Today: both my iPad and iPhone charge on a nightstand by my bed. Both one-meter cables are there, coiled and often overlapping, originating from their respective chargers, which are not the same (larger charger for iPad), and both chargers are plugged in next to one another in the outlet. So I'm constantly fiddling with the cables to determine which to plug into which device. And there's the cables always laying there on the nightstand, presenting clutter. When I want to use one, I usually lay on the bed (I'm in a small but well appointed studio condo here in Cebu City, Philippines, so most of my use of the iPad, and sometimes iPhone, is while laying on the bed). The one-meter cable tethering me to the charger is too short, so I end up unplugging for use anyway, as the cables are simply not long enough to allow me to use the devices unless I lay on my side at the edge of the bed facing the nightstand. I could get longer cables, but then I'd have longer cables dangling around the nightstand and making it that much more of a nuisance to sort out to determine which is the iPhone cable and which is the iPad cable. In short, cables are a nuisance.
Future: a couple charging pads sitting there, with their cables tucked down behind the nightstand. I place the iPhone on its pad and the iPad on its pad. When I want to use one, I lift it off the pad. I'm instantly untethered, and yes, no longer charging, but as stated above, that's the case anyway when using one of the devices. Very convenient, less clutter. Not sure how those suggesting there is no value to this can justify their opinion.
Um, different coloured cables would solve your "problems".
How would a different coloured cable solve the key problem he mentioned - "clutter"?
What's the attraction of wireless charging? Can someone point out the pros? You still need to touch it on something, just not plug it in. Still needs to be in the proximity of the charger. If anything, it's more limiting, because you don't have the cable which you can use to move the phone around while charging.
Magnets are cool. We charge our watches by putting them on a magnet. We charge our MacBooks by snapping on a magnetic connector. So of course we want iPhones and iPads to charge with magnets. It's destiny. They just need to stop calling it "wireless."
I guess I'm taking the approach of simplicity: if there is no real benefit, why bother. To me there is not, because if it is based on contact with a surface, might as well the cable in, and maybe it will even charge faster. My issues is not as much the added feature, go ahead, make it available. Just don't see the advantages of it.
Yes, and Apple doesn't go for mere features. That's a Samsung marketing thing. For Apple, each feature has to have a purpose that makes the product better rather than merely glitzier...
Assuming that this is true, I will be interested to see where Apple takes this...
What's the attraction of wireless charging? Can someone point out the pros? You still need to touch it on something, just not plug it in. Still needs to be in the proximity of the charger. If anything, it's more limiting, because you don't have the cable which you can use to move the phone around while charging.
You're asking what benefit there is for not having to fiddle with inserting a small connector v being able to rest a device with no attention given to accuracy or having to use a second hand for the cable end of lining up the connector?
No, his question is actually pretty spot on. As far as I can recall, Apple stated some time ago that they will only implement wireless charging once it's more developed and makes more sense (which is what Apple usually does anyway), because the current solution that's used in Android phones obviously makes little sense and is not much more than a gimmick. As long as you can't really move or even use the phone during the charging process, then there's very little if any added value in such impractical solution. I was hoping it'll be Apple who will develop wireless charging that would work over certain distance, without the need of having the device laying flat on a charging pad. I understand these are all just rumors at this point, but if this is really what Apple is going to introduce with their next iPhones then that's extremely disappointing and it'll be fair to say that they're the ones simply copying other manufacturers now.
1) So… the way the Apple Watch charges is a gimmick? Not having to use two hands to plug in a tiny connect is a gimmick? Being able to almost toss your iPhone onto a charger at home, in the car, or in the office is a gimmick? Not having to hold a dock down with one hand as you lift with the other because your Lightnng connector is a tight fit that even a solid aluminum dock lifts up when removing your iPhone is a gimmick?
2) Keep in mind that you're saying in your "as far as I can recall" statement that Apple would never introduce the very type of charger is using for the Apple Watch. Do you not see how ridiculous your statement is?
I charge my watch and my phone beside my bed each night. Connecting the phone is the easier of the two.
Probably an Apple sanctioned strategic leak, to preempt any perception that the non 'edition' models will be old tech and non premium. Expect more sanctioned leaks that talk up the s models.
As products mature, they tend to compete increasingly on price rather than features -- because features tend to become increasingly incremental -- in smaller and smaller increments. The power of an IPhone 7 (when only used to power the phone), is incredible already.
Apple to date has maintained its technological lead but also managed to meet the needs of the 'everyday, price conscious buyer' by selling older models such as the 6S. The SE is an exception to that rule. So is the IPad Mini. ... I can see Apple developing a two tiered system where the 8 is bleeding edge, state of the art while the 7S is more "conventional" technology more focused on practicality and less on innovation.
What's the attraction of wireless charging? Can someone point out the pros? You still need to touch it on something, just not plug it in. Still needs to be in the proximity of the charger. If anything, it's more limiting, because you don't have the cable which you can use to move the phone around while charging.
According to the article, it is rumored to also have wired charging. So what's your issue wireless as added feature? I don't get it.
Why "wireless" charging if it's going to have wired charging? And why do we need another charger for "wireless?" It makes no sense, really.
To make everything simple, it should be restricted to only ONE type of interface and be able to support a variety of protocols. The USB-3 interface is the best example of how it should be - the ability to support USB and Thunderbolt and alternate mode and power.
Why come up with other interfaces? Personally, I prefer Apple's Lightning interface (much cleaner and thinner than USB-C but Apple owns it, it's not open standard) but the madness of so many different cables for different devices have to stop.
One charger for the Apple Watch One charger for the IPhone One charger for the IPad One charger for the Mac ... And One-Charger to Rule Them All!
What's the attraction of wireless charging? Can someone point out the pros? You still need to touch it on something, just not plug it in. Still needs to be in the proximity of the charger. If anything, it's more limiting, because you don't have the cable which you can use to move the phone around while charging.
Magnets are cool. We charge our watches by putting them on a magnet. We charge our MacBooks by snapping on a magnetic connector. So of course we want iPhones and iPads to charge with magnets. It's destiny. They just need to stop calling it "wireless."
I guess I'm taking the approach of simplicity: if there is no real benefit, why bother. To me there is not, because if it is based on contact with a surface, might as well the cable in, and maybe it will even charge faster. My issues is not as much the added feature, go ahead, make it available. Just don't see the advantages of it.
I think the power loss alone is a bad idea to go wireless. I can easily plug in a Lightning cable - in complete darkness, even when groggy. Does any real-world user of Lightning actually have difficulty plugging it in?
There are so many iPhones out there, it would be irresponsible to even offer an option to expand their power consumption by 1/3rd. The Watch is a different story. It is "impossible" to put a Lightning connector in the Watch, and its power consumption is paltry in comparison.
Apple factors in the energy usage of its products for its own energy consumption metrics.
Today: both my iPad and iPhone charge on a nightstand by my bed. Both one-meter cables are there, coiled and often overlapping, originating from their respective chargers, which are not the same (larger charger for iPad), and both chargers are plugged in next to one another in the outlet. So I'm constantly fiddling with the cables to determine which to plug into which device. And there's the cables always laying there on the nightstand, presenting clutter. When I want to use one, I usually lay on the bed (I'm in a small but well appointed studio condo here in Cebu City, Philippines, so most of my use of the iPad, and sometimes iPhone, is while laying on the bed). The one-meter cable tethering me to the charger is too short, so I end up unplugging for use anyway, as the cables are simply not long enough to allow me to use the devices unless I lay on my side at the edge of the bed facing the nightstand. I could get longer cables, but then I'd have longer cables dangling around the nightstand and making it that much more of a nuisance to sort out to determine which is the iPhone cable and which is the iPad cable. In short, cables are a nuisance.
Future: a couple charging pads sitting there, with their cables tucked down behind the nightstand. I place the iPhone on its pad and the iPad on its pad. When I want to use one, I lift it off the pad. I'm instantly untethered, and yes, no longer charging, but as stated above, that's the case anyway when using one of the devices. Very convenient, less clutter. Not sure how those suggesting there is no value to this can justify their opinion.
There is a value only if you don't lose the able to use while tethered charging (which I expect to be the base).
I use the thetered chargins A LOT and there aren'T pads everywhere. I routinely use McD's and other coffee shops to charge my phone when its going down (I could also charge an external battery but then I'd have to remember to charge that too.
Q: What's the attraction of wireless charging? A: It doesn't require wires, which also means it doesn't require connectors (holes in the device). With AirPods and wireless charging, the phone can be made much more water resistant, and that's huge for a lot of people.
The article asks about Lightning vs USB-C on upcoming and future iPhones and iPads. I prefer they stick with Lightning. I already have a new Lightning connected audio interface (crowd-funded development) that also includes a Lightning port on the device for charging while listening through earphones.
Comments
How would a different coloured cable solve the key problem he mentioned - "clutter"?
Here's the power cord. Just dive in and plug it in! Easy-Peasy!
Assuming that this is true, I will be interested to see where Apple takes this...
Apple to date has maintained its technological lead but also managed to meet the needs of the 'everyday, price conscious buyer' by selling older models such as the 6S. The SE is an exception to that rule. So is the IPad Mini.
... I can see Apple developing a two tiered system where the 8 is bleeding edge, state of the art while the 7S is more "conventional" technology more focused on practicality and less on innovation.
One charger for the IPhone
One charger for the IPad
One charger for the Mac
... And One-Charger to Rule Them All!
There are so many iPhones out there, it would be irresponsible to even offer an option to expand their power consumption by 1/3rd. The Watch is a different story. It is "impossible" to put a Lightning connector in the Watch, and its power consumption is paltry in comparison.
Apple factors in the energy usage of its products for its own energy consumption metrics.