Slashdot Mirror
Why the Google Pixel 3 Charges Faster On a Pixel Stand Than Other Wireless Chargers (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Google's Pixel 3 smartphone is shipping out to the masses, and people hoping to take advantage of the new Qi wireless charging capabilities have run into a big surprise. For some unexplained reason, Google is locking out third-party Qi chargers from reaching the highest charging speeds on the Pixel 3. Third-party chargers are capped to a pokey 5W charging speed. If you want 10 watts of wireless charging, Google hopes you will invest in its outrageously priced Pixel Stand, which is $79.
Android Police reports that a reader purchased an Anker wireless charger for their Pixel 3, and, after noticing the slow charging speed, this person contacted the company. Anker confirmed that something screwy was going on with Google's charging support, saying "Pixel sets a limitation for third-party charging accessories and we are afraid that even our fast wireless charger can only provide 5W for these 2x devices." Normally we would chalk this up to some kind of bug, but apparently Google told Android Police that this was on purpose. The site doesn't have a direct quote, but it writes that, after reaching out to Google PR, it was "told that the Pixel 3 would charge at 10W on the Pixel Stand [and that] due to a 'secure handshake' being established that third-party chargers would indeed be limited to 5W." In an update, Google said the reason has to do with the "proprietary wireless charging technology" it has via its Pixel Stand and other select wireless chargers. The Pixel 3 only supports 5W Qi charging; "Google's 10W proprietary wireless charging technology" is what will allow the phone to charge at faster speeds.
"Google says it is 'certifying' chargers for the Pixel 3 via the 'Made for Google' program and pointed us to one such device, a Belkin charger called the 'Boost Up Wireless Charging Pad 10W for Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL,'" reports Ars Technica. "Belkin's description is very enlightening, saying 'Made with the Google Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL in mind, this wireless charging pad uses Google's 10W proprietary wireless charging technology. It's certified for Pixel, so you know that the BOOST UP Wireless Charging pad has been made specifically for your Pixel 3 and meets Google's high product standards.'"
Android Police reports that a reader purchased an Anker wireless charger for their Pixel 3, and, after noticing the slow charging speed, this person contacted the company. Anker confirmed that something screwy was going on with Google's charging support, saying "Pixel sets a limitation for third-party charging accessories and we are afraid that even our fast wireless charger can only provide 5W for these 2x devices." Normally we would chalk this up to some kind of bug, but apparently Google told Android Police that this was on purpose. The site doesn't have a direct quote, but it writes that, after reaching out to Google PR, it was "told that the Pixel 3 would charge at 10W on the Pixel Stand [and that] due to a 'secure handshake' being established that third-party chargers would indeed be limited to 5W." In an update, Google said the reason has to do with the "proprietary wireless charging technology" it has via its Pixel Stand and other select wireless chargers. The Pixel 3 only supports 5W Qi charging; "Google's 10W proprietary wireless charging technology" is what will allow the phone to charge at faster speeds.
"Google says it is 'certifying' chargers for the Pixel 3 via the 'Made for Google' program and pointed us to one such device, a Belkin charger called the 'Boost Up Wireless Charging Pad 10W for Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL,'" reports Ars Technica. "Belkin's description is very enlightening, saying 'Made with the Google Pixel 3 and Pixel 3 XL in mind, this wireless charging pad uses Google's 10W proprietary wireless charging technology. It's certified for Pixel, so you know that the BOOST UP Wireless Charging pad has been made specifically for your Pixel 3 and meets Google's high product standards.'"
It's so they can charge you MORE for the faster charger. DUH I prefer slow charging anyway. Typically safer charges are when you slow charge. And it typically has less chemical impact on the battery life.
To be fair, there's a pretty big difference here.
1) qualcomm's quick charge actually violated the USB spec. Their quick charge still used USB cables to provide power. micro-usb wasn't designed to handshake or negotiate the cable's capabilities to the charger and the phone. The usb cable standard did NOT allow for quickcharge power draw. That actually IS dangerous.
2) Google's 10w proprietary standard is negotiated, and there's no intermediate medium (unless you count the air molecules between the charger and the device, and I'm pretty sure there's no specification defining their behavior)
By no standard definition is usb-pd proprietary. It's no more proprietary than USB is (so if you consider USB proprietary, well fine, here's some more tin foil).
Any fast charge capable (10W) wireless charger works just fine with an iPhone.
Google is being worse than Apple in this case.
Just about any fast charge capable wireless charger from Anker, Samsung, Belkin, Mophie, Logitech, etc. works just fine with an iPhone.
Even a no-name-brand fast wireless charger will charge an iPhone 8 and X at 7.5w, and iPhone XS and XR at 10w
Google updated my Nexus 4 for two years then said fuck you. I said, never again Google hardware.
Sure, many vendors are even worse, but this is supposed to be Google demonstrating how to do it right. Very much unimpressed.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Isn't that why Barsteward compared it to "Microsoft of old"
Apple has always been big into proprietary Apple only (for the last 40 years). This is why Apple even though it is the world biggest company, doesn't have much corporate/business presence, for the large part because of Apple proprietary nature Apples standards and protocols rarely make it to the general use.
Compare to Microsoft 20 years ago. The browser war was full on, with the attempt to take control of the internet. and the Embrace, Extend, Extinguish approach. Microsoft wasn't making incompatible tools, that only worked with Microsoft. They made tools that worked with the standards, then they added Microsoft only features to them, in hope where their feature will over power the original use. For the browser war of the late 1990's Microsoft won, luckily they had failed their final objectives. What Microsoft really wanted with the browser war was.
1. Become the dominate browser [Embrace] (they got this)
2. Have web developers make sure IE was compatible first (they got this)
3. Add IE only features [Extend] such as Active X (they got this)
4. Have Active X become the primary way to access a website (This was limited to business apps)
5. Drop HTML and HTTP [Extinguish] and fully make Active X technology the dominate way of using the internet (this failed)
What happened with this plan? Well primarily Microsoft didn't account for security and for the individual when asked a question they will answer "Yes" Thus turning Active X the primary deployment method of Malware. Causing some major security problems in 2002-2004 which people actually decided to either switch to Firefox (Which at the time was the small, light, and fast browser) that supported internet standards better then IE did, or actually got Sick of PC's and moved to Mac's which used the Safari browser (Webkit based). This but a dent in Active X development, and more focus on DHTML. That and Microsoft got so delayed in making the next version of Windows and IE. That XP and IE 6 became outdated.
Apple isn't a saint, but you more or less know what you are going to expect with Apple. Microsoft of old was much more sneaky and underhanded.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.