Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple 'Evaluating' Solar Cell Vendors for Future Products?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It will charge as you use it
It should charge whenever you are using it adding extended life to the battery. Amorphous solar cells don't have to be in the direct sunlight to work.
It should charge whenever you are using it adding extended life to the battery. Amorphous solar cells don't have to be in the direct sunlight to work.
Ever think that hundreds of brilliant and motivated engineers might have a few ideas that you couldn't think of, Random Internet Person?
Seems like someone from the energy companies is down voting all the comments speaking positively about solar.
Let's hope cases get solar panels, too. I have a Mophie case/external battery pack, which would cover up any solar panels on the back.
I do like the idea, though.
I do like the idea, though.
Practical?
My iPhone is almost always in my pocket or indoors. The few times I was tanning in the sun while listening to music, it overheated and shut down. Electronics in direct sunlight is never a good idea. With the few number of consumers that would actually use the feature, I think it's better off leaving it as a 3rd party accessory.
My iPhone is almost always in my pocket or indoors. The few times I was tanning in the sun while listening to music, it overheated and shut down. Electronics in direct sunlight is never a good idea. With the few number of consumers that would actually use the feature, I think it's better off leaving it as a 3rd party accessory.
Zing!
EDIT: Personally, I think solar panels are an aesthetic nightmare. If Apple does include solar panels, I'd expect them to make it very subtle.
Last edited:
Why are you posting a photo of Samsung's first ever ENTRY LEVEL solar powered phone from 2009? It's totally irrelevant to what we're dealing with, things have moved on.
This will be amazing once Apple gets it working. It will increase battery life by 5x or longer for many users, in fact some people will see infinite battery life. If you use your phone only 30 minutes per day, maybe the solar cells running 24 hours per day can provide enough power and more.
It means many people will NEVER have to charge their phones.
Can you imagine NEVER having to charge your cell phone?
That's what Apple will bring to the table.
It means many people will NEVER have to charge their phones.
Can you imagine NEVER having to charge your cell phone?
That's what Apple will bring to the table.
If you use your iPhone in direct sunlight, it turns off because of overheating... how will you be able to solar charge your device without damaging it?
Where do you live? The Sahara desert?
Honestly, I have *never* had that happen.
Hahah.. excellent retort Sir!
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
We can figure that one out but those who make great profit from existing energy sources can't figure out how to preserve and/or make more money by evolving toward Solar. Develop small, cheap, relatively high-efficiency solar cells and people will buy their own, put them on their roofs, cars, etc and then stop sending an ever-increasingly large payment to the power company. Those who profit from those payments want to keep those monthly payments flowing (and growing).
That's also why they desperately want the hydrogen fuel cell concept to be the future for automobiles, as then there is a reason to keep having to go to a refueling station and pay for fuel on a regular basis. Heaven forbid we evolve technologies that might allow us to do away with the gas station.
In capitalism, the ultimate problem is when a big leap forward will extinguish a mainstream commodity market (like utilities, communications, insurance, etc- the stuff just about everyone must pay for on a regular basis) AND you have a small pool of very wealthy people who are on the receiving end of those cash flows. They have ZERO incentive to invest or support drives to cut their own revenue throats... even for the betterment of their fellow man and the planet. Instead, they'll be quick to buy out the independent inventor breakthroughs and suppress internal innovations that risk the status quo.
These are the companies quick to patent everything for defensive purposes. In other words, they're not patenting something to protect their opportunity when they go to market... they have NO intention of going to market. Instead, they seek lots of patents to use against others who might want to take something to market that might upset their apple cart. IMO, defensive patents should be killed off with a "use it or lose it policy." Little-to-no progress in going to market or licensing it to go to market turns the patent into public domain in the short term. A better patent system should be about bringing big innovations to market ASAP, not blocking others from bringing life-changing innovations to market.
The only way to break this is to have the independent inventor choose to forego the wealth offered by the established players and force his/her invention into the mainstream in a way that it is going to take hold even when the defensive patents are used to try to suppress the invention. Then, we move forward whether the deep-pocket company lawyers crush the inventor and his/her company or not. For example, if the independent inventor of- say- a cure for a major disease (that currently yields massive revenues on one-a-day pill "treatments") would release the specifics of the cure in full to the public domain such that people with even modest knowledge of such things could make their own, the cure would likely kill off a big (highly profitable) disease whether the pharmaceutical company sued the original inventor into oblivion and/or made claims that his cure infringed on elements of their defensive patent portfolio. Otherwise, the status quo rules for as long as those with deep pockets and ever-bigger (defensive) patent portfolios rule. And don't look to the government to fix this issue without observing the kinds of companies that contribute most to both Dem and Rep re-election campaigns.
Last edited:
There is also the fact that phones tend to spend most of their time in pockets/purses or indoors. The value of a solar panel in such a product is debatable, however I can understand Apple looking into it. If it can be incorporated into an iPhone with no drawbacks, then it probably should be. I'll take an extra hour of battery life any day.
I don't see any downside if they can work it into the phone so it does not hurt the design.
If Apple wants to be truly revolutionary they should try to find a way to harness internet hot air, especially on this forum, and use it to charge i devices.
Yes, that is the only potential drawback that comes to mind. If Apple can't hide the ugliness of solar panels, then I doubt they'd use it.
Solar power isn't much use in my pocket, and even out of it in Scotland! Much better would be to generate power from motion, then when I'm walking, the phone is charging, whether it's in my pocket or on my arm.
Also, when the battery runs down, I could give it a quick shake to charge it up.
iPhone users are such bankers.
Also, when the battery runs down, I could give it a quick shake to charge it up.
iPhone users are such bankers.
eww the prius of mobile phones.
If people were really interested in clean renewable energies and using solar power, we might as well build the wardenclyffe tower again
If people were really interested in clean renewable energies and using solar power, we might as well build the wardenclyffe tower again
iPhone? In the sun?
How do you resolve any over heating issues?
That seems to be a problem.
Thomas
How do you resolve any over heating issues?
That seems to be a problem.
Thomas
I gotta think this is more for an accessory than it is for the device itself. Maybe like an inductive charging mat, or a case that's wearable while out and about. Pretty cool IMO.