Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 2274 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
Posted

The other day when I showed @david_wedzik the AirPods, one of his first remarks was how people would lose them. I said "Nah, you just put them back in the little case when you're done…" and he said "No, YOU won't lose them, but other people will."

I guess he knows I"m fairly organized or fastidious with where my gadgets are…? :-)

Anyway, short story before a link: http://daringfireball.net/2017/01/losing_airpods .

Quote

And because they’re small, they certainly could be easily lost. But that’s true of all small things. You can easily lose a $100 casino chip. You can easily lose expensive jewelry. It happens. But it’s not that common, because you know these things are valuable. It’s human nature to be more careful with valuable items. If AirPods cost $29 and were included in the box with iPhones, they’d be lost more frequently than they are as a $159 standalone product. (Let alone a $159 product that is still backordered by six weeks.)

Maybe Dave just has way more money than I do. ;-)

Quote

The habit I’ve gotten into is taking my case with me everywhere I go wearing AirPods. Whenever I take one or both of them out, I put them into the case. I try never to set them down or put them loose into a pocket. The buds are either in the case, in my ears, or in my fingers.

Yeah, that's my strategy. Plus the case is so tiny, and cute, and it's so satisfying to open and close it.

This, too:

Quote

 

In college I worked for several years at a fancy fountain pen store. We sold pens that ranged from $25 to several thousand dollars. People loved to wander in and say “What’s the point? I always lose my pens.” And we always responded — it was one of the first things I learned working there — “I think you’ll find that once you have a nice one, you won’t lose it.”

Two things about that: (1) I think it’s totally right. (2) Maybe surprisingly, it was very effective as a sales technique. Many times, people responded as if that thought had never occurred to them, and it made a genuine difference in their willingness to consider investing in something nice.

 

Anyway, I think the "easily lost" thing is mostly bogus. Unless you're the type of person who loses your keys or wallet all the time (and I don't just mean misplaced).

I still really love these. Next I have to try out the microphone on some phone calls.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
26 minutes ago, iacas said:

The other day when I showed @david_wedzik the AirPods, one of his first remarks was how people would lose them. I said "Nah, you just put them back in the little case when you're done…" and he said "No, YOU won't lose them, but other people will."

I guess he knows I"m fairly organized or fastidious with where my gadgets are…? :-)

Anyway, short story before a link: http://daringfireball.net/2017/01/losing_airpods .

Maybe Dave just has way more money than I do. ;-)

Yeah, that's my strategy. Plus the case is so tiny, and cute, and it's so satisfying to open and close it.

This, too:

Anyway, I think the "easily lost" thing is mostly bogus. Unless you're the type of person who loses your keys or wallet all the time (and I don't just mean misplaced).

I still really love these. Next I have to try out the microphone on some phone calls.

I think there's another distinction. I have not lost my keys or wallet in decades, actually I don't think I've ever lost my wallet - because I know they're so important and security and identity theft, maybe even leads to a dangerous situation. But it's the disposable stuff I lose, stuff that doesn't really "hurt" to lose. Umbrellas. Scarfs. Hats. Water bottles.

[Insert - OK, I just read the Daring Fireball post. I swear, this was my idea before I read the post]

So these Airpods kind of fall in between. It doesn't "hurt" to lose, but they are $160. So I'm the don't lose important stuff but don't sweat the disposable stuff and I think these Airpods fall in between those zones thus the "controversy". They're not socks, but they're not your wallet either.

Whatever the case, I love the concept. If you extend the idea, eventually we'll have these implanted, and losing them will not be problem, although it'll always be something else. One day, we'll think of anything audio, and it'll be streamed into our heads, without moving an inch.

 

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted (edited)

Damn.  I read this thread, and in 5 minutes, I went from "No way" to "I want some."  

But I can't get them right now because I just overcame my wife's objections to buying a new TV and I will probably have to lay low for a while. 

 

Edited by Marty2019
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted
14 minutes ago, Marty2019 said:

Damn.  I read this thread, and in 5 minutes, I went from "No way" to "I want some."  

But I can't get them right now because I just overcame my wife's objections to buying a new TV and I will probably have to lay low for a while. 

Understandable. :-)

Honestly I didn't want them either, at first. I poo pood (?) the idea. But after reading enough reviews from people who raved about them, I figured I'd try them out, and I'm not one to listen to music much (podcasts are another story, but I do that primarily in the car), especially since I could re-sell them pretty easily given the wait times.

They're really pretty great. I ended up having relatively high expectations, but they haven't disappointed.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Moderator
Posted

$100 to make them black.

http://blackpods.store/

 

 

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 years later...
  • Administrator
Posted

I ordered a pair but not until later in the day, so mine are still a few weeks out. 12 days or so, actually.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted

Here are my "Ear Buds". Be careful with the volume of yours otherwise you may need mine in the future! :-P Actually, I found out it was genetic. Oh well. 

Oticon.jpg

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted

Oh, yeah, I keep mine low enough that I can hear people and things outside, and with noise canceling, you can actually keep the volume even lower just to hear what you're listening to.

Mine are preparing to ship and my card was charged so true to history, it'll probably ship soon and arrive ahead of the projected date. Apple tends to be an underpromise/overdeliver type of company. Surprise and delight.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I've got a pair of Sony over-ear noise cancelling headphones, but it would be nice to have some AirPods Pros for working out/golf/quick around the town things. I'll probably get a pair in a month or two.

In my bag:

Driver: Titleist TSi3 | 15º 3-Wood: Ping G410 | 17º 2-Hybrid: Ping G410 | 19º 3-Iron: TaylorMade GAPR Lo |4-PW Irons: Nike VR Pro Combo | 54º SW, 60º LW: Titleist Vokey SM8 | Putter: Odyssey Toulon Las Vegas H7

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 1 month later...
Posted

So far, I am impressed with the AirPods Pro. I found the sound to be much better than the normal AirPods. 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted

I'll eventually get a pair, but using a copycat and very happy with it, partially because 1/5 the price. At least I know that I'm more than comfortable with things hanging out my ear.

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 1 month later...
Posted

Got a pair of Powerbeats Pro.  I like how it fits.  Seems a bit more secure especially during workout compared to Airpods 2 that I have.  Don't get me wrong, Airpods 2 does not fall out when working out, but I prefer a little for more security of Powerbeats Pro.

I just wish they would make an ANC model like Airpods Pro.

Don

:titleist: 910 D2, 8.5˚, Adila RIP 60 S-Flex
:titleist: 980F 15˚
:yonex: EZone Blades (3-PW) Dynamic Gold S-200
:vokey:   Vokey wedges, 52˚; 56˚; and 60˚
:scotty_cameron:  2014 Scotty Cameron Select Newport 2

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 1 month later...
Posted

I too have the Powerbeats Pro. Much better for me than the Airpods. I also think the sound is better. 

My bag:

Taylor Made R7 (x-stiff).
Taylor Made Burner 2 irons (stiff)
Cleveland Wedges (gap and 60)
Odyssey two ball putter (white) 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted

I fell asleep in bed, twice, with these type of pods in my ear and it was a pain to find them, lol.

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted

I’m probably going to get the AirPods Pro. Funny enough it’s mostly for work - to handle phone calls while I’m doing things - and I need something that isn’t going to bother me if I wear it all day and won’t fall into a pot of 350° oil.

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
26 minutes ago, billchao said:

I’m probably going to get the AirPods Pro. Funny enough it’s mostly for work - to handle phone calls while I’m doing things - and I need something that isn’t going to bother me if I wear it all day and won’t fall into a pot of 350° oil.

I went with the TOFA-6 to see all the hype that they’re as good as Air Pods. They are. And they’re $50. Just saying.....

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I got a pair of AirPods pro for a bonus from work a few months ago. Cheap asses figure giving out bright shiny objects are cheaper than having to shell out real bonuses... But anyway Ive only used them a handful of times. Thesound quality is as good as any other headphone ive used with my phone. Wore them to hit balls and even played a round of golf with no big issues. If i bended over for something, like a golf ball, they tended to get loose or fall out. 


Note: This thread is 2274 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 610 - 2026-06-03 Got some work in between lessons today. Rare late day, teaching until 7:30pm.
    • Let's continue on… Cool. The thing is, nobody's claiming par is "reliable" and par's inclusion piggy-backs in the course rating, which is awfully close to par and, thus, brings par in to make it make sense. Once again, for those in the back… (CR - Par) just makes it really easy to know what kind of score you need to shoot to best, match, or play worse than your handicap index. Yes, when par is different, the players from the higher par tees get an extra stroke (72 vs. 71, the 72s get an extra stroke. That makes sense and is a small complication (more info at https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/roh/Content/rules/Committee%20Content/USGA/LG_R6d.htm). However, most of the time, this adjustment will not be needed, as many courses play to the same par for the same genders from all sets of tees. And, the rare times it is needed, par (measured in whole numbers, integers) and strokes (also whole numbers/integers) map easily and the idea is easily grasped. Dean seems to be unaware of the fact that most every golfer carries something orders of magnitude more powerful than the highest end desktop computers available the last time he consulted with the USGA in their pockets. While it is quaint that his club puts printouts by the first tee… get with the times, Dean. Look up your handicap index and course handicap in the GHIN app and get on with it. It's a better system than the one that didn't account — at all — for a difference in the playing conditions (via an algorithm, not a judgment). Dean's assertions about the "less precise system because of par" continues to make absolutely zero sense. Right, it still changed tee to tee. Now it just changes differently… and in a way that more accurately reflects the score you need to shoot to play to your handicap. Previously, a 1.1 index would get 1 stroke on a 66.7/122 par-72 course. Now they give four strokes back to the course and must shoot 68 to play to their handicap. This makes way more sense. The 18-shot difference is a pretty extreme example. Maybe a long course that also offers a par-three set of tees could play that long, but… man, that's not going to be super common. Sensationalistic much, Dean? Also, once those unhappy (complete assumption) golfers realize a) what the change shows them (playing to net par = playing to your index) and b) realizes that their differential is going to be the same… I think they'll get over their initial questions. No. And yet… if he shoots the same scores, he'll get the same handicap index he has now. But he'll know on each course what score he needs to shoot to "play to his handicap." Sheesh, Dean. This stuff isn't that hard to figure out. Enough with the sensationalistic stuff. I don't find it "unacceptable" at all. Then again, I'm not nearly 80 and seemingly incapable of doing basic math these days. No. This literally makes no sense, as that part of the differential calculation and the course handicap calculation remains identical. Good! No. Categorically wrong. They should have been adjusting their handicaps all along. Previously it was by subtracting the course ratings. Which… is still basically what's done, with the addition of the course rating being "baked in" to the course handicap calculation. Dean is wrong here, or doing some math heretofore unknown by the world. When par is the same, what determines the difference in handicaps? The course rating, which Dean loves! Sheesh! You had to things when players were in situations like this before, too. This is getting exhausting. He keeps using words like "less precise" and "unfair" but does not seem to understand what they mean. This is like the Princess Bride meme: "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." The caps reduce upward movement. Committees have reign to reduce a player's handicap, and there's still an automatic Exceptional Score Reduction. I'm going through these more quickly now because… well, it's silly how badly Dean misses the mark with this blog post. Dean is literally confusing the upward movement (with the soft and hard caps) here with the exceptional score reduction which is used when lowering handicaps due to an exceptionally good score. The creators of the WHS are handicap experts. They know more about the current state of handicaps/handicapping than the Pope Emeritus. It's been shown to have almost no effect across all handicaps. Yes, some 36s under the old system are now 35s under the new system. Yawn. He should have stopped there. It's easier to apply and makes more sense. This makes no sense. It's "not complex" but players will have to guess? And, for men or women, the stroke index of each hole doesn't change because they play a different set of tees. They get a different number of strokes, but it's always been true that when you get 14 strokes you apply a stroke to stroke index holes 1-14, and when you get 11, to just holes with a SI of 1-11. Objection, your honor. Assumes facts not in evidence. Dean's just out here continuing to make shit up about "the inaccuracy of par" and ignoring that with Par (an integer) came the Course Rating, which he agrees is precise and accurate. No. No, this is inaccurate. Also, as noted, you can randomly assign stroke indexes, and so long as all the low numbers or all the high numbers are not clumped together at the beginning or ends of the 18 holes, matches generally work out the same. This is inaccurate. It is an algorithm that looks at scores. That's it. Also, this is better than a system like the prior one where no such thing existed at all. Wildly inaccurate and off-base. Did they do actual testing? No need. They have millions and millions of rounds and ran many, many, many simulations. That's testing. Dean seems to continue to be unaware of the fact that computers are more powerful now than they were in 2002. But, he's nearly 80, so we can understand if not going so far as to give him a pass on how much he gets wrong. Cool. Noted. For the most part that was because many countries haven't been able to rate enough of their courses. :sigh:
    • Day 3 (3 Jun 26) - More work on keeping arms connected today - hard foam balls with 7i and 5w…..
    • Day 274 6-3 flow drill getting chest through, arms in front. Arms get a little pinned to the side, not as much in front as I want them when I add speed. 
    • Shot 48 yesterday.  For me bogey golf is good.  I was 10 over through 7 and figured with a Par 3 and 4 coming on all I needed was birdie / par to get my 45. I had a great tee shot on #8 and sunk  a 5 footer for birdie, game was coming together, now just needed par on #9. Had a great tee drive and the green was within range for a hoped GIR or nGIR.  But I pulled the shot left into tall weeds and needed to take a drop.  So much for par, but a bogey for 46 is still good for me. I hit my lob wedge to get over a small tree and saw the ball riding nicely  on line to the pin when my club hit the ball a 2nd time on my follow through causing the ball to change directions and ended up @ pin high but along the same tall weeds I just took an unplayable out of.  had no room for a backswing, Just hacked at it and it shot across the green to the rough on the far side.  Needed a chip & 1 putt got a triple bogey. you can see the hole fall apart in the screenshot below.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.