technology

23502 readers

498 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

context@hexbear.net

EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net

SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net

gaycomputeruser@hexbear.net

ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net

the whole bluetooth-only earbuds for phones thing really was a con... (hexbear.net)

submitted 1 day ago by cyber_godqueen@hexbear.net to c/technology@hexbear.net

83 comments fedilink hide all child comments

yeah sure not having a wire is nice, but two generations of earbuds from my phones own manufacturer and both pairs i get regularly dogshit audio quality, and half the time one of the buds doesn't even work or produces barely any audio. There is no way to remedy this even after resetting the buds and the bluetooth connection. and you have to shell out 3x as much money for these things. also it's yet another device whose charge you have to keep track of

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Well i guess it has pros and cons. A pro would be for example that you can connect it to the bluetooth speakers in your car, or any other device where cable wouldn't do. A con is that cable is simply more sturdy and less fickle.

The same goes for internet connectivity. All bigger servers are connected over cable, because it simply is more reliable and has higher throughput than wireless. But also, with wireless, you can move around the house without worrying about stumbling on cables and accidentally plugging them out.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 hours ago

A con is that cable is simply more sturdy and less fickle.

Maybe versus bad Bluetooth devices. But when you have two devices that are actually good I’ve had very little issues with Bluetooth. With my iPhone and AirPods I’ve had a single digit number of issues with it connecting.

Meanwhile I’ve gone through an ungodly number of earbuds and audio cables in my life. Never again having to resolder the headphone jack on my phone is well worth it.

[–] bleepbloopbop@hexbear.net 6 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

"bluetooth-only" not the mere concept of bluetooth. phones before 2016 could still do all the things you mention.

also wifi is a pretty bad analogy tbh. not only is it not nearly as shitty and unreliable as bluetooth, but the typical use case is way different. listening to music from a device in your pocket or hand to speakers in your ears is pretty different from running ethernet around your house (and if even a small amount of effort is put in you could run ethernet around your house in such a way that it isn't in the way, even if ugly. if anything the cost is more prohibitive than dealing with a bunch of cables)