Apple Joins Wireless Power Consortium Behind 'Qi' Standard Ahead of iPhone 8

[freediverx]

Its charging the phone without a wire so its wire less

There's a wall wart connected to a wire connected to a humongous charging pad that must be in contact with the phone. One has to be pretty gullible to think of this as wireless innovation.

 

[bushman4]

Qi is old news. I'd rather plug my iPhone in and have rapid charging instead, Or have long distance wireless charging. But Long distance wireless charging doesn't seem to be proven and ready yet inspite of their appearances at CES.

 

[Barry Bishop]

You have seen marketing videos of their wireless charging tech. Reality paint's a different picture. CES 2017 just passed.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4036499-energous-expectations-ces-2017

I've seen it with my own eyes. I was there.
[doublepost=1487054258][/doublepost]

Why is it a gimmick, it works. Whether you like how it works is irrevant, but you can charge your device without plugging a cable into it, simple by placing it on a desk. The end.

Same reason 3D tv's are a gimmick, not practical.

 

[Bromeo]

Would be great to see Qi support on the next iPhone. It is something I like on my Android phones. I also like how Apple implemented inductive charging on the Watch using a magnet and convex shape to align the coils. That works extraordinarily well at night when going to bed - the watch and charging disc just kind of find themselves and click together on my nightstand. I wish my AirPods case had that, and... yes, my iPhone. As much as I loved the Lightning connector over micro-USB, as the iPhone has gotten thinner, plugging in the lightning connector into the edge of a thin, slippery iPhone in the dark is almost as bad as micro-USB in the old days. Would rather I could just set it down onto some charging disc instead.

The biggest problem I had with Qi in my other devices was the alignment requirement; this was especially so with the built-in Qi charging pad in my car... by the time I fiddle around getting the phone lined up just so to accept a charge, I could have just plugged it in. Maybe Apple will have a better solution.

 

[admob71]

I've seen it with my own eyes. I was there.
[doublepost=1487054258][/doublepost]

Same reason 3D tv's are a gimmick, not practical.

You place your phone on a flat surface and it starts to charge. The end...
How is this the same as wearing silly glasses that give you a headache to watch the same programme.. give over fella, you are making yourself look silly now.

 

[Smartass]

This current wireless tech is a total BS. And it's not even wireless, you still have to plug that charging pad into the wall and it's even worse since you cant use your phone properly while its charging, unless you want to stop it.
Much better, and easier, solution for Apple would be to just stick a 10m long lightning cable into the box with the iphone so people can at least walk around the room while their phone is charging... It's not wireless but still beats the sh*t out of these remarkably useless charging pads.

 

[Ma2k5]

Always found contact wireless charging very useless, because it isn't practical to be able to use your phone while charging. If you use it as a music controller to bluetooth devices, it gets really fiddly if it has to lay specifically down on a mat. If like me you like to use it in the car for SAT-NAV while charging, brings a plethora of issues.

I'd rather just have a strong magnetic charger, similar to Magsafe, that would bring some added functionality (less likely for your phone to go flying on pulled cables!). It is also a more pleasant experience of putting/taking off a cable.

 

[McCool71]

But wouldn't Apple have a red face if their wireless charging solution was Qi with no long range capacity? How many interviews did they say there was no benefit to the Qi type system!

I don't think that will be a problem at all. Apple has a long history of pi**ing all over features that they don't have yet, only to praise it as the second coming as soon as they offer it themselves. You sell what you have, that's the way the world works, also for Apple.
[doublepost=1487064630][/doublepost]

you cant use your phone properly while its charging, unless you want to stop it.

If your phone in effect charges every time you put it down, the need for charging while using it to avoid running out of steam is reduced by a huge margin.

Do you plug in your cable every time you put your phone down at home or in the office? Probably not. With QI charging you do, the phone rarely reaches 0 battery capacity because you don't wait until the last minute to plug it in like most people do today.

 

[dilbert99]

A mat is not real wireless charging.

Everyone is different in their views and that is fine, personally, I view a mat as wireless charging as in it gives me benefit of being able to charge my devices without having to fiddle with cables. When you live in a family with lots of devices from watches, phones, tablets, laptops and so on, i'd love the day I can charge all these just by placing them on the table, be it at home, at work or cafe.

We will never get charging without wires, as in the device that supplies the charge will be plugged in to the mains via a wire.

As for distance charging, I wonder what tech would provide this efficiently. Would it be some kind of sonic or light/laser based tech?

But good that Apple is joining a standard.

 

[zapmymac]

It's a convenience feature.

When I get home I just drop my Note5 onto its Qi stand and walk away.

No fumbling with wires, reaching behind my desk or nightstand because it fell back there, no aiming, one-handed, reach-for-it-in-the-middle-of-the-night-without-ripping-the-cord-out or waking-the-wife-because-the-lamp-fell-over-when-the-cord-was-wrapped-around-it convenient.

It's about damn time Apple did this.

it was great back in 2009 to drop my palm pre on the charging stand,next to my bed at night. The night face clock was quite nice. No fiddling, you felt the magnet lock on, and done.

 

[jimbo1mcm]

I've had wireless charging on a Galaxy S7. It was nice but I prefer the quick charging of my Pixel.

 

[mazz0]

Well, it's good that they're working with standards instead of proprietary solutions, but it's not looking promising for actual ranged wireless charging, ie the kind that's actually useful.

 

[MacBH928]

maybe its for other products like apple pencil charging off iPad or mouse charging off macbook/imac

 

[epicrayban]

What some are failing to understand about wireless charging are these three key points:

1) The "wireless" in wireless charging is between the charging pad/stand and the smartphone. To get it to charge, you aren't plugging anything into your device each time. In that sense, it is wireless.

2) So what if the charging pad/stand has a wire connected to an outlet? You're never fumbling with it. It's tucked away like any other power cable for an electronic. I don't see what the obsession is with pointing out the wire for the charging pad just to say it isn't wireless charging. Until the technology develops, true range/proximity charging seems a while away. And those who fear wireless charging is too slow, imagine how slow range charging would be.

3) Most importantly... even if you want to do away with these arguments about cables, the real draw, the real feature, the real advantage of wireless charging is that you get to top off your device's battery throughout the day. Instead of idling on a table, it's idling on a charging pad. This allows you to not have to worry about battery life as much; it's constantly being charged up whenever you put it down. I sometimes leave work with 100% on my phone if I haven't been picking it up and using it much.

And hey, if you still don't find wireless charging worth it, that's fine, too. It's not like Apple is going to remove the charging port anytime too soon. As such, there really is no reason to argue against wireless charging in the next iPhone.

In fact, I have a feeling many will finally understand the convenience of wireless charging now that Apple is finally onboard. I'm disappointed, too, that they didn't leapfrog the competition and introduce range charging, but it's about time they jumped onboard with inductive.

 

[rGiskard]

I'll be stoked if Apple go with a the Qi standard. If both Apple and Android devices conform to Qi then charging mats will finally show up in public areas, cafes, cars, etc. No more fussing with chargers and cables while out.

 

[AsherN]

Range charging still needs a power cable to the emitter. And you need emitters. So it would not chrge everywhere. Until someone finds a way to use existing RF emmissions to cherge, it won't be ubiquitous. Imagine if your phone could chrge using all that WiFi crap out there.

 

[Analog Kid]

No, Inductive charging isn't considered wireless because your phone has to be tethered to one spot, often in one position, while it charges.

And yet it is without wires, thus wireless (and also untethered...).

NFC is also short range, but wireless.

You really don't get to change the meaning of words arbitrarily just to overstate your rhetoric. You're completely obscuring the beneficial distinction that people like @melendezest see with inductive charging. For you (and me) being wireless is not sufficient, it also needs to be less restrictive-- so say that.

Range charging still needs a power cable to the emitter. And you need emitters. So it would not chrge everywhere. Until someone finds a way to use existing RF emmissions to cherge, it won't be ubiquitous. Imagine if your phone could chrge using all that WiFi crap out there.

We could harvest microwatts at a time!

My Mac is about 10 feet from my high end WiFi router and it's receiving -35dBm (about 300 nanoWatts). The iPhone7 has a 7.45Whr battery. Charging that battery from my WiFi would take about 2700 years. And that's ignoring the self discharge of the battery...

 

[Appleaker]

And yet it is without wires, thus wireless (and also untethered...).

NFC is also short range, but wireless.

You really don't get to change the meaning of words arbitrarily just to overstate your rhetoric. You're completely obscuring the beneficial distinction that people like @melendezest see with inductive charging. For you (and me) being wireless is not sufficient, it also needs to be less restrictive-- so say that.

We could harvest microwatts at a time!

My Mac is about 10 feet from my high end WiFi router and it's receiving -35dBm (about 300 nanoWatts). The iPhone7 has a 7.45Whr battery. Charging that battery from my WiFi would take about 2700 years. And that's ignoring the self discharge of the battery...

I don't believe I ever said inductive isn't wireless - of course it is. I was just saying that that's the reason I think people say it isn't wireless, rather than what you said which was that it's not considered wireless because the pad still has to be plugged in. You could be right, but if that is the case then what are they expecting?

 

[Val-kyrie]

Your argument is entirely an argument from silence. Imagination is well indeed, but nothing you describe exists. In reality, it is easier to plug your iPhone into a wall using an adapter.

Before you latch onto your wireless dream scenario, you should also consider how little impact there has been in the PC peripheral space despite all the aficionados of USB-C. There has been no increase in USB-C anything except docks and adapters. Third party peripherals have not shifted. Apple's adoption of a technology does not guarantee widespread adoption and technological revolution.

Think beyond yourself and your immediate needs. How about the traveler who would like to be able to go and not lug along the brick? How about a mat in the airplane tray table? How about mats on the train or bus? How about mats at the airport instead of huddling up with others around sockets and sitting on the floor? How about mats at restaurants where you can grab a charge while you are eating lunch? Office desks? Conference tables? Student desks? Seminar tables? And on and on.

There's lots of places your phone rests where plugging in Lightning to charge is not possible, easy or readily available. Now imagine charging pads in such places. Once Apple goes with a standard (or their own (non)standard) such pads will pop up in lots of places where they cannot already be found. And as they propagate, one might gain the confidence to be able to leave the brick at home.

Besides, it doesn't really matter if one sees this as pointless or not right now. If Apple implements it, some of the same people will be back gushing about the greatness of it and why it is must have, "how did we ever get by with wired charging?" Right now, opinions can vary widely because rumors are early and nobody knows if Apple is really going to do it. Once the collective believes Apple is going to implement it, a wave of enthusiasm for it will rise up and swamp anyone who still see it as pointless.

 

[fyun89]

The distinctions people are drawing are getting kind of silly. Qi goes into the hundreds of kHz which can be considered RF. A mat is just as "wireless" as WiFi is. I think some people are trying to say a mat isn't wireless because you need a wire to the mat and want to contrast that with something like Energous-- but the Energous base stations need wires too.

There are three categories of technology that I see being discussed: those that transfer power by conduction, those that rely on reactive (or near) fields, and those that rely on radiated (or far) fields. If it isn't powered by conduction, it's wireless.

It's pointless to try and change, narrow or distort the meaning of words like "wireless" and "RF" to mean something special here. There are plenty of words already in existence that distinguish the different technologies-- can we just use them?


This doesn't really make sense. Magnetic fields aren't radiation. If the battery itself is susceptible to the magnetic fields it is a combination of bad luck and bad design.

If you're worried about heat and stress, then quick charging sounds like the worst possible thing to do-- more current in less time means more heat buildup and more stress.

Lithium Ion battery life is measured in charge cycles so whether you are discharging and charging, or constantly topping off doesn't make a difference-- a typical battery can pass so many coulombs in its life regardless of how many times it was plugged in. If you are plugged in to the charger and the device powers itself from the line voltage rather than the battery (which would make more sense that constantly charging and discharging the battery) then the battery will receive less wear.

"Long range" isn't happening if long range means out of the near field.

Can anyone explain to me how long range charging is meant to work? I'm assuming they're trying to operate in the unlicensed ISM bands. Current ISM band restrictions in the US limit power to 1W of conducted power through a maximum 6dBi antenna.

Basically that means if you capture all of the energy transmitted, you get 1W at your device. But to capture all of the power, you need an enormous antenna. As a rough estimate, if you want to capture that full 1W at a distance of 5m from the source, you need an antenna with an aperture of about 20 square meters. Not something that will readily fit in your pocket.

If you make the transmit antenna more directional, the FCC requires you to also reduce the conducted power meaning that you might be able to make the receive antenna smaller but then your best case power recovery becomes much less than a Watt.

Am I missing something here?

I think you need to reread my post. I was against the people who were complaining lol

 

[Val-kyrie]

Its charging the phone without a wire so its wire less

It still requires direct contact with the charger, so regardless of marketing, it is still contact charging--and less efficient to boot.

This is guaranteed to cause heat-related problems and higher energy bills.

And it is still less convenient for normal usage, like plugging it into your car or at an airport or at a friend or family member's house.

Sorry, this has gimmick written all over it.
[doublepost=1487105780][/doublepost]Is it really so much more difficult to use a dock with a lightning port than a dock without?

Either way you need the dock, so what does this really accomplish?

I should have added this: No aiming or inserting. Nothing to break off. Literally drop-it-on-the-mat-or-stand easy.

A dock is the next best thing, but others here have already provided examples of how Qi charging can be more useful in other certain scenarios.

 

[JayMBP]

I don't get some of the philosophies here.

Wireless charging is bound to have less efficiency as distance increases no matter how it's implemented. It's simply against the very basic law of physic and thermodynamic to not do so. Far (or really just medium field) field wireless power transmission has a few important points up for trade: Efficiency/Cost/Safety.

You can pick any 2 of the three, but never achieving all 3 together. At least no solution is currently known of doing all 3. And don't take my word for it... Google wireless power transmission and IEEE and you'd see the exact same point.

Qi is a trade off that I think it's justifiable. It's less convenient and less magical, but it's the solution capable of achieving mass-adoption as it's simple and cheap to implement.

Energous sounds cool and all, but I have yet to see an announcement of its emitter pricing. And given that none were even demonstrated (only products with receiving end), I'd imagine the emitter itself is not designed to be as consumer friendly as say a Qi charging mat.

 

[Analog Kid]

I think you need to reread my post. I was against the people who were complaining lol

lol I think you need to reread your post because it looks to me like you're agreeing that a system without wires isn't truly wireless:

I get the point that mat induction charging isn't true wireless charging.

I didn't say anything about whether people should complain or not, I'm simply saying that wireless is a word with a meaning and ya'll are using it wrong. Induction charging is truly wireless.

 

[AsherN]

We could harvest microwatts at a time!

My Mac is about 10 feet from my high end WiFi router and it's receiving -35dBm (about 300 nanoWatts). The iPhone7 has a 7.45Whr battery. Charging that battery from my WiFi would take about 2700 years. And that's ignoring the self discharge of the battery...

Not saying it feasible, just saying that until something like that can be achieved, Qi is the only viable wireless option. With the Energous-type solution, you have to be in close proximity to the emitter. I look at my fairly typical usage. The phone is n a dock all night and on my desk whenever I'm sitting at my desk. When I had my Nexus5, I had a Qi charger on my night table and one on my desk. That phone spent a fair amount of time charging. I don't remember it going below 50% on any given work day.

 

[iMi]

Lumia 950. Has an 808 Snapdragon. I get up at 5:30 plug in at 5:35 leave at ~6:30 100% charge.. rinse repeat. I think the 55 minutes of quick charge once a day is fine.

How do you like the Lumia? How do you mitigate the app store issue or does it not matter to you?