I think wireless charging is a nice feature to have. I enjoyed it back on the Palm Pre and got used to grabbing my phone and leaving without bothering with cables.
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.
Are you in favour of wireless charging?
- Thread starter The Game 161
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I did not realize how much I enjoyed it until I had one and then tried a phone that did not have wireless charging. It is hard to go back to a cable when you are use to wireless....I think that pretty much applies to a lot of technology (keyboard, mouse, gaming controller).
Why would you be 'not in favor' ?
You still can charge via USB so what difference does it make a device supporting it.
I don't ever use NFC but I would not begrudge devices having / supporting NFC.
Wireless charging usually takes time to fully charge a device compared to USB cables. But meh, Idc. I'd like to have it on any iDevices soon. Having two options to charge a device is always better than having only one.
Such an inconvience
Ive never had a problem even if im falling asleep with it unplugged but thats me.
It is a pita, trying to line up the connector in the dark, half asleep, making sure it's right side up. I use an Android phone currently, but IMO the lightning cable is much easier to plug in blindly. "but that's me".
I'm all for REAL wireless charging.....
What's peddled today as wireless isn't actually wireless, so for the purposes of this poll I would vote no.
What's peddled today as wireless isn't actually wireless, so for the purposes of this poll I would vote no.
Disadvantages
From Wikipedia:
Disadvantages of inductive charging:
Lower efficiency, waste heat - The main disadvantages of inductive charging are its lower efficiency and increased resistive heating in comparison to direct contact. Implementations using lower frequencies or older drive technologies charge more slowly and generate heat within most portable electronics.[citation needed]
More costly - Inductive charging also requires drive electronics and coils in both device and charger, increasing the complexity and cost of manufacturing.[1][2]
Slower charging - due to the lower efficiency, devices can take longer to charge when supplied power is equal.
Inconvenience - When a mobile device is connected to a cable, it can be freely moved around and operated while charging. In current implementations of inductive charging (such as the Qi standard), the mobile device must be left on a pad, and thus can't be moved around or easily operated while charging.
Incompatibility - Unlike (for example) a standardized MicroUSB charging connector, there are no de facto standards, potentially leaving a consumer, organization or manufacturer with redundant equipment when a standard emerges.(Note: Qi has become a standard adopted by many companies such as Google and Nokia.)
From Wikipedia:
Disadvantages of inductive charging:
Lower efficiency, waste heat - The main disadvantages of inductive charging are its lower efficiency and increased resistive heating in comparison to direct contact. Implementations using lower frequencies or older drive technologies charge more slowly and generate heat within most portable electronics.[citation needed]
More costly - Inductive charging also requires drive electronics and coils in both device and charger, increasing the complexity and cost of manufacturing.[1][2]
Slower charging - due to the lower efficiency, devices can take longer to charge when supplied power is equal.
Inconvenience - When a mobile device is connected to a cable, it can be freely moved around and operated while charging. In current implementations of inductive charging (such as the Qi standard), the mobile device must be left on a pad, and thus can't be moved around or easily operated while charging.
Incompatibility - Unlike (for example) a standardized MicroUSB charging connector, there are no de facto standards, potentially leaving a consumer, organization or manufacturer with redundant equipment when a standard emerges.(Note: Qi has become a standard adopted by many companies such as Google and Nokia.)
It would have been nice to post the advantages from the same wiki page for balance.
From Wikipedia:
Advantages of inductive charging:
Protected connections - no corrosion when the electronics are all enclosed, away from water or oxygen in the atmosphere.
Safer for medical implants - for embedded medical devices, allows recharging/powering through the skin rather than having wires penetrate the skin, which would increase the risk of infection.
Convenience - rather than having to connect a power cable, the device can be placed on or close to a charge plate or stand.
Easier than plugging into a power cable (important for disabled people).
Durability - Without the need to constantly plug and unplug the device, there is significantly less wear and tear on the socket of the device and the attaching cable.
Last edited:
That was my prediction. May not seem like much, but once tried, would be difficult to go back.
I'm really looking forward to this feature in the N5 (and N7).
The advantages seem vastly insignificant and redundant compared to the disadvantages.
Because the advantages seem
Are you sure you don't mean "I'm all for APPLE wireless charging"? Heh, jk.
But, what is "real" wireless charging? And how will we get there? Won't today's wireless charging technology lead into tomorrow's?
I asked the same question earlier:
Also:
I don't get your sentiment. Why would you not be for a technology today that costs you virtually nothing (you don't lose USB charging, you aren't forced to use wireless charging, you aren't forced to buy extra accessories...), that has the potential to clearly grow and get better and become more impressive (as technology tends to do over time), have the potential to make our lives easier (again, I think this is something that sounds small, but would be missed if one ever tried it and then was forced to go back to charging with a wire. Think about the aforementioned example above about wireless syncing. Imagine having to plug to sync again.)?
If you don't desire it or wish to use it today, but want it to become "real" in the future, why wouldn't you be for it today? Sounds bizarre to me. How else does technology advance if not for today's understanding of it?
Subjectively, we lose nothing when a feature that can be turned on/off is added. Objectively, the industry and technology gains.
----------
Right. So you were being imbalanced, just like Daveathall pointed out.
To you perhaps, but to others, who knows? My point being that while you were copying and pasting the disadvantages it would have added to your post to have included the advantages, by your selective editing all you did was reveal your bias.
Hey guys, remember this thread?! =D
Why is wireless charging considered a selling point?: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1535637/
: chuckle :
Why is wireless charging considered a selling point?: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1535637/
: chuckle :
Hmm didn't realize this was available on the note 3. And the note 3 just got rooted.
You mistake my not caring for being completely against it. If it was standard, I wouldn't care. That's my point.
And I don't see how the current "wireless" charging will bring about TRUE wireless charging. I'm talking about witricity - essentially charging through a wifi-like signal. It exists now - but obviously isn't consumer ready.
You ever heard the saying "jack of all trades, master of none"? I'm not saying there's a huge issue, but I don't buy the "there's no harm in throwing everything into a phone" bit.....OEMs lose focus and don't make any one feature or experience really great....
Just my opinion.
Pointless to me, and I'm largely indifferent.
Why would I ever want to charge slower?
Also wireless charging is an and/or prospect for device usage.
Cable charging gives me charging and usage...imagine that...
Why would I ever want to charge slower?
Also wireless charging is an and/or prospect for device usage.
Cable charging gives me charging and usage...imagine that...
Fair points. Just curious, what are they compromising, per se, by putting in wireless charging? And are they really that bad of a tradeoff, if any?
What are OEMs "losing focus" on because of wireless charging?
"Subjectively, we lose nothing when a feature that can be turned on/off is added. Objectively, the industry and technology gains."
No?
I don't agree that your last statement is 100% true. Do I have any specific evidence? Not at this time....just don't feel it always holds true.
Just an opinion.
I want to re-address this point in particular. I'm no expert, but how are you so sure wireless charging technology has nothing to do with witricity? Wouldn't wireless charging be part of the growing vocabulary and growing knowledge of charging devices in general? How are you so sure improvements in wireless charging won't lead to improvements (or at least a better understanding) in wifi-like charging? They're both different methods, I get that, but how are you so positive they aren't linked at even a conversational level?
And what if wireless charging takes off to allow for witricity to become a serious next step? That is, if witricity is feasible today but expensive, what exactly do you think will get us to the point where it's more affordable or widespread? Maybe people will understand witricity because of widespread and common use of wireless charging. You really can't see beyond your own scopes that wireless charging is, at the very least, related to witricity? And if not, bound quite hand in hand?
This might not be a direct analogy, but 3D television is being regarded as the future, and while HD TV doesn't necessarily relate, it's part of the same world. I wouldn't for a second choose not to support HD TV just because I'm waiting for 3D. If someone can think of a better analogy, I'm all ears, but that's what I came up with off the top of my head.
This is the growth and evolution of technology. No?