Wireless charging and new glass casing will require heat compensation in Apple's 'iPhone X...

Posted:
in iPhone edited February 2017
In reimagining the iPhone from the ground up with new features like wireless charging, Apple will reportedly also have to rethink how the handset is built, adding a thin graphite sheet to the handset's internals to prevent overheating.


"iPhone 8" OLED concept via iMore.


This year's anticipated flagship iPhone, known colloquially as an "iPhone X" for the smartphone's 10th anniversary, is expected to switch to a glass external casing while also offering wireless charging. Wireless charging adds heat, and glass handles that heat poorer than metal.

In addition, according to analyst Ming-Chi Kuo of KGI Securities, the switch to a new film sensor for 3D Touch in the new handset is more sensitive to heat. As a result, he expects that Apple's "iPhone X" or "iPhone 8" will gain a graphite sheet to help dissipate heat.

The new 3D Touch sensor is expected to cost between 30 and 50 percent more than the one currently found in the iPhone 7 series. The assorted cost increases could explain why rumors suggest the "iPhone X" will carry a starting price tag of more than $1,000.

If Apple didn't laminate an additional graphite sheet with the new design, the high-end iPhone could become prone to malfunctioning due to overheating.

But with the design change, Kuo says Apple has addressed the issue, and users won't notice a difference.

Kuo believes that the OLED iPhone will offer a better 3D Touch experience for users, though he didn't indicate in what ways performance or capabilities might improve. The details, including forecasts for 3D Touch module suppliers GIS and TPK, were revealed in a note to investors on Thursday, a copy of which was obtained by AppleInsider.

Reports have suggested the iPhone will see a design shakeup this year, enabling Apple to embed key features -- including the FaceTime camera, earpiece and Touch ID fingerprint sensor-- beneath the display, boasting a truly seamless edge-to-edge design.

Alongside the premium "iPhone X," Apple is also expected to launch successors to the iPhone 7 series in similar designs, sized with the same 4.7- and 5.5-inch screens. It is rumored that those handsets will stick with LCD technology for their displays, while the OLED iPhone will have a "considerably better" panel, helping to justify its jumbo-sized price tag.

Kuo suggested on Thursday that the so-called "iPhone 7s" handsets will also feature wireless charging, making the technology the new standard for the company's product lineup.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 70
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,792member
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    What if the iPhone X doesn't have any ports? Why would you need a port if you can wirelessly charge it? I'm tell ya people this is coming soon...as soon as Apple gets wireless charging down, that lighting port will be a thing of the past. You can sync it wirelessly, connect bluetooth devices to it (wirelessly)such as EarPods and now charging wirelessly. No need for a lightning port anymore. I know this will piss people off just like the headphone jack, but people will get over it just like they did with the headphone jack missing. 
    paulhmtmayirelandstanthemancornchip
  • Reply 2 of 70
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,770member
    One down side to wireless charging is that you can't pick up the phone and use it while charging. Might be convenient for cars that offer that capability because you are not supposed to pick up the phone while driving anyway, but I'd rather just have a battery that lasts all day under heavy usage so that I only need to charge at night where plugging it in is no big deal. I imagine a wireless charger is going to be a bit bulky, so not really that convenient to carry around.
    edited February 2017 mike1dysamoriacornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 70
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    I don't understand how someone can be so unimaginative and against technological progress, but ok. 

    I think it would be amazing to be able to lay my phone down anywhere on my nightstand, desk, or in my car and just have it start charging without having to fumble around for a cable. This is assuming it works over a reasonable distance rather than a charging pad. 

    Everything else is wireless, and if we can make charging work, then why not that too? I guess you were against wireless syncing and Bluetooth back in the day as well though. 
    schlackcornchip
  • Reply 4 of 70
    volcan said:
    One down side to wireless charging is that you can't pick up the phone and use it while charging. Might be convenient for cars that offer that capability because you are not supposed to pick up the phone while driving anyway, but I'd rather just have a battery that lasts all day under heavy usage so that I only need to charge at night where plugging it in is no big deal. 
    This isn't induction charging, this is actual wireless charging that works from a distance of at least a few feet.
    schlackcornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 70
    volcan said:
    One down side to wireless charging is that you can't pick up the phone and use it while charging. Might be convenient for cars that offer that capability because you are not supposed to pick up the phone while driving anyway, but I'd rather just have a battery that lasts all day under heavy usage so that I only need to charge at night where plugging it in is no big deal. I imagine a wireless charger is going to be a bit bulky, so not really that convenient to carry around.
    Umm, that isn't wireless charging at all.  Apple seems to be working on true wireless, where there is a module plugged into the wall, but no wires whatsoever to your phone or a stupid pad.  Not too mention being able to use it while charging.  No one else has done that yet, even though Samsung states th wireless charging, they're lying.
    schlackDeelroncornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 70
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,770member
    waverboy said:
    This isn't induction charging, this is actual wireless charging that works from a distance of at least a few feet.
    I doubt it. Too much power required, slow charging times, bulky, not very portable, expensive, electronic interference, potentially dangerous levels of RF.
    dysamoriacornchip
  • Reply 7 of 70
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 1,821member
    macxpress said:
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    What if the iPhone X doesn't have any ports? Why would you need a port if you can wirelessly charge it? I'm tell ya people this is coming soon...as soon as Apple gets wireless charging down, that lighting port will be a thing of the past. You can sync it wirelessly, connect bluetooth devices to it (wirelessly)such as EarPods and now charging wirelessly. No need for a lightning port anymore. I know this will piss people off just like the headphone jack, but people will get over it just like they did with the headphone jack missing. 

    Of course it'll have a Lightning port. You will still need to charge it via a cable when you're not around a wireless charging transmitter. 
    schlackirelandcornchip
  • Reply 8 of 70
    schlackschlack Posts: 686member
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    It's not so much the time as it's one less thing to think about, one less cable to get snagged on something, to fray and need replacing, one less thing to do/disconnect when running out the door. Should businesses never attempt to make small improvements in their products? Particularly when the technology is widely available and the cost is small?
  • Reply 9 of 70
    For a while the physical port will be required for troubleshooting. Even the Watch has a physical port. And where will the FBI connect to get to your data?
    frantisek
  • Reply 10 of 70
    mjtomlin said:
    macxpress said:
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    What if the iPhone X doesn't have any ports? Why would you need a port if you can wirelessly charge it? I'm tell ya people this is coming soon...as soon as Apple gets wireless charging down, that lighting port will be a thing of the past. You can sync it wirelessly, connect bluetooth devices to it (wirelessly)such as EarPods and now charging wirelessly. No need for a lightning port anymore. I know this will piss people off just like the headphone jack, but people will get over it just like they did with the headphone jack missing. 

    Of course it'll have a Lightning port. You will still need to charge it via a cable when you're not around a wireless charging transmitter. 
    port could be limited to service (non-consumer facing) as with apple watch.
    randominternetpersoncornchip
  • Reply 11 of 70
    macxpress said:
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    What if the iPhone X doesn't have any ports? Why would you need a port if you can wirelessly charge it? I'm tell ya people this is coming soon...as soon as Apple gets wireless charging down, that lighting port will be a thing of the past. You can sync it wirelessly, connect bluetooth devices to it (wirelessly)such as EarPods and now charging wirelessly. No need for a lightning port anymore. I know this will piss people off just like the headphone jack, but people will get over it just like they did with the headphone jack missing. 
    CarPlay springs immediately to mind. Apple did come out with a wireless version, but car manufacturers are only starting to roll it out. Virtually all current CarPlay users are going to be stuck on wired-only implementations for a good long time. I'm all in favor of dropping legacy support when appropriate, but not when it cripples core functionality (and if you spend a significant amount of time in your car, you probably consider CarPlay to be core functionality).

    Also, you will need something for low level technical support. Even the watch has a physical port.
    Deelroncornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 70
    It's funny the excuses people come up with to justify hanging on to the past.

    Some advantages of wireless charging:

    1. Only requires one hand to set the phone on the charger. Wired charging requires one hand to hold the phone and another hand to insert or remove the Lightning connector.

    2. Although the Lightning connectors themselves are fairly robust, cables tend to wear out. Wireless charging eliminates that wear.

    We will NOT be seeing a wireless charger that works over distances of anywhere near "a few feet" with current technology. Even the most sophisticated wireless chargers costing thousands of dollars for electric vehicles can only work with an air gap of a few inches at most. Because physics.
    edited February 2017
  • Reply 13 of 70
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,524member
    volcan said:
    waverboy said:
    This isn't induction charging, this is actual wireless charging that works from a distance of at least a few feet.
    I doubt it. Too much power required, slow charging times, bulky, not very portable, expensive, electronic interference, potentially dangerous levels of RF.
    This is my thinking as well, but supposedly there is a lot of research here with device location detection and beam forming, to at least reduce the power loss for a short distance.  I am skeptical that this is ready for "prime time" in an iPhone that - even if it starts at $1K - would still sell 10's of millions of units in a year.  Who knows though...maybe Apple does have a "one more thing..." to reveal in this area.

    I have said many times - in relation to Apple Watch mainly - never underestimate how much people can come to love a "small convenience".  If/when this tech does get to point of mass consumer production, being able to so simply leave the device on a table/desk/counter where the wireless charger sits & have it charge overnight with no spaghetti of cables (my household with 6+ devices of iPhones, iPods and iPads) would be very welcome.
  • Reply 14 of 70
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,524member
    And what is "Breaking" about this article...?
    StrangeDaysireland
  • Reply 15 of 70
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,792member
    mjtomlin said:
    macxpress said:
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    What if the iPhone X doesn't have any ports? Why would you need a port if you can wirelessly charge it? I'm tell ya people this is coming soon...as soon as Apple gets wireless charging down, that lighting port will be a thing of the past. You can sync it wirelessly, connect bluetooth devices to it (wirelessly)such as EarPods and now charging wirelessly. No need for a lightning port anymore. I know this will piss people off just like the headphone jack, but people will get over it just like they did with the headphone jack missing. 

    Of course it'll have a Lightning port. You will still need to charge it via a cable when you're not around a wireless charging transmitter. 
    That won't stop Apple from removing the lightning port but we shall see. 
    ireland
  • Reply 16 of 70
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    The iPhone X is turning into a giant Apple Watch: Water resistance, no audio jack, BT audio only, OLED Force Touch display, Glossy Black finish, raise-to-wake, and now wireless charging.
    randominternetperson
  • Reply 17 of 70
    brucemc said:
    And what is "Breaking" about this article...?
    Force of habit.
    cornchip
  • Reply 18 of 70
    macxpress said:
    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    What if the iPhone X doesn't have any ports? Why would you need a port if you can wirelessly charge it? I'm tell ya people this is coming soon...as soon as Apple gets wireless charging down, that lighting port will be a thing of the past. You can sync it wirelessly, connect bluetooth devices to it (wirelessly)such as EarPods and now charging wirelessly. No need for a lightning port anymore. I know this will piss people off just like the headphone jack, but people will get over it just like they did with the headphone jack missing. 
    Hmm, this and those concept renders I keep seeing got me thinking...no ports, and maybe no physical buttons or switches either...

    I do rely on the physical buttons to feel which end is up when I pull my phone out of my pocket, but with alternate ways of providing touch ID and taptic feedback for identifying "virtual" touch based buttons that could be on the sides, I could see that it wouldn't matter which way you grabbed your phone. The phone will make whichever side is physically "up" be the functional "up," even from the home screen, right when you pick it up. Elaborating on the way that the screen turns on when you pick up an iPhone 7.

    I'm not sure how a power switch would fit into this concept. And it would be good to keep some physical electrical contact for wired or battery case charging (but maybe this could be achieved like the magnetic keyboard connector dots on iPad Pro).
    cornchip
  • Reply 19 of 70
    tshapitshapi Posts: 291member
    volcan said:
    One down side to wireless charging is that you can't pick up the phone and use it while charging. Might be convenient for cars that offer that capability because you are not supposed to pick up the phone while driving anyway, but I'd rather just have a battery that lasts all day under heavy usage so that I only need to charge at night where plugging it in is no big deal. I imagine a wireless charger is going to be a bit bulky, so not really that convenient to carry around.
    Apple is working with 2 different companies to release a wireless charging capable of using radio waves and not the induction method. Rumor has it you will be able to charge your phone with in up to 15 feet of the charging plug.  
    patchythepiratecornchip
  • Reply 20 of 70
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    I don't understand how someone can be so unimaginative and against technological progress, but ok. 

    I think it would be amazing to be able to lay my phone down anywhere on my nightstand, desk, or in my car and just have it start charging without having to fumble around for a cable. This is assuming it works over a reasonable distance rather than a charging pad. 

    Everything else is wireless, and if we can make charging work, then why not that too? I guess you were against wireless syncing and Bluetooth back in the day as well though. 
    Power efficiency is why. A lot of power is wasted transmitting, which is why most wireless chargers are really little matts that are about half the size of a mouse pad that you put the device on. When you double the distance to the transmitter, you drop the power transfer efficiency by 75%. Data transmission happens because electronics can detect signals that have microwatts or less of power.

    Another way to illustrate why wireless distance power transmission is a bad idea, ponder why microwave ovens have metal shielding.
    edited February 2017
Sign In or Register to comment.