The Apple iPhone 7 Wireless Earbud Story No One is Talking About
Now that Apple has revealed it’s new iPhone 7 and 7 Plus, the big chatter is about the wireless earphones called AirPods.
Okay, there are some people who are going to focus on things such as its water-resistance (note: not waterproof, and there’s no doubt that water damage is still not covered by AppleCare). Others are talking about the loss of a physical home button or the new A10 processing chip. Still others are wondering exactly how good the dual lens of the iPhone 7 Plus will be.
But nothing stands out more than the AirPods. First, because they are just incredibly ugly. The problem is that there wasn’t a lot of other options for Apple to take. If they had taken the stems off of each AirPod and made it look more like the Bragi Dash, they’d be even easier to misplace.
And many reviewers have been critical of the AirPods, Apple’s first venture into the world of wireless earphones not only because they look awful, will be far easier to lose than the current wired earbuds, and to make matters worse those who use them will now have to worry about losing three separate items (each AirPod and the charger).
Of course people are also talking about the $159 price tag for these AirPods. Give Apple credit for fearlessly going into a price range that few would venture for a first-generation product from a company that has traditionally had an alternative that costs less than $30.
But there is a far greater story unfolding that no one is talking about: how the decision by Apple to eliminate the 3.5mm earphone jack from all iPhones will spur a new wave of criminal activity.
We just have to take a little stroll down history lane.
When the iPhone first appeared in 2007, there was a lot of talk about the revolutionary quality of the phone itself.
It wasn’t until 2010 that Apple released Find My iPhone in response to a lot of things, and one of those thing was the clear rise in theft of iPhones. By 2013, the problem had grown so large that New York City created a task force to combat the issue:
The introduction in 2014 by Apple of its iPhone Activation Lock (a “kill switch”) which allows users to remotely lock down their iPhones if stolen or lost significantly reduced iPhone thefts.
That was a big problem, and the solution was software-based, so it was a fix that could be performed relatively quickly and with minimal cost.
If we think about it from a criminal’s perspective, stealing an iPhone has some impediments because you have to remove/steal the unit from someone’s pocket, bag, or straight from their hands.
As traumatic as that is for the victims — and I know from having been mugged and robbed — there are a lot of stuff that we’ve had ripped out of our hands or dropped. So, it’s a shock but usually something related to a previous experience (note: of course if there’s a gun or knife involved in the crime, then all bets are off).
But there is something particularly traumatic when something is ripped off your head or neck, especially because that almost never happens to most people.
Yesterday (September 7, 2016) is an important date to remember, because if history serves as a template, then it will be a couple of years or even sooner until we start hearing about the next huge problem: criminals stealing people’s wireless earbuds and over-the-ear headphones right off their heads.
Some people might not believe this is possible. From a criminal standpoint it’s a no-brainer. Criminals can calculate risk-reward faster than most of us can figure out the multiplication of two single-digit numbers.
What’s a high-target item? Something valuable, something easily resellable, something that can easily be stolen, and something that can’t be tracked.
And unlike an iPhone where a criminal might actually have to confront a victim and risk being identified later, stealing wireless headphones off a person’s head is far easier because it can be done by creeping up behind them, snatching the item, and then running off before the victim can even turn around.
Another great advantage for criminals is that wireless headphone companies make their products fairly distinctive. This allows for faster target acquisition rates. Also, none of the major companies such as Bose, Beats, and Bowers & Wilkins makes a cheap set of wireless cans. So, every pair is highly valuable. Every pair.
So, for a criminal, it takes about a fraction of a second to recognize a high-end pair of wireless headphones on someone’s head, it could take a couple of minutes to find the right opportunity where there aren’t many people and there are multiple escape routes, and then it takes 2 seconds max to rip them off of someone’s head. For a few minutes work, you then can resell them online for $100.
With wireless earbuds and headphones in the $300+ range and no way to track them currently, it’s a wide-open field for criminals. You want a pair of Bose’s latest QC35 ($300), Beats Solo 3 ($400) or Bowers & Wilkins P7 wireless headphones ($400) but only are willing to spend $100? Just wait for a rash of them to start appearing on eBay and other online auction sites. Authentic and untraceable.
All of this comes at a perfect time for criminals. Why? Because in the past couple of years, and especially the past several months with the release by major companies of wireless headphones, the quality of sound has increased significantly enough to convince people to drop several hundreds of dollars on a pair.
Then you combine that with the fact that the company with the most popular and recognizable smartphone in the U.S. has now eliminated the 3.5mm earphone jack, and you can just imagine criminals everywhere salivating at the near-future where many people will spring for wireless headphones.
To be honest, I’d predict that the higher-priced wireless earbuds/headphones least likely to be stolen would be the Apple AirPods. The reason is that it’s far easier for a criminal to grab the cord of a standard connected pair of wireless earbuds or the frame of a pair of wireless headphones. To steal Apple’s AirPods off of someone would require more time and thus more risk because a criminal would have to locate two different target points on a moving head, instead of just grabbing a connecting cord or frame with standard wireless units.
And if I was a conspiracy theorist, I’d predict that there will be a significant lag before Apple or any other wireless audio company starts addressing this issue. Stolen high-end wireless earbuds and headphones are great for a company’s bottom-line. People who normally wouldn’t have bought those high-end wireless headphones now have access to them via criminal resellers, and people who do have the money to buy them and had them stolen right off their heads will go out and buy another pair. That’s one way to get brand recognition quickly.
It’s kind of like people who had their iPhones stolen before the Activation Lock software was implemented; having their original iPhone stolen didn’t stop them from immediately going out and buying a new iPhone.
Since Apple has the technological prowess to put a new W1 chip in the AirPods that among other things uses low-power Bluetooth to keep the two connected, why is there no security feature like a “kill switch” for these AirPods or for the Beats Solo 3 Wireless headphones which Apple also owns?
Because it’s not sexy to debut an item and talk about how one’s company is being proactive against future theft. That might rattle people into not buying the headphones.
Think about the chilling effect on early iPhone sales that Apple might have effected if the company debuted the product in 2007 and said, “Hey, we’ve also put a “kill switch” on this in case someone steals your iPhone because we’re anticipating that a lot of criminals might do this.”
However, what is sexy is for a company like Apple to ride in a few years later after there is a big theft problem and say, “Hey, we’ve now put a “kill switch” in your AirPods and Beats Wireless headphones so that you can remotely and permanently deactivate them if you should happen to ‘lose’ them.”
Then everyone, including police departments around the world, will think, “Thank God that Apple came to the rescue.”
Same action, different timing, much different perception.
Of course, until that time comes around, there is another segment of retail that’s going to have skyrocketing sales: companies that make hoodies with extra-large hoods. Why? Because people will realize that this can act as a partial deterrent for snatch-and-grab criminals.
In the end, now that America’s most popular smartphone has eliminated the 3.5mm earphone jack, it will be the impetus not only to advance Bluetooth transmission technology in the never-ending quest to provide better sound at lower energy costs but also to provide criminals with a whole new blue ocean of opportunity to make a quick and illegal buck.
