Apple Developing Wireless Charging For Mobile Devices (thestack.com) 133
An anonymous reader writes: Apple is currently working with partners in the US and Asia to develop wireless charging for iPhone and iPad. Mobile devices with wireless charging capabilities could be released as soon as next year. Apple has not released the specific details on the range that could be available, but as far back as 2010, Apple applied for a patent to use an iMac as a wireless charging hub for distances of 1 meter. In 2014 it applied for a patent on specialized housing for a mobile device with an integrated RF antenna, which would also allow for wireless charging by helping to eliminate the problem of metallic interference with charging signals. Apple would apparently be building on these ideas to create a new iPhone or iPad that could charge further away from the hub, while continuing to be used.
health concerns (Score:3)
I remember seeing that experiment in high school with a Tesla coil powering a tube light without having to touch it. Aren't there health concerns with that much electricity in the air though?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:health concerns (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, Tesla's dead. That's all the proof I need.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Scroll down the front page.
Only a few hours ago, someone was demanding Apple release a "killer" device.
Re: (Score:2)
Well the inside of a nuclear reactor is also dangerous to your health but you're no so concerned about some background radiation from eating a banana are you? There's a big difference in scale between energising the air enough to light up a flouro tube and charge a small mobile phone. Even if the former was some kind of major health risk.
Let me guess... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually but it will be delayed several months while they try to get the shade of white right.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, let me remind you ... the first companies to make black CPU cases, keyboards and mice for standard PCs had people buying it because everything had been beige before that.
Never underestimate how "wow, that looks cool" can be a factor with buying decisions. And never forget that at one point black PCs became super cool.
I remember a bunch of people standing around a new all black Dell going "ooh" and "aaah" over it.
Which meant the original iMac people went crazy over when you could get it in orange.
Appa
Apple Wireless Charging (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple is looking on a new technology for distance charging of a wireless device – rather than placing the phone on a charging mat, a customer can actually walk around with the device, using it while it charges.
Are there any phones on the market that can do this?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And I'm sure that Apple's solution will be running a 600KV line through your bedroom.
Wait, scale matters?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apple Wireless Charging (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
INNOVATION
... he said after touching his thumb to the home button of his smartphone to read Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Touch, not push.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for showing off the Slashdot Way. Bash Apple when they don't include a marginally useful feature, and then when they include it, bash them for being late to the party with a marginally useful feature.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you for showing off the Slashdot Way. Bash Apple when they don't include a marginally useful feature, and then when they include it, bash them for being late to the party with a marginally useful feature.
And then do it again >3 years later - http://apple.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Why this is special (Score:5, Interesting)
For those who'll say "it's been done before:" no, not like this.
Current wireless charging amounts to dropping your device on a pad. You can't grab your device to use it (since you'll break the power link), and of course this limits just where your device can sit.
The Slashdot post (and the source link) undersells the story. Here, Apple would have wireless charging that doesn't depend on resting the device on a contact pad -- you'd just have to get within range of the charger. Imagine plunking down your iPhone anywhere on your desk and knowing that it'll top up. This kind of technology has been discussed for a while, but hasn't really been implemented on a practical level.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps a more interesting application than the charging-on-any-desk-that-has-an-iMac would be a car which charges any phone present in it.
Re:Why this is special (Score:4, Insightful)
It would be extremely shortsighted for apple to make it an iMac exclusive. Although I wouldn't put it past them.
Hoping it lives up to the hype. It's 2016 and everyone seems to have "hover boards" that neither hover or resemble boards. Lets not make the same mistake with wireless charging. Just say no to pad type.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think the gp intended to imply that but given things I have seen from Apple before I would expect this to be built into their desktops at least. So that they can charge wireless keyboards and mice
Re: (Score:2)
I hadn't even thought of that.
Yes I know the current gen of keyboards and mice run for months between battery changes but still.
Not sure why you would need them to charge. Why not remove the battery entirely then? usable range should be well within the charging area.
Htpc maybe?
Re: (Score:2)
I would guess they would just be powered by this system, maybe with a small backup battery for hick ups in the power flow if necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
For those who'll say "it's been done before:" no, not like this.
Yeah, one of my coworkers has a wireless charging Android phone of some sort, and every time someone bumps his desk it "breaks".
That said, given Apple's track record the past half-decade (in my experience, at least), I wouldn't be surprised if their offering is terribly buggy as well - at least at the software end of things.
Re: (Score:3)
For those who'll say "it's been done before:" no, not like this.
Yeah, one of my coworkers has a wireless charging Android phone of some sort, and every time someone bumps his desk it "breaks".
That said, given Apple's track record the past half-decade (in my experience, at least), I wouldn't be surprised if their offering is terribly buggy as well - at least at the software end of things.
I think I'd be more annoyed at people repeatedly bumping my desk hard enough to make my stuff slide around than I would at having to reposition my phone on the charger. Though I just tried it with my desk - my charger is "sticky" enough to grip the phone so when I bump the desk hard enough, the charger and phone slide together, the phone doesn't slide off the charger.
Re: (Score:2)
I hope that is a work desk, that you're in a cubical, and that you tried varied amounts of force. It's not that I don't like you, or anything. I just have this picture of people staring at you as if you're a lunatic and it'd be disappointing were it not true.
Re: (Score:2)
I hope that is a work desk, that you're in a cubical, and that you tried varied amounts of force. It's not that I don't like you, or anything. I just have this picture of people staring at you as if you're a lunatic and it'd be disappointing were it not true.
Cubicle? That's so 1990's, no one has cubicles anymore. It's just one big open area at work.
but i performed this experiment on my cheap sit-stand desk at home, it's not super stable at full extension, so it's easy to hit it hard enough to move stuff around.
The $1200 desk at work is a lot more stable than my $250 home desk, so it would take a much more substantial hit to get stuff to slide around.
Re: (Score:1)
My work desk used to be one that I picked up at auction. Oh, you know the exact type. It was a government worker's desk (probably secretarial) made during WWII. It had the slide out parts (in the center and on the right) and drawers on both sides. One drawer is a bit different in height. It has a rack for holding folders. It has to be 500 pounds worth of steel.
It was *at least* owned by a government official and a school system before I owned it. It took three men and a boy to move it. If you could use it a
Re:Why this is special (Score:4, Funny)
Imagine plunking down your iPhone anywhere on your desk and knowing that it'll top up.
I'm imagining sitting down at my desk with my iPhone in my pocket, and having my balls microwaved. I think I'm not going to be a beta-tester for this one.
Re: (Score:3)
Intel demoed something similar a few years ago, running a monitor with wireless power. It's less impressive than it sounds, as they were really only sending maybe 10W maximum, probably less.
Any more and it gets dangerous. Even the paltry amount they managed is problematic. If Apple really has cracked this it would be a major breakthrough, which is why I'm sceptical.
Re: (Score:3)
Birth Control - It's a feature!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why this is special (Score:5, Informative)
The challenge is whether WiTricity can deliver useful range range and sufficiently shrink the receivers to be thin enough to be in a smartphone. Useful range is likely a few feet which means it's much shorter than a typical cable. We're also looking at a minimum of 50% losses which might be acceptable for a smartphone, but we know there are plenty of people who have no qualms charging their 400 watt HDTV or 40000 watt car like this.
The real revolution we're seeing in smartphone charging is USB-C with a higher Power Deliver profile. Next generation Samsung phones coming out can be charged in around 20 minutes which means a charge rate of 3C. Batteries can be pushed up to 5C to get charge times times down to 12 minutes which means 6 minutes can fill up most semi-discharged smartphones. Fast charging is far more useful than being stuck in a 3-foot area for 2 hours waiting for the phone to fill up.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny you should mention efficiency and fast charging in the same post. Fast charging is less efficient than slow charging, and also shortens battery life. Once you add in the energy wasted making/recycling batteries, suddenly Qi short range wireless charging doesn't look so bad.
I actually keep a slow, 500mA charger around at home for overnight charging. Makes my phone batteries last longer than nightly charging at 1.5A.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought topping off charges didn't completely count when judging lithium battery charge cycles. I seldom discharge my phone lower than 75% and when it's been retired after 3-some years, it still holds a decent charge.
My understanding was that topping up a lithium battery was good; it was a more complete discharge that added wear cycles to it. Obviously this isn't true forever but better than lots of charge and deep discharge cycles.
Re: (Score:2)
The irreversible damage occurs at both high and low voltage. If the battery capacity is limited to between say the 80% and 20% charge points, then the total energy delivered for a given decrease in capacity goes up so many shallow discharges are better than fewer deep discharges if they occu
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla. Heinlein's Waldo. (Score:3)
It's an old idea, expanded on greatly by Robert Heinlein in "Waldo", in which the whole world was powered wireless, including spaceships.
It's telling how much Edison and Westinghouse buried Tesla's work for a century. God, they hated that man.
Re: (Score:3)
I hope someone does it soon (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
wall warts (whoever came up with that name should be given warts)
Probably the same guy who came up with 'blog'.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know, I can't remember the last time I had a power cord break that wasn't made by Apple, but I've had a fair number of those break. Try third-party cables. The Amazon cables really are a lot more robust.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a wide range of MagSafe cables, with widely varying robustness:
Re: I hope someone does it soon (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Take it to an Apple store ASAP. If it really is that new, they should replace the supply under warranty. That yellowing indicates massive overheating, probably ca
Re: (Score:2)
For the record, that's been the failure mode of 3 of the 4 failed L shape plugs, as well; the 4th was the one that had the cord sliced (caught in the workings of a recliner) and repaired twice, which worked fine for 2 years after the last repair before the supply itself gave up the ghost rather uneventfully. That one just stopped working in the middle of a work day, I noticed when my screen dimmed, wasn't hot or anything, not even warm,
Re: (Score:2)
Efficiency? (Score:2)
Whats the percental loss of energy when the device is so far away? Similar to the loss in sound volume?
Obligatory (Score:1)
1. Develop a way to charge them wirelessly.
2. ???
3. Profit!
Special cables? (Score:1)
100% waterproof (Score:2)
Imagine a phone with NO ports. It uses wireless for charging. It uses Bluetooth for headphones. It uses wifi/cellular for voice and data. The battery isn't user-servicable. It doesn't need any ports. It could be manufactured in a factory-sealed seamless she'll for guaranteed waterproofing.
(except: I don't know how you'd do microphone or speakers...)
Possibly alongside Eneregous? (Score:1)
Energeous (NASDAQ: WATT) has been working on some innovative wireless charging tech for a few years. What's cool about them is that they IPO'd to raise funds (effectively) so there's a lot of behind-the-scenes info you can glean from their SEC filings that you normally don't see with a small startup.
They've been working with a Tier 1 provider for a while. They haven't disclosed who. But they're based down the road from Cupertino...
The stock already jumped Friday on this news, but it's still trading below it
Re: (Score:3)
Another factor: How efficient is it - I predict a considerable transmission loss too, and in this era of energy saving dictates it might be a bad idea.
Re:been done (Score:5, Insightful)
That's one thing that's bugging me with all these wireless charging ideas. I don't care which company makes it, wasting energy for the sake of not having to connect a wire is the perfect example of "First world problem".
Engineers: Hey everyone, we figured out a way to save 5% of our energy!
Tech companies: Great, because all our new devices waste over 50% of the energy they use every day!
Re:been done (Score:4, Insightful)
Definitely get a pair of wireless headphones - no more cables for the dog to trip over, or to get pulled out when there's a sudden emergency downstairs. But the only problem is charging via USB.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not an audiophile, but the tiny amp inside wireless headphones usually suck.
Stop buying the cheapest pair on the rack.
Re: (Score:3)
Even the most expensive pair can't hold a hand to a set of affordable top of the line headphones. That's the thing, you can spend $500 on an okay set of wireless headphones, or you can spend $500 on about the best headphones money can buy. You're making compromises regardless of how much money you spend.
I have both types. But I only use the wireless set for watching TV at night.
Re:been done (Score:5, Informative)
Agreed. Apple spent the last decade making their technology more and more energy efficient. This seems like it is a step straight backwards. You still have to have a device plugged into your wall with a cable up to some sort of charging plate, so (ignoring any theoretical differences in ease of waterproofing) the sole difference between wireless charging and wired charging from a user's perspective is saving about two seconds when you get home at night, and half a second to unplug it in the morning. Even if you're only losing one or two percent, if every device did this, it would add up to real money.
I don't buy the Qi folks' argument that it makes it easier to keep it on the charger all the time, so people will do so. Apart from technology workers who sit at a desk all day, that isn't very practical. People don't leave their phone off the charger all day because it is inconvenient to plug in a cable. They leave their phone off the charger all day because they want to always have it with them, and it is too much hassle even without having to plug it in. And when you factor in the percentage of iPhone users who keep their phone in a case (and thus would get dramatically worse transfer efficiency), the entire concept seems borderline insane.
Now if you told me they were going to bundle a wireless charging station for the Apple TV remote—a device that you pick up several times an hour while in use, that you don't put in a case to protect it, and that you want to always be able to grab without worrying about whether it is charged—that would make a lot of sense. But a cell phone? It just seems like a frivolous waste of power, not to mention space inside the device. And with people already complaining about inadequate battery life, with entire industries springing up to provide pre-charged external battery packs at airports, and with even Apple getting into the external battery pack market, wasting space inside the device for a charging feature that saves at most a few seconds per day seems like just about the dumbest idea I've ever heard, with the possible exception of the rumor that they're going to remove the headphone jack....
Then again, Apple's whole charging story is making less and less sense with every passing year. My parents recently bought one of the new Apple TV models, and we were shocked when we realized that although they provide a lightning cable to charge the remote control, they didn't bother to include a USB port on the device to plug that cable into. So unless you have some other device to use as a charger, when you get an Apple TV in the mail, the very first thing you have to do is go out to the store and drop another twenty bucks on a charger that Apple should have provided as part of the device for a unit cost of maybe five cents....
Re: been done (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The wasted power argument isn't silly. Yes, there's a lot of power waste that I could shave off elsewhere. I'm not one of those people who puts mechanical power switches on their TVs to save a few dollars a year or anything. But when I buy electronics, I do expect manufacturers to do their best to minimize power consumption, within reason, and I actually have replaced equipment when I determined that the power savings would pay for the replacement in under 5 years, so as a consumer I do at least pay som
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care which company makes it, wasting energy for the sake of not having to connect a wire is the perfect example of "First world problem".
This is a cop-out excuse that can be likened to the no-child-left-behind policy. Just because we're not in the 3rd world doesn't mean we should abandon search for new efficiencies. The results can always be weighed up in a cost-benefit analysis. Would I buy a wireless charging dock just to keep my phone charged at work? No, waste of money, no real benefit. Do I have one at home on my bedside table? Yep. Because fumbling for a damn charger at 1am without waking someone else or attempting to silence an alarm
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And how does it "seem pretty efficient" to you? Do you know exactly how much less power it would require without the wireless part?
Re: (Score:1)
I certainly hope you are joking.
Re: (Score:2)
Now the article is talking about working at ~1meter around the power source. Does your kettle work when that far away from the base?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: been done (Score:2)
Re: been done (Score:1)
Never mind, all the extra electromagnetic emissions will probably not be harmful.
Re: (Score:2)
Another factor: How efficient is it - I predict a considerable transmission loss too, and in this era of energy saving dictates it might be a bad idea.
And the same people that buy electric vehicles and look down their noses at all the inferior people are the same ones that buy wireless everything and would use one of these wireless chargers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
And a good thing too. Micro USB is total shit. I can't count how many of those connectors have broken on me. Lightning cables are at least sturdy enough on the connector side. Thankfully it looks like the new USB 3.1 connector solves a lot of the failure issues micro USB has had. Plus, like lightning, it's reversible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting.
I have never broken a micro USB cable despite tripping over them many times.
I have, however, broken 2 lightning cables with very little force, the paddle (piece with the conductors on either side) breaks off easily.
You are giving up sturdiness (metal housing in a trapezoidal shape protecting the conductors) for convenience (no metal housing which allows reversible plug).
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, I fully expect them to invent and trademark some new type of force to accommodate this. Electromagnetic won't possibly do for an Apple product.
Re: (Score:2)
It's called Apple Wave.
Re:Snapple (Score:4, Interesting)
I think it will be good because ive yet to see a non pad type wireless charger in the wild. However I worry about apples rabid lawyers who will probbably sue anyone who try's to make anything similar.
Anyone remember the magsafe connectors? Very few other companies are using similar connections even today.
Decent magsafe type headphone and power connectors for other devices are just now starting to come out this year and I've yet to see any of those in person either.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple didn't invent it either, they just bought the company that did.
Re: (Score:1)
Google didn't create Android either, they just bought the company that did.
Your point?
Re: (Score:2)
MagSafe seems like the ideal solution... but it isn't shiny and new.
Re: (Score:2)
I once got a titanium drill bit stuck in my tooth at a university dental clinic. Didn't hear any radio stations (at least not when awake or asleep), but my tooth would heat up when I used the mobile phone.
Re:Snapple (Score:4, Funny)
It will be incompatible with everything else on the market and the drones will hail Apple as the first one to bring it to market, oh and it will be inefficient as fark and make peoples metal dental work buzz.
It will be 5% efficient, the other 95% will be lost to the reality distortion field.
Re: (Score:2)
And WiTricity [ted.com]...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference here is that Apple's purported solution requires no physical contact with the device. No mat, no pad, just use your device anywhere within the range of the charger and it'll charge wirelessly, over-the-air.
They certainly didn't invent it, and it isn't innovative at this point, but if they're the first ones to put it into widespread use, they'll likely reap a lot of well-deserved credit in the media.
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple builds the technology in to a platform which already has widespread use, then that technology will have widespread use as well... It doesn't say anything else about the technology however (whether or not it is good, or even if it is useful).
It's like saying IE was the best browser because it was so widely used for a time... but that was only because it was the default browser on the dominant (at the time) platform.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like saying IE was the best browser because it was so widely used for a time
Correlation != causation. Contrary to your reading, I neither suggested nor implied that things are good because they're widespread. Rather, I spent a paragraph explaining the differentiating factor for this technology and then suggested that a company stood to gain by getting it to market first. Which is true. Having widespread use is necessary, but by no means is it causative, nor does being widespread mean they're better.
In fact, the reason I specified "widespread" was not because I was making the value