Apple Removes the Headphone Jack from the iPhone

Apple announced the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus on September 7, 2016, with both models conspicuously missing the 3.5mm headphone jack that had been on every iPhone since the original in 2007. Apple marketing chief Phil Schiller justified the removal on stage with the word “courage,” which became a widely mocked summary of the decision. In the box: a Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter (so existing wired headphones still worked with the included adapter plugged in, though simultaneously charging was then impossible) and EarPods with a Lightning connector. Separately, Apple introduced AirPods at $159 — its own wireless earbuds, not shipping until December 2016.

The internal engineering benefit was real if modest: removing the 3.5mm jack freed approximately 1mm of vertical space and one potential water ingress point, contributing to iPhone 7’s IP67 dust and water resistance rating (the first waterproofed iPhone). Apple used a redesigned home button — now a pressure-sensitive surface with Taptic Engine feedback simulating a click rather than a mechanical button — partly enabled by the space reclaimed. Bluetooth 5.0 was not yet available (both AirPods and iPhone 7 used Bluetooth 4.2); the AirPods’ W1 chip handled pairing, switching between Apple devices, and audio delivery, achieving Apple-to-AirPod latency low enough for video-synchronized audio.

Other Android manufacturers — Samsung, LG, Google — publicly mocked Apple’s decision in 2016 while retaining their own headphone jacks. Samsung removed the headphone jack from the Galaxy S20 in February 2020; Google removed it from the Pixel 2 in October 2017 (one year after Apple). By 2021, the headphone jack was absent from most flagship Android phones. AirPods became Apple’s fastest-growing product category by revenue; by 2020, Apple had sold over 100 million pairs. The transition Apple forced in 2016 normalized a wireless audio market that had been growing slowly and accelerated it by years.

Why This Moment Mattered

The topic is useful because it captures a broader shift in how people build, use, and understand technology. In the short term, it gave users and developers something concrete to react to. In the longer term, it became part of a larger pattern in hardware, software, technology-history: hardware, software, services, and user expectations were all changing at the same time.

A good technology milestone usually matters for more than one audience. Enthusiasts notice the specifications or the interface first. Developers ask what new assumptions they can make. Companies look at cost, compatibility, and strategy. Ordinary users mostly notice whether the result makes their devices faster, easier, safer, or more useful.

The Broader Context

This period of computing was shaped by several overlapping transitions: faster networks, more capable mobile devices, cloud infrastructure, stronger security expectations, and software that changed continuously after release. Against that background, the milestone was not an isolated headline. It was one piece of a much larger movement away from static products and toward connected platforms.

That context helps explain why some announcements that looked modest at the time became important later. A browser feature, processor change, development tool, or platform policy can alter what future products are able to assume. Once enough users, developers, and vendors adapt, the new assumption becomes normal.

Looking Back

The value of revisiting the moment is that it shows how technology history is built from many medium-sized steps. Some are celebrated immediately, while others become meaningful only after the ecosystem catches up.

Looking back also keeps the story balanced. Progress usually brings tradeoffs: performance against power use, openness against consistency, convenience against control, and speed against stability. The most interesting milestones are the ones that reveal those tradeoffs clearly. This one belongs in that category because it helps explain not just what changed, but why the direction of computing kept moving the way it did.