Slashdot Mirror
Why Apple Won't Adopt a Wireless Charging Standard
Lucas123 writes As the battle for mobile dominance continues among three wireless charging standards, with many smartphone and wearable makers having already chosen sides, Apple continues to sit on the sideline. While the new Apple Watch uses a tightly coupled magnetic inductive wireless charging technology, it still requires a cable. The only advantage is that no port is required, allowing the watch case to remain sealed and water resistant. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus, however, remain without any form of wireless charging, either tightly coupled inductive or more loosely coupled resonant charging. Over the past few years, Apple has filed patents on its own flavor of wireless charging, a "near field" or resonant technology, but no products have as yet come to market. If and when it does select a technology, it will likely be its own proprietary specification, which ensures accessory makers will have to pay royalties to use it.
So next year, Apple will "invent" it for the masses, using their own proprietary (read: expensive) version of it.
even AC understands this is no news for anybody let alone nerds!!
Charging isn't the only thing the cable does. When you want to sync those multi-GB's of pictures, music and videos or do an iTunes backup, you'll want the cable.
Yup, and then all the Apple-heads will flock to it, talk about how amazing it is (ignoring the fact that the same capabilities existed before, from other companies). Their social zeal and Apple's marketing will overwhelm the field, and at some point everyone will call all wireless chargers "iChargers" even if only half of them are, and the others are actually other brands / technologies that work similarly but pre-dated it. Such is the power - the evil power - that Apple exerts in our dark age...
William George
Links don't click in Chrome.
Enough people don't RTFA as it is, Slashdot now enforcing that?!
They use thunderbolt cables? Or their phones and tablets don't have external memory cards or proper cables? Maybe it's because they treat their entire business model as a closed system locked up tighter than North Korea yet their customers are super happy despite their monopoly; the apple business model isthe envy of CEOs around the world so why ruin a good thing?
Woah woah... Apple Heads are fans of DJO Apple Juice.
I just forgot to log in at work
not invented here
besides since apple didnt slap a brand name on it the second a competitor came out with it then acted like they invented it it may be a while before it starts creeping into their designs, besides they cant put a proprietary connector that breaks with 6 weeks of usage on wireless
If you look at the Nokia phones, the ones with wireless charging are thicker than those without. Personally I'm happy to trade the clunky form for the convenience, I don't think Jony Ives feels the same way.
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs," I said. "we have a protractor"
that Apple would never release a flagship product that didn't rely exclusively on proprietary technology! Just look at the new MacBook, and it's utter dependence on proprietary chargers ... oh, wait ...
just a ghost in the machine.
I know that UW Tech has quite a few patents in the near field charging sphere, so there are always those, based on original research, to draw on.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
for this specific reason. Though it looks like Apple may be able to survive the loss of that particular sale.
Seriously though, wireless charging, throwing out cables, is one of those "how did we manage before it" kind of conveniences. I unboxed my phone two years ago and it has never once been connected to a cable.
Real Nerds know that you need AC for wireless charging, DC just won't cut it.
Seriously though, my opinion as a physicist/engineer is that wireless charging is a little dumb. It wastes a lot of power in an age where energy conservation is paramount, for what exactly? It's not like you can charge your phone from a distance. Inductive charging is a sensible tradeoff in things like dil^Welectric toothbrushes -- just because it can be done, doesn't mean it's great for everything.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Keep drinking that kool-aid.
I takes about 3kWh of electrity _PER YEAR_.
A single 60W bulb uses that much energy in a couple days of continuous use (around 50 hours)
So, go ahead and inductively charge your phone. Change just one frequently used bulb in your house from incandescent to led/etc. and save hundreds of times the energy wasted by wireless charging.
I understand. I haven't logged in to work for a couple of years, and it's been awesome.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
You know what's worse for the environment? Breaking your only USB/charging port, and having to replace the whole device. Shipping a replacement device from the other side of the world has more environmental impact than 0, too.
They're horrific for the environment because of their low efficiency. Rather than asking for wireless charging, we should be fighting to outlaw it. There's a reason Republicans are fans of wireless charging.
I recall something along these lines being said for things like larger screen sizes... until Apple decided to finally jump on the bigger screen bandwagon. Same goes for x86 processors I believe.
If wireless charging looks to be really getting societal acceptance, you can believe Apple will introduce it -- the same way they introduced NFC after being pretty much the only phone manufacturer not to support it. They'll go from "we're not touching it" to "here's the entire solution using that technology, instead of just bits and pieces you have to try and cobble together yourselves."
I thought you could charge them by putting them in the microwave. I'm sure there was an earlier article to that effect.
It's not like you can charge your phone from a distance.
That's coming, and soon. There's a standard coming now which does it at up to 10W, which is enough to run many small devices outright.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Their social zeal and Apple's marketing will overwhelm the field, and at some point everyone will call all wireless chargers "iChargers" even if only half of them are, and the others are actually other brands / technologies that work similarly but pre-dated it.
Sadly, that is probably actually what will happen.
When Steve Jobs died, major news sites like CNN ran stories proclaiming that he "invented the computer mouse". Steve Jobs. Now granted maybe someone typed "Jobs" when they meant to type "Engelbart" as a mere innocent slip of the fingers. Could happen!
Yup, or replace your phone due to water, my S5 with Qi charging is waterproof.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Apple already announced a wireless charging device, so basically, this article is talking bollocks.
Because money?
If you think Apple needs any more reason, you're probably in the category of "fanboy".
That doesn't have to be plugged in to charge all your gear? Where can I order one of those?
Now, your gut instinct is to respond to this with more of the same, twisting odd anecdote into sweeping generalization, in an attempt to somehow show you are speaking plain facts. Resist that temptation.
They couldn't lock it up to only their use and sue everyone else outta the market.
The same people that constantly harp on being green and saving the environment are all upset that they can't waste energy on inductive charging.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
followed by lawsuits against all other wireless charging station makers
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
if "Wireless charging has hit the mainstream 1-2 years ago" like the thread above is saying, wireless exchange of data even more so.
Beaming single files (contacts infos, sending some piece of data, etc) over IrDA was all th craze back then when the first PDA emerged (PDA: you rememmber, those pocket computer with a touch screen that where here ago long ago before Apple 'rediscovered' the form factor).
Then bluetooth started gaining traction and its OBEX feature was even more popular (the standard to sync your contacts list between your feature-phone and your PDA) in addition to other data exchange (sync over Bluetooth between a PC and a PDA) or for connection sharing (phone acting as a modem as DUN - i.e. PPP over Bluetooth serial. That was back before hour ISPs in the US decided that "thetering" was yet another thing that could get charged extra)
So by the time wireless charging started to appear a couple of weeks ago, wireless data was long established (case in point: Palm's webos-powered Pre was among the first to bring wireless charging into mainstream.. That was also a phone without any SD card, instead heavily net-oriented and constantly syncing over 3G or WiFi to the cloud. Later, the HP Pre3 even got a dual-band N, just to make this even more easy and transparent).
Thus, removing the stupid lightning-whatever cable annd keeping sync? Problem solved since long time ago.
In fact, go to your local store and have a look: most of the small speakers for phones and tablets operate over Bluetooth any way. That helps them circumvent the fact that some constructors use non-staandard connectors (like Apple, specially since they also ask for royalties). Only half of them will feature an actual iphone dock.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
The amount of energy wasted by charging a phone wirelessly is insignificant. The entire energy use of a phone in an entire year is roughly the amount of energy used by a single 60W bulb in a couple days. You're "wasting" about $0.25 worth of electricity per year by using wireless charging for your phone.
It probably wastes about as much energy as leaving the phone plugged in for many hours while it's at full charge (like, overnight). The average phone draws about 3.5W of power while charging, and 2W of power after being fully charged. Wireless chargers (at least of the Qi variety) are smart enough to shut off when the device is fully charged!. A Qi charge pad only uses 0.0001W of energy when not actively charging a device.
Now, wirelessly charging your EV is indeed a very bad idea for efficiency, but your phone uses so little energy it just doesn't matter.
What mainstream? None of my devices (and I have a lot of them) have wireless charge options. There are aftermarket options but looking at the tech, it is incredibly wasteful and destructive to the batteries.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Hope Apple reinvents wireless charging, so you can charge several meters away, see Witricity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCUMhkEhTo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRQ_kJtNB4Q
Why all this hype around a technology that involves applying electric fields strong enough to induce electrical currents high enough to recharge an electronic device, which is DANGEROUS to do with electronic equipment (you can fry the device)? Not to mention the serious problem of electromagnetic interference in what is around? It is not much safer simply connect a cable to the device?
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
Apple has filed patents on its own flavor of wireless charging, a "near field" or resonant technology
Resonant wireless electricity transmission was invented by Nikolas Tesla over 100 years ago.
but no products have as yet come to market
That part is just like Nikolas Teslas work too.
A lot of people have been working on this on the past decade. It's probably been displayed on every IDF (Intel Developer Forum) since by so many companies that I can't even remember the names of them all. That and Peltier cooling.
I read that as "Wireless Charging Bastard" for a moment. I could totally see Apple adopting some kid (Regardless of parentage!) and making him charge all their devices!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Real Nerds know that you need AC for wireless charging, DC just won't cut it.
Seriously though, my opinion as a physicist/engineer is that wireless charging is a little dumb. It wastes a lot of power in an age where energy conservation is paramount, for what exactly? It's not like you can charge your phone from a distance. Inductive charging is a sensible tradeoff in things like dil^Welectric toothbrushes -- just because it can be done, doesn't mean it's great for everything.
As a practical matter, the efficiencies are affected by the frequency of the AC Signal. At 50/60 Hz, there are significant losses to heat, due to poor power-factor numbers as well as problems with core saturation (esp. At 50 Hz). However, if you crank the frequency up to about 100 kHz, like a lot of SMPS designs, things begin to look a lot better. Crank it up again, to a few MHz, and the efficiencies get really good, and the components get pretty damned small.
But, as a "physicist/engineer" (which no one who was really either of those would call themselves), you should already know all this.
And beside all that, the measly few Watts that are needed to charge a phone in a reasonable period of time aren't going to deplete the planet's energy reserves anytime soon. Even a poor transformer operating in the 60 Hz world typically achieves over 80% efficiency in it's energy transfer from Primary to Secondary. So, extrapolating from the real-world example of the original 10W iPhone "cube" charger, you would only have to increase that to around 12W to overcome the 20% loss from a small air-gap.
I am NOT talking about charging-at-a-distance. The inverse-square law gets you pretty quick when doing that!
Yup, and then all the Apple-heads will flock to it, talk about how amazing it is (ignoring the fact that the same capabilities existed before, from other companies). Their social zeal and Apple's marketing will overwhelm the field, and at some point everyone will call all wireless chargers "iChargers" even if only half of them are, and the others are actually other brands / technologies that work similarly but pre-dated it. Such is the power - the evil power - that Apple exerts in our dark age...
If you really believe that, you need help.
Their social zeal and Apple's marketing will overwhelm the field, and at some point everyone will call all wireless chargers "iChargers" even if only half of them are, and the others are actually other brands / technologies that work similarly but pre-dated it.
Sadly, that is probably actually what will happen.
When Steve Jobs died, major news sites like CNN ran stories proclaiming that he "invented the computer mouse". Steve Jobs. Now granted maybe someone typed "Jobs" when they meant to type "Engelbart" as a mere innocent slip of the fingers. Could happen!
Excuse me, but now it's Apple's fault that CNN can't do research?
Peltier cooling
Talk about inefficiency...
You have a valid point on one hand, but you ignore the fact that Apple zealots are seriously deluded having swallowed so much of Apple's marketing bullshit, thereby poisoning the larger computing community.
AC transformer PF is 1.0. AC Transformer efficiency is generally between 95%-99%. See a novice primer at https://www.physicsforums.com/....
I was using an Amiga when you Mac faggots were jizzing all over your black-and-white screens and fiddling with your 1 button mice. Macs4all? Fuck you. I prefer real computers.
Amigas had some spectacular hardware. I was even going to embed an Amiga 500 into a stage lighting controller I was designing while you were busy playing Battle Chess on your Amiga.
However, the Amiga OS was just an unstable piece of shit, and, well, we know what happened to Commodore...
And really? A one-button mouse joke and a run at sexuality is the best you can do? Are you mentally challenged,Mir what?
AC transformer PF is 1.0. AC Transformer efficiency is generally between 95%-99%. See a novice primer at https://www.physicsforums.com/....
I stand corrected. I was pulling stuff out of distant memory, based on a comment saying power transformer efficiency was AT LEAST 80%.
So my point that the GGP was full of it is even more true.
Let's just dispense with the "Apple does proprietary connectors to charge royalties and profit!" line. Let's ignore for a minute the fact that modern Macs (including the new USB-C sporting MacBook) have zero "proprietary" connectors on them. And let's ignore for a minute that Apple was the greatest early champion of USB, Ethernet, and WiFi. When Apple does do a home-grown connector, say FireWire for example, it is because they have come up with something better than anything that exists in the market. This was even true of Lightning, which arrived years before USB-C, and was so much better then any small form-factor USB connector. Often, as in the case of FireWire and Mini DisplayPort, Apple either made them available for anyone to adopt as standards or added to an existing standard. And let me just throw this in here preemptively, because I know someone will bring it up. Thunderbolt was developed by Intel and adopted by Apple, so it is not proprietary. Any PC maker can adopt Thunderbolt, and it is inexplicable so few have.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from Macintosh...
I believe it. He specifically claimed that Apple invented multitouch during the iPhone launch even though it had been around for a very long time. The media just refused to call him on his lies.
Energy conservation is paramount when you run on batteries, not for a charger connected to the power socket. Anyway I found it dumb too.
Running to Google for salvation will not really help you though.
The reason I stopped using Apple wasn't the hardware but the unbearably zealous Mac community. "God" is merely one way that the human mind is susceptible to religion. GP pretty much hit the nail on the head, "macs4all".
It's trendy. It's very trendy.
Their success stems from understanding trends, brands and marketing. Not common sense, physics or engineering.
It's not like you can charge your phone from a distance.
That's coming, and soon. There's a standard coming now which does it at up to 10W, which is enough to run many small devices outright.
I doubt it. You either have to point a beam very accurately or you lose efficiency to cube of distance. Using a 100W to get 10W a meter away is just not very acceptable.
2W after being charged? WTF? 0 as they stop drawing current. Try using a power meter to verify your ridiculous claims.
Personally, I hate fumbling with MicroUSB cables and my phone. I don't exactly have sausage fingers, but trying to put in that cable when I'm half asleep, the light on my nightstand is off (and I've been reading an eBook) and the end of the cable is loose *somewhere* on the nightstand is really annoying,
With wireless charging, I place the phone on the rather large/hard-to-miss charger pad, get immediate visual confirmation that the phone is in fact charging and therefore properly on the pad, and can go to sleep.
At the work desk, it's similarly practical: Incoming call, grab phone from charger pad, talk, hang up, put phone back on charger pad. Same thing for texts etc... with a cable or docking station, I find myself unplugging and re-plugging about 50x per day (seriously).
Excuse me, but now it's Apple's fault that CNN can't do research?
They're partially complicit, they could have contacted CNN to point out that they were wrong. They could have dumped out a press release on their website saying it was incorrect, but they didn't. They simply rode the train because it was the easiest thing to do.
Om, nomnomnom...
Excuse me, but now it's Apple's fault that CNN can't do research?
They're partially complicit, they could have contacted CNN to point out that they were wrong. They could have dumped out a press release on their website saying it was incorrect, but they didn't. They simply rode the train because it was the easiest thing to do.
Can you prove they even knew about one random news story among literally millions? And just how many of those news stories contained inaccuracies both big and small? How many hours of tracking down the right people at those news organizations do you think it would have taken, only to have them return a call several days later, after Jobs' death was already a non-story? And can you imagine how it was at Apple in the days following Jobs' death?
You live in some sort of fantasy world if you think Apple acted irresponsibly, or in a way contrary to any other company on this planet.
They can't make the hardware all one colour and uni body construction.
Read this article.
http://ipod.about.com/od/gloss...
Very far from unbiased writing. Anyone that was not living in an Apple bubble during that time period could write a totally different story.
I was buying tracks from the major record labels for 0.99 and some for 0.79 before iTunes was open for business. Getting them to my MP3 player was not a magic process that required a breakout box and a clean room like others claim it was, it was drag and drop to the device. Electronic companies had already broke through the barriers with the record labels. The foot print and business model was out there and gaining steam. Apple made a product that many people liked and the concept continued to gain ground at a furious pace for Apple/iTMS users and it was equally robust for people that did not use the iTunes/ipod model.
>Apple
>Standards
That's why.
Ah yes. "If there's anything happening in the world that's more wasteful than this, it's not worth eliminating this waste as well."
You may have noticed that they stopped selling 60W incandescent bulbs at the store recently. Guess everybody's already doing away with that waste, so why not move on to things like wasteful wireless chargers?
Are you REALLY that fucking lazy that plugging in a cable to charge your device is some kind of onerous, Herculean task?
The system demonstrated by Intel did aim a narrow beam at the receiver. It did it automatically after locating the target with a low power radio link. WiFi already does this to a much lesser extent in the latest versions using beam forming and multiple antennas.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It depends what the trade off between the energy wasted by wireless charging and the waste from broken cables/connectors is.
Wireless charging is slower than wired charging which extends battery life. Fast charging warms the batteries and causes them to degrade faster. Slow wired chargers are worth keeping for overnight use, to make your batteries last longer.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Is 'distant memory' a pet name you use for your ass?
As to your comment about physicist/engineer: fuck off, Apple shill. This is still Slashdot.
Go peddle your turds someplace else more friendly to shills.
I doubt it.
If only you knew how to use google then perhaps you would be informed.
Yes, the prototype is grossly inefficient. And yes, the final product will also be grossly inefficient. But for very small devices like watches, it makes perfect sense. You're only going to need to deliver small wattage to them anyway.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
> X Watt of energy
Tell us more about your ignorance.
What is gp an acronym for?
You live in some sort of fantasy world if you think APL *WILL* act responsibly, even if they were aware of the situation.
No other company is makes huge margins and: misleads UK citizens about LTE. Yes, it had LTE... US band LTE, so it wouldn't work inside the UK? Price fixing e-books?
There's corporate greed, then there's the standard APL sets...
If you choose to buy i devices exclusively, of course not.
Also, how is it "destructive" to the batteries? It's electricity - charging is charging regardless of where it comes from...
I suspect you'll jump on the bandwagon when a certain company goes all in.
I wouldn't say I've been *missing* it, Bob...
Bark less. Wag more.
So:
2 W * (1/24) * 3e8 = 25 MW
That's an extra gas turbine, small wind farm, or similar, just to compensate for the losses of chargers, and not taking into account the fact that the peak power draw going to loss could be as high as 600 MW, or almost a fission-plant's worth.
Or, we could all not be lazy and just plug the damn things in.
Yes, I hate all of Apple's proprietary standards. Like how they used AAC for their iTunes store, or mini-DisplayPort for the video connectors. And then they used Thunderbolt. Oh, and now they're using USB Type-C ports.
If you're confused as to why I grouped USB Type-C ports in there, it's because I was being sarcastic. Contrary to popular belief, none of those things that I listed are Apple proprietary technology. AAC does not stand for "Apple Audio Codec", and it's a standard put out by the same people who put out the MP3 standard, but actually has had fewer patent issues. Mini-DisplayPort was created by Apple, but the turned it into an open standard that is completely free to use, with no patent issues. Thunderbolt is a standard that Intel created, though supposedly Apple helped develop it. It's being used on lots of non-Apple hardware.
I guess the MagSafe port is proprietary. It's also really good, and they were smart to develop it. iPhones and iPads have the Lightning port, which was apparently used because they found the specs for the current USB micro connectors to be insufficient. There have been some rumors that Apple helped develop the USB Type-C ports because they wanted a replacement for USB's current micro connectors that would be usable in their products. Their wireless communications are all WiFi and Bluetooth. A lot of their software is based on open-sourced software.
Yes, obviously not all of their software is open source, and they aren't producing commodity hardware. However, it doesn't really make sense to imply that they refuse to follow standards and instead create more expensive non-compatible alternatives.
This is what has happened again and again. If it was limited to Apple fanboys it might be tolerable, but the mainstream media insists on parroting the view that Steve Jobs invented things that trailblazers were doing 5+ years before.
I especially loved the fallout from the iPhone 1 vs. Android third party application situation with the full on meme-generating commerical blitz--"There's an app for that!" Yes, there's an app for that. Because competition from Android forced you to abandon some of your draconian 'Apple experience' enhancing lock-downs.
And, of course, 3G simply didn't exist until the iPhone 3G came along.
Meh. It depends on what you mean by "a lot". I think we're better off pushing for better heating/cooling solutions and more fuel efficient cars than insisting consumers screw around with micro usb cables to save a handful of watt-hours per year.
Also, I love how you think inductively charging your wireless toothbrush is "sensible" but making it easier to keep a life-saving device like a cell phone fully charged is, apparently, not.
Your phone disconnects from the charger and runs off battery once it's charged? I'd assume, then, that it reconnects once it's not fully charged anymore (e.g. immediately)? How many charge cycles is that per hour? DERP. It keep drawing power once it's done charging the battery, to run the phone, so it isn't wasting charge cycles by discharging and recharging the battery. Do you even own a power meter?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
20W output at 66% full load efficiency
Some transformers can have high efficiency when running at light loads - but that means you just paid extra for an oversized transformer. In general, copper losses go up with the square of load current and iron (core) losses go up with the square of voltage. Of course a 30MW transformer will be designed for higher efficiencies - no one wants to pay for 10MW of losses or deal with all that heat.
Worldwide domestic electricity consumption is about 2e16
Your calculation of waste is 2.5e7
There are other electric energy inefficiencies (such as your "always on" TV or computer) that waste much more energy to worry about. This is not even a rounding error.
In personal terms: My solar panels generate about 25 kWh per day... that should cover the 2Wh I waste charging my phone each day.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
All of my family phones and tablets (about 5 at last count) have wireless charging. I won't buy a phone without that capability. It's just so much more convenient than fumbling with a connector.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
wireless charging mats are gimmicky anyways.
The device still has to be right on top of the mat, and they never work quite as well as wires. Like plugging in a cable is that much harder anyways. The mat still has to be plugged in so it's not like you can charge and walk around or anything.
You must not know any of them. I do, they exist, and they behave as described. Not every Apple user is like that (I'm certainly not, I own a MacBook Pro and I love it, but have no interest in pretty much anything else Apple makes), but those people do exist and they're vocal enough that they appear to be the majority, whether they are or not.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Woha, buddy, I hate fanboys as much as the next guy but maybe you need to go look in the mirror. This you actually posted a reasoned argument, a sign of sentient though, not fanboyism. Or is sentient thought what you take issue with?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
They initially used AAC with proprietary FairPlay DRM. It's only fair to mention that.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
You and people like you are a big part of the reason a lot of us can't stand the whole Apple universe. Isn't there some other cult you could join where your zeal would be better spent? You're spattering all over this discussion. It's patently obvious you're not just a paid shill, you're just mentally ill in the same way as a rabid Scientologist. Go away. Really.
If you can't stand the whole Apple Universe, then why do you keep posting to Apple-oriented articles?
Can't you just ignore them? I'm sure there are plenty of people that just ignore you.
Your definition of evil and mine are very different. In fact, you degrade the term to the point of making it meaningless.
Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
You live in some sort of fantasy world if you think APL *WILL* act responsibly, even if they were aware of the situation.
No other company is makes huge margins and: misleads UK citizens about LTE. Yes, it had LTE... US band LTE, so it wouldn't work inside the UK? Price fixing e-books?
There's corporate greed, then there's the standard APL sets...
Overall, they have a better record of responsibility than most, and this thread was about a news story that Apple didn't even CREATE.
Nice strawman.
You must not know any of them. I do, they exist, and they behave as described. Not every Apple user is like that (I'm certainly not, I own a MacBook Pro and I love it, but have no interest in pretty much anything else Apple makes), but those people do exist and they're vocal enough that they appear to be the majority, whether they are or not.
I am a huge Apple fan; I know the difference between their products because I am forced to use other brands at work, and from time to time elsewhere. But don't attempt to paint all Apple fans as fanbois. You're right, I don't know any of those, and have many, many friends that USED to use other brands, until their first Apple product...
And if you really go around analyzing the posts on Slashdot, what you will find is mostly others ANTICIPATING Apple knee-jerk fanboyism, with zero actual "blind adulation". Think about it.
I post in a lot of Apple threads here; but pretty much always to "correct the record" using facts, not opinion. Like the post I just answered elsewhere to this article, where the person accused Apple of using a proprietary connector with USB-C, even after the article about the new Pixel Chomebook appeared on Slashdot!!!
But don't attempt to paint all Apple fans as fanbois.
To be fair, I did say
Not every Apple user is like that
so I'm not sure WTF you're talking about.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Also, I love how you think inductively charging your wireless toothbrush is "sensible" but making it easier to keep a life-saving device like a cell phone fully charged is, apparently, not.
Screwing around with micro-usb is a lot more practical when you don't have to worry about a wet environment. Of course, there are also waterproof and otherwise more rugged phones, so inductive charging makes more sense for them.
Also, in such a comparison, you need to consider how many lives are actually saved by _easier_ charging -- somehow most people manage to keep their phones charged with old-fashioned connectors, and only a tiny fraction of all phone usage is related to saving lives. Of course you'll get a non-zero number; now compare that to infections, heart disease etc. caused by not keeping your teeth healthy.
On a more general note, I think charging should be as simple as possible, not just for the user, but on a technical level to keep things more reliable (hence saving more lives). A lot of phones manage to screw up this idea even with wired connections: for example, you cannot run a phone off a charger alone, without a battery.
I imagine wireless charging hardware is not just a dumb induction loop, and some device identification/negotiation needs to take place first. For example, leaving metallic objects on the charging pad might be hilarious without such considerations. This IMHO is needlessly complicated for something that should be simple and reliable. At least, the extra comms takes up some power, making the efficiency even worse.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Wow, your life is seriously fucking tough
grand parent
it relates to the post that that the post that this is a reply to replied to.
I was mostly being sarcastic - there are many more things far more evil than Apple and their influence on culture.
However, I would point out that falseness / untruth / lies / misinformation is indeed evil, in my opinion. Such things are used to control people without their realizing, and are the opposite of truth / honesty / genuine intellectual pursuit of knowledge. That is, then, a degree of evil - though not on par with murder, for example.
William George
I think that parent's point is reasonable. They are inefficient and there's only so much one can do to overcome the laws of physics. You can't just sweep the "small wattage" under the rug as if it's not an issue. Even taking the generous rating of 20% listed in parent's link and assuming same time charging as wired, that means a device that needs 10 wired watts will consume 50 watts to charge via wireless. That's on the order of an incandescent light. Multiply that by the number of phones in the world and we have the same perfect storm of energy waste that has led to us replacing all of our incandescent bulbs with more efficient technologies.
Simple inductive charging (which looks like what you're talking about when you say "wireless" in your comment) is mainstream.
Wireless charging has been around for electric tooth brushes for at least 5 years now, maybe 10. It's been so long I won't even bother to give names.
Wireless charging for cosmetic electronics like the the Claresonic face brush has been around for at least 5 years.
Wireless charging for sex toys has been around for 3-5 years, for an example see the Wee-Vibe.
Wireless charging for electric cars has been around for 2-3 years as well. I believe Tesla does it, and the Nissan Leaf got it in 2013, among others.
It sounds to me like you're not buying the right category of devices.
I saw somewhere that the cost of charging your phone for a year is about $0.50. I don't think we're going to deplete world energy reserves using less efficient phone chargers.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
All wireless chargers require a cord that connects to mains which is why it's a bit of a stupid concept. It does eliminate the need to precisely connect charging cables but usually at the expense of space that could be used for larger batteries.
Other than the loose cable "problem" (which most people solve with a bit of tape, a binder clip, or other mechanism including $10 "solutions" that basically hold the end down), the problem is you're complaining about micro USB, a horrendous connector.
Sorry, this is an Apple article - and the Lightning connector is much nicer to deal with. If you wonder why Apple still made their own connector over using micro USB, think why did the USB Type C connector was invented.
Everyone blasts Apple on their proprietary connectors. Yet there are valid reasons why they exist - just because something is standard doesn't mean it doesn't suck (like micro USB).
Yeah, but that's simply inductive charging, basically placing the secondary coil inside or very close to the primary. You still need to have the device in an exact position very close or in the charger for it to work. At that point it doesn't matter whether or not the wires are touching, it's actually more efficient to have the wires touching (and having a charger that is fully reversible and magnetically snaps is optimal at that point).
What I've understood as wireless charging tech has been in concept for years but not yet fully worked out is a wireless charging mat or area where you simply put down your device (eg. on your night stand) and it starts charging. The problem with that is position, area, air gap etc; the tech exists already but they are woefully inefficient and thus put a big strain on the larger batteries.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com