this post was submitted on 05 Apr 2024
155 points (95.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43472 readers
1251 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (6 children)

I believe it was for waterproofing. One less port means less sealing, making it easier to improve the waterproofing of the phone.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (4 children)

Water ingress isn’t the issue & there’s been waterproofed ports for decades. They wanted to make devices thinner—but what value is it when its too thin to support a jack & made of materials that now require a case?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (3 children)

That's probably just the marketing reason. The realistic reason is probably that they want to sell you their brand of wireless earbuds that need to be replaced in a few years tops

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)