People seriously use the built in speakers instead? I'm

>>56638516
I use bluetooth headphones because I'm not poor.

>>56638516
I want this survey so I can spam it with yes.

>>56638530
spam it with no so that they actually remove the port like fucking madmen

Its only logical for apple to remove the jack from MBs and iPads now that they removed it from the iPhone.

>>56638547
I'd rather not, but considering they're even asking this question I'm guessing the next MacBook Pro won't appeal to me at all.

>>56638522
>I need to be rich to buy Bluetooth headphones
Turbo autism at its finest

I'm curious as to how you wouldn't know if you did

>>56640316
that answer is probably geared towards the mindless consumers who don't even know what a headphone port it.

>>56638516
>People seriously use the built in speakers instead?

yes, at times. i don't want to wear headphones all the time.

>>56638530

i want this survey so i can see what other questions were on there.

File: Assburger 5.png (53KB, 315x315px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 315x315px

>on their computers, Apple is moving to making everything USB type C
>on their phones/tablets, Apple is moving to making everything use the lightning connector
>despite the fact that USB type C is perfectly suitable for phones/tablets, Apple peripherals that would be used on phones/tablets and computers will now be fragmented between using the lightning connector and USB type C
This shit triggers my autism. Hell, I wouldn't really care about Apple killing off old standards and moving everything to USB type C/thunderbolt if they were at least consistent about it and used it on the iPhone/iPad.

>>56640242

Not that guy but I get his point, if you want high end wireless headphones they cost more than top end meme DrsDrs or whatever the name. I just spent a bit over $2000 a year ago on a pair and they have a little over 395 feet of range. I can go run in the park or go somewhere close to buy something and take them with me and get flawless reception, so of course I can wear them anywhere in the house and it'll be fine. This is a luxury that many wiredfags wish they had but they can't have it because low end wireless headphones stop working once you leave the room. It's a rich people only thing.

>>56641369
>2000 dollar headphones
This is the textbook definition of the law of diminishing returns. I bought a 25$ pair of Bluedio T2S headphones of Amazon and they work throughout my entire house. Granted I don't have a mansion but it still works. Also anon implied that Bluetooth headphones in general are for richfags only which is the dumbest shit I've heard. If you get into luxury shit then it's a different case but poorfags always find a way.

>>56638516
Holy shit if they are asking this in a survey, they are actually considering removing it...

that's fucking crazy man

but they did with the iPhone I suppose it's only the logical conclusion to this

>>56641630
Not the guy you responded to, but I don't think you understand what it is like to be rich. At a certain point, you have so much money that you run out of things to spend it on. If you make a few million a year, spending $2000 on headphones isn't even bad.

Although I could afford headphones like that daily, I do agree it's dumb. Money would be better spent elsewhere.

>>56641694
You are right, I am a poorfag so by extension "the rych lyfe" is unknown to me. I think my point would still stand regardless of fiscal status though since like you said 2000$ can be better spent than on headphones