Thread Subject: Re: Audio Connection

Return to this mailing list's archives

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Fri, Aug 17 2007 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: Audio Connection

Hi Mike, Rob, Randy,



Audio connector.



There was a question about whether we could use "connector" or "connection"
since there are now things like Bluetooth



The short answer is



For public devices it needs to be A SPECIFIC STANDARD CONNECTOR (e.g.
HEADPHONE JACK - either 3.5 mm or 2.5mm to support both standard headphones
and standard headsets. Product could use either. User would carry one
adapter. 3.5 is usual std for everything but cell phones. Cellphones
usually are 2.5 mm )

- People can't carry variations around with them and have different
adapters to match what is available.

- Wireless require's pairing - which is something that takes time
and admin rights of some sort

- You can't use the device (if you are blind) til after you have
audio - so how do you find out which type of audio connection and how do you
pair etc.

- If you had "auto pairing" then it might pair with anything
nearby. This both causes inadvertent loss of audio (to some other device)
and privacy issues

- Access is lost if headset is out of power. A problem if you are
trying to buy a ticket home.

- This would only allow access by people who could afford Bluetooth
headsets. (Earphone by contrast cost $1 and many places give one free to
anyone who writes in and asks for one to use with their systems. Answering
the letter costs more than the earphone.)



For personal-private devices however, much more should be acceptable. Here
Bluetooth should be OK as an option.

- All of the above issues except cost drop away for
personal-private devices.

- If product has Bluetooth in it - and the person can afford it -
they can generally afford a Bluetooth earphone.

- There should be an adapter available from the 'other methods' to
the standard 3.5 mm jack. There is for Bluetooth for example. That way
there is always compatibility with hearing aids, cochlear implants and other
listening devices that may not have native Bluetooth or whatever the other
options are.



Oh - also we talked about not requiring a headphone jack (or other
connection) if it was only beep output since other provisions require that
there is visual output.





I think the following wording would be compatible with the discussions so
far and with different groups. At least it should be a lot closer than what
we have.




2.2-C - Audio Connection


When products provide auditory output beyond simple tonal feedback or
signaling, the audio signal must be provided at a standard signal level
through an industry standard connection that will allow for private
listening. If the product is a public-shared product then the connection
must be via a standard 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack. If the product is
personal-private product then the connection can be wired or wireless as
long as a 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack adapter is available from the
manufacturer.











Buzz me if you have a question.





PS Note that when original 255 came out - some cell phone companies did not
want to have standard headphone jack. They wanted the additional revenue
from accessories and wanted to use or keep their proprietary headset jacks.
With FCC encouragement, the standard behavior now is to have a standard
headphone jack or an adapter to standard headphone jack.






Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.

From: David Poehlman
Date: Sat, Aug 18 2007 6:00 AM
Subject: Re: Audio Connection

Hi Greg,

I like this, but what if a better standard for wired connection comes along
or a secure wireless method becomes available that then becomes the industry
standard. Is there a way to cover this contingency without having top
re-write the provision somewhere down the line?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "'TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee'"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] Audio Connection


Hi Mike, Rob, Randy,



Audio connector.



There was a question about whether we could use "connector" or "connection"
since there are now things like Bluetooth



The short answer is



For public devices it needs to be A SPECIFIC STANDARD CONNECTOR (e.g.
HEADPHONE JACK - either 3.5 mm or 2.5mm to support both standard headphones
and standard headsets. Product could use either. User would carry one
adapter. 3.5 is usual std for everything but cell phones. Cellphones
usually are 2.5 mm )

- People can't carry variations around with them and have different
adapters to match what is available.

- Wireless require's pairing - which is something that takes time
and admin rights of some sort

- You can't use the device (if you are blind) til after you have
audio - so how do you find out which type of audio connection and how do you
pair etc.

- If you had "auto pairing" then it might pair with anything
nearby. This both causes inadvertent loss of audio (to some other device)
and privacy issues

- Access is lost if headset is out of power. A problem if you are
trying to buy a ticket home.

- This would only allow access by people who could afford Bluetooth
headsets. (Earphone by contrast cost $1 and many places give one free to
anyone who writes in and asks for one to use with their systems. Answering
the letter costs more than the earphone.)



For personal-private devices however, much more should be acceptable. Here
Bluetooth should be OK as an option.

- All of the above issues except cost drop away for
personal-private devices.

- If product has Bluetooth in it - and the person can afford it -
they can generally afford a Bluetooth earphone.

- There should be an adapter available from the 'other methods' to
the standard 3.5 mm jack. There is for Bluetooth for example. That way
there is always compatibility with hearing aids, cochlear implants and other
listening devices that may not have native Bluetooth or whatever the other
options are.



Oh - also we talked about not requiring a headphone jack (or other
connection) if it was only beep output since other provisions require that
there is visual output.





I think the following wording would be compatible with the discussions so
far and with different groups. At least it should be a lot closer than what
we have.




2.2-C - Audio Connection


When products provide auditory output beyond simple tonal feedback or
signaling, the audio signal must be provided at a standard signal level
through an industry standard connection that will allow for private
listening. If the product is a public-shared product then the connection
must be via a standard 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack. If the product is
personal-private product then the connection can be wired or wireless as
long as a 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack adapter is available from the
manufacturer.











Buzz me if you have a question.





PS Note that when original 255 came out - some cell phone companies did not
want to have standard headphone jack. They wanted the additional revenue
from accessories and wanted to use or keep their proprietary headset jacks.
With FCC encouragement, the standard behavior now is to have a standard
headphone jack or an adapter to standard headphone jack.






Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Gregg Vanderheiden
Date: Tue, Aug 21 2007 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: Audio Connection

You would have to come up with the standard. Then we would have to
promulgate it to all products. Then we would have to ensure that everyone
who has a disability that would need this would have such a device or
connector to a headphone provided for them (or the cost would have to come
down to the point that everyone could afford one. Earphones cost less than
a dollar.).

All of this could happen over time but would not happen within 5-8 years.

In the meantime products need to have a common connector that everyone can
connect to.

IF all this did come to pass before the standards were renewed (because we
did them so well they stand for decades.....) then equiv facil could be
used to justify another method.


Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> David Poehlman
> Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 6:55 AM
> To: TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] Audio Connection
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> I like this, but what if a better standard for wired
> connection comes along or a secure wireless method becomes
> available that then becomes the industry standard. Is there
> a way to cover this contingency without having top re-write
> the provision somewhere down the line?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> To: "'TEITAC desktop/portable (hardware) subcommittee'"
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 5:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [teitac-hardware] Audio Connection
>
>
> Hi Mike, Rob, Randy,
>
>
>
> Audio connector.
>
>
>
> There was a question about whether we could use "connector"
> or "connection"
> since there are now things like Bluetooth
>
>
>
> The short answer is
>
>
>
> For public devices it needs to be A SPECIFIC STANDARD CONNECTOR (e.g.
> HEADPHONE JACK - either 3.5 mm or 2.5mm to support both
> standard headphones
> and standard headsets. Product could use either. User would
> carry one
> adapter. 3.5 is usual std for everything but cell phones. Cellphones
> usually are 2.5 mm )
>
> - People can't carry variations around with them and
> have different
> adapters to match what is available.
>
> - Wireless require's pairing - which is something
> that takes time
> and admin rights of some sort
>
> - You can't use the device (if you are blind) til
> after you have
> audio - so how do you find out which type of audio connection
> and how do you
> pair etc.
>
> - If you had "auto pairing" then it might pair with anything
> nearby. This both causes inadvertent loss of audio (to some
> other device)
> and privacy issues
>
> - Access is lost if headset is out of power. A
> problem if you are
> trying to buy a ticket home.
>
> - This would only allow access by people who could
> afford Bluetooth
> headsets. (Earphone by contrast cost $1 and many places
> give one free to
> anyone who writes in and asks for one to use with their
> systems. Answering
> the letter costs more than the earphone.)
>
>
>
> For personal-private devices however, much more should be
> acceptable. Here
> Bluetooth should be OK as an option.
>
> - All of the above issues except cost drop away for
> personal-private devices.
>
> - If product has Bluetooth in it - and the person
> can afford it -
> they can generally afford a Bluetooth earphone.
>
> - There should be an adapter available from the
> 'other methods' to
> the standard 3.5 mm jack. There is for Bluetooth for
> example. That way
> there is always compatibility with hearing aids, cochlear
> implants and other
> listening devices that may not have native Bluetooth or
> whatever the other
> options are.
>
>
>
> Oh - also we talked about not requiring a headphone jack (or other
> connection) if it was only beep output since other provisions
> require that
> there is visual output.
>
>
>
>
>
> I think the following wording would be compatible with the
> discussions so
> far and with different groups. At least it should be a lot
> closer than what
> we have.
>
>
>
>
> 2.2-C - Audio Connection
>
>
> When products provide auditory output beyond simple tonal feedback or
> signaling, the audio signal must be provided at a standard
> signal level
> through an industry standard connection that will allow for private
> listening. If the product is a public-shared product then
> the connection
> must be via a standard 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack. If the product is
> personal-private product then the connection can be wired or
> wireless as
> long as a 2.5mm or 3.5mm phone jack adapter is available from the
> manufacturer.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Buzz me if you have a question.
>
>
>
>
>
> PS Note that when original 255 came out - some cell phone
> companies did not
> want to have standard headphone jack. They wanted the
> additional revenue
> from accessories and wanted to use or keep their proprietary
> headset jacks.
> With FCC encouragement, the standard behavior now is to have
> a standard
> headphone jack or an adapter to standard headphone jack.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
>
>
>