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

Unreleased 35W Dual Port USB-C Charger Leaked in Apple Doc

B4U said:
It will be available at a magical $99?
Considering the Apple tax.
Click to expand...
My money is on $79. And by “my money” I actually mean my hypothetical money because there is no chance I’d ever pay that much for a charge adapter.

EarPods at $19 may be the only Apple branded accessory I’ve ever felt comfortable paying MSRP and not subject to that Apple tax.
 
KaliYoni said:
My prediction:

:apple:Studio Charger
$79 for base model
$199 additional for stowable plug prongs (must be selected at time of purchase)
$399 for fingerprint resistant nano-finish
Compatible with :apple:Polishing Cloth or new :apple:Anti-static Charger Wipe for $19
Click to expand...
99% correct. It will be dubbed the Studio Pro Max Charger Duo. And they think we’re going to love it.
GizmoDVD said:
It's $149.99....

3-in-1 Apple MagSafe Wireless Charger Pad | Belkin US

Keep your iPhone, AirPods, and Apple watch charged with this 3-in-1 MagSafe Wireless Charger Pad from Belkin.
www.belkin.com www.belkin.com

Yeah, no apple tax there, just $150 ?
Click to expand...
The Apple tax is built in since it supports lightning and Apple Watch.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: KaliYoni
mjs916 said:
99% correct. It will be dubbed the Studio Pro Max Charger Duo. And they think we’re going to love it.

The Apple tax is built in since it supports lightning and Apple Watch.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget the Hermés model ?

I’ll be interested to see if they make this the new standard charger for the new MBAs though…
 
  • Haha
Reactions: KaliYoni and mjs916
jaytv111 said:
Right but Apple includes cables for free. Most people won’t need to buy cables when they are included with iPhones.

I thought you were talking about type-C chargers, since what I was saying was that Apple’s sales of chargers could get squeezed by not having multiport chargers. The cables aren’t really relevant to this, Apple use of Lightning has no effect on whether their own chargers sell or don’t sell as well due to Apple being “behind” on these multiports.
Click to expand...
Ah, you’re right. It would have been different back when Apple was shipping chargers as, even if a user replaced their Apple one, they might still buy a cable for the other (for travel or second house location). But, these days someone could just buy a PD compliant USB-C device and use the MFi lightning cable that came with the device.

In the end, those accessory sales are likely lumped into “other” as some unknown small percentage, not something that worries Apple much. BUT, as they know there are a lot of folks that will buy just because there’s an Apple logo on it, they’ve no problem picking up those easy sales. :)
 
ACHD said:
the fact apple is so far behind on GaN is dissapointing. GaN is more efficient and better for the environment as whole.... The tech is not new and is not in its infancy either. The existing products use tomuch material, take up to much space and run hot which is waste heat and inneficient.

Apple should convert to GaN when possible.
Click to expand...

My guess is that Apple is either waiting for the cost of producing GAN chargers to come down, waiting for production to be able to manufacture at the scale that they require, or a combination of both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StudioMacs
Abazigal said:
Offhand, I am thinking of the apple products that don’t come with their own charging bricks (namely the iphone and Apple Watch). We know the magsafe duo isn’t able to fast-charge the series 7 either, so I wonder if this is a way for consumers to get fast charging for both their iPhone and Apple Watch, so users only need to buy 1 charging brick rather than 2 separate 20-w chargers.

That’s just my theory, at least.
Click to expand...
? the theory that the Apple Watch 7 needs high wattage is BS. The Apple Watch on the usb A is trickle charge. 2-3 watts. With usb c it’s barely 5 watts.
 
anek007 said:
the theory that the Apple Watch 7 needs high wattage is BS. The Apple Watch on the usb A is trickle charge. 2-3 watts. With usb c it’s barely 5 watts.
Click to expand...

About fast charge on Apple Watch - Apple Support

Learn what you need to fast charge your Apple Watch Ultra and later and Apple Watch Series 7 and later.
support.apple.com support.apple.com

To support fast charging, the charger needs to support USB Power Delivery (USB-PD) of 5W or greater or use at least 18w. In the very least, we know the magsafe duo and the Belkin 3-in-1 chargers don’t support said feature, so it’s definitely finickier than it seems.
 
BWhaler said:
This is shamefully long overdue. Not because of the exorbitant cost to customers, but the massive environment cost that we needed multiple blocks of plastic just to have one device charge.
Click to expand...

Your heart is in the right place. But to charge two devices from one block of plastic still uses twice the electricity.

However, don't let this set back stop you from thinking about the environment. You've made a start.
 
35w is so odd especially for a dual port. Apple usually counts by 10 these days.

I guess 14 x 2.5 with a microcontroller for step-down conversion could be the new normal.
 
litmag01 said:
35w is so odd especially for a dual port. Apple usually counts by 10 these days.

I guess 14 x 2.5 with a microcontroller for step-down conversion could be the new normal.
Click to expand...
The 14" M1 MBP comes with either a 67W or 96W USB-C Charger. Seems more like random numbers pulled from a hat.
 
WinterWolf90 said:
Why get this when anker has a 40w one already?
Click to expand...

I bought one of the Anker ones a few months ago. The only advantage that I can see on the Apple version is that you can stick the Apple power cord on this. But, of course, you could just buy a $3 extension cord for the Anker. What I would have loved is a Magsafe brick that supplies 140 Watts to the MacBook Pro and also has two USB-C charging ports.
 
california_kid said:
This is really not the Apple way.

Apple should have the "courage" to make a charger with no ports....
Click to expand...
It is more likely that Apple will make a charger with no plugs, and you have to buy individual plug adapters depending on your country separately. Nickel and diming to the max.
 
ouimetnick said:
Probably $39 or $49. Great for charging iPhone or iPad and Apple Watch or AirPods.
Click to expand...

And MacBook Airs.

Heck, even my 20W iPhone charger does a pretty good job of charging my M1 Air. 35W would be more than sufficient!

And I quite often do find myself wishing it had one more USB-C port to charge one more device…
 
return2sendai said:
Your heart is in the right place. But to charge two devices from one block of plastic still uses twice the electricity.

However, don't let this set back stop you from thinking about the environment. You've made a start.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the friendly ecouragement, but not sure your math is correct.

Two individual plastic blocks uses two individual draws of electricity. This new plug uses only one plastic block, with the two draws of electricity. In both scenarios, the same amount of electricity being drawn, but with the new plug, only 1/2 the plastic is entering the environment.
 
Abazigal said:
You aren't really saving the environment though. Individual products continue to come with individual chargers because nobody in their right mind is going to bundle a multi-port charger (driving up the cost). These are usually purchased by consumers with multiple electronic devices and wish to streamline their charging setup.

So ironically, the most environmentally-conscious move is really to still pull an Apple, remove the charging brick from their products, and let the consumer decide how they want to go about charging their devices.
Click to expand...

Good point, but I believe this is why Apple has stopped shipping charges in iPhones. I bet iPads are next.
 
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