LeEco's latest smartphones replace 3.5mm headphone jack with USB Type-C connector

[Shawn Knight]

Chinese-based smartphone manufacturer LeEco (formerly Letv) on Wednesday refreshed its entire line of handsets. The new devices, the Le 2, the Le 2 Pro and the Le Max 2, are especially noteworthy as none of them feature traditional 3.5mm headphone jacks.

As you might guess, the naming convention represents the company’s mid-tier, flagship and phablet devices, respectively.

The Le 2 and Le 2 Pro both utilize a 5.5-inch, 1080p LCD display. The entry-level Le 2 packs a MediaTek Helio X20 SoC, 3GB of RAM and 32GB of flash storage while the higher-end Le 2 Pro gets MediaTek’s Helio X25 chip and 4GB of RAM to go with its 32GB of local storage.

Those paying a bit more for the Pro model will also enjoy a 21-megapixel rear-facing camera from Sony versus the 16-megapixel shooter on the standard Le 2.

Not impressed yet? Perhaps LeEco’s phablet-class device will sway you.

The 5.7-inch, QHD Le Max 2 features Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 820 SoC with up to 6GB of RAM (a first for any Android phone). It’s offered in your choice of 32GB or 64GB of local flash storage, a 21-megapixel rear-facing camera (Sony IMX230 image sensor) with optical image stabilization, an 8-megapixel selfie cam, dual-band 801.11 a/b/g/n/ac Wi-Fi, 4G LTE and more, all powered by a 3,100mAh battery.

All three handsets ditch the traditional 3.5mm headphone jack in favor of a USB Type-C connector that handles both charging and audio duties. As AnandTech points out, LeEco includes a USB Type-C to 3.5mm audio adapter with each phone so you’ll still be able to use your existing 3.5mm-based headphones.

Pricing is set at around $170 for the Le2 and climbs to roughly $230 for the Le 2 Pro. If it’s the Le Max 2 that you’re after, expect to pay around $325 for the base model with 4GB of RAM and 32GB of storage or $385 for the high-end offering with 6GB of RAM and 64GB of flash storage. Unfortunately, LeEco only has plans to launch these phones in China for the time being although one could show up in the US later this year.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/64511-leeco-latest-smartphones-replace-35mm-headphone-jack-usb.html

 

[VitalyT]

If I'm not mistaken, none of the USB connectors support click-in connection, which is essential for any wearable electronics to keep the plug in. May end up with your phones connector sliding out all the time. That's gonna suck.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Sometimes change is nice, this seems like "lets take something that works well and do something different"

 

[BSim500]

No 3.5mm headphone socket and no micro-SD? So it's another one of those over-engineered "smart" phones that's still dumber than a decade old Nokia for simple MP3 playback?...

 

[SirGCal]

If I'm not mistaken, none of the USB connectors support click-in connection, which is essential for any wearable electronics to keep the plug in. May end up with your phones connector sliding out all the time. That's gonna suck.

You are mistaken. I've hung my LG G5 from it's cable accidentally more then once. If you get junk cables or the manufacturer uses a junk connector, what do you expect? I have 10' cables that cost me $9 that click cleanly and securely into place and still support full QC3 voltages (big enough wires that there isn't enough voltage drop to change the charge).

 

[VitalyT]

You are mistaken. I've hung my LG G5 from it's cable accidentally more then once. If you get junk cables or the manufacturer uses a junk connector, what do you expect? I have 10' cables that cost me $9 that click cleanly and securely into place and still support full QC3 voltages (big enough wires that there isn't enough voltage drop to change the charge).

In which way am I mistaken? It is not about the quality. The USB Type-C standard doesn't include any click-in functionality.

 

[SirGCal]

In which way am I mistaken? It is not about the quality. The USB Type-C standard doesn't include any click-in functionality.

Try some before you complain about them. My LG G5 definitely has a strong click-in. Enough to keep the cable in when it slides off the desk and dangles on the phone's own weight with an Otterbox Defender case WITH the case holder/kickstand attached to it (not light weight). It also has to be a 2 part item, cable and connector have to support it. I've seen a few cheap cables that do not lock in. Garbage. Also, the click-in is surprisingly easy to engage, yet holds very well. You can definitely hear an audible click. It takes a noticeable effort, yet not difficult by any means, to remove the cable from the device.

So yes, it is all about quality...

 

[VitalyT]

Try some before you complain about them. My LG G5 definitely has a strong click-in. Enough to keep the cable in when it slides off the desk and dangles on the phone's own weight with an Otterbox Defender case WITH the case holder/kickstand attached to it (not light weight). It also has to be a 2 part item, cable and connector have to support it. I've seen a few cheap cables that do not lock in. Garbage. Also, the click-in is surprisingly easy to engage, yet holds very well. You can definitely hear an audible click. It takes a noticeable effort, yet not difficult by any means, to remove the cable from the device.

So yes, it is all about quality...

You are again talking about something custom-made, because USB Type-C doesn't include it.

 

[SirGCal]

You are again talking about something custom-made, because USB Type-C doesn't include it.

Apparently you know best...

But I have three USB-C devices, they all do this so. Apparently I have tons of custom parts built on common products... Sweet. /sigh

 

[SirGCal]

You are again talking about something custom-made, because USB Type-C doesn't include it.

I got tired of the attitude so I took 10 minutes to look for myself... Again, you are incorrect.

Per the USB Specifications: http://www.usb.org/developers/usbtypec/

Within the spec ZIP file and in the Type-C folder, the file: USB Type-C Specification Release 1.2.pdf

Page 29, part 3.2.1 sub part 3. See for yourself. Or there is a full part detailed on page 49, under section 3.2.2.2

Enjoy!

 

[VitalyT]

I got tired of the attitude so I took 10 minutes to look for myself... Again, you are incorrect.

Per the USB Specifications: http://www.usb.org/developers/usbtypec/

Within the spec ZIP file and in the Type-C folder, the file: USB Type-C Specification Release 1.2.pdf

Page 29, part 3.2.1 sub part 3. See for yourself. Or there is a full part detailed on page 49, under section 3.2.2.2

Enjoy!

I didn't want to upset anybody. If my post inspired or compelled you to do a research into the subject - it is for the better Now we know something more Cheers!

 

[SirGCal]

I didn't want to upset anybody. If my post inspired or compelled you to do a research into the subject - it is for the better Now we know something more Cheers!

I do not like to tolerate that type of attitude toward anyone (the previous posts I quoted below). It took me less then 10 minutes to actually search the website for the USB standards AND search the PDF for the compliant information. It wasn't research, and it didn't actually take time. I spend more time cleaning my fingernails... I just don't like people getting away with their constant rhetoric..

(I believe that term would be getting closer to being a Troll - spouting misinformation intentionally to gain a reaction. If that was your goal, you win. I reacted and proved my point and am done.)

In which way am I mistaken? It is not about the quality. The USB Type-C standard doesn't include any click-in functionality.

The USB standard was the problem with your statement... Very easy to find the truth. Another inaccuracy that you insisted you knew better about. You were mistaken so it has to be what is left; quality of the parts in question. Initial ports, abused cables, etc. It's a pretty simple deduction.

You are again talking about something custom-made, because USB Type-C doesn't include it.

Seriously? A totally custom part? Come on... Wires would have to be custom too and I've purchased from many different suppliers so far. And you barked about the USB Standard again...

Hey, if your goal was to troll me, you win. I'm one of the lovely flavors of autistic and from that aspect, some of the easiest people in the world to troll. Everything is face value, black and white, etc. (Also what drives me to keep talking). Congratulations if that was your goal. If not, I apologize now for bringing it up. But a simple 'I stand corrected' would have gone a long, long way instead of suggesting you somehow tricked me to do the legwork for ya (of which there really wasn't any which is what baffles me the most).

I'm done with all this. Proved my point and said my piece. Unsubbing from this topic.

 

[VitalyT]

I do not like to tolerate that type of attitude toward anyone (the previous posts I quoted below). It took me less then 10 minutes to actually search the website for the USB standards AND search the PDF for the compliant information. It wasn't research, and it didn't actually take time. I spend more time cleaning my fingernails... I just don't like people getting away with their constant rhetoric..

(I believe that term would be getting closer to being a Troll - spouting misinformation intentionally to gain a reaction. If that was your goal, you win. I reacted and proved my point and am done.)



The USB standard was the problem with your statement... Very easy to find the truth. Another inaccuracy that you insisted you knew better about. You were mistaken so it has to be what is left; quality of the parts in question. Initial ports, abused cables, etc. It's a pretty simple deduction.



Seriously? A totally custom part? Come on... Wires would have to be custom too and I've purchased from many different suppliers so far. And you barked about the USB Standard again...

Hey, if your goal was to troll me, you win. I'm one of the lovely flavors of autistic and from that aspect, some of the easiest people in the world to troll. Everything is face value, black and white, etc. (Also what drives me to keep talking). Congratulations if that was your goal. If not, I apologize now for bringing it up. But a simple 'I stand corrected' would have gone a long, long way instead of suggesting you somehow tricked me to do the legwork for ya (of which there really wasn't any which is what baffles me the most).

I'm done with all this. Proved my point and said my piece. Unsubbing from this topic.

Dude, I unsubscribed from this pissing contest before you even going to. Too much hostility.