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.'"
Its a feature, combination wireless charger & hot plate.
Seriously, why buy a Pixel?
Only android device you will get regular updates from
I mean they glued wear items (ie. the battery) into the phone making it difficult to replace, so it was never really an option for me anyway.
Still, what a poor, customer-hostile decision. Hopefully the Pixel 3 fails in the marketplace.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
I just checked... yep, Google removed "don't be evil" from it's code of conduct back in May!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Perfect for that college student that's not allowed to have a hot plate in their dorm room!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
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.
Google want$ to provide quick charging only from companie$ that give them obei$ance.
Obeisance?
And the Android, never flitting, still is shitting, still is shitting
On the grim carcass of RIM stuck behind my old shelf drawer;
And his pixels have all the seeming of a demon’s that is dreaming,
And the LED-light o’er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;
And my phone from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor
Shall be updated-nevermore!
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).
But why do 5W Qi and 10W proprietary when most other phones do 5W Qi and 10W Qi?
Qi already goes up to 15W (though I'd imagine there are thermal concerns), so why do we need a proprietary Google standard for 10W when everybody else is just using 10W Qi pads?
So charging at 10W means 10W of heat in the charger.
The way energy conservation laws go, charging at a 10W rate means that the generated heat will be at the level of (H - 10W), where H is the total wattage sent to the charger. So for example if 12W are being sent to the charger and 10W of that is being used to charge, the heat will be 2W worth.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
... so why do we need a proprietary Google standard for 10W when everybody else is just using 10W Qi pads?
Because some bright product manager is banking on their model of the market that predicts a higher overall profit to Google via original hardware sales and proprietary protocol licensing.
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.
USB-PD is proprietary? Is that why I can use an Apple 87W USB charger from a MacBook to charge my Dell XPS 15?
Yeah, that sounds horribly proprietary, and is the worst kind of Vendor lock-in.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
I want to know what Apple's unshipped wireless charging device issues has to do with Google putting vendor lock-in proprietary DRM-esque garbage in their phones and chargers, screwing their customers and their accessory makers at the same time.
Misdirection much?
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
I had the same experience and same conclusion.
I believe the official QI standard supports 5W, 7.5W and 10W. It actually goes as far as 120W IIRC but that's not relevant here.
Same expectation and experience with the Nexus 5.
Slightly different conclusion though: Don't buy *expensive* Android phone models as they are likely to be throwaway devices security-wise in two years.
BTW, went Motorola. Happy. Much better value than Pixel.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
with this "Made for Google" program, they are getting more and more like Microsoft of old
"The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
Having worked with wireless charging technology, I am not surprised. Despite a certain subset of consumers and manufacturers being in love with it, it's actually a pretty shitty way of delivering power. The limitations are mostly thermal. Sure: you can get do >5W charging, but all the other metal content of the phone is heating up, too, including the battery. Batteries charging while hot will have reduced lifespan or, at worse, a higher chance of catastrophic failure (read: fire).
The analogy I use is trying to fill a water bottle in the shower. It's really slow, much slower than sticking the same bottle under the tap, and you're going to get soaked in the process. You might be able to speed things along by holding the bottle closer to the spray, or using a funnel to capture more water, but you're still getting wet. Oh, and your water bill goes up, because most of it just goes down the drain.
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.
Ironically, Apple seems to be the one supporting > 5 W Qi charging here, as the iPhones will do up to 7.5 W from any Qi charger that supports that target.
... Afraid to compete because they are unable to compete without a self-granted advantage.
I don't get your point.
Apple may be less evil then old Microsoft. But that doesn't mean Apple isn't evil.
Besides "Boycotting" Apple because Apple isn't giving you the services you wan't or need, isn't boycotting them. Boycotting is putting yourself in a disadvantage to bring up a point.
I don't like squash, so I don't buy it. I am not boycotting squash, I just don't like it.
Now I like bacon, but say there is something that I feel strongly against in the Bacon Industry I would stop eating bacon, until they fixed it. Then I would happily begin eating it again.
You don't like Apple products, so you never bought them. if Apple changes its business practices you still will not buy from them... You are not boycotting, you just not a customer.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.