Apple Developing Wireless Charging For Mobile Devices (thestack.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Apple is currently working with partners in the US and Asia to develop wireless charging for iPhone and iPad. Mobile devices with wireless charging capabilities could be released as soon as next year. Apple has not released the specific details on the range that could be available, but as far back as 2010, Apple applied for a patent to use an iMac as a wireless charging hub for distances of 1 meter. In 2014 it applied for a patent on specialized housing for a mobile device with an integrated RF antenna, which would also allow for wireless charging by helping to eliminate the problem of metallic interference with charging signals. Apple would apparently be building on these ideas to create a new iPhone or iPad that could charge further away from the hub, while continuing to be used.

Comments

Re:Why this is special

[George_Ou]

WiTricity has been demoing the only feasible technology (resonant inductive power transfer) since 2009. They can actually reach out a few feet without worrying about getting blocked by clothing or body parts or orientation of the receiver. But the media has forgotten them in favor of utterly unworkable solutions like Ultrasonic Power Transfer which can't go through objects and require exact receiver orientation and alignment to work. https://www.ted.com/talks/eric...

The challenge is whether WiTricity can deliver useful range range and sufficiently shrink the receivers to be thin enough to be in a smartphone. Useful range is likely a few feet which means it's much shorter than a typical cable. We're also looking at a minimum of 50% losses which might be acceptable for a smartphone, but we know there are plenty of people who have no qualms charging their 400 watt HDTV or 40000 watt car like this.

The real revolution we're seeing in smartphone charging is USB-C with a higher Power Deliver profile. Next generation Samsung phones coming out can be charged in around 20 minutes which means a charge rate of 3C. Batteries can be pushed up to 5C to get charge times times down to 12 minutes which means 6 minutes can fill up most semi-discharged smartphones. Fast charging is far more useful than being stuck in a 3-foot area for 2 hours waiting for the phone to fill up.

Re:been done

[dgatwood]

That's one thing that's bugging me with all these wireless charging ideas. I don't care which company makes it, wasting energy for the sake of not having to connect a wire is the perfect example of "First world problem".

Agreed. Apple spent the last decade making their technology more and more energy efficient. This seems like it is a step straight backwards. You still have to have a device plugged into your wall with a cable up to some sort of charging plate, so (ignoring any theoretical differences in ease of waterproofing) the sole difference between wireless charging and wired charging from a user's perspective is saving about two seconds when you get home at night, and half a second to unplug it in the morning. Even if you're only losing one or two percent, if every device did this, it would add up to real money.

I don't buy the Qi folks' argument that it makes it easier to keep it on the charger all the time, so people will do so. Apart from technology workers who sit at a desk all day, that isn't very practical. People don't leave their phone off the charger all day because it is inconvenient to plug in a cable. They leave their phone off the charger all day because they want to always have it with them, and it is too much hassle even without having to plug it in. And when you factor in the percentage of iPhone users who keep their phone in a case (and thus would get dramatically worse transfer efficiency), the entire concept seems borderline insane.

Now if you told me they were going to bundle a wireless charging station for the Apple TV remote—a device that you pick up several times an hour while in use, that you don't put in a case to protect it, and that you want to always be able to grab without worrying about whether it is charged—that would make a lot of sense. But a cell phone? It just seems like a frivolous waste of power, not to mention space inside the device. And with people already complaining about inadequate battery life, with entire industries springing up to provide pre-charged external battery packs at airports, and with even Apple getting into the external battery pack market, wasting space inside the device for a charging feature that saves at most a few seconds per day seems like just about the dumbest idea I've ever heard, with the possible exception of the rumor that they're going to remove the headphone jack....

Then again, Apple's whole charging story is making less and less sense with every passing year. My parents recently bought one of the new Apple TV models, and we were shocked when we realized that although they provide a lightning cable to charge the remote control, they didn't bother to include a USB port on the device to plug that cable into. So unless you have some other device to use as a charger, when you get an Apple TV in the mail, the very first thing you have to do is go out to the store and drop another twenty bucks on a charger that Apple should have provided as part of the device for a unit cost of maybe five cents....