foggyhill

suddenly newton said:

mubaili said:

Please stop calling it wireless charging because it is not. 

While it's more accurate to say inductive charging, it's interesting that Qi markets themselves as "wireless charging" and apparently nobody ever challenged that, so I don't blame the writers at AI for thinking that way. The groundwork for that was already laid by companies pushing the tech.

Inductive is wireless, the range is just really small.   Induction is what happens when pulsating electromagnetic wave hit a conductor and move some electrons, that can happen at short distances (like a stovetop and Qi) or long distance if you're talking about antennas.

Sending power is always a iffy thing because it decreases at the inverse square root of distance, which requires some a very directed beam or beams to get the power to destination with minimum loss.  But what if the target zone is moving, the receiving antenna is changing orientation? Well, that's even more complexity.

 Of course, that power then has to go through the air or maybe people, which has its own big issues; using things like interference patterns and you could in theory create some small spots with much higher power when everywhere else has less. Having it adaptive could ensure the transmitter sending power to your phone is the closest ( a bit like cell phone handoff)..

So, overall complexity of fully wireless system seems pretty high and advantages well, not that high, how many watts are you getting into your phone then? If the phone is not in use, say in your pocket or sitting anywhere in the room then it could replenish it with a few watts. A better use would be for the watch that now would never need to be charged ever for most people.

There is probably an engineering reason like say size of space in the smaller phone than competition and also capacity to dissipate heat. Cause any wave not converted into power becomes heat.

Total bullshit, I'm considered a paying customer but I got a 2 year promotions from Rogers/Fido.
So, Spotify is probably getting $3 buck per month from Rogers for my service.

There is so much lying and dishonesty in reporting and so called analysts that its kind of sickening.
Seamingly no one gives a crap about actual facts anymore.

wood1208 said:

Qualcomm has right to defend it's IP as well ask for fair/reasonable compensation. Either you buy from someone or develop your own. It appears, Qualcomm is in jam when too many strong fighting against.

Nobody agrees double dipping, fees based on whole device, or  extorsion level fees for Ip used in standards is fair, no country courts or judge, 

before intel emerged as an option, apple had to take their abuse because Qualcomm was essentially a monopoly, but that's no longer the case. With many of their patents running out it will only get worse for them too.