Like someone has stated elsewhere I'm still waiting to see what problem the MagSafe charging solution solves? Wouldn't it had made more sense to put a larger battery in that space?
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.
MagSafe Charges 2x Slower Than Wired 20W USB-C Charger
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Based on the report, it looks like Magsafe is not twice as fast, i.e. using your example it would take about 70 minutes. Of course now, most Qi chargers are now at least 10W with many of the Chinese brands already at 50W and Oppo about to launch a 125W wireless charger
I can think of an example.
The lightning cables used to charge eventually wear down to where they can be a bit positional in regard to forming a good connection or charging the phone.
Qi chargers mean your phone can’t be picked up while charging.
In theory MagSafe fixed that problem.
for me personally the issue I’d have is that the cable length is only 3 feet apparently and I’d love a longer cable while in bed
And anyone who uses their device for any kind of music recording/production. You just can use wireless tech for this, quality is too low and the lag is a massive issue
Cool idea at first but I don’t think it will happen in the foreseeable future. Aside from the CarPlay issues noted by others, I highly doubt Apple is willing to call a phone “fully waterproof” due to liability issues. It would mean that Apple would be on the hook to replace any phone with water damage even if they made a disclaimer otherwise (guarantee you’d see a class action filed in the 9th Circuit).
Losing a wired charging port would also make it extremely difficult for many people to charge their phones in their car or while traveling. There are plenty of things I don’t like about Apple and iPhones but that would be true with any manufacturer - losing the charging port, however, would definitely make me consider leaving the Apple ecosystem.
Can engineers squeeze some performance percentages out of the design? Probably. Can they get anywhere near a wall adapter/hard wire efficiency? No.
Both actually operate on the same principle to generate electricity. Your power supply for a plug in is a transformer that steps the voltage down from 120/220 that your home is wired at to a lower voltage and that’s converted from alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC), and that provides the power needed to charge the battery. But any inefficiencies would show up in the power supply or brick plugged into a wall outlet, not in the power converted to DC and sent to the phone.
Qi or MagSafe moves that transformer from the wall power supply to the charging puck and your phone. It can’t be as as efficient because it has a lower supply voltage, probably requires a DC-DC switching circuit to create an oscillating field and because of the gap between the MagSafe or Qi and the coil in the phone can vary including having to move the charging field through the back of a glass or ceramic phone surface.
With multiple things being more inefficient using Qi or MagSafe charging you will never come close to a wired power solution.
I’m not the engineer, so I’m probably oversimplifying it. But companies like Xiaomi did figure something out. Search for their MMT technology for parallel charging. They already use it In the Poco X3 and Mi 10T.Jesus. You can’t simply double the charging rate by physically splitting a battery in half.
Battery charge times
I thought of an idea recently, and I wanted to know if electrical engineers agreed with my theory. I have a smartphone. Recently I bought a power bank because I found my phone's battery not holdin...electronics.stackexchange.com
Spend maybe a few minutes doing some basic research before posting ridiculous nonsense.
It’s gimmick. If they had magnets in airpods or watches and you could reverse charge them on your iPhone. That be good.
Doesn't this mean that ~50% of energy is wasted when charging with the magnet adapter?
So much for the "saving the environment" marketing campaign they are running.
So much for the "saving the environment" marketing campaign they are running.
Yes, but instead of using all of the 15W to simply provide 3 amps of power some of that power is used to create the charging field that gets generated and that is what charges the phone. No energy generation or conversion is free from loss, even if it’s highly efficient it’s never 100%.
That’s why I’d be interested in comparing Qi chargers on other brands with Qi on Apple, and then comparing MagSafe with the best of those. That would show where Apple is compared to other phones.
Y’know, there’s how you think, and how you feel. I’ve had the 12 for about 8 hours now.
I KNOW lightning to my USB C power brick IS faster.
I FEEL like my MagSafe charger connects better, faster and makes me happier.
I also KNOW that my sleep cycle does not give a duck how long it takes to charge.
I KNOW lightning to my USB C power brick IS faster.
I FEEL like my MagSafe charger connects better, faster and makes me happier.
I also KNOW that my sleep cycle does not give a duck how long it takes to charge.
DARN YOU! I wasn’t even going to bother watching the video, but now I’ve GOT to see this silliness!
I’m fingering my MagSafe I type.
If you want it to be an issue, it will be.
If you don’t want it to be an issue it won’t be.
it’s strong enough for me.
Last edited:
It is quite literally over 1 yard as it is 1 meter which is 1.09 yards lol hilarious.
MagSafe is going to be faster than an Apple Qi. It’s got more wattage than the Apple Qi has, even if everything else is the same efficiency charging with MagSafe ought to be twice as fast as charging with an Apple approved Qi. I think Apple limits Qi to 7.5 watts and MagSafe says it uses 15 watt. I don’t know those numbers are accurate especially the Apple limiting Qi to 7.5 watts.
Wifi is called wireless too. Have you ever questioned that? My modem is full of wires.
Wires are involved, but there are no wires in my phone connected to the wires in my charger.
Wireless indicates a wire-free gap between one system and another. There are no wires physically connecting the two systems.
My Phillips Hue bulbs wirelessly connect to the internet - it still has wires. Stop being a Richard.
Cable will always be king to users who disregard their power and usage until 10 minutes before they have to leave and need a charged phone. Some of us just place the phone on a wireless charger when it’s low and don’t think about it until we need the phone to be fully charged. But not all users or use cases are the same so we have options for now.
Why? It simply means charging took -100% of the wired speed, meaning it was fully charged 30 minutes BEFORE it was plugged it in. Couldn't be clearer. And it's convenient - if you are using your phone, and it suddenly jumps to 100% charge, you suddenly know that in 30 minutes you will be plugging it in.
Okay. So this means I can fully charge my iPhone 12 Pro in two hours using the MagSafe method. So where's the problem? My God, I would think a two hour fully charged time frame is very reasonable considering it's been done wirelessly. I'm sure plenty will whine and complain on how it should charge much quicker. I say, too bad so sad. This isn't NASCAR where we need to be fully refueled in 10 seconds flat.......