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.
iPad Pro Yes, the iPad Pro charges SLOWLY. Here’s why.
- Thread starter echo1877
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Explain. A USB-C with the associated support for higher charging rates as defined in the standard would clearly solve the problem.
We will see a next-gen Lightning spec years before we a new connector on iOS devices. Every time somebody says "USB-C on iOS" I die a little inside, recalling that Phil Schiller flat-out stated that Lightning was the new connector for the next 10 years of iOS devices. That is 2012 - 2022.
I think he would know.
And every time someone wants to solve some minor inconvenience with a new connector/port that would otherwise upturn the entire accessory market, I question your savvy.
I think he would know.
And every time someone wants to solve some minor inconvenience with a new connector/port that would otherwise upturn the entire accessory market, I question your savvy.
I was proposing USB-C as a solution, which it clearly is
. Your point is not that "USB-C has nothing to do with' it, but rather that it won't happen.This is fine. If that really is the case, does anyone know if the lightning electrical specifications allow for higher current or voltage to increase charging rates? If so, what are the limits?
Are you serious? That is exactly what Apple did with USB-C and the Retina Macbook. Ok straight to the ignore bin.
For a single standalone Mac product.
Not for the entirety of the MacBook line, or the iOS line.
And the only reason for that decision was a radical change that involved removing ALL other ports. That is not a minor thing. Like, for instance, charing the iPad a little bit faster.
And it is all moot anyway, as a newer Lightning spec is all that is needed.
Mine was annoying slow too. I don't care why, I just feel like they need to make it better. grrr
The Surface Pro is a laptop design, not a tablet. So comparing it to an ARM tablet is not a great one. But the main issue here is that while the Pro really does need a beefier charger, Apple painted themselves into a corner with lightning cable design, IMO.
Probably not. Moving more current requires a thicker gauge wire to not be a fire hazard. I would wager that you'd need a thicker gauge than what Apple used in Lightning cables to go much higher than 2.4A. The real risk is that you could have "supported" and "unsupported" cables where one is a fire risk while the other isn't. Or limit old cables, and have users not understand why you shouldn't charge with one or the other.
Uh, lightning can transmit however much power Apple wants it to.
A lightning to USB-C cable could be specced to allow high wattage charging. A lightning to USB-A cable can't without major revisions to the port spec. (And new USB-A ports for power supplies.)
The key differentiation between USB-C and older connector specs is that it is specifically intended to support high power draw charging. The rest of it is just (somewhat nice) fluff.
I have been following the recent news regarding a Googler reviewing USB-C to USB-A cables for charging. What I took away from that is that internal resistors in the cable (head?) play a part in controlling the overall current. If Apple were to make available a thicker lightning cable with an appropriately tuned resistor, would that not solve the problem without confusing customers?
In any case, customers are already confused or unaware that the choice of charger and cable can affect the charging speed and general charging safety...
Interesting. So you're saying the limitation is on the USB-A side? So is it feasible that if we have a USB-C to lightning cable, it would allow for higher wattage charging? I'm not sure about the limitations of the lightning cable in terms of power draw limits...
Question: It's my understanding that slow-charging is beneficial to overall battery health and longevity (that fast-charging accelerates - perhaps minimally - battery degradation). Wouldn't a lower wattage charger provide some benefit in this sense?
The base model Surface Pro 4 uses a 4.5W Core M3-6Y30 fanless tablet class processor which is similar in power consumption to A9X.
So, you can't charge without current, and so it doesn't matter how you do it really. But thin gauge wire simply cannot move much current without heating up. It is how incandescent light bulbs work: throw a good amount of current through very thin wire, watch it glow because it got really hot.
The problem is more all the existing cables. You either have two options: try to pull more current through them and watch them melt, which isn't an option. Or, you limit the draw through them and watch people not understand why one cable doesn't charge so well. As an engineer, I know that I'd make the mistake every so often, get frustrated, and have to track down the one cable that charges at full speed amongst my multiple cables. And that's me, where I understand why it is the way it is. It wouldn't be intuitive at all. So I suspect Apple didn't want to go that route.
Yes, that is correct. My original post was because I discovered that 2400mA is not the intended charging current for the iPad Pro. The intended charging current is 5560mA.
Charging that much more slowly would probably extend the Pro's battery life somewhat, yes.
Your kidding right??? Apple is the gold standard of battery life and longevity.
Every Ipad I own since Ipad 2 has been and is still very good.
My Ipad 3 still gets 12 hours of battery life while internet surfing and it was purchased on the release date. No Android tablet (and I have alot as well) comes close.
Every Ipad I own since Ipad 2 has been and is still very good.
My Ipad 3 still gets 12 hours of battery life while internet surfing and it was purchased on the release date. No Android tablet (and I have alot as well) comes close.
It is also the only one that draws this much power. And as I mentioned before, Apple has basically painted themselves into a corner with the lightning cable and previous tablets in their lineup whe 12W is fine. It may be anemic for the Pro, but I don't see it as anemic for tablets (a more general claim). And the Surface Pro is not really a tablet when you are pushing it as a laptop replacement running x86 (that can be a tablet if it must).
Either way, we are getting into a realm where some devices don't really fit into one area or the other in terms of power envelope.
That is why some mobile devices negotiate with the charger for a higher voltage source yet live with a microUSB connection. Double the voltage and twice the power is delivered.
I understand where you are coming from. But remember that, without a charger, the iPP is good for nearly 10 hours. With the charger, I am guessing it will be good for 15+ hours, even though the battery is constantly running down. Subtracting the time for sleep, meals, breaks, I think we will be OK.
I appreciate the input BUT most folks are just going to charge overnight anyways. If one needs more hands on time during their day, buy two Pros or bring your charger with you.
I appreciate the input BUT most folks are just going to charge overnight anyways. If one needs more hands on time during their day, buy two Pros or bring your charger with you.
I agree.
A third (mobile) alternative is get one of these battery packs:
http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-usb-battery-pack-travel/
"Anker’s battery pack has two full-sized USB ports. Each is capable of providing up to 2.4 amps of power on its own for a combined total of 3.0 A"
(2.4 Amps means 12W here)
Exactly what I was getting at. There are a few USB c to lightening cables on the market now. The hold back before was adding the adapter for standard USB into the mix caps the maximum wattage without it the issue could be resolved.
Battery life varies with workload and brightness level. Have seen extreme gaming tests reduce iPP battery life to ~4 hours and other things like video editing will also have higher consumption where it'll likely still drain while plugged in. Ideal is designing for worst case consumption and still have it charge or at least doesn't drain while plugged in.
It technically could, but Apple would probably have to make a new version of the lightning cable with circuitry that can handle higher voltages (this may already be the case, but they haven't given us a charger yet that 'unlocks' this mode). USB-C and Qualcomm's quick charge are able to charge at much higher rates as they are a multi-voltage standard. The rMB's charger charges at only 12 watts max when at the default 5volts of USB. When the charger senses it's connected to a rMB it triples the voltage. This is what allows a thin wire/connector to carry over the double the wattage.
Here's a chart showing USB's different modes
Attachments
I don't think this is a big issue. Remember that the lightning cable contains a chip for authentication and most likely the ability to identify cable capabilities. It's probably entirely possible to release new lightning cables that carry more power and that devices can identify for faster charging as needed.
Also, stepping up the voltage allows for more power to be carried over the same gauge wire without causing extra losses in the wire (which is a function of current). Again, depends on the circuitry on either side.