I have an HTC DNA that came with wireless charging capability and I find it very convenient to use. One thing I didn't realize at first is that the wireless charging works through the case I have on it. I have also started seeing wireless charging pads at Airports and other areas which is a great way to get a power boost without having to carry a cable around.
However, I will admit, a dock is also a reasonable solution. Although I still think wireless charging is more convenient/better. Plus, for a dock to work, there has to be a hole in your case, if you use one, which in theory reduces protection.
That being said, I don't think I would ever add wireless charging via a case if my phone didn't come with the feature built-in. To be really useful, it really has to be built-in to the phone.
For me, wireless charging is one of those features that is nice to have but not a deal breaker when deciding on a phone.
I have an HTC DNA that came with wireless charging capability and I find it very convenient to use. One thing I didn't realize at first is that the wireless charging works through the case I have on it. I have also started seeing wireless charging pads at Airports and other areas which is a great way to get a power boost without having to carry a cable around.
However, I will admit, a dock is also a reasonable solution. Although I still think wireless charging is more convenient/better. Plus, for a dock to work, there has to be a hole in your case, if you use one, which in theory reduces protection.
That being said, I don't think I would ever add wireless charging via a case if my phone didn't come with the feature built-in. To be really useful, it really has to be built-in to the phone.
For me, wireless charging is one of those features that is nice to have but not a deal breaker when deciding on a phone.
-kpluck
Apple could use a hybrid design between a dock and wireless charging. The phone could be placed upright in the dock as usual but instead of a Lightning connector in the base of the dock it just sets in shallow cavity leaning against the backing plate that introduces the charge.
To do that the transmitter needs to be extremely powerful. Not to mention anything made of similar metal within that area will also likely be heated and/or catch fire.
Yeah, not really. All tests show otherwise.
Originally Posted by bonobob
And never mind the efficiency (or lack thereof) of an inductive charging device. Lots of energy will just be broadcast out to dissipate unused in the environment.
Radio and TV do that; you don’t see anyone whining about them.
Radio and TV do that; you don’t see anyone whining about them.
[/quote]
Transmitting a radio signal and transmitting power for a device are very different types of wireless transmissions. it would be great if your WiFi router could safely power your iDevices and Macs but we're simply not there and may never be in our lifetimes.
it would be great if your WiFi router could safely power your iDevices and Macs but we're simply not there and may never be in our lifetimes.
Hmm. What am I misunderstanding here, then?
They said the same thing about room temperature superconductors, too. Now we’ve come up with one that should superconduct at 212F! Huddler won’t let me type the degrees symbol.
They said the same thing about room temperature superconductors, too. Now we’ve come up with one that should superconduct at 212F! Huddler won’t let me type the degrees symbol.
What I'm seeing is a very large device that creates an extremely shortrange magnetic field that appears to be directional (and my limited knowledge of magnetic fields would say it's bi-directional to the front and back of the square transmitter). Nothing in that video shows that anything has been solved that would all wireless power to work in the same longrnge, omni-directional way as radio and TV broadcasts.
Note that's we've seen this before with Nikoli Tesla, who is breifly mentioned in the video; this just looks like a very minor advancement due to general advancements in technology that makes powering a cellphone and TV look more impressive.
Some questions that come to mind:
What is the power needed for a 60W lightbulb compared to that small LCD TV and a cellphone?
How much power was being pushed through the transmitter to make it work?
How much energy was lost due to it being wireless over being wired?
Does the transmitter not transmit power when the TV is off, the cellphone is full, or there is nothing in its path, the same way that PSUs for devices will not keep using power when there is nothing to power?
I think the last two are especially important for a company like Apple. Even if they had a way to increase the field to fit the WiFi range, make it fit inside a router, keep the field from causing any interference, get FCC approval (i.e.: no health risks), find a way to have it direct various levels of power to specific devices in relation to their location on a Cartesian coordinate system with the power device being (0,0,0) they still need to have the power efficiency be excellent and devices talk back to the main device to say, "Hey, I'm full."
That's why I think it's more likely we'll see something that 1) requires the item to rest against it so the magnetic field is very small, and 2) be an item, like a wearable computer, that has a very, very small battery.
Radio and TV do that; you don’t see anyone whining about them.
[/quote]
Transmitting a radio signal and transmitting power for a device are very different types of wireless transmissions. it would be great if your WiFi router could safely power your iDevices and Macs but we're simply not there and may never be in our lifetimes.
These confusions always seem to arise when wireless power transmission gets discussed. Virtually all proposed solutions are now based on near-field resonant coupling which, unlike signal transmission, suffers little from radiative losses and does not pose a health hazard. The near-field aspect does limit the effective range to substantially less than one wavelength; as the separation increases the transfer rate drops but mostly not to radiative loss, which remains low.
It depends on what you're changing. I'd say that wireless charging for a notebook would have more downsides than upsides with the known state of the art, but with a wrist worn device that has an extremely small battery I'd say it could possibly have more upsides. For a phone, I also think it could bring more upsides but I also think how inductive charging is achieved still needs to be tweaked to make it as convenient as TouchID is to unlocking your phone quickly.
It works quite well for phones, IMHO. At least for me.
I'm habitual person, I usually put phone on same spot over night (when at home, of course).
So right now, I have charging pad there. It saves the spot for the phone (otherwise my wife might decide to put something else there).
It is reasonably efficient - if I recall correctly, Lumia 920 will fully charge through cable in something like 2:15, and from pad in something like 2:45.
Charger is "smart", it will not turn on for any incompatible object dropped on it. It detects chargeable device somehow. Also in case of Lumia phone, it will also turn charger off when phone is fully charged. I've read somewhere that it will not turn charging back on rigt after device's battery starts discharging, story was that it will let charge drop 5 or 10% before it starts charging again. I cannot confirm that, but in my scenario - putting phone on pad before going to sleep, when I pick it up in the morning it is not warm and charger light is off, meaning it wasn't charging at least some time before I take it.
It is not something one can't live without, but it is nicely convenient. Pad is easy to locate in the dark, for example. Since I'm usually going to bed after my other half, I don't have to turn lights and risk waking her up. You can do it single-handed (makes it easier to grab phone from the night table, do something and drop it back to keep charging). Etc etc.
Apple could use a hybrid design between a dock and wireless charging. The phone could be placed upright in the dock as usual but instead of a Lightning connector in the base of the dock it just sets in shallow cavity leaning against the backing plate that introduces the charge.
They said the same thing about room temperature superconductors, too. Now we’ve come up with one that should superconduct at 212F! Huddler won’t let me type the degrees symbol.
It's possible that at some point wall outlets will go the way of corded telephones and land lines in general, but right now it remains horribly inefficient. That's basically what I hate about it. I have a tendency to dislike things that are significantly less efficient than what they replace for the purpose of minor convenience. For what it's worth, I hate excessive packaging too, disposable coffee cups, etc. There are many things I try to avoid. Inductive charging is just particularly bad due to the number of devices it could spread across before it's really ready. I don't mean in regards to Apple specifically, basically any electronics company.
I was picturing something more elegant but essentially yes.
My understanding is that charging pad must have substantial surface area to achieve efficient charging, so you will not see anything petite like standard iPhone dock... not with current technology, at least.
My understanding is that charging pad must have substantial surface area to achieve efficient charging, so you will not see anything petite like standard iPhone dock... not with current technology, at least.
I'm fine with a backing plate and my original comment even suggested one. I just think the Nokia charging dock is ugly. I'd like to see something that doesn't look like multiple units and looks good by itself.
While devices that can charge without the need for power connectors sounds great - and precisely the sort of feature Apple would drool over - the magic would fail the moment you need to charge the device in your car, at the office or anywhere else away from home. You will still need power connectors until/unless some standardized wireless charging technology becomes ubiquitous.
For the car just get a phone holder that supports wireless charging, they are available, and they work well.
I'm fine with a backing plate and my original comment even suggested one. I just think the Nokia charging dock is ugly. I'd like to see something that doesn't look like multiple units and looks good by itself.
Inductive charging is a solution in search of a problem.
There's not much convenience in wireless charging so long as it requires 1) a charging pad that takes up precious desktop/table space and 2) a power cord for the charging pad. If you must have something plugged into your computer and that something must take up space on your desk for the device to charge on - well you've just described a charging dock, with the only convenience being the ability to place the device on top of the charger instead of sliding it into a cradle. Not exactly a showstopper feature.
For a wireless charging solution to truly make sense, it would have to be seamless and invisible. One possibility is that the technology becomes so ubiquitous and inexpensive that it can be built into a variety of furniture. A second possibility is that the technology advances to the point where a single power transmitter in the home can be designed to charge devices several feet away in a truly wirelessly fashion without the need for a charging pad or station (not sure if the physics support this.)
At the moment, though, everyone's just jumping on a technology that sounds really cool without really providing any convenience for the user. I suspect this is a primary reason why Apple has yet to implement the feature in any of their products.
When I think of having a wireless charging station, I immediately think of one use case, which isn't the "computer connected" scenario that you described. I wouldn't mind having a charging pad on my nightstand, where I can just lay my iPhone down as I crawl into bed and pick it up fully charged when I roll back out of it. Seems convenient enough to me, and in my opinion is preferable to having a lightning cord dangling there, not to mention the "tetheredness" of the phone itself should I need to access it in the middle of the night. If it didn't cost an arm and a leg, I would be interested. But I won't buy one yet, because the two choices above either involve losing access to my lightning port or attaching a special case that seems unappealing. So I'm not a buyer yet.
Inductive charging is a solution in search of a problem.
The real "problem" is that Apple does not have wireless charging in its own devices. As soon as Apple introduces iPhones with wireless charging, even if it only works with Apple branded chargers, all the dismissals of this feature will suddenly disappear.
Apple will not make a video iPod. Nobody cares about a video iPod.
Apple should not allow third parties to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native iPhone applications.
Comments
However, I will admit, a dock is also a reasonable solution. Although I still think wireless charging is more convenient/better. Plus, for a dock to work, there has to be a hole in your case, if you use one, which in theory reduces protection.
That being said, I don't think I would ever add wireless charging via a case if my phone didn't come with the feature built-in. To be really useful, it really has to be built-in to the phone.
For me, wireless charging is one of those features that is nice to have but not a deal breaker when deciding on a phone.
-kpluck
Apple could use a hybrid design between a dock and wireless charging. The phone could be placed upright in the dock as usual but instead of a Lightning connector in the base of the dock it just sets in shallow cavity leaning against the backing plate that introduces the charge.
You don't own an iPhone. The battery is fine but I still need to charge it daily.
You could have said the same thing about touchID.
I've owned an iPhone, an iPhone 3GS, an iPhone 4S, an iPhone 5, and now own an iPhone 5S. So, sorry to burst your bubble on that one.
In the past couple of years I haven't been using my phone nearly as much as I used to. I rarely need to charge it every day.
Yeah, not really. All tests show otherwise.
Radio and TV do that; you don’t see anyone whining about them.
Radio and TV do that; you don’t see anyone whining about them.
[/quote]
Transmitting a radio signal and transmitting power for a device are very different types of wireless transmissions. it would be great if your WiFi router could safely power your iDevices and Macs but we're simply not there and may never be in our lifetimes.
Hmm. What am I misunderstanding here, then?
They said the same thing about room temperature superconductors, too. Now we’ve come up with one that should superconduct at 212F! Huddler won’t let me type the degrees symbol.
What I'm seeing is a very large device that creates an extremely shortrange magnetic field that appears to be directional (and my limited knowledge of magnetic fields would say it's bi-directional to the front and back of the square transmitter). Nothing in that video shows that anything has been solved that would all wireless power to work in the same longrnge, omni-directional way as radio and TV broadcasts.
Note that's we've seen this before with Nikoli Tesla, who is breifly mentioned in the video; this just looks like a very minor advancement due to general advancements in technology that makes powering a cellphone and TV look more impressive.
Some questions that come to mind:
I think the last two are especially important for a company like Apple. Even if they had a way to increase the field to fit the WiFi range, make it fit inside a router, keep the field from causing any interference, get FCC approval (i.e.: no health risks), find a way to have it direct various levels of power to specific devices in relation to their location on a Cartesian coordinate system with the power device being (0,0,0) they still need to have the power efficiency be excellent and devices talk back to the main device to say, "Hey, I'm full."
That's why I think it's more likely we'll see something that 1) requires the item to rest against it so the magnetic field is very small, and 2) be an item, like a wearable computer, that has a very, very small battery.
Yeah, not really. All tests show otherwise.
Radio and TV do that; you don’t see anyone whining about them.
[/quote]
Transmitting a radio signal and transmitting power for a device are very different types of wireless transmissions. it would be great if your WiFi router could safely power your iDevices and Macs but we're simply not there and may never be in our lifetimes.
These confusions always seem to arise when wireless power transmission gets discussed. Virtually all proposed solutions are now based on near-field resonant coupling which, unlike signal transmission, suffers little from radiative losses and does not pose a health hazard. The near-field aspect does limit the effective range to substantially less than one wavelength; as the separation increases the transfer rate drops but mostly not to radiative loss, which remains low.
It works quite well for phones, IMHO. At least for me.
I'm habitual person, I usually put phone on same spot over night (when at home, of course).
So right now, I have charging pad there. It saves the spot for the phone (otherwise my wife might decide to put something else there).
It is reasonably efficient - if I recall correctly, Lumia 920 will fully charge through cable in something like 2:15, and from pad in something like 2:45.
Charger is "smart", it will not turn on for any incompatible object dropped on it. It detects chargeable device somehow. Also in case of Lumia phone, it will also turn charger off when phone is fully charged. I've read somewhere that it will not turn charging back on rigt after device's battery starts discharging, story was that it will let charge drop 5 or 10% before it starts charging again. I cannot confirm that, but in my scenario - putting phone on pad before going to sleep, when I pick it up in the morning it is not warm and charger light is off, meaning it wasn't charging at least some time before I take it.
It is not something one can't live without, but it is nicely convenient. Pad is easy to locate in the dark, for example. Since I'm usually going to bed after my other half, I don't have to turn lights and risk waking her up. You can do it single-handed (makes it easier to grab phone from the night table, do something and drop it back to keep charging). Etc etc.
Me happy.
Something like this, basically:
I was picturing something more elegant but essentially yes.
Hmm. What am I misunderstanding here, then?
They said the same thing about room temperature superconductors, too. Now we’ve come up with one that should superconduct at 212F! Huddler won’t let me type the degrees symbol.
It's possible that at some point wall outlets will go the way of corded telephones and land lines in general, but right now it remains horribly inefficient. That's basically what I hate about it. I have a tendency to dislike things that are significantly less efficient than what they replace for the purpose of minor convenience. For what it's worth, I hate excessive packaging too, disposable coffee cups, etc. There are many things I try to avoid. Inductive charging is just particularly bad due to the number of devices it could spread across before it's really ready. I don't mean in regards to Apple specifically, basically any electronics company.
Why use complex wireless charge? Why not simple thing like this one?
My understanding is that charging pad must have substantial surface area to achieve efficient charging, so you will not see anything petite like standard iPhone dock... not with current technology, at least.
Outside of size, I think it looks fine.
http://www.nokia.com/nz-en/accessories/accessory/dt-910/
I'm fine with a backing plate and my original comment even suggested one. I just think the Nokia charging dock is ugly. I'd like to see something that doesn't look like multiple units and looks good by itself.
For the car just get a phone holder that supports wireless charging, they are available, and they work well.
One issue with the iQi is lack of access to the Lightning port once the device is installed
Does the Duracell Powermat have the same issue? This was not addressed in the article, thus making the comparison seem unfair.
It is true. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Inductive charging is a solution in search of a problem.
There's not much convenience in wireless charging so long as it requires 1) a charging pad that takes up precious desktop/table space and 2) a power cord for the charging pad. If you must have something plugged into your computer and that something must take up space on your desk for the device to charge on - well you've just described a charging dock, with the only convenience being the ability to place the device on top of the charger instead of sliding it into a cradle. Not exactly a showstopper feature.
For a wireless charging solution to truly make sense, it would have to be seamless and invisible. One possibility is that the technology becomes so ubiquitous and inexpensive that it can be built into a variety of furniture. A second possibility is that the technology advances to the point where a single power transmitter in the home can be designed to charge devices several feet away in a truly wirelessly fashion without the need for a charging pad or station (not sure if the physics support this.)
At the moment, though, everyone's just jumping on a technology that sounds really cool without really providing any convenience for the user. I suspect this is a primary reason why Apple has yet to implement the feature in any of their products.
When I think of having a wireless charging station, I immediately think of one use case, which isn't the "computer connected" scenario that you described. I wouldn't mind having a charging pad on my nightstand, where I can just lay my iPhone down as I crawl into bed and pick it up fully charged when I roll back out of it. Seems convenient enough to me, and in my opinion is preferable to having a lightning cord dangling there, not to mention the "tetheredness" of the phone itself should I need to access it in the middle of the night. If it didn't cost an arm and a leg, I would be interested. But I won't buy one yet, because the two choices above either involve losing access to my lightning port or attaching a special case that seems unappealing. So I'm not a buyer yet.
Thompson
Inductive charging is a solution in search of a problem.
The real "problem" is that Apple does not have wireless charging in its own devices. As soon as Apple introduces iPhones with wireless charging, even if it only works with Apple branded chargers, all the dismissals of this feature will suddenly disappear.
Apple will not make a video iPod. Nobody cares about a video iPod.
Apple should not allow third parties to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native iPhone applications.
Apple will never switch to Intel processors.