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's 140W Power Adapter is Company's First GaN Charger, Supports USB-C Power Delivery 3.1
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I’ve heard this excuse before. Every Anker plug I’ve ever purchased is UL listed.
Apparently not all Anker chargers are UL Listed. Not an excuse.
I was simply talking about the electrical engineering reason. You can trash Apple all you want, but the separation between high and low voltage is what matters as all manufactures have to deal with the same physics.
Yes. For now USB-C is limited to 100W.
Once an EPR USB-C cable exists, it’s very likely Apple will go to 140W fast charge on the USB-C ports as well. We already know the brick is PD 3.1. There just hasn’t been a cable other than Apple’s MagSafe cable that is EPR, which can carry 240W.
Source:
]
Sure, the ****** ones, but there are tons of legit brands out there. Satechi Anker, Aukey, etc. USB-C is an open standard not like the old knock off magsafes
Why? It’s 140W. It’s the largest of its kind. The rest of the industry is delivering 100W GaN only on USB-PD 3.0. This is the first 3.1 charger; to add more ports will make the brick even larger.
The fact that all of the new chargers aren't using GaN is also a bit bewildering... Why only the 140W version? Especially if you're making a 67W that is new to the lineup as well?
Yet another charger where the cable comes out at 90° to the wall. Will this ever change? It causes sooo much extra wear and tear.
This makes sense— Apple likely has higher safety requirements than companies like Anker and Hyper. If something goes wrong with their chargers on millions of devices, it’s a big deal…
Some products are:
Anker 360 Charger (60W)
The Anker Advantage: Join the 50 million+ powered by America's leading USB Charging Brand. Advanced Charging Technology: PowerIQ and VoltageBoost combine to pro
us.anker.com
"Certified Safe: Anker’s MultiProtect safety system and UL certification ensures complete protection for you and your devices. Worldwide 100-240 volt AC input voltage."
So is it just for fast-charging that a Macbook touted as cooler and more efficient needs a brick 50% more powerful than the 2019 MBP 16?! Regardless, it feels like a letdown.
Guessing supply chain constraints. Prioritizing enough parts for the bigger charger which needed miniaturization would be my guess.
If it had 2 ports, then it couldn't deliver 140W to the Macbook Pro when 2 devices are plugged in and charging. I would guess the 16" MBPMax needs all the power it can get.
Multiple ports are convenient, but if you use more than one port, the wattage is split and lowers the max deliverable to a single port.
Exactly. We all saw with the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 what happens when a big producer goes cutting edge on power/battery technology.
Then there wouldn’t be anything to innovate on and change in the next few years to make you buy one.
The detail still missing is the dimensions of the charger. Everyone is complaining about the size of a charger that “looks big”. We just don’t know.
I want to know what the power draw is on the fully loaded 16” to not slide backwards on battery when plugged in to a different charger. My dock provides 87 watts of power delivery. Is the 140 watt brick to supply enough power for fast charging, or am I going to be forced to use the power brick in addition to my dock?