Hands-On With Apple's New MagSafe Duo Charger for iPhone 12 and Apple Watch

[The Game 161]

Used my 18w charger and worked wel it’s nice having a charger with no risk of knocking it off during the night and it’s good to know it’s secure on the place it’s charging

small and compact too so not taking up space

 

[LongWayHome]

Factually wrong. Third party chargers get full speed. MagSafe requires the new PD3.0 profile while most old chargers were stuck at PD2.0. Zollotech did an update video showing the new Anker and Aukey 20w charger works: "As long as you have a 9V/2.22A charger, it'll charge at full speed"

Apple isn't forcing people to buy their new chargers. Any third party charger running PD3.0 with at least 20W can do full charging.

Combine with the fact that MagSafe works with other Qi devices, MagSafe is far more compatible than a lightning cable which means MagSafe is more than likely going to outlast the lightning standard in supporting many devices in the future.

It's environmentally friendly.




No. As I mentioned above, all PD2.0 chargers don't support the 9V 2.2A spec. PD2.0 has to use the next power profile down. This is why an 87W Apple USB-C charger won't charge at full speed because it doesn't have the 9V 2.2A spec.

Please educate yourself on what PD3.0 is.




Factually wrong again. Any PD3.0 >=20W charger works. As noted above, my Anker 20W charges at full speed. I think you've been brainwashed by the typical clickbait articles complaining about full MagSafe charge speeds.



Apple has been shipping USB-A to Lightning cables since 2013. That's 7+ years. Apple continues to sell USB-A to lightning.

On the otherhand:
Apple released the 87w charger in 2016 and replaced with 96w only 3 years later. 87w is no longer sold by Apple
Apple released the 29w charger in 2015 and replaced with 30w only 3 years later. 29w is no longer sold by Apple.
Apple released the 18w charger in 2018 and replaced with 20w only 2 years later. 18w is no longer sold by Apple.

Tell me which is more consistent?



Disagreed, considering your thesis was based on incorrect information as noted above.

I'm sorry but I'm not wrong. I never said 3rd party chargers couldn't attain fast charging speeds. I said Apple is forcing people to buy another charging brick (theirs or otherwise) if they want to attain that fast charging speed. And let me tell you, they are pushing hard for people to buy their 20W brick. When I bought my 12PM I've never heard such a sales pitch on why I needed to buy their 20W brick. When I asked how that was helping the environment, the girl (who admittedly was very sweet) said "Yeah I know, but we have been told to really try and sell our charger."

I only said Apple is forcing people to buy an additional charger if they want the fast charging speed. Apple's schtick on chargers is "We aren't putting them in the box because its environmentally friendly as everyone already has our charging bricks." But they fail to mention to the consumer that with their new phones and charging accessories (Magsafe) that they will need to buy an additional charger in order to get fast charging capability.

Magsafe works with other Qi devices if you want to charge them at a snails pace. Its worthless using Magsafe with anything other than an iPhone.

I haven't been brainwashed by anything. Unless you have a specific type of charger (one that Apple is also conveniently pushing) then your iPhone won't fast charge with Magsafe. So if you want to be able to do that you will need to buy an additional charger if you don't have a PD3.0 20W charger. So yes I realize that people don't have to buy it, but I'd buy into the envronment nonsense a little more if Apple didn't conveniently come out with at 20W charger the same year they ditch the charging brick. If they were so concerned over the environment they would have just left it at "There are a billion charging bricks out in the world and we recommend these 3rd party bricks should you need one."

Again I'd disagree with you on consistency. Apple supplied a charging brick with all of their previous USB-A devices. Its not consistent to release a cord only one year later without the supplied power brick and tell the customer "everyone already has these power bricks" when they just started releasing lightning to usb-c for their phones last year. The consistency is the cable working with the bricks they've supplied. Releasing a new cable last year that requires a completely different charging brick than every single iPhone purchased previously, then taking that charging brick away this year, is hardly consistent.

Again, I don't care about any of this when it comes to buying it. If I did I wouldn't have bought the iPhone 12 and just stayed with what I had. But nothing you will say is going to add up to the fact that what Apple is doing is SOLELY motivated by profit and has zero to do with the environment. And that's fine, their goal is to make money.

 

[Traverse]

I had a suspicion there was a catch to how nice it looked, I’ve been debating one of them to clean up the nightstand but I may just keep looking.😞 Thanks for sparing me the disappointment!

The (new) Nomad base station pro supposedly has full surface charging but at $199 it’s more expensive and not as compact as the MagSafe duo.

I would not recommend the Base Station Pro for a few reason:

1. You have to use Mac/PCs to update it's firmware, which is absurd for a charger
2. It has no integrated Apple Watch charger
3. It's having issues charging an iPhone 12. While this should be fixed with a firmware update, I want to worry about updating my charger.

 

[Traverse]

That makes no sense. Apple decides to release something like MagSafe without a brick to save the environment, but only allows their 20W brick to supply the full power which requirs people that want that to go out and buy another charging brick? The proof is that people aren't wanting to go out and buy another brick, Apple is forcing them to buy it if they want to get the full charge capabilities of their MagSafe charger. Its not a limitation of the 18W charger, its a limitation set by Apple so that ONLY their 20W charger that people will have to go buy will supply the full power to MagSafe. People wouldn't be throwing away their 18W chargers if Apple would just allow those chargers to supply the full power to MagSafe. They don't, and want people to go buy a new brick from them.

How do cords remain consistent over the years if Apple just started changing the cord to lightning to usb-c last year for iPhones? Its not consistent simply because Apple chooses to not make it consistent. Every other year has been lighting to USB-A before the iPhone 11. That to me isn't consistent with anything outside of people needing to buy new charging bricks now if they want to use the cord that comes with their phone.

For the record, I am not one of these people that cares that Apple removed the charger. My only issue is with those that think this was done for environmental reasons. It absolutely was not. Apple can't say "We are not including charging bricks because there are too many of them in the world and we want to do our part for the environment" while at the same time release a entire new ecosystem of charging accessories that require people to buy a new brick for them to work at their full capacity. If Apple was so concerned about the environment I highly doubt they would be releasing an entire new line of chargers encouraging people to replace their old form of charging their phone.

Its ridiculous to think it was done for any other reason that money. And that's fine, but the environment nonsense wears thin on me.

Uh, there are several YouTube videos showing that the 18W charger works just fine. The iPhone charges 1-2W slower, but I doubt anyone would notice, it was like a 5% difference over an hour as even the 20W gets throttled as the device heats up.

If I get one then I’ll use my 18W charger. I see no need to throw out my perfectly good 18W charger for a marginal benefit.

It would be different if Apple didn’t let it charge at all.

 

[jcshas]

I would not recommend the Base Station Pro for a few reason:

1. You have to use Mac/PCs to update it's firmware, which is absurd for a charger
2. It has no integrated Apple Watch charger
3. It's having issues charging an iPhone 12. While this should be fixed with a firmware update, I want to worry about updating my charger.

I have no interest in the nomad base station pro. Very happy with my MagSafe duo from Apple. Fully compatible with my iPhone 12 Pro and Series 6 Apple Watch and it’s less expensive than the Nomad Base Station Pro.

 

[vipergts2207]

I'm saying they imposed a limitation on Magsafe to only fast charge with their 20W charger. The 18W charger is capable of supplying more wattage through MagSafe, but Apple wanted people to purchased a new 20W charger to gain that functionality. I couldn't care less, but it has little to do with the environment.

No because the 18W brick doesn’t appear to support the PD 3.0 standard that MagSafe does. The 20W brick does support it. Did you even read the article I posted? Apple followed the PD 3.0 specification and that’s the sole reason why the 18W doesn’t charge at max speeds.

 

[LongWayHome]

No because the 18W brick doesn’t appear to support the PD 3.0 standard that MagSafe does. The 20W brick does support it. Did you even read the article I posted? Apple followed the PD 3.0 specification and that’s the sole reason why the 18W doesn’t charge at max speeds.

And that's fine, but Apple can't give me an environmental lecture on how charging bricks are already out in the wild while releasing a device that requires a new charging brick to fast charge. And oh by the way we conveniently now have one to offer you!

I don't care about PD 3.0 or any of that because that's not my argument. My argument is solely that Apple removed the charger claiming it was for "environmental purposes" and it absolutely was not.

 

[LongWayHome]

Uh, there are several YouTube videos showing that the 18W charger works just fine. The iPhone charges 1-2W slower, but I doubt anyone would notice, it was like a 5% difference over an hour as even the 20W gets throttled as the device heats up.

If I get one then I’ll use my 18W charger. I see no need to throw out my perfectly good 18W charger for a marginal benefit.

It would be different if Apple didn’t let it charge at all.

Then why come out with a new one at all if it was for the environment? You and others are confusing what I'm saying in that Apple somehow bricked their old chargers and that they won't work anymore. I know they work, they just don't charge as fast as Apple's new 20W charger. And when you go and buy your phone and buy MagSafe, Apple is going to "highly recommend" that you buy their 20W charger.

An environmental approach would have been to either design magsafe to fast charge with their already released 18W charger or to not release a new 20W charger and point people to 3rd party chargers if in fact they wanted to buy one. Yes that is a ridiculous thing for them to do becuase of course they want to make money off of chargers, which is the sole purpose they are doing this. Again, I'm fine with it, but their posturing on the environment is a gigantic eyeroll.

 

[vipergts2207]

Then why come out with a new one at all if it was for the environment? You and others are confusing what I'm saying in that Apple somehow bricked their old chargers and that they won't work anymore. I know they work, they just don't charge as fast as Apple's new 20W charger. And when you go and buy your phone and buy MagSafe, Apple is going to "highly recommend" that you buy their 20W charger.

An environmental approach would have been to either design magsafe to fast charge with their already released 18W charger or to not release a new 20W charger and point people to 3rd party chargers if in fact they wanted to buy one. Yes that is a ridiculous thing for them to do becuase of course they want to make money off of chargers, which is the sole purpose they are doing this. Again, I'm fine with it, but their posturing on the environment is a gigantic eyeroll.

Using their existing 18W brick instead of offering a new PD 3.0 complaint 20W charger would’ve made for an inferior product offering, not only with MagSafe, but with other products like the new iPad Air. Even if Apple had designed around the 18W, charging would’ve been capped low anyway. You realize even the 20W brick only charges at 11W right? The 18W would’ve capped at 9W at best. Progression of technology isn’t new, and Apple had to release a new adapter for PD 3.0 compatibility, end of story. Nobody should complain about Apple following industry standards.

And how is pointing people to third-party options better than releasing their own? A piece of future e-waste is being bought regardless. And with their own product Apple has full control over environmental (and human rights) standards. Apple should’ve continued to offer and design new products around an outdated power brick just to make you happy? You realize it’s possible to do something for more than one reason? It’s called a win-win. And Apple isn’t lecturing anybody. All they did was explain the reasoning for what they did. You’re free to agree or disagree with their action, but that doesn’t make it a lecture.

 

[Traverse]

Then why come out with a new one at all if it was for the environment?

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your argument. Yes, I find Apple's environmental excuse a bit obnoxious because that is clearly an ancillary motivation, but all they did was replace their 18W charger with a newer 20W that incorporated newer standards. Products are updated all the time.

I feel like you're arguing for the planned obsolesce angle, as in Apple intentionally planned this product to force people to buy another charging brick thereby making them more money and also hurting the environment, but I don't think they did that. The extra $19 for each MagSafe Duo charger (which will surely be a relatively small segment) will not move the needle from a financial perspective. Could they have updated the 18W to 20W before now? Maybe.

But again, I feel like you argument falls short due to the fact that their 18W charger that been sold for a while works just fine. There's no reason to go out and by the 20W unless you REALLY want that extra 5% or so an hour of charge.

 

[vipergts2207]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your argument. Yes, I find Apple's environmental excuse a bit obnoxious because that is clearly an ancillary motivation, but all they did was replace their 18W charger with a newer 20W that incorporated newer standards. Products are updated all the time.

I feel like you're arguing for the planned obsolesce angle, as in Apple intentionally planned this product to force people to buy another charging brick thereby making them more money and also hurting the environment, but I don't think they did that. The extra $19 for each MagSafe Duo charger (which will surely be a relatively small segment) will not move the needle from a financial perspective. Could they have updated the 18W to 20W before now? Maybe.

But again, I feel like you argument falls short due to the fact that their 18W charger that been sold for a while works just fine. There's no reason to go out and by the 20W unless you REALLY want that extra 5% or so an hour of charge.

Exactly. I’m all for criticizing Apple where it makes sense. Like the price of this product for instance. Or not including a charging brick with the charger. But criticizing Apple for updating one of their products is asinine.

 

[LongWayHome]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your argument. Yes, I find Apple's environmental excuse a bit obnoxious because that is clearly an ancillary motivation, but all they did was replace their 18W charger with a newer 20W that incorporated newer standards. Products are updated all the time.

I feel like you're arguing for the planned obsolesce angle, as in Apple intentionally planned this product to force people to buy another charging brick thereby making them more money and also hurting the environment, but I don't think they did that. The extra $19 for each MagSafe Duo charger (which will surely be a relatively small segment) will not move the needle from a financial perspective. Could they have updated the 18W to 20W before now? Maybe.

But again, I feel like you argument falls short due to the fact that their 18W charger that been sold for a while works just fine. There's no reason to go out and by the 20W unless you REALLY want that extra 5% or so an hour of charge.

Exactly. I’m all for criticizing Apple where it makes sense. Like the price of this product for instance. Or not including a charging brick with the charger. But criticizing Apple for updating one of their products is asinine.

Oh. My. God. I don't know how to make this any clearer. I'm not criticizing Apple in any way for making MagSafe compatible with fast charging with a newer charging brick. I'm also not criticizing them for removing the charging brick from the box. I'm simply saying that this had ZERO to do with the environment. It had everything to do with squeezing more money out of the consumer in any way possible. That's it, there's nothing else to it. Its all about squeezing a few more million out of the consumer every year by getting unknowing customers to walk into their store and buy their charging brick. Every single time someone buys a phone they are going to push for the charging brick sale and every single time someone buys a MagSafe cable (which is of itself a strike against the environment) they are going to push for the charging brick sale, thereby negating their argument that they are trying to help the environment by reducing the number of chargers out in the world. I witnessed this first hand from two different Apple geniuses when I bought iPhone 12's at different times this year. Both of them "strongly" recommended I buy the new 20W charging brick A. Because the phone didn't come with one and B. Because the phone will charge quicker with it. If I didn't know better I would have probably bought it both times because at no time did they say it would work with any other USB-C Charger or that I could use my old USB-A lighting cable. Many people won't know or will want fast charging and will buy the new charging brick "hurting" the environment.

If Apple could sell every single person who buys an iPhone this year and moving forward a charging brick they would be happier than pigs in ****. They wouldn't be sitting around going "Darn, be hurt the environment by selling all these bricks to the consumer. What a shame."

That's it, that's all. But please feel free to comment again on why Apple decided to release their 20W brick again updated with industry standards which means absolutely nothing in regards to what I was saying.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

Here’s a break down:
Any USB-A bricks do “not” work with magsafe, or the duo.
Apple 18 W: charges up to 10.7 W.
Apple 20 W: charges up to 11 W.
27 W +, charges at 14 W.
From what I can tell, with the exception of Apple’s 29 W adapter, the large majority of USB-C bricks work fine.
Also, Macs with USB-C can power the duo, but the iPad Pro and Air can not

 

[7thson]

Would not have thought to try using an iPad Pro/Air to power the Duo. Not surprised it doesn’t work, though.

 

[vipergts2207]

Oh. My. God. I don't know how to make this any clearer. I'm not criticizing Apple in any way for making MagSafe compatible with fast charging with a newer charging brick. I'm also not criticizing them for removing the charging brick from the box. I'm simply saying that this had ZERO to do with the environment. It had everything to do with squeezing more money out of the consumer in any way possible. That's it, there's nothing else to it. Its all about squeezing a few more million out of the consumer every year by getting unknowing customers to walk into their store and buy their charging brick. Every single time someone buys a phone they are going to push for the charging brick sale and every single time someone buys a MagSafe cable (which is of itself a strike against the environment) they are going to push for the charging brick sale, thereby negating their argument that they are trying to help the environment by reducing the number of chargers out in the world. I witnessed this first hand from two different Apple geniuses when I bought iPhone 12's at different times this year. Both of them "strongly" recommended I buy the new 20W charging brick A. Because the phone didn't come with one and B. Because the phone will charge quicker with it. If I didn't know better I would have probably bought it both times because at no time did they say it would work with any other USB-C Charger or that I could use my old USB-A lighting cable. Many people won't know or will want fast charging and will buy the new charging brick "hurting" the environment.

If Apple could sell every single person who buys an iPhone this year and moving forward a charging brick they would be happier than pigs in ****. They wouldn't be sitting around going "Darn, be hurt the environment by selling all these bricks to the consumer. What a shame."

That's it, that's all. But please feel free to comment again on why Apple decided to release their 20W brick again updated with industry standards which means absolutely nothing in regards to what I was saying.

It didn’t have zero to do with the environment. Apple will undoubtedly ship far fewer charging bricks by not including them with iPhones. That’s the fact that you’re either ignoring or missing. Most people won’t be buying this Duo, nor a 20W brick. Most people will continue using one of the many 5W power bricks they already have because it’s free and they charge their phone overnight so it doesn’t matter if it charges to 100% in 2 hours or 5 hours. I’m an Apple and general tech geek, but even I didn’t have a fast charger until just a couple weeks ago when I bought the 20W brick to use with the Duo.

If Apple sells a 20W brick to even half of iPhone buyers next year, which is likely very optimistic, they will have avoided shipping around 90 million bricks, and that’s just in one year. How does that not help the environment? Nobody’s debating that there aren’t also ulterior motives at play here, but you’re the only one ignoring the bonafide difference in environmental impact.

 

[Traverse]

So I ended up ordering one as a replacement to the Mophie charging puck I bought with my iPhone 8.

It's not perfect and yes it's too expense and should come with the 20W adapter, but I think I'll keep it. I've spent a lot of money trying out wireless chargers and they all just stop working or are too finicky. I'll be returning my Nomad Base Station as I realized that I actually tried the non-Apple Watch version a year ago and quickly returned it due to being finicky.

For now I've left the Mophie out as a permanent resting place for my AirPods, but I may put that away and just use the MagSafe Duo as that would be no different than my  Watch + Mophie setup. While it's not my ideal 3-device permanent charging mat solution, I like MagSafe. I've gotten used to the Mophie, it was always annoying to have to jiggle the phone to ensure it was charing and I still had the occasional issues (like this morning) where I woke up and realized the phone was mis aligned and didn't charge. I appreciate the MagSafe snap to place approach and U.I.

Also, you can life the iPhone off this charger one-handed, but it does require a bit of attention. Again, it's my m AirPower dream, but it's better than what I had.

 

[LongWayHome]

It didn’t have zero to do with the environment. Apple will undoubtedly ship far fewer charging bricks by not including them with iPhones. That’s the fact that you’re either ignoring or missing. Most people won’t be buying this Duo, nor a 20W brick. Most people will continue using one of the many 5W power bricks they already have because it’s free and they charge their phone overnight so it doesn’t matter if it charges to 100% in 2 hours or 5 hours. I’m an Apple and general tech geek, but even I didn’t have a fast charger until just a couple weeks ago when I bought the 20W brick to use with the Duo.

If Apple sells a 20W brick to even half of iPhone buyers next year, which is likely very optimistic, they will have avoided shipping around 90 million bricks, and that’s just in one year. How does that not help the environment? Nobody’s debating that there aren’t also ulterior motives at play here, but you’re the only one ignoring the bonafide difference in environmental impact.

Sigh....Did I say somewhere that it wouldn't have an environmental impact? I said Apple didn't do it for environmental reasons. They did it to try and squeeze several more million out of the consumer by introducing a new way to charge (MagSafe) as well as selling the brick outside of the phone and all accessories. Yeah they will put less of them out there, but at the same time they are adding to environmental waste by introducing a brand new charger (MagSafe) while also selling many, many more charging bricks than they would have before because they are no longer including it. We can continue to argue on this I guess if you want though.

 

[farewelwilliams]

I'm sorry but I'm not wrong. I never said 3rd party chargers couldn't attain fast charging speeds. I said Apple is forcing people to buy another charging brick (theirs or otherwise)

Nope.

Let's recap with direct quotes from you

"but only allows their 20W brick to supply"
"its a limitation set by Apple so that ONLY their 20W charger that people will have to go buy will supply the full power to MagSafe"
"I'm saying they imposed a limitation on Magsafe to only fast charge with their 20W charger."

Keywords: ONLY and THEIR. Please don't tell me you've been suggesting third party chargers work when you've said those phrases.

And let me tell you, they are pushing hard for people to buy their 20W brick. When I bought my 12PM I've never heard such a sales pitch on why I needed to buy their 20W brick. When I asked how that was helping the environment, the girl (who admittedly was very sweet) said "Yeah I know, but we have been told to really try and sell our charger."

1. Employees don't get commission from selling 20W chargers.
2. Apple is a public company. Why wouldn't they want to sell chargers.
3. I am 100% confident she did not say those exact words. I think you got the impression that she's been told to sell hard, but no employee would admit to such thing. You're exaggerating here.

I only said Apple is forcing people to buy an additional charger if they want the fast charging speed.

1. Nope. You said Apple is forcing people to buy an Apple branded charger for fast charging speed.
2. Apple can't make the 61W/87W/96W provide full power to the MagSafe. They have specific profiles that deliver a certain amount of power. Look on your charger. It lists out the profiles. My 87W allows 9V/3A and 5.2V/2.4A. MagSafe would burn if it used 9V/3A or cause damage to the phone for providing too much power (overheat). So MagSafe has to use the lower 5.2V/2.4A. That's just how chargers work. MagSafe can't tell an 87W charger to give me exactly 20watts of power at 9V/2.22A because the charger doesn't understand that profile.

MagSafe was designed to deliver as much power as it can while keeping the battery safe. Apple found that 9V/2.22A provides that balance. Even then, MagSafe isn't delivering that full power the entire time. iPhone heats up, then MagSafe asks the charger to step down the profile to deliver less power.

Magsafe works with other Qi devices if you want to charge them at a snails pace. Its worthless using Magsafe with anything other than an iPhone.

1. You can still use it. Unlike the lightning which you have to throw away if you switch to Android next year.
2. Most charge their phones over night so most don't need the fast charge.

I haven't been brainwashed by anything. Unless you have a specific type of charger (one that Apple is also conveniently pushing) then your iPhone won't fast charge with Magsafe. So if you want to be able to do that you will need to buy an additional charger if you don't have a PD3.0 20W charger.

Again, you're changing what you said earlier. You specifically accused Apple of forcing customers to "ONLY" buy "THEIR" charger when in fact that's not true.

Releasing a new cable last year that requires a completely different charging brick than every single iPhone purchased previously, then taking that charging brick away this year, is hardly consistent.

That's not what I'm arguing. I said the power cable is more consistent than the charging bricks.

Again, I don't care about any of this when it comes to buying it. If I did I wouldn't have bought the iPhone 12 and just stayed with what I had. But nothing you will say is going to add up to the fact that what Apple is doing is SOLELY motivated by profit and has zero to do with the environment. And that's fine, their goal is to make money.

Considering people can buy a cheaper third party alternative to charge their phones at full speed, no. You *might* have a case if Apple required USB-C bricks to be certified by Apple (where Apple gets a royalty) before charging at full speed, but even then I can argue that Apple makes less than one tenth of a percent of revenue from 20W brick sales. Apple could probably make just as much money removing the Apple stickers from every single iPhone box if they badly needed that profit.


Sorry, but I'm going to end it here discussing this with you. You're obviously changing what you said earlier so that tells me you refuse to admit wrong when I blatantly showed with hard evidence that you said otherwise. Have a good one.

 

[LongWayHome]

Nope.

Let's recap with direct quotes from you

"but only allows their 20W brick to supply"
"its a limitation set by Apple so that ONLY their 20W charger that people will have to go buy will supply the full power to MagSafe"
"I'm saying they imposed a limitation on Magsafe to only fast charge with their 20W charger."

Keywords: ONLY and THEIR. Please don't tell me you've been suggesting third party chargers work when you've said those phrases.



1. Employees don't get commission from selling 20W chargers.
2. Apple is a public company. Why wouldn't they want to sell chargers.
3. I am 100% confident she did not say those exact words. I think you got the impression that she's been told to sell hard, but no employee would admit to such thing. You're exaggerating here.



1. Nope. You said Apple is forcing people to buy an Apple branded charger for fast charging speed.
2. Apple can't make the 61W/87W/96W provide full power to the MagSafe. They have specific profiles that deliver a certain amount of power. Look on your charger. It lists out the profiles. My 87W allows 9V/3A and 5.2V/2.4A. MagSafe would burn if it used 9V/3A or cause damage to the phone for providing too much power (overheat). So MagSafe has to use the lower 5.2V/2.4A. That's just how chargers work. MagSafe can't tell an 87W charger to give me exactly 20watts of power at 9V/2.22A because the charger doesn't understand that profile.

MagSafe was designed to deliver as much power as it can while keeping the battery safe. Apple found that 9V/2.22A provides that balance. Even then, MagSafe isn't delivering that full power the entire time. iPhone heats up, then MagSafe asks the charger to step down the profile to deliver less power.




1. You can still use it. Unlike the lightning which you have to throw away if you switch to Android next year.
2. Most charge their phones over night so most don't need the fast charge.



Again, you're changing what you said earlier. You specifically accused Apple of forcing customers to "ONLY" buy "THEIR" charger when in fact that's not true.



That's not what I'm arguing. I said the power cable is more consistent than the charging bricks.




Considering people can buy a cheaper third party alternative to charge their phones at full speed, no. You *might* have a case if Apple required USB-C bricks to be certified by Apple (where Apple gets a royalty) before charging at full speed, but even then I can argue that Apple makes less than one tenth of a percent of revenue from 20W brick sales. Apple could probably make just as much money removing the Apple stickers from every single iPhone box if they badly needed that profit.


Sorry, but I'm going to end it here discussing this with you. You're obviously changing what you said earlier so that tells me you refuse to admit wrong when I blatantly showed with hard evidence that you said otherwise. Have a good one.

LOL TLDR but I'll just agree so we can't stop this nonsense.

 

[Apleeseed84]

Ehhh ended up getting it, using the veterans homepage through apple.com at a massive discount paying it with apple gift cards but just remember

apple.com user guide tells you to take off your leather/silicone case so it doesn’t compress because of the heat...

 

[7thson]

MagSafe would burn if it used 9V/3A or cause damage to the phone for providing too much power (overheat).

According to https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211829, this isn’t correct:

apple.com user guide tells you to take off your leather/silicone case so it doesn’t compress because of the heat...

It would be good to provide a link to this page. Couldn’t find it myself.

 

[Apleeseed84]

According to https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211829, this isn’t correct:View attachment 1688249

It would be good to provide a link to this page. Couldn’t find it mysel

it’s under their support pages, towards the bottom, they also talk about how the material that folds will wrinkle over time and that it will work.

How to use MagSafe Duo Charger with your iPhone and Apple Watch - Apple Support

Learn how to charge your iPhone 12, iPhone 13, or iPhone 14 and your Apple Watch wirelessly with MagSafe Duo Charger.

support.apple.com

Going back on your post I also noticed they changed their wording on that statement now they are using the term peak power hahaha wow

basically MagSafe will only fast charge your phone using the 15w up to 50%, then it slow charges up to 90% at which point it crawls it’s way to a 100%.

I had to get a new iPhone 12 pro, new MagSafe charger, new 20w brick to find this out. MagSafe is toooo controlling but to be honest this new iPhone does not have the magnet problems the last one had and since I figure the MagSafe duo is a new device altogether I gave it a chance so why not.

 

[vipergts2207]

Sigh....Did I say somewhere that it wouldn't have an environmental impact? I said Apple didn't do it for environmental reasons. They did it to try and squeeze several more million out of the consumer by introducing a new way to charge (MagSafe) as well as selling the brick outside of the phone and all accessories. Yeah they will put less of them out there, but at the same time they are adding to environmental waste by introducing a brand new charger (MagSafe) while also selling many, many more charging bricks than they would have before because they are no longer including it. We can continue to argue on this I guess if you want though.

So then what are you complaining about exactly? What Apple did helps the environment. They also make some extra money. I’m having some trouble seeing the problem here. Would it have been better if Apple included the charger to the detriment of the environment, but made less money because of it?

 

[farewelwilliams]

According to https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211829, this isn’t correct:View attachment 1688249

read my post again. I specifically stated MagSafe uses 9V/2.22A and cannot use 9V/3A profile.

 

[7thson]

read my post again. I specifically stated MagSafe uses 9V/2.22A and cannot use 9V/3A profile.

Read Apples support document, again.
“Higher wattage adapters at or above 9V/2.56A will also deliver a maximum of up to 15W peak power to iPhone 12.”
I can’t make it more clear than that.