Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPhone 15 to Support 15W Wireless Fast Charging Using Third-Party Chargers That Aren't MagSafe Certified

I wonder will the iPhone 15 models support Qi charging at 15 watts under the old standard or will it require the new Qi2 standard? If the latter, owners of current Qi chargers will still be limited to 7.5 watts initial charging rate. 🙁
 
Orange Bat said:
I was going to commission a multi-year $5 million study on the popularity of MagSafe so that I could make a hyper accurate comment on this forum
Click to expand...

Or you could just stop assuming stuff that you don‘t really know anything about …

Orange Bat said:
but then I decided to just go with my gut.
Click to expand...

Better don‘t.

Besides, it‘s very simple: if MagSafe was „a bust“, a) Apple would stop selling it and b) Qi2 would not be a carbon copy of it. You don‘t need a „multi-year study“ to figure this out.

Sorinut said:
It's an observation, not a statement of fact.
Click to expand...

Sure sounded like one (statement of fact), though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
segfaultdotorg said:
It's sad that the EU made them do away with Lightning. Apple saw the need for a reversible port before Android did and now they're being punished for it.
Click to expand...
Apple is literally member of the USB-IF, they contributed to USB-C and were the first to adopt them on laptops (2015 MacBooks). The only reason they’re being punished is not because of Lightning early arrival, it’s because of their MFI greed and their insistance on making Lightning “a connector for the next decade” without upgrading any of its standard during that decade. They could not have make that statement, and transition to USB-C 3 years later, but they didn’t want to lose the MFI golden cow. They only have themselves to blame for this.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Tim Apple’s Glasses and 3530025
Orange Bat said:
Has MagSafe been a bit of a bust? The accessories have proven to be too expensive for a lot of people and I don’t know anyone who uses it all that much. I have an accessory for my car, but otherwise I and my family use much cheaper and slower Qi chargers, and we’re all pretty happy with them. I just don’t think MagSafe really caught on in any meaningful way.
Click to expand...

Some thoughts on MagSafe and why it hasn't caught on. Fundamentally I'm not sure exactly what it solves:

  • No MagSafe puck in the box, and they're not cheap to buy either, so most people stick with the included cable or use their own wireless charger.
  • When it magnets onto the phone it attaches. With traditional wireless chargers to place or pick up your phone on a surface and it charges, magic. With MagSafe I have to pull the puck off the back of the phone, how is this any different than just using a cable?
  • It's big! When travelling a simple cable is more convenient.
  • The phone gets hotter, and charges slower, with MagSafe. Again why not use a cable which is more efficient?
Essentially with MagSafe you have invented a new 'port', except it attached onto the rear of the phone and is bigger and more expensive. And also charges the phone more inefficiently.

Apart from limited usage with battery packs what exactly is the point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim Apple’s Glasses and Orange Bat
tomtad said:
Some thoughts on MagSafe and why it hasn't caught on. Fundamentally I'm not sure exactly what it solves:

  • No MagSafe puck in the box, and they're not cheap to buy either, so most people stick with the included cable or use their own wireless charger.
  • When it magnets onto the phone it attaches. With traditional wireless chargers to place or pick up your phone on a surface and it charges, magic. With MagSafe I have to pull the puck off the back of the phone, how is this any different than just using a cable?
  • It's big! When travelling a simple cable is more convenient.
  • The phone gets hotter, and charges slower, with MagSafe. Again why not use a cable which is more efficient?
Essentially with MagSafe you have invented a new 'port', except it attached onto the rear of the phone and is bigger and more expensive. And also charges the phone more inefficiently.

Apart from limited usage with battery packs what exactly is the point?
Click to expand...
It’s pretty great for car mounts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange Bat
tomtad said:
Some thoughts on MagSafe and why it hasn't caught on. Fundamentally I'm not sure exactly what it solves:

  • No MagSafe puck in the box, and they're not cheap to buy either, so most people stick with the included cable or use their own wireless charger.
  • When it magnets onto the phone it attaches. With traditional wireless chargers to place or pick up your phone on a surface and it charges, magic. With MagSafe I have to pull the puck off the back of the phone, how is this any different than just using a cable?
  • It's big! When travelling a simple cable is more convenient.
  • The phone gets hotter, and charges slower, with MagSafe. Again why not use a cable which is more efficient?
Essentially with MagSafe you have invented a new 'port', except it attached onto the rear of the phone and is bigger and more expensive. And also charges the phone more inefficiently.

Apart from limited usage with battery packs what exactly is the point?
Click to expand...
Completely agree with all your points. I would have bought one at some point just to try it out if it so expensive when first released. By the time 3rd party chargers were released, I had already bought qi chargers and didn’t need MagSafe.

As someone else said, car charging is great and I use one myself. But otherwise I just don’t see the benefit of it.
 
tomtad said:
Some thoughts on MagSafe and why it hasn't caught on. Fundamentally I'm not sure exactly what it solves:

  • No MagSafe puck in the box, and they're not cheap to buy either, so most people stick with the included cable or use their own wireless charger.
  • When it magnets onto the phone it attaches. With traditional wireless chargers to place or pick up your phone on a surface and it charges, magic. With MagSafe I have to pull the puck off the back of the phone, how is this any different than just using a cable?
  • It's big! When travelling a simple cable is more convenient.
  • The phone gets hotter, and charges slower, with MagSafe. Again why not use a cable which is more efficient?
Essentially with MagSafe you have invented a new 'port', except it attached onto the rear of the phone and is bigger and more expensive. And also charges the phone more inefficiently.

Apart from limited usage with battery packs what exactly is the point?
Click to expand...
To not have ports.
 
Marie.D said:
…and their insistence on making Lightning “a connector for the next decade” without upgrading any of its standard during that decade.
Click to expand...
They did upgrade Lightning to USB 3.0, but it was only on the Lightning iPad Pros, 10.5” and the first two 13”, and only with the camera connection kit.
 
This would be a welcome change, and hopefully not just limited to the new phones. I've recently have moved from using a regular 7.5W Qi pad to an official MagSafe puck as the main way to charge my iPhone 13P because it is faster and more reliable with its magnetic alignment. While MagSafe is a great charging option, there are virtually no third party puck chargers that can use the 15W charge speed even if they use magnetic alignment (other than a select few very expensive multi-device stands), and the official (also relatively expensive) Apple puck has many of it’s own design shortfalls. Wired charging will always be best, but at least we are hopefully getting improved charge options in addition to USB C.
 
this doesn't sound like Apple - why opening something up, when you can keep it closed and charge extra
 
I still haven't seen a good scale test of what faster charging does to battery cycle life. If you always charge at 15W, do you get less than the 500 cycles to 80% capacity of the old 5W charger it's always been rated on? Does wireless charging making more heat contribute to more degradation?

What about some of the insanity in the Android world boosting to 240-300W?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back