Wireless Charging Company Energous Partners With Apple Supplier Dialog

[Soccertess]

MacBooks would definitely become more designable if they had wireless charging. Then I wouldn't be so sad about losing the magsafe 2 port.

I hope this rumor is true. It would have an impact on the environment and on our daily routine. The amount of cords that I have thrown away because they break is insane!

I am just scared Captain dongle head will screw this up somehow. He might want to charge an extra 1000 for this feature, or make a 10k gold version base station.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

Wireless charging, Apple definitely would want to remove the 'time to fully charged' indicator.

I am guessing it would be really slow but wouldn't matter as your phone is charging constantly. If for some reason you ran your battery down you would probably want to plug the phone in to bring it up quickly.

That is if there is a plug of any kind left on the phone at that point. What I can see them doing is pulling the lightning plug and having some sort of charging pad it uses to do fast charging like the current Samsung's in addition to long range trickle charging. You will pay an extra $49 for that privilege though is my guess.

These chargers will be in Starbucks, at your work, most restaurants, etc. eventually so in theory it would be rare to run out of batteries. The question is can it keep up with a charge if you are playing video and other uses that pull juice.

If it does an adequate charge for an area of 2 or 3 meters I think it would be ready to ship. People would complain but it would be a leap ahead of what is out there now. If the distance is really a problem they should leave the cable port and/or have a charging pad. I obviously have no idea what the current ranges are or if I am even in the ball park with my wish for 3 meters.
[doublepost=1481783053][/doublepost]

Not to be a Luddite, but this just sounds very cancerous. I'm not really that interested in wireless charging. What I would consider "earth shattering" would be the phone that takes 2 seconds to charge. Sick of being about to leave for class only to see my phone's at 5%. Would be nice if charging were instantaneous. Someone needs to develop that

Understand the concerns over health issues. But if it is safe you would never need to charge your phone and it would never run out of battery. In theory your battery would never run down to 5% because you would never forget to plug it in.

I think this technology would work with fast charging capabilities as well.

If you are looking for the be all end all solution, look no further than putting nuclear technology into a device. Charged in the shop when you buy it and no need to charge with in your (now greatly shortened) lifetime.

In all seriousness why wish for fast charging or wireless charging when we could have both?

 

[Barry Bishop]

First of all that video is the same video that's been on their website. I know because that's the first place I saw it. It's old. Even the In the News section of their website is outdated. Seems they haven't done anything to the site in a while. Secondly, they've already debuted the smaller transmitter at CES 2016. The distance issue had nothing to do with government regulations, it's the laws of physics. They've already improved the distance, but it will always be a challenge because of the aforementioned physics. They've gotten the charge distance to 5ft (5.5 watts), 10ft (3.5 watts), and 15ft (1 watt). The info I posted earlier came from their website (which hasn't been updated). I didn't post it to knock the tech, only to get people to pump the brakes on the hype.

First of all that video is the same video that's been on their website. I know because that's the first place I saw it. It's old. Even the In the News section of their website is outdated. Seems they haven't done anything to the site in a while. Secondly, they've already debuted the smaller transmitter at CES 2016. The distance issue had nothing to do with government regulations, it's the laws of physics. They've already improved the distance, but it will always be a challenge because of the aforementioned physics. They've gotten the charge distance to 5ft (5.5 watts), 10ft (3.5 watts), and 15ft (1 watt). The info I posted earlier came from their website (which hasn't been updated). I didn't post it to knock the tech, only to get people to pump the brakes on the hype.

The potential is amazing. But I guess I am biased

 

[ryanwarsaw]

First of all that video is the same video that's been on their website. I know because that's the first place I saw it. It's old. Even the In the News section of their website is outdated. Seems they haven't done anything to the site in a while. Secondly, they've already debuted the smaller transmitter at CES 2016. The distance issue had nothing to do with government regulations, it's the laws of physics. They've already improved the distance, but it will always be a challenge because of the aforementioned physics. They've gotten the charge distance to 5ft (5.5 watts), 10ft (3.5 watts), and 15ft (1 watt). The info I posted earlier came from their website (which hasn't been updated). I didn't post it to knock the tech, only to get people to pump the brakes on the hype.

Okay how long would that be to charge a dead iPhone 7 to full at 5 feet? I looked and the phone comes with a 5 watt charger. So at 5 feet it charges the same as with the plug and at 10 feet it would be a bit longer? Am i reading this right if true? If so that basically good enough already.

 

[IJ Reilly]

"Anything further father? That can't be right."

(For the one in a thousand who will get it.)

 

[341328]

Currently wireless charging is charging on a mat. I'd like to hope that if Apple introduce wireless charging, it will be truly wireless, rather than a gimmick.

I still think that mat charges are better then current cables. I'm also weary of health concerns regarding long range charging.
[doublepost=1481787747][/doublepost]

We're already being bombarded by electromagnetic radiation. Not only do our electronics emit them (wifi, radio, cell radio, bluetooth, tv, av receiver, speakers, anything with an electric current in general, etc.) but so does anything involving combustion (your car engine, your grill, stars) and even your own body. Low energy radiation is absolutely everywhere and has been for as long life has existed on this planet. We've evolved to get along fine with it. The only real danger is if the waves are highly concentrated like in a microwave oven or a giant radio wave transmitter. They won't give you cancer but they'll cook you alive. And for the record, I highly doubt Apple, or any company for that matter, would back a technology that literally cooks its users. I'm pretty sure that would END them as a company.

Or the COMBINED effects of multiple devices are an issue without any single company taking responsibility because separately they ship safe devices.

 

[BvizioN]

Great, now they'll take away the Lightning port too.

I will be happy if they do. In the last couple of years, I have used lighting port to ONLY charge the battery and nothing else.

 

[cube]

Worst title higgledy-piggledy in the history of macrumors.

 

[thekeyring]

Currently wireless charging is charging on a mat. I'd like to hope that if Apple introduce wireless charging, it will be truly wireless, rather than a gimmick.

Same here. It would be great that if the charger was plugged in all I had to do was have my iPhone in the same room.

 

[Marx55]

Wireless whatever is a waste of energy and aggression to planet Earth. It should be avoided whenever possible.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

I will be happy if they do. In the last couple of years, I have used lighting port to ONLY charge the battery and nothing else.

Just for the hell of it I deleted 50 GB of music from my phone and began a wifi sync. I have no idea how long it will take but wouldn't this be problematic when getting a new phone? I have time but it looks like this will take maybe until sometime tomorrow.

I am all for getting rid of the port but there would need to be a solution for this that doesn't involve subscribing to Apple music. I already pay a premium for Apple products and don't want to add to the cost by buying Icloud and Apple music subscriptions.

 

[44267547]

"Anything further father? That can't be right."

(For the one in a thousand who will get it.)

Horse Feathers. Two in a thousand.

 

[The Game 161]

Currently wireless charging is charging on a mat. I'd like to hope that if Apple introduce wireless charging, it will be truly wireless, rather than a gimmick.

I think thats their plan and why they haven't brought it in sooner

 

[BlackFingolfin]

I so wish there was some truth to this, but unfortunately I am pretty sure this is another Theranos - i.e. overblown hype at best and fraud at worst, just like its competitior uBeam. Peolpe alreadz mentioned physics as a reason why this implausible. But you can also read about why you probably will never be able to charge a MacBook from multiple feet away, from the former head of engineering at uBeam on his blog "Lies, Damn Lies, and Startup PR". Sobering read...

 

[dilbert99]

I'd love to see how they overcome the distance problem. The inverse square law is pretty hard to beat considering it is a fundamental physical property of the universe we live in, and also the reason the signal strength reduces drastically the farther you get away from the source.

If they can truly charge at distance, this would be huge, just think of all your internet of things devices, security cameras etc not needing a power point.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

Was just thinking that these things could be a combo induction/distance unit. You set your phone on it and it does fast charge like the Samsung currently does. You pick it up and with in a distance of a few feet or whatever the rating is and it trickle charges it. Something like that.

 

[apolloa]

Reading this article it's not been fully tested for safety yet, it has no track record on tissue absorption and they were yet to test this too. Not sure I would trust this tech.
It'll also be very slow, you need to be within 4 feet to get around 4 watts, any further and it drops down
I personally think charging pads are a much better option and safer.

http://www.androidauthority.com/wattup-wireless-charging-512966/

Still if Apple uses it then no doubt everyone else will...

 

[Keirasplace]

If they can truly charge at distance, this would be huge, just think of all your internet of things devices, security cameras etc not needing a power point.

Yes, the real use for this is for IOT, low power devices, which could just be plopped anywhere and work indefinitely.

A low power device like the watch (and maybe airpods though them being near the head makes this less likely) seems eminently suited to this kind of thing.

Also, people could carry a power pack on themselves and background charge their phones and other devices, that way without having to either put their extra power in a case, or have to plug it in their purse.

People are thinking of the regular once a day way of charging devices, but this opens up a whole new way. What if you just plopped the device under your living room table and it charged while you were reading it in the morning. The esthetic advantage over normal charging mats is great.

 

[slprescott]

Also, does or will Xcode support wireless building of apps that way we don't need to use the Lightning port anymore? If Xcode still requires a physical connection then Apple really doesn't have the complete vision.

I'd like that too, but I disagree with "... doesn't have a complete vision." This isn't about removal of a port for data-transfer, it's focused only on energy transfer. Means for data transfer exist (Wifi, Bluetooth, Airplay, etc.), and Apple could consider leveraging one of those for the Xcode / Simulator use case you mention.

 

[randyj]

Guys, if you want to have kids (more kids) one day, don't charge your iphone 8 in your pocket...

Surely long range wireless charging will not be good for you. It sounds great in theory but seriously how hard is it put put a phone on a pad (or plug in a cable) to charge at night?

 

[69Mustang]

Reading this article it's not been fully tested for safety yet, it has no track record on tissue absorption and they were yet to test this too. Not sure I would trust this tech.
It'll also be very slow, you need to be within 4 feet to get around 4 watts, any further and it drops down
I personally think charging pads are a much better option and safer.

http://www.androidauthority.com/wattup-wireless-charging-512966/

Still if Apple uses it then no doubt everyone else will...

Your link is a little dated. Try this one. http://www.androidauthority.com/energous-wearable-wireless-charger-666002/

Charging pads are no more or less safe than the Energous tech (it has already passed UL safety testing). The biggest hurdle people are going to have to overcome is cost. The big transmitter that can do 5 watts at 5 feet, 3.5 watts at 10 feet, and 1 watt at 15 feet currently run $200-300. The smaller, less expensive transmitter can charge at a distance of 6 inches. Now, who's spending $200 to charge a phone at a reasonable distance? The 6 inch distance is no better than the Qi pads.
[doublepost=1481805418][/doublepost]

Okay how long would that be to charge a dead iPhone 7 to full at 5 feet? I looked and the phone comes with a 5 watt charger. So at 5 feet it charges the same as with the plug and at 10 feet it would be a bit longer? Am i reading this right if true? If so that basically good enough already.

Question you should be asking is am I willing to pay $200 to get that 5 feet.

 

[randyj]

We're already being bombarded by electromagnetic radiation. Not only do our electronics emit them (wifi, radio, cell radio, bluetooth, tv, av receiver, speakers, anything with an electric current in general, etc.) but so does anything involving combustion (your car engine, your grill, stars) and even your own body. Low energy radiation is absolutely everywhere and has been for as long life has existed on this planet. We've evolved to get along fine with it. The only real danger is if the waves are highly concentrated like in a microwave oven or a giant radio wave transmitter. They won't give you cancer but they'll cook you alive. And for the record, I highly doubt Apple, or any company for that matter, would back a technology that literally cooks its users. I'm pretty sure that would END them as a company.

It hasn't ended Philip Morris to sell cancer sticks to millions.
Doctors used to smoke too. (I am sure many still do)
It may take years to work out the ill effects of a lot of this technology.
They can all point the finger at someone else. It is the genetically modified food, it is the artificial sweetener, it is the exhaust gases, it is the wifi, it is the longer working hours, it is everything else killing us all but it certainly isn't our product.
Putting a phone on a pad while you sleep really isn't that hard to do. I really don't think we need long range wireless charging.

 

[dannys1]

I sure wouldn't want to sleep with my head near something emitting enough energy to charge a phone at a distance.

You could sleep in a tin cap to protect yourself?

 

[BlueCreek]

If this is coming in 2017, we're getting an iPhone 7S because it'll be more than enough to have record iPhone sales.

I really hope not, but they could definitely last another year with the same design if this feature was included

 

[BreadofWonder]

cook as in fry your brain cells? not likely...

But it will just keep continuing as no one currently wants to be chained via a cable anymore.

Cook as in exactly what happens to food inside your microwave. If it were happening you would feel it. In fact, it would be extremely painful. You'd be literally boiling from the inside out. I'm not saying this charging is going to do that, though. Actually, I meant the opposite. I would be shocked if this wasn't totally safe.