Well, if they can, that’s interesting. But the method used to control volume and a mic are a hell of a lot simpler than transferring data. You’d need an expanded jack with extra circuitry afaik.
At that point, you’re over to a usb cable, which is where all this starts.
I mean, it’s all just electrical signals. They could simplify the data for such a transfer. The volume and mic do have an extra wire or two in them, but those are still made no bigger than those without, and the jack just has an extra ring or two on it for the connection. Most everybody is oblivious to the presence of those rings. So, I would say it’s totally possible, but is it worth it money-and-effort-wise?
Well, there’s a difference between analog and digital. So, no matter how you cut it, if the aux jack is there, making it do double duty is essentially turning it into a usb port.
You can’t really send much data at any kind of useful speed over the size and types of wiring in even the more complicated headphone wires, which usually aren’t even present in an actual aux cord that’s got a plug on each end.
The level of data transfer over Bluetooth is both higher, and is already set up to move data like the cars nowadays scrape.
So, while it would conceivably be possible to make new aux cords that are beefed up to do it, and make the jacks in both phones/tablets and head units interpret the signals, it isn’t so much whether or not it’s worth it money wise, it’s will the car owners and passengers buy it?
The connectors, as is, have a limited number of connections, poles. To change that, you have to make the plugs and jacks bigger, or radically redesign them.
From a “worth it” standpoint, they’re already taking the cheaper way out of trying to force everyone to use the Bluetooth that’s already built in. Get device makers to stop having jacks, stop putting them in cars, and the problem is solved on their end. It then falls to the consumer to find a way around that.
Really? Because there are aux jacks that allow for voice and volume control. Seems to me like they could make one for “real data”.
Well, if they can, that’s interesting. But the method used to control volume and a mic are a hell of a lot simpler than transferring data. You’d need an expanded jack with extra circuitry afaik.
At that point, you’re over to a usb cable, which is where all this starts.
I mean, it’s all just electrical signals. They could simplify the data for such a transfer. The volume and mic do have an extra wire or two in them, but those are still made no bigger than those without, and the jack just has an extra ring or two on it for the connection. Most everybody is oblivious to the presence of those rings. So, I would say it’s totally possible, but is it worth it money-and-effort-wise?
Well, there’s a difference between analog and digital. So, no matter how you cut it, if the aux jack is there, making it do double duty is essentially turning it into a usb port.
You can’t really send much data at any kind of useful speed over the size and types of wiring in even the more complicated headphone wires, which usually aren’t even present in an actual aux cord that’s got a plug on each end.
The level of data transfer over Bluetooth is both higher, and is already set up to move data like the cars nowadays scrape.
So, while it would conceivably be possible to make new aux cords that are beefed up to do it, and make the jacks in both phones/tablets and head units interpret the signals, it isn’t so much whether or not it’s worth it money wise, it’s will the car owners and passengers buy it?
The connectors, as is, have a limited number of connections, poles. To change that, you have to make the plugs and jacks bigger, or radically redesign them.
From a “worth it” standpoint, they’re already taking the cheaper way out of trying to force everyone to use the Bluetooth that’s already built in. Get device makers to stop having jacks, stop putting them in cars, and the problem is solved on their end. It then falls to the consumer to find a way around that.