Most people I know have no clue about fast charge and they still use the tiny charger that came with their iPhone because it's convenient, and that charger delivers 5W. To them, wireless chargers deliver a 50% charge speed improvement and the convenience of not having to connect the cord. I see wireless charging as a wonderful complement to Wireless CarPlay. I've been using a Qi charge tag with my iPhone for over a year, and I love it. While it's not perfect, and I certainly would like to see faster charging, it's great to keep the phone topped off, and it's incredibly convenient. I'm very happy Apple adopted the feature and the dominant Qi standard, which guarantees compatibility with pretty much every car and adapter out there.
Let’s wait and see on that last commment. It hasn’t shipped yet. I hope to God you’re right.
What is so difficult with plugging in an iPhone to charge? Wireless charging is NOT important, to me at least.
Such a weird argument to suggest that inductive charging may come to the iPhone because plugging it in is somehow "difficult." Were you also on the review of the Alpine's iLX-107 saying "What is so difficult with plugging in an iPhone for CarPlay? Wireless CarPlay is NOT important, to me at least."?
You Ok? I think his comment is sound. It’s his opinion. He’s merely saying wireless charging isn’t a big deal to him, and he doesn’t mind plugging in.
I concur with those here who say Apple is reserving the 15W tech for the iPhone 9 so as to have something compelling for would-be buyers of the iPhone 9. Seriously, those of us who have been Apple enthusiasts since the 1980s know Apple very well. This is nothing new. Apple has long put "old tech" in their devices so as to make more money and to compel people to upgrade when the next "latest and greatest" Apple device comes out. And that is precisely why Power Computing other Mac clone makers were so successful in taking away business from Apple when Apple decided to license macOS in the 1990s. It was because those clone makers departed from Apple's strategy and instead put modern technology in their devices, along with greater expandability and upgradability, which is what the lured customers away from Apple's comparatively sub par machines. Even though Apple had a better industrial design than those clone makers, customers flocked to the clone makers because of faster performance, more ports, and better overall hardware functionality.
All of this means that if Apple would start giving people more value in Macs, they would have even more success than they have now. Macs have always been expensive, but in the past at least we Mac lovers could say that we were getting our money's worth. I'm not so sure we can really say that anymore about modern Macs, perhaps with the exception of the iMac alone.
This truth will of course piss off all of the "Apple is always right and never wrong, let's worship Apple" people in this forum. But truth is truth. If Apple were to license macOS today, a clone maker would probably come out with a 17 inch MacBook Pro that offers not only all of the functionality 15 inch MacBook Pro offers, but also restore everything Apple gutted from the 2015 edition. And they would probably sell quite well even if some could argue that Apple's manufacturing precision and design aesthetic were comparatively better.
Windows lovers would try to argue that we can get all of that now simply by turning the Windows, but that's like a Jedi turning to the Darkside. We who love macOS are sticking with macOS. We simply long for a greater value in the machines that we buy which run MacOS, which means we want more functionality, not less. And that doesn't mean more functionality from "a universal port that requires numerous dongles that likely will be forgotten at home." I'm happy to have those new USBC ports so long as we have at least one of the old USBA ports onboard too. And let us not forget the beloved SD card slot either.
What is so difficult with plugging in an iPhone to charge? Wireless charging is NOT important, to me at least.
The point of a “wireless” standard is you can lay your phone on a table in a train, plane, airport, café or automobile and it starts charging. That could be very useful.
You could... but it's only theoretical for most people. The most useful part is probably for people at work who want to top off their phone at their desk during the day
I very much enjoy the wireless charging experience of the Apple Watch. Having a similar ease-of-use for the iPhone would be awesome for most of us, but particularly for folks who have limited manual dexterity, poor eyesight, and arm/hand/finger motor skills challenges. The Lightning connector is a big improvement on the 30-pin and micro USB but it still requires exacting dexterity and gentle handling to avoid damaging the delicate contacts on the cable connector and in the phone. It's also very prone to dust and lint build-up, especially when you carry it in a pants pocket. Imagine what it must be like for a person with hand tremors to plug a charging cable into a phone, much less clean the lint build-up out of the charging/docking port on the phone. Wireless charging is a nicety for some but a necessity for others.
Just because 15w fast charging exisits doesn’t mean it is good. Despite apple’s planned obsolescence IF you keep trying to upgrade iOS, the hardware seems to have great longevity. I would image, given the heat the the Apple Watch generates while charging, that the heat from fast wireless charging would degrade the battery quickly.
I am, however, not a battery engineer....more just observations I have made of my own wireless charging experiences and what I read.
What is so difficult with plugging in an iPhone to charge? Wireless charging is NOT important, to me at least.
Such a weird argument to suggest that inductive charging may come to the iPhone because plugging it in is somehow "difficult." Were you also on the review of the Alpine's iLX-107 saying "What is so difficult with plugging in an iPhone for CarPlay? Wireless CarPlay is NOT important, to me at least."?
You Ok? I think his comment is sound. It’s his opinion. He’s merely saying wireless charging isn’t a big deal to him, and he doesn’t mind plugging in.
No, the question is a commonly used dumb argument to claim that if it's not too difficult that there should be no advancement or options. Difficultly is not the issue, which is why no one is saying, "now that inductive charging is coming to the iPhone I'll finally get one."
Just because 15w fast charging exisits doesn’t mean it is good. Despite apple’s planned obsolescence IF you keep trying to upgrade iOS, the hardware seems to have great longevity. I would image, given the heat the the Apple Watch generates while charging, that the heat from fast wireless charging would degrade the battery quickly.
I am, however, not a battery engineer....more just observations I have made of my own wireless charging experiences and what I read.
Apple has repeated shown me that they rarely move technologies until they are ready. This may be wanting to be a better company and/or because they have deep pockets and the greatest mindshare, but it seems like a safe bet that if Apple is moving to faster charging as default that they've worked out something. Yet, we also can't completely discount the potential that this will be problematic—only time will tell and history only allows us to create a statistical model, not see into the future.
Exactly how long are we talking for a single charge? If I have the wireless pad somewhere the phone sits for a couple of hours a day anyway am I ever going to worry about charging apart from that?
Google is my friend. 6+ almost 3 hours on 1A 5w charger so under 2 for full charge on 7.5w. Charge most days is going to be an hour or so
Exactly how long are we talking for a single charge? If I have the wireless pad somewhere the phone sits for a couple of hours a day anyway am I ever going to worry about charging apart from that?
Google is my friend. 6+ almost 3 hours on 1A 5w charger so under 2 for full charge on 7.5w. Charge most days is going to be an hour or so
That depends on your usage. At home and in the car you may do wireless charging, but at work, on the subway, and other places you may find that wired charging is best, especially when you only have a short time.
It looks like Apple is going with a much smaller and denser logic board and an L-shaped battery, but we can't know 1) if the battery's capacity will be dramatically increased (the inductive charger may thin most of it out compared to the current models), and 2) if they're including much more powerful and power hungry chips that suck up most of a larger battery's capacity (we've seen a few times where battery life was slightly reduced YoY, but usually they go bigger).
I'm ok with this. Wireless charging on the next iPhone is a bonus to me. In real world usage, is probably still charge my phone via a cable so that I can actually use my phone.
What would be be nice is if Apple could somehow allow for dual charging (wired and induction) at the same time which would allow for faster charging AND still allow my phone to charge when I remove it from the induction charger. Perhaps this is apple's implementation thats why the lower wattage.
I feel the same way on this subject. Having got used to fast charging I would have a hard time living without it, but wireless charging is a nice convenience and if both options could be rolled into the same phone it would make a lot of people happy even at 7.5W.
I concur with those here who say Apple is reserving the 15W tech for the iPhone 9 so as to have something compelling for would-be buyers of the iPhone 9. Seriously, those of us who have been Apple enthusiasts since the 1980s know Apple very well. This is nothing new. Apple has long put "old tech" in their devices so as to make more money and to compel people to upgrade when the next "latest and greatest" Apple device comes out. And that is precisely why Power Computing other Mac clone makers were so successful in taking away business from Apple when Apple decided to license macOS in the 1990s. It was because those clone makers departed from Apple's strategy and instead put modern technology in their devices, along with greater expandability and upgradability, which is what the lured customers away from Apple's comparatively sub par machines. Even though Apple had a better industrial design than those clone makers, customers flocked to the clone makers because of faster performance, more ports, and better overall hardware functionality.
All of this means that if Apple would start giving people more value in Macs, they would have even more success than they have now. Macs have always been expensive, but in the past at least we Mac lovers could say that we were getting our money's worth. I'm not so sure we can really say that anymore about modern Macs, perhaps with the exception of the iMac alone.
This truth will of course piss off all of the "Apple is always right and never wrong, let's worship Apple" people in this forum. But truth is truth. If Apple were to license macOS today, a clone maker would probably come out with a 17 inch MacBook Pro that offers not only all of the functionality 15 inch MacBook Pro offers, but also restore everything Apple gutted from the 2015 edition. And they would probably sell quite well even if some could argue that Apple's manufacturing precision and design aesthetic were comparatively better.
Windows lovers would try to argue that we can get all of that now simply by turning the Windows, but that's like a Jedi turning to the Darkside. We who love macOS are sticking with macOS. We simply long for a greater value in the machines that we buy which run MacOS, which means we want more functionality, not less. And that doesn't mean more functionality from "a universal port that requires numerous dongles that likely will be forgotten at home." I'm happy to have those new USBC ports so long as we have at least one of the old USBA ports onboard too. And let us not forget the beloved SD card slot either.
I concur with those here who say Apple is reserving the 15W tech for the iPhone 9 so as to have something compelling for would-be buyers of the iPhone 9. Seriously, those of us who have been Apple enthusiasts since the 1980s know Apple very well. This is nothing new. Apple has long put "old tech" in their devices so as to make more money and to compel people to upgrade when the next "latest and greatest" Apple device comes out. And that is precisely why Power Computing other Mac clone makers were so successful in taking away business from Apple when Apple decided to license macOS in the 1990s. It was because those clone makers departed from Apple's strategy and instead put modern technology in their devices, along with greater expandability and upgradability, which is what the lured customers away from Apple's comparatively sub par machines. Even though Apple had a better industrial design than those clone makers, customers flocked to the clone makers because of faster performance, more ports, and better overall hardware functionality.
All of this means that if Apple would start giving people more value in Macs, they would have even more success than they have now. Macs have always been expensive, but in the past at least we Mac lovers could say that we were getting our money's worth. I'm not so sure we can really say that anymore about modern Macs, perhaps with the exception of the iMac alone.
This truth will of course piss off all of the "Apple is always right and never wrong, let's worship Apple" people in this forum. But truth is truth. If Apple were to license macOS today, a clone maker would probably come out with a 17 inch MacBook Pro that offers not only all of the functionality 15 inch MacBook Pro offers, but also restore everything Apple gutted from the 2015 edition. And they would probably sell quite well even if some could argue that Apple's manufacturing precision and design aesthetic were comparatively better.
Windows lovers would try to argue that we can get all of that now simply by turning the Windows, but that's like a Jedi turning to the Darkside. We who love macOS are sticking with macOS. We simply long for a greater value in the machines that we buy which run MacOS, which means we want more functionality, not less. And that doesn't mean more functionality from "a universal port that requires numerous dongles that likely will be forgotten at home." I'm happy to have those new USBC ports so long as we have at least one of the old USBA ports onboard too. And let us not forget the beloved SD card slot either.
Well … that certainly was a lot of words.
it's extra weird because it's been over a decade and Apple still uses the same PSU for the iPhone, but now Apple got this idea that every year (two years?) it will increase the PSU? It makes no fucking sense. And it's not like he's saying Apple is just catching on to earning a profit because he says Apple has been doing this since the 1980s, yet I see no evidence of Apple increasing the PSU at the rate he suggests… ever. And why 5W for 2007, then an additional 2.5W in 2017, and then additional 15W in one to two years? "What's the logic on that," he says, but afraid of what the answer may be.
What is so difficult with plugging in an iPhone to charge? Wireless charging is NOT important, to me at least.
I have to agree with you. Not a killer feature to me at all. Now if it charged from a few feet that would be one thing. But we all know it won't be that.
My experience of using the iPad charger on my 7+ was it does charge faster but it also loses the charge faster. When I use the supplied charger; it did take longer to charge but the battery life was much better.
What is so difficult with plugging in an iPhone to charge? Wireless charging is NOT important, to me at least.
I have to agree with you. Not a killer feature to me at all. Now if it charged from a few feet that would be one thing. But we all know it won't be that.
That wouldn't change the facile argument that it's not difficult to plug in, and your comment contradicts his statement since inductive charging is also not difficult so there's no need to have wireless charging from "a few feet" using that logic. A reasonable person would say that each step increases convenience.
No complaints, 7.5W is fine. Induction charging wastes energy, it is not efficient. If I am able to plug it in, well that is the best most efficient option. Also to state the obvious, 'wireless changing' is not wireless.
How inefficient is the Apple Watch over having a Lightning connector built in?
Most people I know have no clue about fast charge and they still use the tiny charger that came with their iPhone because it's convenient, and that charger delivers 5W. To them, wireless chargers deliver a 50% charge speed improvement and the convenience of not having to connect the cord. I see wireless charging as a wonderful complement to Wireless CarPlay. I've been using a Qi charge tag with my iPhone for over a year, and I love it. While it's not perfect, and I certainly would like to see faster charging, it's great to keep the phone topped off, and it's incredibly convenient. I'm very happy Apple adopted the feature and the dominant Qi standard, which guarantees compatibility with pretty much every car and adapter out there.
Let’s wait and see on that last commment. It hasn’t shipped yet. I hope to God you’re right.
Good point. I'm putting together the rumors of wireless charging and the fact that they belong to the Qi committee, and also that so many car manufacturers already have Qi trays in their cars, it would make no sense to use a different standard. But yes, they could certainly use something proprietary like they did for the watch. We'll find out soon.
Please stop calling it wireless charging because it is not. For Apple Watch the induction charge is perfect but I don’t get it why we need induction chaging for iPhone, it is much easy to have a lightning cable with you and be able to charge it wherever possible. It would be a much more hassle to drag a induction pad along the way. The reversable lightning port makes charging a non issue. Not sure what benefit an induction charge would bring.
Comments
You Ok? I think his comment is sound. It’s his opinion. He’s merely saying wireless charging isn’t a big deal to him, and he doesn’t mind plugging in.
This truth will of course piss off all of the "Apple is always right and never wrong, let's worship Apple" people in this forum. But truth is truth. If Apple were to license macOS today, a clone maker would probably come out with a 17 inch MacBook Pro that offers not only all of the functionality 15 inch MacBook Pro offers, but also restore everything Apple gutted from the 2015 edition. And they would probably sell quite well even if some could argue that Apple's manufacturing precision and design aesthetic were comparatively better.
Windows lovers would try to argue that we can get all of that now simply by turning the Windows, but that's like a Jedi turning to the Darkside. We who love macOS are sticking with macOS. We simply long for a greater value in the machines that we buy which run MacOS, which means we want more functionality, not less. And that doesn't mean more functionality from "a universal port that requires numerous dongles that likely will be forgotten at home." I'm happy to have those new USBC ports so long as we have at least one of the old USBA ports onboard too. And let us not forget the beloved SD card slot either.
Lightning max is not 10 or 12 Watts.
I am, however, not a battery engineer....more just observations I have made of my own wireless charging experiences and what I read.
Do you have any idea what the maximum "wattage" is for the lightning port interface/connector?
If I have the wireless pad somewhere the phone sits for a couple of hours a day anyway am I ever going to worry about charging apart from that?
Google is my friend. 6+ almost 3 hours on 1A 5w charger so under 2 for full charge on 7.5w. Charge most days is going to be an hour or so
It looks like Apple is going with a much smaller and denser logic board and an L-shaped battery, but we can't know 1) if the battery's capacity will be dramatically increased (the inductive charger may thin most of it out compared to the current models), and 2) if they're including much more powerful and power hungry chips that suck up most of a larger battery's capacity (we've seen a few times where battery life was slightly reduced YoY, but usually they go bigger).