Slashdot Mirror
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.
I remember seeing that experiment in high school with a Tesla coil powering a tube light without having to touch it. Aren't there health concerns with that much electricity in the air though?
Another factor: How efficient is it - I predict a considerable transmission loss too, and in this era of energy saving dictates it might be a bad idea.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
INNOVATION
For those who'll say "it's been done before:" no, not like this.
Current wireless charging amounts to dropping your device on a pad. You can't grab your device to use it (since you'll break the power link), and of course this limits just where your device can sit.
The Slashdot post (and the source link) undersells the story. Here, Apple would have wireless charging that doesn't depend on resting the device on a contact pad -- you'd just have to get within range of the charger. Imagine plunking down your iPhone anywhere on your desk and knowing that it'll top up. This kind of technology has been discussed for a while, but hasn't really been implemented on a practical level.
It's an old idea, expanded on greatly by Robert Heinlein in "Waldo", in which the whole world was powered wireless, including spaceships.
It's telling how much Edison and Westinghouse buried Tesla's work for a century. God, they hated that man.
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".
Engineers: Hey everyone, we figured out a way to save 5% of our energy!
Tech companies: Great, because all our new devices waste over 50% of the energy they use every day!
I think it will be good because ive yet to see a non pad type wireless charger in the wild. However I worry about apples rabid lawyers who will probbably sue anyone who try's to make anything similar.
Anyone remember the magsafe connectors? Very few other companies are using similar connections even today.
Decent magsafe type headphone and power connectors for other devices are just now starting to come out this year and I've yet to see any of those in person either.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
Definitely get a pair of wireless headphones - no more cables for the dog to trip over, or to get pulled out when there's a sudden emergency downstairs. But the only problem is charging via USB.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
It will be incompatible with everything else on the market and the drones will hail Apple as the first one to bring it to market, oh and it will be inefficient as fark and make peoples metal dental work buzz.
It will be 5% efficient, the other 95% will be lost to the reality distortion field.
sure its been done, but just like micro USB, you cant expect apple to use those common technologies. they have to have their own!!!
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
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....
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Even the most expensive pair can't hold a hand to a set of affordable top of the line headphones. That's the thing, you can spend $500 on an okay set of wireless headphones, or you can spend $500 on about the best headphones money can buy. You're making compromises regardless of how much money you spend.
I have both types. But I only use the wireless set for watching TV at night.
The difference here is that Apple's purported solution requires no physical contact with the device. No mat, no pad, just use your device anywhere within the range of the charger and it'll charge wirelessly, over-the-air.
They certainly didn't invent it, and it isn't innovative at this point, but if they're the first ones to put it into widespread use, they'll likely reap a lot of well-deserved credit in the media.