Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging will have to gain not only a big foothold in homes, but everywhere else too. It's one thing to tote around a charging cable to be able to plug in anywhere there's a spare outlet. It's a whole other thing to have to carry a charging mat around.
How is carrying around a charging mat a bigger problem than carrying around the cable and charger you’re already carrying around? A small portable disk that magnetically attaches to the back of the phone shouldn’t add substantially to that bundle. Plus Qi charging is rapidly expanding in public places. By the time Apple is ready to drop the Lightning port, it probably won’t be that hard to find a charging station or mat. Then again, when has Apple ever cared if the support for a hardware choice was already in place before changing something?
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging is completely impractical for too many people and too many use cases.
As an example, I forgot to charge my phone last night. If I couldn't use a portable battery pack today, I would not be able to use my phone for the first few hours of my work day. Second, under normal conditions, not being able to use the phone while it's charging is a major hindrance.
If you had a portable battery pack with a charging mat attached, I’d think it would be no different. Or you have a new battery pack with a built-in Qi charger eliminating the need for cables. And why wouldn’t you be able to use your phone while it’s charging on a Qi mat?
Charging mats are more expensive and bulkier. Qi charging may be gaining a foothold, but for the foreseeable future cables will still rule the land. The bottom line is a cable can charge everything. A mat can charge some things. in general, cables are faster, too.
Another issue with Qi charging is on the order of 30-40% less efficient. If I'm running out of power and have to use a battery to recharge my phone, I don't want to waste 40% of that power.
As I said in my other post, cars pose an issue because if you don't have a flat, stable place for it, it won't work. In my car, my phone is usually resting in a cupholder. a charging mat won't work for that.
Then there's the issue with cases...
First, the Apple Watch already offers this, with the charging puck included in the box. So, cost is not really an issue. Second, the Apple Watch charging puck is magnetic and sticks to the back of the watch -- so no, you don't need a flat, stable surface to charge it on. Third, the Lightning port stays for at least two more generations before it comes off completely, and Apple is certainly working on improving the efficiency of Qi charging during that time. Fourth, there's always adding a SmartConnector to the iPhone as was rumored last year I think; this would give virtually all of the same benefits that Lightning currently does as far as charging and data, albeit with another proprietary connector -- but that connector is only for those who don't want to move to the wireless standard Apple is clearly moving to. And finally, cases would be designed to accommodate these needs.
Apple Watch has it because there is no other choice. It's a smaller, lower powered charger as well. To my knowledge, there are no magnetic phone charging mats, so the placement issues are real. Besides, Apple won't even spring for a 3.5mm dongle or a bigger AC adapter. Do you really think they's switch from a cable to a pad unless they had to?
Qi will hopefully become more efficient, but the physics of inductive charging make it inherently less efficient than an actual electrical connection, and effective power transfer drops exponentially with distance (ask Nikola Tesla about this), so the extra couple of millimeters added by a case actually do make a difference.
I have no idea what Apple's plans are for new connectors, but a new proprietary connector would make absolutely no sense. The switch from 30pin to lightning was necessary and lightning was clearly a much better connector but the disruption it caused with accessories frustrated a lot of people. If they were to switch to a new connector, there would have to be clear benefits over both the lightning and USB C connectors.
Finally, if for no other reason, Car Play requires a wired connection. There is a wireless mode, but virtually no vehicles use it. If they were to switch to a purely wireless world as you see it, they would alienate a lot of users and manufacturers.
Re: the durability of the USB C connector, I don't have experience, but I know there are some other phones on the market that use it. I'm curious as to how they have held up. I don't know if this is a limitation of the standard vs the design of the specific connectors used.
Wireless may work for your world, but there are a lot of worlds for which it won't work
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
There are still some things that can only be done via ITunes on the desktop. I have tons of video on my devices and the only way I got it there is syncing via iTunes. Now if Apple updates iOS to allow downloading and accessing this media directly from the device (no you can’t access it via the Files app) I’d be very happy but I’m not getting my hopes up.
1) You can sync with iTunes over WiFi 2) What kind of crappy video app are you using that requires you to sideload video data through iTunes anyway? The apps I use — VLC, Infuse, nPlayer etc all can use direct WiFi transfer via browser, or can download files via Bonjour, DLNA, SMB, FTP, Plex server, etc.
1. Thunderbolt, as of today, is still not free. And still an Intel "Only" Standard.
2. Thunderbolt is expensive, by its technical nature, which makes USB-C all standards inclusive cable expensive.
3. USB-C is more prone to damage the pin inside, especially for an object that gets easily moved during charging ( Phone ), with lightning I break the cable only, not my $1099 phone.
4. We do not have any technologies that could transfer 100W of power in thin and light cable. Power delivery continues to be a problem, and unless we have new innovation in material science don't expect a 100W cable to be thin and affordable within the next 10 years.
The basic Strategy for Apple is quite clear, Anything that is below may be 12W uses lightning. Anything higher goes to USB-C.
In fact I would like Apple to invent a new standard called USB-D, that includes everything from USB 3.2 and 100W Power with the same plug, and forces a strict standard requirement so we don't have the current USB-C mess, not only on hardware level but also on drivers and firmware levels.
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging will have to gain not only a big foothold in homes, but everywhere else too. It's one thing to tote around a charging cable to be able to plug in anywhere there's a spare outlet. It's a whole other thing to have to carry a charging mat around.
How is carrying around a charging mat a bigger problem than carrying around the cable and charger you’re already carrying around? A small portable disk that magnetically attaches to the back of the phone shouldn’t add substantially to that bundle. Plus Qi charging is rapidly expanding in public places. By the time Apple is ready to drop the Lightning port, it probably won’t be that hard to find a charging station or mat. Then again, when has Apple ever cared if the support for a hardware choice was already in place before changing something?
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging is completely impractical for too many people and too many use cases.
As an example, I forgot to charge my phone last night. If I couldn't use a portable battery pack today, I would not be able to use my phone for the first few hours of my work day. Second, under normal conditions, not being able to use the phone while it's charging is a major hindrance.
If you had a portable battery pack with a charging mat attached, I’d think it would be no different. Or you have a new battery pack with a built-in Qi charger eliminating the need for cables. And why wouldn’t you be able to use your phone while it’s charging on a Qi mat?
Charging mats are more expensive and bulkier. Qi charging may be gaining a foothold, but for the foreseeable future cables will still rule the land. The bottom line is a cable can charge everything. A mat can charge some things. in general, cables are faster, too.
Another issue with Qi charging is on the order of 30-40% less efficient. If I'm running out of power and have to use a battery to recharge my phone, I don't want to waste 40% of that power.
As I said in my other post, cars pose an issue because if you don't have a flat, stable place for it, it won't work. In my car, my phone is usually resting in a cupholder. a charging mat won't work for that.
Then there's the issue with cases...
First, the Apple Watch already offers this, with the charging puck included in the box. So, cost is not really an issue. Second, the Apple Watch charging puck is magnetic and sticks to the back of the watch -- so no, you don't need a flat, stable surface to charge it on. Third, the Lightning port stays for at least two more generations before it comes off completely, and Apple is certainly working on improving the efficiency of Qi charging during that time. Fourth, there's always adding a SmartConnector to the iPhone as was rumored last year I think; this would give virtually all of the same benefits that Lightning currently does as far as charging and data, albeit with another proprietary connector -- but that connector is only for those who don't want to move to the wireless standard Apple is clearly moving to. And finally, cases would be designed to accommodate these needs.
Apple Watch has it because there is no other choice. It's a smaller, lower powered charger as well. To my knowledge, there are no magnetic phone charging mats, so the placement issues are real. Besides, Apple won't even spring for a 3.5mm dongle or a bigger AC adapter. Do you really think they's switch from a cable to a pad unless they had to?
Qi will hopefully become more efficient, but the physics of inductive charging make it inherently less efficient than an actual electrical connection, and effective power transfer drops exponentially with distance (ask Nikola Tesla about this), so the extra couple of millimeters added by a case actually do make a difference.
I have no idea what Apple's plans are for new connectors, but a new proprietary connector would make absolutely no sense. The switch from 30pin to lightning was necessary and lightning was clearly a much better connector but the disruption it caused with accessories frustrated a lot of people. If they were to switch to a new connector, there would have to be clear benefits over both the lightning and USB C connectors.
Finally, if for no other reason, Car Play requires a wired connection. There is a wireless mode, but virtually no vehicles use it. If they were to switch to a purely wireless world as you see it, they would alienate a lot of users and manufacturers.
Re: the durability of the USB C connector, I don't have experience, but I know there are some other phones on the market that use it. I'm curious as to how they have held up. I don't know if this is a limitation of the standard vs the design of the specific connectors used.
Wireless may work for your world, but there are a lot of worlds for which it won't work
I still don’t see the worlds where wireless won’t work, but I’ll take your word for it.
Agreed that today there is not widespread adoption of Qi, or magnetic charging mats, et al. But that kind of limitation didn’t affect Apples decision to switch to Lightning, nor to switch to USB-C. When the MacBook Pro with USB-C came out, there was a better chance of finding a gold brick in my office building than a USB-C cable. And it’s not much different than that today. Again, that did not affect Apples decision whatsoever. Moreover, we’re not discussing what’s supported today, we’re discussing what will be supported when Apple removes the Lightning port. My money is still on the technology Apple will bring to the table in a couple of years, and that’s not likely to involve a brief flirtation with USB-C, requiring a billion customers to toss all of their Lightning gear, and replace it with USB-C gear, for a short term transition to a truly wireless device.
If a wireless solution truly won’t accomodate some specific need, the SmartConnector will likely handle it, including CarPlay.
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging will have to gain not only a big foothold in homes, but everywhere else too. It's one thing to tote around a charging cable to be able to plug in anywhere there's a spare outlet. It's a whole other thing to have to carry a charging mat around.
How is carrying around a charging mat a bigger problem than carrying around the cable and charger you’re already carrying around? A small portable disk that magnetically attaches to the back of the phone shouldn’t add substantially to that bundle. Plus Qi charging is rapidly expanding in public places. By the time Apple is ready to drop the Lightning port, it probably won’t be that hard to find a charging station or mat. Then again, when has Apple ever cared if the support for a hardware choice was already in place before changing something?
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging is completely impractical for too many people and too many use cases.
As an example, I forgot to charge my phone last night. If I couldn't use a portable battery pack today, I would not be able to use my phone for the first few hours of my work day. Second, under normal conditions, not being able to use the phone while it's charging is a major hindrance.
If you had a portable battery pack with a charging mat attached, I’d think it would be no different. Or you have a new battery pack with a built-in Qi charger eliminating the need for cables. And why wouldn’t you be able to use your phone while it’s charging on a Qi mat?
Charging mats are more expensive and bulkier. Qi charging may be gaining a foothold, but for the foreseeable future cables will still rule the land. The bottom line is a cable can charge everything. A mat can charge some things. in general, cables are faster, too.
Another issue with Qi charging is on the order of 30-40% less efficient. If I'm running out of power and have to use a battery to recharge my phone, I don't want to waste 40% of that power.
As I said in my other post, cars pose an issue because if you don't have a flat, stable place for it, it won't work. In my car, my phone is usually resting in a cupholder. a charging mat won't work for that.
Then there's the issue with cases...
First, the Apple Watch already offers this, with the charging puck included in the box. So, cost is not really an issue. Second, the Apple Watch charging puck is magnetic and sticks to the back of the watch -- so no, you don't need a flat, stable surface to charge it on. Third, the Lightning port stays for at least two more generations before it comes off completely, and Apple is certainly working on improving the efficiency of Qi charging during that time. Fourth, there's always adding a SmartConnector to the iPhone as was rumored last year I think; this would give virtually all of the same benefits that Lightning currently does as far as charging and data, albeit with another proprietary connector -- but that connector is only for those who don't want to move to the wireless standard Apple is clearly moving to. And finally, cases would be designed to accommodate these needs.
Apple Watch has it because there is no other choice. It's a smaller, lower powered charger as well. To my knowledge, there are no magnetic phone charging mats, so the placement issues are real. Besides, Apple won't even spring for a 3.5mm dongle or a bigger AC adapter. Do you really think they's switch from a cable to a pad unless they had to?
Qi will hopefully become more efficient, but the physics of inductive charging make it inherently less efficient than an actual electrical connection, and effective power transfer drops exponentially with distance (ask Nikola Tesla about this), so the extra couple of millimeters added by a case actually do make a difference.
I have no idea what Apple's plans are for new connectors, but a new proprietary connector would make absolutely no sense. The switch from 30pin to lightning was necessary and lightning was clearly a much better connector but the disruption it caused with accessories frustrated a lot of people. If they were to switch to a new connector, there would have to be clear benefits over both the lightning and USB C connectors.
Finally, if for no other reason, Car Play requires a wired connection. There is a wireless mode, but virtually no vehicles use it. If they were to switch to a purely wireless world as you see it, they would alienate a lot of users and manufacturers.
Re: the durability of the USB C connector, I don't have experience, but I know there are some other phones on the market that use it. I'm curious as to how they have held up. I don't know if this is a limitation of the standard vs the design of the specific connectors used.
Wireless may work for your world, but there are a lot of worlds for which it won't work
I still don’t see the worlds where wireless won’t work, but I’ll take your word for it.
Agreed that today there is not widespread adoption of Qi, or magnetic charging mats, et al. But that kind of limitation didn’t affect Apples decision to switch to Lightning, nor to switch to USB-C. When the MacBook Pro with USB-C came out, there was a better chance of finding a gold brick in my office building than a USB-C cable. And it’s not much different than that today. Again, that did not affect Apples decision whatsoever. Moreover, we’re not discussing what’s supported today, we’re discussing what will be supported when Apple removes the Lightning port. My money is still on the technology Apple will bring to the table in a couple of years, and that’s not likely to involve a brief flirtation with USB-C, requiring a billion customers to toss all of their Lightning gear, and replace it with USB-C gear, for a short term transition to a truly wireless device.
If a wireless solution truly won’t accomodate some specific need, the SmartConnector will likely handle it, including CarPlay.
There is an idea. Smart connector for when a charging pad isn’t handy. That is a much less invasive connector. I’m happy to trade a hole in my phone (and the data/charging that comes with it) for any wireless charge/data option. Qi + SmartConnector should cover off anything I can imagine.
1. Thunderbolt, as of today, is still not free. And still an Intel "Only" Standard.
2. Thunderbolt is expensive, by its technical nature, which makes USB-C all standards inclusive cable expensive.
3. USB-C is more prone to damage the pin inside, especially for an object that gets easily moved during charging ( Phone ), with lightning I break the cable only, not my $1099 phone.
4. We do not have any technologies that could transfer 100W of power in thin and light cable. Power delivery continues to be a problem, and unless we have new innovation in material science don't expect a 100W cable to be thin and affordable within the next 10 years.
The basic Strategy for Apple is quite clear, Anything that is below may be 12W uses lightning. Anything higher goes to USB-C.
In fact I would like Apple to invent a new standard called USB-D, that includes everything from USB 3.2 and 100W Power with the same plug, and forces a strict standard requirement so we don't have the current USB-C mess, not only on hardware level but also on drivers and firmware levels.
I don't understand what you're trying to say about 2. Thunderbolt's licensing has nothing to do with the USB-C connector itself. While we'd LIKE Thunderbolt 3 across the entire line, we understand that it's not practical.
As far as 4 goes -- 100W, sure, but an iPhone doesn't need 100W. There are plenty of thin and light USB-C charging and data cables with lower wattage. I'm not opposed to a refinement, like your proposed USB-D, but given that USB-C 3.2 is already 100W and 20Gbit/sec, I'm not expecting it.
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging will have to gain not only a big foothold in homes, but everywhere else too. It's one thing to tote around a charging cable to be able to plug in anywhere there's a spare outlet. It's a whole other thing to have to carry a charging mat around.
How is carrying around a charging mat a bigger problem than carrying around the cable and charger you’re already carrying around? A small portable disk that magnetically attaches to the back of the phone shouldn’t add substantially to that bundle. Plus Qi charging is rapidly expanding in public places. By the time Apple is ready to drop the Lightning port, it probably won’t be that hard to find a charging station or mat. Then again, when has Apple ever cared if the support for a hardware choice was already in place before changing something?
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging is completely impractical for too many people and too many use cases.
As an example, I forgot to charge my phone last night. If I couldn't use a portable battery pack today, I would not be able to use my phone for the first few hours of my work day. Second, under normal conditions, not being able to use the phone while it's charging is a major hindrance.
If you had a portable battery pack with a charging mat attached, I’d think it would be no different. Or you have a new battery pack with a built-in Qi charger eliminating the need for cables. And why wouldn’t you be able to use your phone while it’s charging on a Qi mat?
Charging mats are more expensive and bulkier. Qi charging may be gaining a foothold, but for the foreseeable future cables will still rule the land. The bottom line is a cable can charge everything. A mat can charge some things. in general, cables are faster, too.
Another issue with Qi charging is on the order of 30-40% less efficient. If I'm running out of power and have to use a battery to recharge my phone, I don't want to waste 40% of that power.
As I said in my other post, cars pose an issue because if you don't have a flat, stable place for it, it won't work. In my car, my phone is usually resting in a cupholder. a charging mat won't work for that.
Then there's the issue with cases...
First, the Apple Watch already offers this, with the charging puck included in the box. So, cost is not really an issue. Second, the Apple Watch charging puck is magnetic and sticks to the back of the watch -- so no, you don't need a flat, stable surface to charge it on. Third, the Lightning port stays for at least two more generations before it comes off completely, and Apple is certainly working on improving the efficiency of Qi charging during that time. Fourth, there's always adding a SmartConnector to the iPhone as was rumored last year I think; this would give virtually all of the same benefits that Lightning currently does as far as charging and data, albeit with another proprietary connector -- but that connector is only for those who don't want to move to the wireless standard Apple is clearly moving to. And finally, cases would be designed to accommodate these needs.
Apple Watch has it because there is no other choice. It's a smaller, lower powered charger as well. To my knowledge, there are no magnetic phone charging mats, so the placement issues are real. Besides, Apple won't even spring for a 3.5mm dongle or a bigger AC adapter. Do you really think they's switch from a cable to a pad unless they had to?
Qi will hopefully become more efficient, but the physics of inductive charging make it inherently less efficient than an actual electrical connection, and effective power transfer drops exponentially with distance (ask Nikola Tesla about this), so the extra couple of millimeters added by a case actually do make a difference.
I have no idea what Apple's plans are for new connectors, but a new proprietary connector would make absolutely no sense. The switch from 30pin to lightning was necessary and lightning was clearly a much better connector but the disruption it caused with accessories frustrated a lot of people. If they were to switch to a new connector, there would have to be clear benefits over both the lightning and USB C connectors.
Finally, if for no other reason, Car Play requires a wired connection. There is a wireless mode, but virtually no vehicles use it. If they were to switch to a purely wireless world as you see it, they would alienate a lot of users and manufacturers.
Re: the durability of the USB C connector, I don't have experience, but I know there are some other phones on the market that use it. I'm curious as to how they have held up. I don't know if this is a limitation of the standard vs the design of the specific connectors used.
Wireless may work for your world, but there are a lot of worlds for which it won't work
I still don’t see the worlds where wireless won’t work, but I’ll take your word for it.
Agreed that today there is not widespread adoption of Qi, or magnetic charging mats, et al. But that kind of limitation didn’t affect Apples decision to switch to Lightning, nor to switch to USB-C. When the MacBook Pro with USB-C came out, there was a better chance of finding a gold brick in my office building than a USB-C cable. And it’s not much different than that today. Again, that did not affect Apples decision whatsoever. Moreover, we’re not discussing what’s supported today, we’re discussing what will be supported when Apple removes the Lightning port. My money is still on the technology Apple will bring to the table in a couple of years, and that’s not likely to involve a brief flirtation with USB-C, requiring a billion customers to toss all of their Lightning gear, and replace it with USB-C gear, for a short term transition to a truly wireless device.
If a wireless solution truly won’t accomodate some specific need, the SmartConnector will likely handle it, including CarPlay.
But what's the point of replacing one connector with another? If you're going to do that, why not just stick with the lightning connector (or USB)?
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging will have to gain not only a big foothold in homes, but everywhere else too. It's one thing to tote around a charging cable to be able to plug in anywhere there's a spare outlet. It's a whole other thing to have to carry a charging mat around.
How is carrying around a charging mat a bigger problem than carrying around the cable and charger you’re already carrying around? A small portable disk that magnetically attaches to the back of the phone shouldn’t add substantially to that bundle. Plus Qi charging is rapidly expanding in public places. By the time Apple is ready to drop the Lightning port, it probably won’t be that hard to find a charging station or mat. Then again, when has Apple ever cared if the support for a hardware choice was already in place before changing something?
Alternative idea: Perhaps the plan for iPhone is to phase out a wired connector entirely. It seems to me that once wireless charging gets a big enough foothold, and Bluetooth matures for short range data transmission, there is not compelling reason to continue punching a big hole in the bottom of our iPhones. I'd prefer a completely wireless iPhone that was more waterproof & had more room for battery & functional components.
Wireless charging is completely impractical for too many people and too many use cases.
As an example, I forgot to charge my phone last night. If I couldn't use a portable battery pack today, I would not be able to use my phone for the first few hours of my work day. Second, under normal conditions, not being able to use the phone while it's charging is a major hindrance.
If you had a portable battery pack with a charging mat attached, I’d think it would be no different. Or you have a new battery pack with a built-in Qi charger eliminating the need for cables. And why wouldn’t you be able to use your phone while it’s charging on a Qi mat?
Charging mats are more expensive and bulkier. Qi charging may be gaining a foothold, but for the foreseeable future cables will still rule the land. The bottom line is a cable can charge everything. A mat can charge some things. in general, cables are faster, too.
Another issue with Qi charging is on the order of 30-40% less efficient. If I'm running out of power and have to use a battery to recharge my phone, I don't want to waste 40% of that power.
As I said in my other post, cars pose an issue because if you don't have a flat, stable place for it, it won't work. In my car, my phone is usually resting in a cupholder. a charging mat won't work for that.
Then there's the issue with cases...
First, the Apple Watch already offers this, with the charging puck included in the box. So, cost is not really an issue. Second, the Apple Watch charging puck is magnetic and sticks to the back of the watch -- so no, you don't need a flat, stable surface to charge it on. Third, the Lightning port stays for at least two more generations before it comes off completely, and Apple is certainly working on improving the efficiency of Qi charging during that time. Fourth, there's always adding a SmartConnector to the iPhone as was rumored last year I think; this would give virtually all of the same benefits that Lightning currently does as far as charging and data, albeit with another proprietary connector -- but that connector is only for those who don't want to move to the wireless standard Apple is clearly moving to. And finally, cases would be designed to accommodate these needs.
Apple Watch has it because there is no other choice. It's a smaller, lower powered charger as well. To my knowledge, there are no magnetic phone charging mats, so the placement issues are real. Besides, Apple won't even spring for a 3.5mm dongle or a bigger AC adapter. Do you really think they's switch from a cable to a pad unless they had to?
Qi will hopefully become more efficient, but the physics of inductive charging make it inherently less efficient than an actual electrical connection, and effective power transfer drops exponentially with distance (ask Nikola Tesla about this), so the extra couple of millimeters added by a case actually do make a difference.
I have no idea what Apple's plans are for new connectors, but a new proprietary connector would make absolutely no sense. The switch from 30pin to lightning was necessary and lightning was clearly a much better connector but the disruption it caused with accessories frustrated a lot of people. If they were to switch to a new connector, there would have to be clear benefits over both the lightning and USB C connectors.
Finally, if for no other reason, Car Play requires a wired connection. There is a wireless mode, but virtually no vehicles use it. If they were to switch to a purely wireless world as you see it, they would alienate a lot of users and manufacturers.
Re: the durability of the USB C connector, I don't have experience, but I know there are some other phones on the market that use it. I'm curious as to how they have held up. I don't know if this is a limitation of the standard vs the design of the specific connectors used.
Wireless may work for your world, but there are a lot of worlds for which it won't work
I still don’t see the worlds where wireless won’t work, but I’ll take your word for it.
Agreed that today there is not widespread adoption of Qi, or magnetic charging mats, et al. But that kind of limitation didn’t affect Apples decision to switch to Lightning, nor to switch to USB-C. When the MacBook Pro with USB-C came out, there was a better chance of finding a gold brick in my office building than a USB-C cable. And it’s not much different than that today. Again, that did not affect Apples decision whatsoever. Moreover, we’re not discussing what’s supported today, we’re discussing what will be supported when Apple removes the Lightning port. My money is still on the technology Apple will bring to the table in a couple of years, and that’s not likely to involve a brief flirtation with USB-C, requiring a billion customers to toss all of their Lightning gear, and replace it with USB-C gear, for a short term transition to a truly wireless device.
If a wireless solution truly won’t accomodate some specific need, the SmartConnector will likely handle it, including CarPlay.
But what's the point of replacing one connector with another? If you're going to do that, why not just stick with the lightning connector (or USB)?
I prefer the minimum number of holes built in to my phone. Either Qi or SmartConnector fit the bill nicely.
Comments
Qi will hopefully become more efficient, but the physics of inductive charging make it inherently less efficient than an actual electrical connection, and effective power transfer drops exponentially with distance (ask Nikola Tesla about this), so the extra couple of millimeters added by a case actually do make a difference.
I have no idea what Apple's plans are for new connectors, but a new proprietary connector would make absolutely no sense. The switch from 30pin to lightning was necessary and lightning was clearly a much better connector but the disruption it caused with accessories frustrated a lot of people. If they were to switch to a new connector, there would have to be clear benefits over both the lightning and USB C connectors.
Finally, if for no other reason, Car Play requires a wired connection. There is a wireless mode, but virtually no vehicles use it. If they were to switch to a purely wireless world as you see it, they would alienate a lot of users and manufacturers.
Re: the durability of the USB C connector, I don't have experience, but I know there are some other phones on the market that use it. I'm curious as to how they have held up. I don't know if this is a limitation of the standard vs the design of the specific connectors used.
Wireless may work for your world, but there are a lot of worlds for which it won't work
2) What kind of crappy video app are you using that requires you to sideload video data through iTunes anyway? The apps I use — VLC, Infuse, nPlayer etc all can use direct WiFi transfer via browser, or can download files via Bonjour, DLNA, SMB, FTP, Plex server, etc.
I think you might be doing it wrong.
2. Thunderbolt is expensive, by its technical nature, which makes USB-C all standards inclusive cable expensive.
3. USB-C is more prone to damage the pin inside, especially for an object that gets easily moved during charging ( Phone ), with lightning I break the cable only, not my $1099 phone.
4. We do not have any technologies that could transfer 100W of power in thin and light cable. Power delivery continues to be a problem, and unless we have new innovation in material science don't expect a 100W cable to be thin and affordable within the next 10 years.
The basic Strategy for Apple is quite clear, Anything that is below may be 12W uses lightning. Anything higher goes to USB-C.
In fact I would like Apple to invent a new standard called USB-D, that includes everything from USB 3.2 and 100W Power with the same plug, and forces a strict standard requirement so we don't have the current USB-C mess, not only on hardware level but also on drivers and firmware levels.
Agreed that today there is not widespread adoption of Qi, or magnetic charging mats, et al. But that kind of limitation didn’t affect Apples decision to switch to Lightning, nor to switch to USB-C. When the MacBook Pro with USB-C came out, there was a better chance of finding a gold brick in my office building than a USB-C cable. And it’s not much different than that today. Again, that did not affect Apples decision whatsoever. Moreover, we’re not discussing what’s supported today, we’re discussing what will be supported when Apple removes the Lightning port. My money is still on the technology Apple will bring to the table in a couple of years, and that’s not likely to involve a brief flirtation with USB-C, requiring a billion customers to toss all of their Lightning gear, and replace it with USB-C gear, for a short term transition to a truly wireless device.
If a wireless solution truly won’t accomodate some specific need, the SmartConnector will likely handle it, including CarPlay.
As far as 4 goes -- 100W, sure, but an iPhone doesn't need 100W. There are plenty of thin and light USB-C charging and data cables with lower wattage. I'm not opposed to a refinement, like your proposed USB-D, but given that USB-C 3.2 is already 100W and 20Gbit/sec, I'm not expecting it.