This seems both useful and plausible. I have to wonder though: if Qi is pronounced "chee", how is Pi pronounced?
One nit regarding the Pi description:
The closer the device to the Pi, the faster it charges, with a gradual drop-off in charging speed the further away the phone is.
If it's inductive, and Qi is inductive, then it's not a gradual drop off, it's precipitous. The magnetic near field decays with r^4.
I really wish MR would give up on the Energous idea...
The Pi might not reach the distances claimed by
Energous' WattUp technology, which uses radio frequencies to charge devices from up to 15 feet away, but it does offer more flexibility than existing pads that devices must be directly placed upon.
Energous doesn't reach the distances claimed by Energous. Milliwatts at 15 feet don't justify the installation of an antenna that's also dimensioned in feet.
As for Apple, there is plenty of
anecdotal evidence to suggest it has partnered with Energous to work on bringing a truly wire-free, over-the-air charging technology to its consumer devices, but we'll likely have to wait for at least another year to see the possible fruits of those labors.
Please stop pushing this nonsense. Even Disruptive Tech Research appears to have pulled the article you're referring to. This is the evidence you attribute to Louis
Basenese Baseless:
"Apple is working with a partner rather than developing an in-house solution due to the small number of patents the company has filed surrounding wireless charging"-- note that Qi also allows Apple to deploy a solution without their own patents.
"he points towards their common manufacturing partners (TSMC and Foxconn)"-- most of the world uses TSMC and Foxconn, that's like saying their working together because both companies are based in California.
"he points towards ... their membership in ANSI working towards standards for wireless power transfer compliance testing"-- which ANSI group is this? I can't find reference to it anywhere including on the referenced site. Publicly being members of a standards committee does not mean you have a private business agreement.
"he points towards ... the fact that Energous's RF-based wireless charging system is the only long-distance solution nearly ready to launch." -- isn't this kind of circular? Energous is about to launch through Apple because they're about to launch?
And the claim that Energous signed a deal with a top five consumer electronics company? "Of course, the identity will remain a mystery, as AAPL's notorious about insisting on secrecy with partners and employees."-- it must be Apple because they won't give a name and we all know Apple keeps secrets?
May as well say the companies are linked because Apple ends with an 'e' and Energous starts with an 'e'...