MagSafe Battery Pack images show it doubles iPhone 12 thickness

Posted:
in iPhone edited August 5
The first photographs of Apple's MagSafe Battery Pack by an iPhone owner show the portable power source as quite a hefty add-on, one that practically doubles the thickness of the iPhone when used.

MagSafe Battery Pack [Reddit/Steven Russell]
MagSafe Battery Pack [Reddit/Steven Russell]


The MagSafe Battery Pack is a portable battery that magnetically attaches to the back of the iPhone 12 generation of devices. While there has been some speculation as to how much heft it would add to the iPhone 12, real-world photos of the accessory in use didn't surface until Monday.

Published to Reddit, images from Steven Russell show the Apple MagSafe Battery Pack attached to an iPhone 12 Pro. While a full-back photo gave some idea of how much the pack sticks out the back, a side-on view shows the pack as effectively doubling the thickness of the combined hardware.

According to Russell, the pack was bought from their local Apple Store, rather than an online order. This is probably by mistake, as the Apple website says in-store pickup of the battery isn't available, but that it would ship within 5 to 7 business days.

In comments on the device's appearance, the Reddit user said it used a "smooth hard plastic" rather than what was assumed to be silicone, which "might hold up better" overtime. The magnet itself is strong, with Russell seeing "where this would be an issue with leather cases & the circular imprint."

Russell did not notice the MagSafe Battery Pack getting warm, something that would be occasionally noticed with a similar Mophie battery pack.

Apple has priced the MagSafe battery pack at $99. With a capacity of 1,460mAh, it has been the subject of some complaint for a seemingly minimal battery life, though such criticism doesn't take into account other specifications of the unit.

Keep up with everything Apple in the weekly AppleInsider Podcast -- and get a fast news update from AppleInsider Daily. Just say, "Hey, Siri," to your HomePod mini and ask for these podcasts, and our latest HomeKit Insider episode too.If you want an ad-free main AppleInsider Podcast experience, you can support the AppleInsider podcast by subscribing for $5 per month through Apple's Podcasts app, or via Patreon if you prefer any other podcast player.




Read on AppleInsider
patchythepirate

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    Slow news day?
    StrangeDayspulseimageswatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 16
    thttht Posts: 4,029member
    Published to Reddit, images from Steven Russell show the Apple MagSafe Battery Pack attached to an iPhone 12 Pro
    That looks like a Pro Max to me. Here's Apple's press image. The Reddit image definitely looks like it is a Pro Max. Then, I have to wonder how it is going to look on the 12 mini.


    Hoping someone measures charging efficiency versus a cable, including with and without cases. Always kind of interesting how thick battery cases are. Not worth going through a custom design to make them thinner. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 16
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,041member
    tht said:
    Then, I have to wonder how it is going to look on the 12 mini.

    Wonder no more.


    baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 16
    Nice to see some real world pics of this. I really want one, but don't really need it, hmm.. maybe it'll become a late night ambien impulse buy lol
    jimdreamworxwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 16
    jimdreamworxjimdreamworx Posts: 1,077member
    Am I the only person who thinks iPhones are getting too thin?  Maybe they are to justify the added dimensions of such accessories, as I have tried to use an iPhone naked and it just didn't feel right.  Wait, that didn't come out quite right...
  • Reply 6 of 16
    Honey!   Does this battery make my ass look fat?
    mSakwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 16
    thttht Posts: 4,029member
    Am I the only person who thinks iPhones are getting too thin?  Maybe they are to justify the added dimensions of such accessories, as I have tried to use an iPhone naked and it just didn't feel right.  Wait, that didn't come out quite right...
    Not enough of you to make a difference. ;)

    Once runtimes get beyond a certain number of hours (about 10 to 12 hr) for the mass market or people, they will value thinness over additional runtime. Ie, a phone that is 7mm with 10 hrs of runtime will get a lot more sales than a phone that is 12mm with 20 hrs of runtime. Motorola had a decent market test case for this with their Maxx phones. They had a thin "normal" version and a thicker version with ~2x runtimes and about +$100 more. Those Maxx phones didn't have enough sales to dent the market. If it was a feature people really wanted, it would have gotten a lot more sales and a lot more phones would have bigger batteries.

    There are enough people to support an attachable battery accessory market as is evident, just not enough for phones to have it builtin. Too many people will reject them at first sight.

    I think it would be pretty cool to have a ruggedized plastic backed iPhone and iPad myself, that is thick enough to make the back camera flush, but nobody is going to buy it. Oh well.
    applguydewmewatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 16
    qookhooqookhoo Posts: 2member
    Just curious. 
    Would it work with older iPhones & AirPod charging case?
  • Reply 9 of 16
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 5,689member
    qookhoo said:
    Just curious. 
    Would it work with older iPhones & AirPod charging case?
    Apparently, yes — definitely AirPods and I would assume it follows that anything that works with a Qi charger would also work, including older iPhones:



    edited July 19 patchythepirate
  • Reply 10 of 16
    em_teem_te Posts: 39member
    tht said:

    Once runtimes get beyond a certain number of hours (about 10 to 12 hr) for the mass market or people, they will value thinness over additional runtime. Ie, a phone that is 7mm with 10 hrs of runtime will get a lot more sales than a phone that is 12mm with 20 hrs of runtime. Motorola had a decent market test case for this with their Maxx phones. They had a thin "normal" version and a thicker version with ~2x runtimes and about +$100 more. Those Maxx phones didn't have enough sales to dent the market. If it was a feature people really wanted, it would have gotten a lot more sales and a lot more phones would have bigger batteries.
    Were both options priced considerably different? If the thicker one was only a few dollars more expensive or even the same price, I wonder if people would have gone for the thicker one for more value at the cost of having to carry around a heavier phone. Or if people would have preferred the slimmer phone at the same price for the portability factor.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 16
    tht said:
    Am I the only person who thinks iPhones are getting too thin?  Maybe they are to justify the added dimensions of such accessories, as I have tried to use an iPhone naked and it just didn't feel right.  Wait, that didn't come out quite right...
    Not enough of you to make a difference. ;)

    Once runtimes get beyond a certain number of hours (about 10 to 12 hr) for the mass market or people, they will value thinness over additional runtime. Ie, a phone that is 7mm with 10 hrs of runtime will get a lot more sales than a phone that is 12mm with 20 hrs of runtime. Motorola had a decent market test case for this with their Maxx phones. They had a thin "normal" version and a thicker version with ~2x runtimes and about +$100 more. Those Maxx phones didn't have enough sales to dent the market. If it was a feature people really wanted, it would have gotten a lot more sales and a lot more phones would have bigger batteries.

    There are enough people to support an attachable battery accessory market as is evident, just not enough for phones to have it builtin. Too many people will reject them at first sight.

    I think it would be pretty cool to have a ruggedized plastic backed iPhone and iPad myself, that is thick enough to make the back camera flush, but nobody is going to buy it. Oh well.
    I think you are mistaken on the battery runtime topic. Almost ALL of the Android phones are now coming with 4000mAh+ battery (and that is the absolute bare minimum, with many phones having 5000mAh battery and few going to even 6000/7000mAh batteries) these days. Reason - People simply rejected the phones with lower battery capacity. The usual holdouts (LG, HTC, Sony) who stuck to small battery phones are already gone or on the verge of leaving the market. People have already spoken with their wallets (at least in the Android world where choices are available) and Android OEMs (Samsung, BBK, Huawei and Xiaomi) have accepted and adapted to that reality - that people prefer large batteries in their phones.

    Since there are no alternatives available in the iOS market, people are sticking to phones with smaller batteries. But that does not imply that people prefer slim phones with smaller batteries. We just do NOT know that YET, because Apple is NOT providing that option for the people to choose.
    edited July 22 avon b7
  • Reply 12 of 16
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 5,895member
    IMO, this is expensive, ugly and cumbersome. A very 'anti-Apple' design. On a par with the iPad Max case.

    I'm a big fan of casual wireless charging. Drop and charge. There is a convenience factor there especially in home and car use etc. 

    On-the-go, however I much prefer an efficient, super fast, wired connection from a higher capacity, light and compact flexible device. A few minutes of fast, wired charging and you get your phone back without ugly, bulk hanging off it. 

    Flexible enough to charge via different connection options and even a laptop if need be. 

    For low demand devices (like AirPods) the charging functionality should be on the phone itself too (with larger battery with reverse wired and wireless charging as standard). 


    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 13 of 16
    crowleycrowley Posts: 8,712member
    avon b7 said:
    IMO, this is expensive, ugly and cumbersome. 
    And optional.  Don't forget optional.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 16
    thttht Posts: 4,029member
    tht said:
    Am I the only person who thinks iPhones are getting too thin?  Maybe they are to justify the added dimensions of such accessories, as I have tried to use an iPhone naked and it just didn't feel right.  Wait, that didn't come out quite right...
    Not enough of you to make a difference. ;)

    Once runtimes get beyond a certain number of hours (about 10 to 12 hr) for the mass market or people, they will value thinness over additional runtime. Ie, a phone that is 7mm with 10 hrs of runtime will get a lot more sales than a phone that is 12mm with 20 hrs of runtime. Motorola had a decent market test case for this with their Maxx phones. They had a thin "normal" version and a thicker version with ~2x runtimes and about +$100 more. Those Maxx phones didn't have enough sales to dent the market. If it was a feature people really wanted, it would have gotten a lot more sales and a lot more phones would have bigger batteries.

    There are enough people to support an attachable battery accessory market as is evident, just not enough for phones to have it builtin. Too many people will reject them at first sight.

    I think it would be pretty cool to have a ruggedized plastic backed iPhone and iPad myself, that is thick enough to make the back camera flush, but nobody is going to buy it. Oh well.
    I think you are mistaken on the battery runtime topic. Almost ALL of the Android phones are now coming with 4000mAh+ battery (and that is the absolute bare minimum, with many phones having 5000mAh battery and few going to even 6000/7000mAh batteries) these days. Reason - People simply rejected the phones with lower battery capacity. The usual holdouts (LG, HTC, Sony) who stuck to small battery phones are already gone or on the verge of leaving the market. People have already spoken with their wallets (at least in the Android world where choices are available) and Android OEMs (Samsung, BBK, Huawei and Xiaomi) have accepted and adapted to that reality - that people prefer large batteries in their phones.

    Since there are no alternatives available in the iOS market, people are sticking to phones with smaller batteries. But that does not imply that people prefer slim phones with smaller batteries. We just do NOT know that YET, because Apple is NOT providing that option for the people to choose.
    Obviously I disagree. OEMs are designing to about 10 to 12 hr of runtime for average use. I do think phones are now at a solid 10 to 12 hrs as opposed to advertised 10 to 12 hr about 5 years ago, when it was really for a certain way in using the phone, and it was really 8 to 10 hr of average use. So, phones today have more solid runtimes than in the past.

    Battery capacities have increased because display sizes of 6.5" to 6.8" are now normal, plus other features that eat up power. A few years ago, display sizes were about 6" to 6.5". A few years before that, they were about 5.5" to 6". Battery capacities have increased commensurately with the increase in display sizes. So what used to be thought of as a nice capacity battery of 10 WH (2700 mAH) when paired with a 5" display, is now not suitable for a phone with a 6.5" display. For those display sizes, you really need about a 15 WH battery (4000 mAH).

    There have been a couple of features that generally have driven up battery capacities in the last couple of years too: 90 to 120 Hz refresh rates and 5G modems are making their way into a lot of phones. Then, probably a 3rd reason in the last year, Qualcomm is still using TSMC 7nm or Samsung 7nm/5nm for chips. QC application processors and modems look like they are trying to squeeze a 3rd chipset rev on basically the same process while also trying to eek out some more performance. So, OEMs really have to balance out device thickness and weight while hitting 10 to 12 hours of average use with these features and constraints. So, you see 20 WH batteries in these phones with these high power features.

    One big benefit is that talk times have definitely doubled, but talk time is one of those features that we can argue as not being that important anymore. Apple definitely would say it is a minor feature now, and for people who want that long talk time, they offer battery accessories. If the display is lit, and the cell radios are on, it's 10 to 12 hrs runtime for 90% of the phones being sold today.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 16
    tht said:
    tht said:
    Am I the only person who thinks iPhones are getting too thin?  Maybe they are to justify the added dimensions of such accessories, as I have tried to use an iPhone naked and it just didn't feel right.  Wait, that didn't come out quite right...
    Not enough of you to make a difference. ;)

    Once runtimes get beyond a certain number of hours (about 10 to 12 hr) for the mass market or people, they will value thinness over additional runtime. Ie, a phone that is 7mm with 10 hrs of runtime will get a lot more sales than a phone that is 12mm with 20 hrs of runtime. Motorola had a decent market test case for this with their Maxx phones. They had a thin "normal" version and a thicker version with ~2x runtimes and about +$100 more. Those Maxx phones didn't have enough sales to dent the market. If it was a feature people really wanted, it would have gotten a lot more sales and a lot more phones would have bigger batteries.

    There are enough people to support an attachable battery accessory market as is evident, just not enough for phones to have it builtin. Too many people will reject them at first sight.

    I think it would be pretty cool to have a ruggedized plastic backed iPhone and iPad myself, that is thick enough to make the back camera flush, but nobody is going to buy it. Oh well.
    I think you are mistaken on the battery runtime topic. Almost ALL of the Android phones are now coming with 4000mAh+ battery (and that is the absolute bare minimum, with many phones having 5000mAh battery and few going to even 6000/7000mAh batteries) these days. Reason - People simply rejected the phones with lower battery capacity. The usual holdouts (LG, HTC, Sony) who stuck to small battery phones are already gone or on the verge of leaving the market. People have already spoken with their wallets (at least in the Android world where choices are available) and Android OEMs (Samsung, BBK, Huawei and Xiaomi) have accepted and adapted to that reality - that people prefer large batteries in their phones.

    Since there are no alternatives available in the iOS market, people are sticking to phones with smaller batteries. But that does not imply that people prefer slim phones with smaller batteries. We just do NOT know that YET, because Apple is NOT providing that option for the people to choose.
    Obviously I disagree. OEMs are designing to about 10 to 12 hr of runtime for average use. I do think phones are now at a solid 10 to 12 hrs as opposed to advertised 10 to 12 hr about 5 years ago, when it was really for a certain way in using the phone, and it was really 8 to 10 hr of average use. So, phones today have more solid runtimes than in the past.

    Battery capacities have increased because display sizes of 6.5" to 6.8" are now normal, plus other features that eat up power. A few years ago, display sizes were about 6" to 6.5". A few years before that, they were about 5.5" to 6". Battery capacities have increased commensurately with the increase in display sizes. So what used to be thought of as a nice capacity battery of 10 WH (2700 mAH) when paired with a 5" display, is now not suitable for a phone with a 6.5" display. For those display sizes, you really need about a 15 WH battery (4000 mAH).

    There have been a couple of features that generally have driven up battery capacities in the last couple of years too: 90 to 120 Hz refresh rates and 5G modems are making their way into a lot of phones. Then, probably a 3rd reason in the last year, Qualcomm is still using TSMC 7nm or Samsung 7nm/5nm for chips. QC application processors and modems look like they are trying to squeeze a 3rd chipset rev on basically the same process while also trying to eek out some more performance. So, OEMs really have to balance out device thickness and weight while hitting 10 to 12 hours of average use with these features and constraints. So, you see 20 WH batteries in these phones with these high power features.

    One big benefit is that talk times have definitely doubled, but talk time is one of those features that we can argue as not being that important anymore. Apple definitely would say it is a minor feature now, and for people who want that long talk time, they offer battery accessories. If the display is lit, and the cell radios are on, it's 10 to 12 hrs runtime for 90% of the phones being sold today.
    5G and Larger & inefficient HRR displays have definitely played a role in increase of battery capacity in Android phones. However, I would have agreed with you on the core point - i.e. people prefer slim phones with lesser battery capacity instead of thicker phones with higher battery capacity ONLY IF majority of the phones are stuck at 4000mAh battery (providing similar battery endurance to the mid sized iPhones), but that is NOT the case. 5000mAh battery is the norm now. Even phones with 4300mAh, 4500mAh are considered to be having lower capacity. And some people are not even satisfied with 5000mAh battery phones, which is why there are 6000/7000mAh phones available from mainstreams OEMs (Samsung, Xiaomi, BBK etc) off late.

    My core point is - People buying Android phones DO prefer phones with bigger capacity batteries, with thinness (even weight) being damned. Apple is NOT providing it, so we would NOT know about the preference of iPhone buyers until Apple provides that option (which is most likely never going to happen in any case).
  • Reply 16 of 16
    thttht Posts: 4,029member
    My core point is - People buying Android phones DO prefer phones with bigger capacity batteries, with thinness (even weight) being damned. Apple is NOT providing it, so we would NOT know about the preference of iPhone buyers until Apple provides that option (which is most likely never going to happen in any case).
    I still disagree with your point here. I don't see 5000 mAH Android phones as large battery phones. They are phones with the minimum battery needed to support running its primary features for about 10 to 12 hours. It's done by design.

    Most Android phones are 7 to 9 mm thick, even ones with 5000 mAH batteries. They aren't "thickness and weight be damned" phones. Android phones provide about the same runtimes as Apple phones, on order 10 to 12 hours when the screen is lit and the radios are on, even the 5000 mAH ones. I was only explaining why those 5000 mAH batteries are needed for 10 to 12 hr runtimes: large screens, high refresh rates, and higher power consumption chipsets.

    To achieve a doubling of runtimes to 20 to 24 hrs, you need a doubling of battery capacity (10 AH or 35 WH), and it would increase device thickness by about 60 to 70%, to about 12 to 14 mm. Like I said before, a device that is 12 to 14 mm thick will lose sales upon first sight when compared to 7 to 9 mm phones that provide about 10 to 12 hour runtimes.

    And like I said originally, this thick 20 to 24 hour runtime phone versus a 10 to 12 hr runtime phone has already been tried on the market. It wasn't successful enough to convince any OEM of import to ship a 20 to 24 hr runtime phone as its baseline phone.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.