←back to thread

AirPods libreated from Apple's ecosystem

(github.com)
1424 points moonleay | 2 comments | 16 Nov 25 00:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
moonleay ◴[16 Nov 25 00:02 UTC] No.45941605[source]▶
A cool project, when you want to use AirPods outside of Apples ecosystem. Sadly, you have to use a rooted android device with a small patch due to a bug in the Android Bluetooth implementation. https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/371713238
replies(6): >>45942063 #>>45942373 #>>45942451 #>>45943437 #>>45943943 #>>45944340 #
jmgao ◴[16 Nov 25 03:12 UTC] No.45942451[source]▶
It doesn't seem obvious to me that this is actually a bug in the Android implementation, it seems like this is due to AirPods violating the spec and requiring a special handshake before responding to standard requests. It doesn't seem reasonable to expect Android to work around a device that appears to be intentionally breaking the spec for vendor lock-in purposes: the possibility of them just OTAing an update that breaks in some other way means that you'd have to be entirely bug compatible with iOS's bluetooth implementation.
replies(7): >>45942490 #>>45942736 #>>45942932 #>>45943032 #>>45943140 #>>45944246 #>>45944276 #
a13n ◴[16 Nov 25 04:20 UTC] No.45942736[source]▶
is there evidence it’s for vendor lock in purposes? airpods have a pretty stellar connection for bluetooth, wouldn’t be surprised if there were performance reasons for them going off spec
replies(7): >>45942851 #>>45942878 #>>45943031 #>>45943234 #>>45943236 #>>45943578 #>>45943875 #
fingerlocks ◴[16 Nov 25 09:45 UTC] No.45943875[source]▶
No there isn’t. I’ve said this a million times before, but usually just downvoted: this is about reducing support costs, not increasing revenue from lock-in. This is not a theory, I’ve sat in meetings at Cupertino and been told first hand.

Support is very expensive. Say what you want about Apple, but they provide absolutely stellar support, especially with the stupidly inexpensive Apple Care insurance. This is only cost effective if they can make reasonable predictions about how their devices will behave in any given scenario. Interfacing Apple hardware with non-certified (MFi, BLE, etc) third party hardware has a non-trivial risk of unpredictability high support costs, either from excessive Apple Care claims, customer support communications, or just overloading the Genius Bar.

Reducing support cost could easily explain the motivation of the entire walled garden if they are sufficiently high.

replies(2): >>45944506 #>>45944883 #
bubblethink ◴[16 Nov 25 13:13 UTC] No.45944883[source]▶
That's tautological. Everything that is not supported is so because supporting it has a cost. The question is what is the cost? It seems quite obvious that the marginal revenue from airpods would be overshadowed by the revenue of getting a user in the ecosystem.
replies(2): >>45947133 #>>45948405 #
1. rangestransform ◴[16 Nov 25 21:08 UTC] No.45948405[source]▶
Having to test the AirPods with more standards compliant devices, having to waste time to tell customers to fuck off if their phone/laptop/toaster is not standards compliant, having to waste engineering time to investigate non compliant aliexpress phones/laptops/toasters, wasting time to implement additional functionality for Apple customers because it has to go into the spec first
replies(1): >>45949437 #
2. bubblethink ◴[16 Nov 25 23:30 UTC] No.45949437[source]▶
Yes, all that is a part of the cost equation, which points to the same thing, namely, that $200-$300 widgets are not worth selling to the general public; they would rather sell them to a customer who will spend a lot more in the ecosystem. Same as razors and blades or consoles and games.