Talk:AirPods

Apple Inc. Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why is there a section "criticism" but no section for "good things"?

With glowing reviews of customer response ("Apple has accomplished a rare feat we have not seen in many years of studying owners of brand new technology products. They have succeeded at delivering a product with an industry best customer satisfaction rating and Net Promoter Score rating." [1]) and huge sales ("Apple Watch + AirPods/Beats sales now size of Fortune 500 company", [2]), I feel that the article as it currently stands does not accurately reflect reality at all. Why is there a section on criticism but no section for what it great about the product? We have to do a major rewrite on this one. Bonomont (talk) 14:42, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vice versa

They feature new user interactions; for example, removing an AirPod from one's ear causes playback to pause and vice versa

I suspect the author doesn't understand the meaning of this phrase, unless pausing playback results in the device popping out of one's ear. 2601:146:C901:6C8B:28B4:7AD5:4698:916E (talk) 20:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)Anonymous pedant[reply]

Lol, correct :-) Bonomont (talk) 06:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This page looks like heavily edited by Apple Team

This page reeks too much of 'edited by Apple Team'. For every criticism, there is explanation saying why this is not so anymore. If its a criticism section, certainly, we wish to see the criticisms and not the explanation by the company regarding the same.

Satishynd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.98.50.18 (talk) 06:10, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Everything in the "Criticism" section appears to be cited to a reliable source. If you believe that editors are violating the conflict-of-interest guideline, the appropriate place to report such is the COI noticeboard. — fourthords | =Λ= | 14:53, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

–Agreed. But, when you read that the earpods used to fall, there will always be some another website which would justify something. "however, testing by Business Insider has shown that it is quite unlikely for this to happen during normal use for most ear types". If every blog/site explains the criticism and if wiki article gives a lookout that issue has been resolved, it somehow creates a perception of not-an-current issue. Although its a very minor issue, it could've been better written. Satishynd

I agree that the AirPods falling off the ears ,are a total myth. Wired headphones fall out usually,due to the weight of the wires. Wireless headphones like the AirPods ,if they fit your ears, will most likely not fall off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Racerhomie (talk • contribs) 06:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 December 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 02:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apple AirPods → AirPods – Apple refers to this product as simply "AirPods" without the Apple name in front of it. This also aligns with the way virtually every other Apple product page is named without "Apple" in the page name, e.g. iPhone not Apple iPhone, unless Apple includes their name in the product, e.g. Apple TV and Apple Watch. Shivertimbers433 (talk) 01:02, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support - There was no rationale given for the move to append "Apple" to it, which is unnecessary. For example, the article for PlayStation 4 is not called Sony PlayStation 4._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:45, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support move. Clearly the common meaning of "AirPods" in camelcase. ONR (talk) 18:58, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are other products called Airpods out there. Example, http://www.core77.com/posts/23193/airpod-the-car-that-runs-on-air-23193. Having it as Apple Airpods avoids any disambiguation and it is easier to search. RenZut ^ↂ 04:43, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Apple's product is trademarked as AirPods, plural. The cited product is AIRPod, singular.--Shivertimbers433 (talk) 06:09, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That was an example. You know, anyone can buy that Trademark tomorrow and prove you wrong. For example, here's a trademark called 'Airpods' filed way before Apple even thought about it - https://www.trademarkia.com/airpods-85053634.html RenZut ^ↂ 17:01, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Other Apple products do not contain the brand in the title (e.g. iPhone, iPad). We should remove it for consistency. The only reason to include it is if it's part of the official name such as Apple Watch. Swedeaction (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

AirPods Vector.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental issues with AirPods

This article has a lot of useful information on the the environmental issues of AirPods, I will add some information from it, just adding it here incase anyone else would like to too

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/neaz3d/airpods-are-a-tragedy

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 11:14, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AirPods firmware version

I know that my AirPods 2nd generation are showing a version of 1A673, but my 1st generation still show the 6.3.2 version shown in this article. So it seems that the first and second generation AirPods don't use the same firmware. This is original research so I'm not editing the article, but if someone could find info on that it would be beneficial.