit mistakes and go with user preference. This backlash against Apple, from myself and some others, may show companies that removing a very common standard doesn’t go over well.
I suspect the “backlash” will die down after a month or two.
The vocal backlash, perhaps, but the sales numbers will still show it. My parents, for example, won’t suddenly want to switch to wireless headphones in a year, and I think many others are in the same boat. They’ve invested in 3.5mm-jack products, and will stick with options that make integrating their phone and those accessories easy. The lasting backlash will show up in Apple’s sales.
Maybe, but I doubt it. If anything, the sales figures will show that only people who care about photography using their phones will have a reason to upgrade. If you don’t use your iPhone for photography, there wasn’t much of a reason to upgrade. If you DO use your phone for photography, then there was HUGE reasons to be excited.
I doubt it. I don’t know anyone seriously deterred by this change. It’ll blow over fast.
And people invested in floppy disks and DVDs, but life went on. Tell me: Do you wish the floppy disk would come back?
When the floppy drive was removed, CDs were already common and widely adopted. When the DVD drive was removed, digital downloads were already relatively common. Those transitions were easier because they occurred more gradually, and were replacing older technologies with something noticeably better.
Removing an open-source, widely-adopted port standard in favor of either a propriety wired connection or battery-powered-and-lower-quality bluetooth audio is not objectively better.
Just like the traumatic loss of the floppy and the DVD slot. Oh the horror!
It will. Technology is moving inexorably towards wireless solutions. It’s not a matter of ‘if’ but rather ‘when’ a wired solution will be replaced by wireless.
Even power transmission is slowly but surely going wireless. Thanks, Tesla!
Change is difficult, especially when a change you/we have no real control over will cost us some extra money. I’m still a little sore over the switch to the lightening connector, mainly because my iPhone 4 just died and that’s what I connected to a 30 pin speaker dock :( within a few months we’ll start to see cheap MiFi lightening headphones, the market will be huge for them! I would highly recommend giving wireless headphones a go; I won’t be getting the AirPods because I know they’ll fall out of my ears, but I’ve been using Jaybird X2s for six months now and having no cord is increadable, I resent normal headphones now ;)
I don’t want wireless headphones, though. They’re more expensive, they’re generally worse sound quality (My Bose QC25 are second-to-none), and the require charging to work at all. That’s too many compromises for me, and honestly for a lot of other people. We’re certainly moving towards cheaper devices, better sound quality and better batteries, but we’re not there yet, and it’s too soon for Apple to be pushing people towards it and charging them for adapters if they don’t like it.
“… but we’re not there yet …” The only way you get there is to start. That’s what Apple is doing now, and what it’s done many times in the past. Embrace the future now.
A company can start moving forward without screwing over people who aren’t there yet.
My phone has bluetooth so I can use wireless when I want to, but it also has the headphone port for my legacy devices (and my expensive Bose headphones). A better way of moving forward would be enticing people to voluntarily move into the new wireless system by convincing them that it’s better, not forcing them into it, dragging them kicking and screaming and making their old headphones a hassle.
So, really, this has happened for a long time, but people aren’t recognizing it. How long has a headphone jack *and* bluetooth been available? Since the original iPhone and even other phones before it. So, like human nature, what has happened is that very few people have transitioned because they haven’t needed to and people don’t like change.
But, the more people move to bluetooth headphones, the sooner we’ll have more and better and cheaper options. And, I think that gets to the heart of the issue. When it comes down to it, it’s really about price. Some people just want the cheapest option they can get.
However, even for those people, there’s still the adapter option. It’s not perfect, but it’s the best alternative after 10 years of having both options.
Unless you have multiple sets of regular earbuds/headphones, I don’t see why you’d ever remove the adapter from the headphone cable (unless you use them on a PC or something). And if you did have multiple headsets, you probably would get one adapter for each headphone. It is going to be a pain to get used to for sure though. My first Android G1 phone needed a micro USB to 1/8 jack and it wasn’t fun. At least it let me charge at the same time though!
As for Samsung doing the same, that would really become a nightmare since they would have to use a usbc connector and we would have yet another competing headphone connector out there. Really wish Apple went to usbc instead of lightning for this reason.
I agree with the sound quality issue you mention. Apple’s earpods have horrible sound compared to other earbuds as they lack in volume and good base ranges. And since it’s compressed audio as you say, they never had any chance of perfect audio anyway.
Some people have multiple headphones (work, home, in the car maybe, etc), so they might need more than one adapter. With the older models, you just plugged in headphones and listened – easy, done in a second, good to go – but now you need these adapters which you have to carry around, remember, not lose, and maybe buy multiples. It’s just not consumer friendly. That’s my main complaint.
Hey man, the future needs some adapting and that’s fine. Not everybody will get the better end of it if they switch right away, but I’m sure they’ll make it work. Lots of people can probably just use their computers or something else to listen to music. And maybe accessories will be launched similar to the MacBook USB-C hubs that allow for multiple simultaneous actions.
I have no doubt that Apple will release a “listen and charge” dongle, but I think even needing a dongle to do that belies a fundamental design failure. That, along with “Lots of people can probably just use their computers or something else to listen to music,” fails to understand why the iPhone was so popular – it did all of these things in one device, easily. It meant someone no longer needed to carry around multiple devices like a point-and-shoot camera, an iPod, a cell phone, a calendar, a notepad, etc. It just did these things, all in one. Needing dongles or other devices is a step backwards.
In the end, yes, the industry is moving towards wireless. But that takes time, and forcing people to change this early in the transition isn’t good. It’s akin to teaching a child to swim by throwing them in the deep end of the pool.
You know wireless charging will solve your charging issue, right? I’d be very surprised if we don’t get that next year. I know, if that’s what they’re going to do whey not wait to get rid of the jack, and at the end of the day I couldn’t even speculate on why. Sounds like this isn’t the phone for you though, it’s,not for me either ;) maybe next year dude.
Wireless charging would definitely help, but the problem is that the iPhone doesn’t have it. Sure, it would be nice and solve the problem, but since it’s not a feature in the iPhone, it means nothing for this generation.
This phone definitely isn’t for me, it isn’t for a lot of people. To make my motives clear here, I’m annoyed by sites like this posting apologist articles for Apple’s consumer-unfriendly behavior. I love the Apple products I do own (EarPods, iPad Pro, three Macs), and I want to see that continue. That means not praising stupid stuff like this and letting Apple get on the wrong track.
yeah, I see where you’re coming from; I’m a pragmatic Apple fanboy so I get it. I’m very much not a fan of the AirPods, but for different reasons, and I have recently reconsidered my stance on Apple given I think I pay more tax here in Australia than Apple does, very unethical! I didn’t read this article as being ‘apologist’ though. I really think it’s just saying “think before you attack Apple”. I read an article today where concerns have been raised over Apple releasing a product, the AirPods, that is a choking hazard for children. The group raising the concerns were attacking Apple, not the product category, I think that’s an ignorant approach for people to take. Same thing with this article; don’t have a go at Apple over the price of AirPods without an understanding of comparative product costs.
I agree that they are competitively priced compared to other *wireless* earbuds, but taking a step back, they’re very expensive earbuds. The headline “AirPods are cheap AF!” is simply wrong.
Don’t upgrade your iphone. Problem solved.
I won’t be upgrading. I’m still going to speak out against poor design, in the hopes that a loud enough response can change future designs for the better.
And yet they probably sound like rubbish. Especially compared to a proper wired in-ear. And you can get some really good ones for the same price as the AirPods.
As someone who absolutely does not want in-ears, I’m really happy with Apple’s EarPod/AirPod design. They’re somewhat of a hybrid: they don’t filter out too much sound, nor do they easily make you go deaf, they sound good and they generally sit neatly in my ears (YMMV). I’m convinced they’ll sound great, I always try to get the best near-source sounding version of music to optimize my music experience, but I’m no audiofile. Nor am I a purist who can ‘most damning and definitely’ hear the difference in 100 tests and neither are you.
I agree on the price though. It’s too high for a switch up from EarPods, but it’s also a first generation investment. The iPhone itself dropped a couple hundred dollars half a year later and Apple even paid back the initial backers. I hope there’s a nice price drop whenever the second generation launches. I’ll be interested then.
I can definitely hear the difference between good and bad in-ears and headphones. I’m into HiFi for almost 20 years now, and I have had quite a number of devices, headphones/in-ears and loudspeakers. And no, the current generation of EarPods do not sound good. Neither does the analog output of iPhone devices…
This is just a scam by Apple to just barely undercut the market rate for other wireless headphones, then force you to buy their own by eliminating the headphone jack, and therefore any other options for buying a $10 set of headphones.
Apple are a bunch of pricks, and the writer of this article is a sellout.
Admittedly, they do offer adapters for other headphones ($9!). Still, pricks indeed.
Since when have Apple ever been interested in undercutting competitor prices? You’ve clearly never bought an Apple product as you’d know how ridiculous your statement is ;)
But scamming Apple is not fooling you, right? Apple is fooling millions and millions of people, and yet you’ve figured out their scam from the get go.
I think you are forgetting about sound quality…..which is yet to be tested on these.
But If the standard is going to be what apple had with their traditional earpods, which is very bad compared to some of the earbuds you post in this note….then I think its reasonably priced, if not expensive.
I am not exactly an audiophile but I can tell the difference of apple earbuds vs, say, Bose’s. Not to mention Grado’s, Seinheisser or other hi fi brands…..
Rabid fanboyism is always wildly apparent on cult of Mac. If you don’t like it, I recommend 9to5mac. They spend less time trying to defend every price gouging, bone headed move that Apple makes. The commenters above are willing to spend 130$ on something they are HIGHLY likely to lose. Something that offers only one advantage: less time spent untangling a cable.
There are cheaper wireless headphones well below 100$, equal to or greater than the sound quality of Apple airpods. Just do some research.
9to5Mac is great! But I also really like CoM too so you may not like my overall opinion, sorry. Anyway, um, so the sound quality of the AirPods is inferior to sub $100 wireless headphones? Have you used the AirPods? I’ll do my research one the product is available!
When and where have you listened to the airpods?
P.S. Try The Verge, they have a great article/video on wireless earbuds.
My opinion may not count, but I never considered $159 compared to $200 to equate to ‘cheap AF’.
You can get wireless headphones for less. I got Plantronics Bluetooth headphones at Costco on sale for around $60 (regularly $80). The sound quality is excellent, and they get about 6-8 hours play time per charge. I have noticed some issues with them during phone calls. On occasion, the iPhone switches to its speaker instead of the headphones, and I have to switch them back. This is why the pairing capabilities of the new AirPods is an interesting feature. If they pair with all Apple devices as easily as they showed in the keynote, the AirPods (and the W1 processor) can be a real plus.
This article is about “Truly Wireless Earbuds”. You did not buy Truly Wireless Plantronics at Costco because they don’t exist.
Yea now that’s a good point. Those 3rd party buds are quite expensive compared to the Air Pods.
This rhetoric right here is the issue. Your logic is essentially “stop wincing, it could have been worse.”
A $159 price point is expensive “af” compared to an *optional* $300 that comes from a company that specializes in audio, so chances are not in Apple’s favor that the new pressure to use this is justified.
And if you want to play the price-without-specs game, I have a $10 pair of bluetooth headphones I got from dollar general. They work better than earpods, mainly by not hurting every other person’s ear or breaking, so they’ve got that going for them. But they aren’t great!
At any rate, my point is this: it’s really not comforting if you’re trying to defend a product from “whiners.” This is an item they’re hoping to sell. You’re allowed to dislike it and not purchase the product. When it’s a potentially large purchase, then yes, verbally complaining or discussing it makes total sense, since that’s a bigger decision. Pobody’s nerfect, and it’d be nice to see this site acknowledge it. Both a reviewer and product are more trustworthy when faults are acknowledged – when justifications like, “more expensive units are out there” are in play, it’s time to consider you’re grasping at straws. At least wait and see.
The point of the article is that Apple has not overpriced these earbuds. As far as I know these will actually be the cheapest Truly Wireless Earbuds on the market when they launch.
Relative to their competitors these are very inexpensive.
The Bose headphones shown are not wireless, those are the QC20s Noise Cancelling earphones.
I’d be inclined to agree if they sound better than earpods. But earpods sound like $20 earbuds. OK, but not >$100 earbuds.
So IF they have the same drivers, don’t expect them to sound awesome or anything. I think buying a better brand would be a better use of money.
cordless(not wireless) buds start @ $30 shipped from the US, $17 if you just want one. 160 isn’t cheap af.
Making them truly wireless is actually really difficult. The problem is that the earbuds need to communicate to each other… but your brain is in the way (blocking weak wireless signals like bluetooth). Many of the competitors are using magnetic waves instead for this communication.
Development of that kind of technology takes effort, time and money. The price of these earbuds is reflective of that.
This article is stating that for the technology embedded in these they are extremely cost competitive vs. other alternatives.
Comparing to non “truly wireless” earbuds is not useful. It’s a completely different class of product.
Those are not “Truly Wireless”… note the HUGE wire between the earbuds.
I wonder how dangerous they might be for children 4 and under? Total choking hazard.
yes, they still look like a really bad deal you effin sellout/fanboy
I want those Earin ones but refuse to spend that much.
lol, cherrypicking comparisons much?
$159 is expensive AF when compared with the vast majority of wireless ear buds on the market.