citpeks
About
- Username
- citpeks
- Joined
- Visits
- 335
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,007
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 272
Reactions
-
The real story behind MagSafe, USB-C PD, and why you need a 20W AC charger
Mike Wuerthele said:Good on the -gate thing. Apologies for misunderstanding. We are not the first to come to the conclusion that a suitable specced PD 3.0 charger will do the job, but we're the first (I believe) to explain specifically why, and address why 15W isn't sufficient. There is sufficient other proof on the internet that this is the case, but we will be looking into it further, as time allows.
What you're looking for specifically is in the piece in regards to wattage, just not in the sentence you've quoted. I've clarified the language in that sentence a hair.It's early, and the dust has yet to settle, so it is good that you're trying to address the uncertainty by providing the facts, with some authority.Unfortunately, theory is not always consistent with practice, and that's what I wanted to note.There are standards, and they can be written on stone tablets and hoisted to the top of Mt. Everest, but that does not assure that they will be implemented properly, or not deviated from.We've seen this kind of thing before, from the fustercluck at the beginning of USB-C (ref -- Benson Leung), to the mishmash of Qi "fast" charging profiles. The standards provide the foundation, but the companies still go and build houses to their liking that may not meet code. It's the users who suffer, and it sows confusion and mistrust.Kamirose said:A video by Alvin Lim on youtube shows him pulling the same current as an apple 20w brick on two different third party PD 3.0 bricks, one being 120w and the other being 65w. Both support the 9V/3A standard output that any compliant USB brick 27w or over will provide.Can you provide the link? I don't doubt that there are adapters available now that do work, and there will eventually be more. But sorting the wheat from the chaff will still be a work in progress, until products with assured compatibility with the 20W level become more prevalent.And there is still the slim possibility that Apple could alter the rules, and retroactively handicap shipped products, as it did with iOS 7 and Lightning cables, or the "7.5W" non-EPP Qi chargers with 13.1. One could argue that the latter was a matter of closing a loophole, but that doesn't help the users who find that their chargers won't charge as fast as before due to an iOS update. Go back far enough, and Apple has done that kind of thing with RAM as well, after an OS update.
-
The real story behind MagSafe, USB-C PD, and why you need a 20W AC charger
Mike Wuerthele said:it is not PD 3.0. PD 3.0 is backwards compatible with PD 2.0, 1.0, and USB 3 charging, so I'm not sure what you're wondering about with "quirks" on the iPhone 12.
In no way is this a "gate" by any definition, and that's a ridiculous assertion. This is a matter of spec compliance, and nothing else.I meant "-gate" in the sense of being a false, overinflated controversy, I know exactly what is going on, and what's in play.But you fail to address my real point, at the point, there is no assurance that "any" PD 3.0 adapter will successfully negotiate the 2.22A profile with the MagSafe or the iPhone 12. In theory, that should be the case, but in practice, has yet to be proven, or the available findings would confirm it. Or do you plan to provide some empirical testing to back up that contention?And yes, 2,22 is a quirk, at least for now, or we wouldn't be having this discussion to begin with.
-
The real story behind MagSafe, USB-C PD, and why you need a 20W AC charger
MplsP said:Nice article - it explains a lot. It still doesn’t explain why the MagSafe connector couldn’t use the older 2.0 protocol to get higher power delivery. Strictly limiting bit to the 3.0 protocol that’s less than a year old means relatively few people are going to have a compatible charger. If it’s not clearly documented, many more people will never know why they are not reaching the full potential of their device.PD 3.0 takes a different approach than PD 2.0. 3.0 is dynamic, and proactive, and takes into account variables that 2.0 cannot. 2.0 is still bi-directional, but more passive, in a more "take it or leave it" manner. Think of it as the difference between ordering from a set menu, as opposed to having a chef tailor dishes to your taste.There is backward compatibility, but due to the paradigm shift, it operates according to the newer approach, and the old one is only kept as a fallback.Would it surprise you to learn that one of Apple's first full USB 3.1/3.2 and PD compliant devices, the iPads Pro, only support a lowly standard 7.5W charge level when not connected to a non-PD adapter? They don't even support Apple's own 12W/2.4, but do have that minimum baseline level capability, but only as a backup, not as the primary, which is all in the PD basket.
-
The real story behind MagSafe, USB-C PD, and why you need a 20W AC charger
"if you don't want to buy Apple's USB-C AC adapter, any USB-PD 3.0 one will do to get that faster charging speed, and a lesser one, won't."Is that really the case? Apple's 96W adapter, released in 2019 with the MBP 16", has been tested to result in only a 10W level with the MagSafe. Presumably, it's PD 3.0 compliant.I think there is a distinction to be made -- 1) an adapter must be PD 3.0 spec, and 2) it must be able to successfully negotiate the new/oddball (for now) 2.22A/20W profile that Apple has created. The latter is far from certain, even with a PD 3.0 adapter. PD 3.0 introduced better handshaking and accounts for more variables, but when the source and the sink don't agree, it will default to the next lowest step.Another distinction that hasn't been noted in this new "-gate" controversy, and that's what it is -- is that these quirks apply not only to the MagSafe, but to the iPhone 12 as well. That's made clear in Apple's support documents. Everyone is testing against MagSafe, but that introduces another variable in the wireless coupling.What people should be testing against is the iPhone 12 itself, where the only negotiation is between the adapter and the phone itself, which eliminates all the potential quirks that exist in the wireless coupling negotiation as well.On the surface, non-proprietary standards like USB PD should prevent a lot of issues. But underneath the surface, there are plenty of deviations and proprietary games being played, which only get noticed in situations like this. Apple is not alone in playing these games.Many fail to see the bigger picture that the MagSafe and iPhone 12 have new requirements, and it will take time for 3rd parties to adjust and adapt with new products to match. But they will, and eventually the issue will fade, just like it did with Apple 2.4A, which saw scant support when it first appeared, but eventually became ubiquitous, despite not being an official USB spec. -
New iPhone 12 owners bombarded with free Apple Arcade offers
Did similar notifications in Settings offering iCloud storage, the free year of AppleTV+ promo, and AppleCare+ somehow go unnoticed?The one pushing additional iCloud storage is triggered in response to failed backups due to insufficient space, and is actually the most obtrusive because it throws up a entire screen of its own. It has been around since at least iOS 12. The others are benign in comparison.The one for AppleCare+ is kind of helpful, counting down the 60 day grace period if it is not purchased at the same time as the device.I'd prefer to not have any of these things, but they're relatively mild.If they're that annoying, wait until some overzealous regulators declare that Apple is a monopolist, and enact poorly written laws that force 3rd party apps, marketplaces, and payment methods to be installed at the factory. Anyone looking forward to that?
