To sell wireless headphones for $100+, higher revenue per person, and provide a non dorky way to listen to stuff through your smartwatch. All of them have wireless earbuds and smart watches. You need to replace them when the non removable battery dies so it's really a wireless headphone subscription. Apple's practice for the watch were the two final iPod nanos. Attaching it to your wrist with a headphone cord running up your arm looked dorky. Apple doesn't do dorky, Android OEMs didn't want smartwatches with headphone jacks to look dorky either. And Android OEMs often copy Apple because Apple is the more stylish one

They literally just said the answer. Which I think was obvious tbh. Apple (and Google) literally sell the most losable objects ever made for $200+. They are greedy capitalists. Of course they're gonna try to push you into that.

I read it. I found it increasingly confusing. I thought I was being very clear in making a singular point: engineers rarely if ever decide what features get built, unless their input on what's cost effective or possible is properly considered. In this case meaning engineers saying they want or don't want a headphone jack on a phone would probably not be a thing because they know if it did they would be ignored. Here's how this actually went:

Execs at company ask some team to find a new way to make revenue. They come up with the idea to remove the headphone jack and start making and selling wireless headphones and (bonus) adapters for people who don't want wireless. The CEO loves the idea and forces it to happen. The engineers were told to design a new phone without it. Some of them gripe about it but no one cares. Maybe even one guy quit over it. The phone gets made anyway because engineers don't decide features. They decide the how not the what.