Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Unless the device can sense and adapt its current draw to the adapter using too low a wattage can possibly damage it or cause it to overheat potentially causing a fire risk.
That is completely incorrect. The device can only draw as much wattage as the adapter will supply. A device that can use a 100 watt charger can work just fine on a 35 watt charger. The charger will not be damaged, the charger (if it is a reputable brand) will not catch fire. If a device can charge on 70 watts, then is attached to 35 watt charger, the device will not catch fire.
So Apple is needlessly specifying a 70 watt charger?
No, Apple is providing a charger that will charge the laptop in a shorter time. The ads that promote 50% charge in 40 minutes etc. require a higher wattage. Marketing hype requires a higher wattage charger. If Apple provided a 35 watt charger that took 5 hours to charge a MacBook people would be screaming.

Charging over a period of 7 or 8 hours will work for many devices on a 35 watt charger. My MacBook charges just fine on 35 watts. I do it all the time when I am at home. I am currently on a 35 watt charger for my M4 Pro. No issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ab22
I think it's about time we start an uprising about this....
Why? This is what you voted for in the E.U. isn't? While you sat back and gave tacit approval for their utter nonsense because you liked the idea of USB-C on an iPhone, now they can get away with anything they want. Enjoy it.
 
Amazing. Great job EU. Keep regulating yourselves into a void. I can't wait for the day when Apple get's a new Steve Jobs personality in the CEO role, who decides 7% of their revenue is worth giving up to stop doing business in the batsht EU. That would finally get EU citizens attention to take control of their own government.
 
Yes, it can. That's why fuses and circuit breakers exist. To protect devices from damage and against overheating (which can lead to fire damage). Given the lower voltages used by laptops it's unlikely to cause a fire hazard but damage is a real possibility.
Do show an instance where such a thing has happened to any Mac, rather than something you imagine is possible.
 
That is completely incorrect. The device can only draw as much wattage as the adapter will supply. A device that can use a 100 watt charger can work just fine on a 35 watt charger. The charger will not be damaged, the charger (if it is a reputable brand) will not catch fire. If a device can charge on 70 watts, then is attached to 35 watt charger, the device will not catch fire.

Unless a device can sense the output capability of a power source (of which a power adapter is) and adjust its current draw to match it certainly can draw too much power causing damage and / or heat. This is the entire reason fuses / circuit breakers exist.

Here in the US a typical power outlet provides 1,800 watts (120 volts x 15 amps) of power. Exceed that and you're going to blow a fuse / trip a breaker. Those devices exist to keep the wires from overheating and melting / catching fire.

It's the same for any electrical device. Electrical devices have minimum power requires and the power source must meet or exceed them in order to avoid risking damage / fire hazard. A device which can adjust its power draw based on the power source still follows this rule, it just matches the adapters capability.

No, Apple is providing a charger that will charge the laptop in a shorter time. The ads that promote 50% charge in 40 minutes etc. require a higher wattage. Marketing hype requires a higher wattage charger. If Apple provided a 35 watt charger that took 5 hours to charge a MacBook people would be screaming.

Charging over a period of 7 or 8 hours will work for many devices on a 35 watt charger. My MacBook charges just fine on 35 watts. I do it all the time when I am at home. I am currently on a 35 watt charger for my M4 Pro. No issues.
Why is it Apple supplies different wattage power adapters with the MacBook Pro Pro (70 watt) / Max (96 watt) systems? Or different power adapters with different versions of the Pro based on core count (70 watt base, 96 watt higher core counts)?
 
For the best charging experience...

You really think Apple mean : "damage or fire may result if you don't…" ?.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brucemr
Unless a device can sense the output capability of a power source (of which a power adapter is) and adjust its current draw to match it certainly can draw too much power causing damage and / or heat. This is the entire reason fuses / circuit breakers exist.
I have many devices in my house that do not negotiate on the power. My desk lamp, 15 watts, only draws 15 watts, about 0.15 amperes. It will not draw more power than it needs. The breaker is there to protect against shorts and significant over current.

The power adapters will not deliver more power than their designed limit. Well built and reputable devices. My MacBook can charge with 100 watts. But I use a 35 watt charger, no magic smoke. Yes the devices negotiate and the MacBook has to settle for the 35 watts. Which is significantly less than Apple recommends. But it works just fine.

I could dead short the 35 watt power supply. By design it cannot, and will not, deliver more than 35 watts of power. I hook two devices to the power supply, both capable of drawing 50 watts or more. Yet only 35 watts is delivered, divided between the two devices.
 
Why is it Apple supplies different wattage power adapters with the MacBook Pro Pro (70 watt) / Max (96 watt) systems?
Mostly so the power supply can charge the device while under load. The MAX consumes more power in CPU intensive tasks the Pro chip.

My 35 watt charger could not keep up with the power draw on my M4 Pro while pegging the CPU at 100% for over 5 minutes. When the machine is doing nothing, the 35 watt charger is adequate.
 
I have many devices in my house that do not negotiate on the power. My desk lamp, 15 watts, only draws 15 watts, about 0.15 amperes. It will not draw more power than it needs. The breaker is there to protect against shorts and significant over current.

Exactly! Your desk lamps minimum power requirement is 15 watts. Connect over 120 of them to the same circuit (assuming a typical US household 120-volt outlet) and you risk tripping the breaker.

Why do you think things like electric ranges / dryers utilize 240-volt circuits? Because they exceed the power capabilities of a standard 120-volt outlet.

Edit: It's also the reason for the existence of different power outlets. A 240-volt power outlet has a different connector compared to a 120-volt outlet to help ensure you don't plug a device which exceeds the 120-volt power outlets capability.

The power adapters will not deliver more power than their designed limit. Well built and reputable devices. My MacBook can charge with 100 watts. But I use a 35 watt charger, no magic smoke. Yes the devices negotiate and the MacBook has to settle for the 35 watts. Which is significantly less than Apple recommends. But it works just fine.

Again: Exactly! They can only supply what they're designed to supply. Exceed that and you risk damage / overheating.

I could dead short the 35 watt power supply. By design it cannot, and will not, deliver more than 35 watts of power. I hook two devices to the power supply, both capable of drawing 50 watts or more. Yet only 35 watts is delivered, divided between the two devices.
A third again: Exactly! Short it and it will likely shutdown in order to protect itself from damage. As for multiple devices why is it that daisy chaining power strips is not recommended?
 
Last edited:
You can add a new charger while preparing your order if you require a new charging plug.Not difficult at all.😉
That’s not the point! It costs extra! Also strangely unavailable in the UK with the 512Gb option. I would also point out that the UK is no longer in the EU so it’s obviously excluded for other reasons than legalisation.
 
Hilarious! And totally unacceptable. What is next? No box? Just a plastic bag? Wait no plastic! A macbook pro in recycled paper bag??
In the next step, you will have to personally pick up your new MacBook and carry it out with your bare hands.
 
I am not all knowing about all Mac incidents, so no.
I imagine that most will follow Apple guidance, that lower than original wattage chargers will cause no harm.
It's hard to believe they would offer such specific advice, if it posed any danger.
 
I imagine that most will follow Apple guidance, that lower than original wattage chargers will cause no harm.
It's hard to believe they would offer such specific advice, if it posed any danger.
Apple's guidance is to use a 70-watt adapter with this computer. Is it dangerous to use a lower powered adapter? Unlikely given the power draw of a typical laptop. However, it could damage or, more likely, shorten the life of the adapter.

That said my focus isn't specifically on Apple but rather the Common Charger EU directive. Under this directive it leads the consumer to believe that any adapter with a USB-C connector is the same as any other adapter. That's not the case. Setting aside any potential damage / safety issues if one were to plug their MacBook Pro M4 Max laptop (which specifies a 96-watt adapter) into an iPhone adapter (20 watts) is going to give a subpar experience. I can see this resulting in the end user thinking there's something wrong with their laptop and reaching out to Apple to get it fixed.

The one thing the directive did is, by specifying USB-C as the connector, to standardize on the adapter voltage.
 
Why do you think things like electric ranges / dryers utilize 240-volt circuits? Because they exceed the power capabilities of a standard 120-volt outlet.
Nope. Using 240V is to allow the devices to heat faster. They do not exceed the power capabilities of 120 volt circuits. You could put 100 amperes on a 120 volt circuit with the proper wiring. Doing so would require 4 gauge wire and that is expensive and difficult to use. Using 240 volts is a matter of efficiency and minimizing line losses over distance.
Connect over 120 of them to the same circuit (assuming a typical US household 120-volt outlet) and you risk tripping the breaker.
If I had a regulated power supply that would only deliver 100 watts, then connecting a hundred lights would still not trip the circuit breaker. The difference is that houses don't have regulated power supplies like are used for MacBook and phone chargers.
They can only supply what they're designed to supply. Exceed that and you risk damage / overheating.
By design the chargers cannot exceed their rating. The chargers will not be damaged and will not overheat. You say they can only supply what they're designed to supply then state that design power delivery can be exceeded. Either the chargers deliver the maximum they are designed for, or they don't. There cannot be two possibilities.
As for multiple devices why is it that daisy chaining power strips is not recommended?
Because you are dealing with an unregulated power source in power strips. Computer chargers are regulated. Big difference.

Short it and it will likely shutdown in order to protect itself from damage
For a dead short, hopefully it should shut down if it can detect a dead short. I can place a load, a 120 V 100 watt hot wire bulb across the the supply, and the power supply will continue to deliver 35 watts to that load. The supply will not attempt to supply 100 watts to that load.

A device that caps its maximum power delivery at 35 watts is not going to magically deliver 50 watts. There is circuitry, voltage conversion, temperature monitoring, clamping circuits, significant intelligence to make the chargers safe. A 35 watt charger can deliver 0.001 watts all the way to the maximum rating of 35 watts. It will deliver no more power than what is rated.

I used to do dummy loads on computer power supplies to test their ability to deliver the power that was promised. Some wire wound forced air cooled ceramic resistors that could be switched in a various levels to simulate a load. A power supply at 1200 watts would stop delivering anything beyond 1200 watts regardless of the load switched into the circuit. And 1200 watts is the equivalent of a space heater. These power supplies were significantly less intelligent than the current state of laptop and phone chargers.

Don't continue to confuse household plugs which have unregulated current, and voltage, to an intelligent device that monitors its output, voltage and current, (wattage) to stay within its design limits.
 
Is it dangerous to use a lower powered adapter? Unlikely given the power draw of a typical laptop. However, it could damage or, more likely, shorten the life of the adapter.
Not even close. I have been using a 35 watt adapter for many years. First on my M1, then my M2 and now my M4. The adapter continues to work just fine.
 
Apple's guidance is to use a 70-watt adapter with this computer. Is it dangerous to use a lower powered adapter? Unlikely given the power draw of a typical laptop. However, it could damage or, more likely, shorten the life of the adapter.

It's not, and it couldn't.

Apple say, at https://support.apple.com/en-us/109509

...If your Mac uses USB-C to charge, you can charge your Mac laptop with any USB-C power adapter or display. You can safely use a power adapter or display with higher or lower wattage than the adapter included with your Mac. For the best charging experience, you should use the power adapter and cable included with your MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, or MacBook...


**edited for clarity**
 
Last edited:
I think why this annoys me so much more than the phone is because any major company will just make a decision to screw over the consumer and we just sit there and take it, then it moves on to bigger things, new products and they see how far they can push it.
So let’s stop taking it. I’ve been boycotting Apple because of their anti-consumer practices. Until they change or a competitor starts making better products, I’m only buying Apple stuff used. Saved me money too!
 
It's not, and it couldn't.

Apple say

...If your Mac uses USB-C to charge, you can charge your Mac laptop with any USB-C power adapter or display. For the best charging experience, you should use a power adapter or display that provides at least the minimum wattage of the power adapter included with your MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, or MacBook...
Go back and read what I said. Specifically this part:

"Is it dangerous to use a lower powered adapter? Unlikely given the power draw of a typical laptop. However, it could damage or, more likely, shorten the life of the adapter."
 
Devices shipping without chargers was an explicit desire of the EU common charger rules.
No. The EU want companies to give customers the OPTION to buy without a charger. Like Valve does with the Steam Deck. You can buy the Steam Deck with or without a charger, the cost will be the same though either way. But Apple is so damn greedy that they just remove it altogether and then blame the environment!?

This is BS.

I and hate when ppl say ”oh, I got chargers all over the place.” I sell my MacBooks when I buy a new one. And when I sell them I OBVIOUSLY send the charger that CAME with the MacBook along with it to the new owner.

I do understand that eventually, after a few years, when no MacBook comes with a charger and haven’t for a couple of generations of MacBooks, then you sell your used MacBook without a charger, since they don’t come with the MacBook anymore. But still.. This is some greedy BS, and I hate it. It shouldn’t be allowed to sell a device that REQUIRES charging without a charger to charge it!! 😡
 
  • Love
Reactions: Imperial926
That is stupid EU rules! Mobile phones fine cos they are very common and there good chance charger already available average home BUT laptop charger is NOT common thing have in average home.

UK not even in EU. Switzerland too and Norway and Iceland I think. Are they also force have no charger thing like UK have to? I think seen someone mentioned Switzerland is missing charger.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.