I'm okay with charging that happens if I drop it on some sort of pad or something like that. But this whole flood the air with electricity and see who gets cancer thing to me seems like not a great idea.
Interesting -- are you a medical researcher that studies this? If not, why do you value your own opinion to that degree? I haven't seen any data that suggests we're all getting or will be getting cancer.
Apple is going to offer wireless charging using a specially designed bumper case for the iPhone X. The phone itself has a lightning port, while the case has a lightning jack.
And the back surface of the case is high efficiency unbreakable solar panel - which will charge the phone whenever it is in light.
So you simply put the phone down, on its face, wherever there is ambient light, and it starts charging.
For when you are at home, or in your car, you can simply place the device on a charging mat.
One of the reasons for using this approach, is that, it allows Apple to sell the phone cheaper, but whoever needs wireless charging can pay extra for it. Secondly, the wireless charging works efficiently throughout the day, dramatically boosting the phone's battery life. But more importantly, Apple is moving away from people keeping the phone on their person - just leave it on your desk, and you can stay connected to the phone wirelessly through Apple Watch. For alerts, notifications, etc. And even reply to messages using Siri on the Apple Watch.
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.
you are going to still need at least 1 port. You cant rely 100% on wireless
Apple Watch
Actually, Apple Watch DOES have a port -- it's under the band. It's currently used for diagnostics. But, I strongly suspect it will come into play when Apple expands functionality out into the band.
Irrelevant -- he was (obviously) referring to a user-facing port, not a service port. The AW does not require the user to interface with any ports.
Apple is perhaps just now catching up to Nikola Tesla (the true father of AC electric current) who demonstrated wireless power transmission over a hundred years ago. First he demonstrated it by holding a precursor to a fluorescent tube in his hand (without wires) in a charged field and it lit up. Later he built the Tesla Tower. It started as a radio tower but he attempted to convert it to power transmission tower -- but JP Morgan cut off his funding it was destroyed in 1917. Tesla's tower was not designed to provide power within a room, but within a city.
Not quite fair to say "caught up", since his work was never tested to the degree one would need it to be today. Remember, the pioneers of X-rays got cancer because they didn't realize what they were doing. This tower might have worked, it might not have. We don't know. (Tho I would think if it worked perfectly as conceived somebody would have recreated it for kicks, right?)
I'm okay with charging that happens if I drop it on some sort of pad or something like that. But this whole flood the air with electricity and see who gets cancer thing to me seems like not a great idea.
Interesting -- are you a medical researcher that studies this? If not, why do you value your own opinion to that degree? I haven't seen any data that suggests we're all getting or will be getting cancer.
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.
you are going to still need at least 1 port. You cant rely 100% on wireless
Apple Watch
Actually, Apple Watch DOES have a port -- it's under the band. It's currently used for diagnostics. But, I strongly suspect it will come into play when Apple expands functionality out into the band.
Irrelevant -- he was (obviously) referring to a user-facing port, not a service port. The AW does not require the user to interface with any ports.
Irrelevant? No. First it IS a port -- quibbling over what its used for is, well, just quibbling. But, more importantly, it is highly likely to be used to connect to smart bands if/when Apple decides to expand the functionality and sensors of the watch into its band.
But, the big point is: eliminating ALL ports from a device like a smart phone or smart watch carries with it inherent limitations and tradeoffs. Yes, I can attach my phone to my car's audio system using either Bluetooth or its lightening cable. But, while Bluetooth is more convenient, it drains the battery rather than charging the battery. And, theoretically, the lightening connector provides higher quality audio (although, to be honest, they both sound pretty darn good to me). I mostly use bluetooth so kids in the back seat can play their games on my phone through the car's audio system. It's crashes and booms are very impressive!
If you use Apple Music, there's no need to sync. You just stream. Guess what Apple wants you to do....
Waste my incredibly slow bandwidth and never actually own the content for which I’ve paid. I reject that delusion. Local content or no content.
Apple couldn't care less about your 3rd world internet...It never has in the past and shouldn't today.
I suspect you're mistaken about that, because Apple cares about him and me and millions of others buying their products. Making a product that depends on an expensive third-party product that is not even available to a large segment of potential buyers -- i.e. fast wireless data access -- would be self-defeating in that it would discourage sales. Providing wireless capabilities is a selling point. Making the device less useful to those for whom wireless is not a viable option by making it the ONLY option is a deterrent to buying. Why would Apple want to discourage sales of its own products? Obviously they wouldn't, so it seems likely that Apple would care about how the product may be used in the absence of unfettered internet access.
I don't understand your assertion that Apple SHOULDN'T care. Is it that you don't see any valid use cases in which wired options are important, or do you perceive some benefit to excluding that segment of the market?
May be it looks like this. Height is shorter, but wide bigger than Iphone 7. Front glass panel just has a hole for speaker. Home button is under screen, being slightly deep. Touch ID function does not affect the software.
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.
Would be awesome if true, but I'm highly skeptical this tech is ready for prime time.
Comments
Made up alternative-facts.
Irrelevant -- he was (obviously) referring to a user-facing port, not a service port. The AW does not require the user to interface with any ports.
Not quite fair to say "caught up", since his work was never tested to the degree one would need it to be today. Remember, the pioneers of X-rays got cancer because they didn't realize what they were doing. This tower might have worked, it might not have. We don't know. (Tho I would think if it worked perfectly as conceived somebody would have recreated it for kicks, right?)
First it IS a port -- quibbling over what its used for is, well, just quibbling.
But, more importantly, it is highly likely to be used to connect to smart bands if/when Apple decides to expand the functionality and sensors of the watch into its band.
But, the big point is: eliminating ALL ports from a device like a smart phone or smart watch carries with it inherent limitations and tradeoffs. Yes, I can attach my phone to my car's audio system using either Bluetooth or its lightening cable. But, while Bluetooth is more convenient, it drains the battery rather than charging the battery. And, theoretically, the lightening connector provides higher quality audio (although, to be honest, they both sound pretty darn good to me). I mostly use bluetooth so kids in the back seat can play their games on my phone through the car's audio system. It's crashes and booms are very impressive!
I don't understand your assertion that Apple SHOULDN'T care. Is it that you don't see any valid use cases in which wired options are important, or do you perceive some benefit to excluding that segment of the market?