Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Iphone Apple

Will Apple's Next iPhones Get Rid of Charging Ports Too? (cnet.com) 174

Posted by EditorDavid from the un-plugged dept.
"First they came for our headphone jacks. Now, they're taking our ports," writes CNET: Reliable Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo has reported that the company is gearing up to remove the Lightning connector from the flagship iPhone released in 2021... Kuo predicts that having a totally wireless phone will help differentiate the flagship iPhone from all other models in the lineup. Having no physical ports mean iPhones will have less moving parts and it can improve water resistance or make more room for a bigger battery...

We've also seen other rumors indicating that Apple may bundle AirPods with the new iPhones, which makes sense if we get a portless phone. Apple would not be the first to experiment with a portless phone: Other companies have shown off concepts, like the Vivo Apex from earlier in 2019.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Will Apple's Next iPhones Get Rid of Charging Ports Too? More

Will Apple's Next iPhones Get Rid of Charging Ports Too?

Comments Filter:

  • The #1 Reason... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by magusxxx ( 751600 ) <`moc.oohay' `ta' `0002_xxxsugam'> on Sunday January 05, 2020 @05:58PM (#59590048)

    Tethered jailbreaks wouldn't work.

    • Re:The #1 Reason... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by b0s0z0ku ( 752509 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @06:09PM (#59590084)
      .... and "stinking via the clown" (iCloud) will become mandatory, so you'll have to pay for more and more storage space, instead of downloading photos and videos directly to your computer for free.

      • If there is a means to get data to the "cloud" without wires then there's means to get data to a personal computer by wireless transfer.

        Also, being without a charging port does not mean lack of a data port. Sure, the data port might go too but I cannot see how this in any way forces people into cloud services. This is especially true since a bit selling point of Apple iProducts is their ability to transfer data to and from other items people own. Things such as printers, speakers, laptops, cars, and various home automation systems.

        If there is a lack of a "port" then I suspect the use of contacts on the phone like they use for the iPad Smart Connector. This makes even more sense on a phone where people like to put on personalized cases, for dressing up the phone and protecting it from abuse as well as to add features like more battery capacity or wireless charging (for early models that didn't have it already). Also with phones a charging port is something that can collect pocket lint or other unpleasant small particles that could obstruct and damage the port. Surface contacts removes this risk and still allows for the addition of a port for data and charging with an appropriate case if people still want it.

        Just think about this, with Smart Connector style contacts the debate over USB-C or Lightning is gone. They release a phone with a Smart Connector (or whatever they might call it) and then a choice of cases for the phone that add Lighting or USB-C. Or micro-B if you are still into the torture that was in trying to plug those in while tired and/or drunk. (Not that I have any experience with that.) Or if you really want "old school" then get a case with the 30 pin connector, because I know someone will make one.

        I didn't miss the headphone port when that went away, by that time I had worn out the headphone port on my iPod Touch and realized just how little I needed that headphone port.

        Wireless charging and wireless data lessens the need for wires, but it doesn't go away. Wires are good, but there's better ways to connect them.

        Oh, and data contacts for accessories will also make all those haters shut up about the lack of a headphone port. If you have to have it then get a case with it. Such cases are going to be ugly and anachronistic but I'm quite certain someone will make one, if they haven't already.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by adfraggs ( 4718383 )
          I'm all for surface contacts as a fundamental redesign on how we do physical connectors, it seems like it has a ton of potential. But let's not forget we've been doing different variations of ports and plugs ever since there has been electricity. It's possible that apple are the ones who finally nail this problem and iron out all the issues that have plagued each variation of plug we've ever tried ... it's also possible that what they come up with is just another variation with it's own issues. If they do i

          • OK, we'll be miffed for a while because we have to go through another generation of peripheral replacements, but if it's actually the final killer solution then it would be worth it.

            This always happens and in most cases people eventually grow to like what's new.

            People complained with USB replacing PS/2. Then serial and parallel ports started to be replaced by USB. People complained about phone makers moving to USB to charge phones. Type-A and micro-B ports were then replaced by USB-C. Every time people complained about a need for a new peripheral or adapter. In time though people just went with it and then look back at the troubles they had before and are glad they are in the past

            • Yup, it'll become the new normal. Speaking of which, this is what your iPhone will look like in two more generations' time [amazon.com].

            • Re:Think surface contacts (Re:The #1 Reason...) (Score:5, Interesting)

              by war4peace ( 1628283 ) on Monday January 06, 2020 @12:09AM (#59591008)

              There is a difference.
              All port changes you mention happened because the "old" ports were too slow in transferring data. They had to be replaced with faster and faster data transfer, which mandated creation of different physical ports.

              Going portless does not achieve that. I charge my phones faster using cables than using wireless charging, and I am yet to encounter a phone which charges just as fast using wireless compared to wired charging.

              Here's a list of disadvantages inductive charging has: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

              • There is a difference.
                All port changes you mention happened because the "old" ports were too slow in transferring data. They had to be replaced with faster and faster data transfer, which mandated creation of different physical ports.

                Going portless does not achieve that.

                It can achieve that. It means having a wireless connection that's faster than USB-C or Lightning as currently implemented in Apple iProducts. It means inductive charging that is also faster than the current wired connections.

                Since the Lightning and USB-C ports used now are limited to USB 2.0 or USB 3.x speeds, and power that's somewhere in the 20 to 30 watt range, there's certainly wireless technology now that can do better.

                This obviously doesn't rule out the use of faster protocols and higher voltages on

                • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                  by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

                  10W is really pushing out for wireless charging. Remember that Apple tried to make a wireless charger and failed already.

                • Re:Think surface contacts (Re:The #1 Reason...) (Score:4, Interesting)

                  by war4peace ( 1628283 ) on Monday January 06, 2020 @07:22AM (#59591586)

                  It can achieve that. It means having a wireless connection that's faster than USB-C or Lightning as currently implemented in Apple iProducts. It means inductive charging that is also faster than the current wired connections.

                  Which at the moment doesn't exist. I have searched for it and it's simply not there yet. I have both wired and wireless chargers and both the charging and data transfer speeds differences are noticeable.

                  The iPhone 11 already supports 7.5 watts by wireless charging and wireless data in the gigabits per second range.

                  Wired charging through the Samsung Note 9 works perfectly using 9V, 1.67A fast charging. My 20K mAh Anker Speed Powerbank charges using Power Delivery at 30W. The PowerCore+ 26800 PD can charge ultraportable laptops, etc. As far as wireless data transfers go, I have bought several 1900AC wireless adapters (ASUS, D-Link) and the maximum download speed I could reach with optimizations in place was around 500 Mbit/s, with consistent transfers at about 350 Mbit/s under optimal conditions (less than 5 feet from an Ubiquiti AC Pro). Wired connection gets me 950 Mbit consistent transfers at any time with a 20m long CAT6 cable. And then there's the reliability thing: my wired connection gives me 1ms ping to the router consistently, the wireless connection has hiccups even under optimal conditions, I am seeing the odd 1000-2000 ms hangs every 15-20 minutes or so.

                  Boost this up a bit to something like 30 or 50 watts, and push things like WiFi and Bluetooth to the next version

                  The same could be said about wired connections, they already support up to 100W using USB-C Power Delivery, and 10Gbit RJ45 have existed for years, they are really affordable right now with Mikrotik CRS305-1G-4S+IN offering 4x SFP+ ports for as low as 135 USD. A TRENDnet SFP+ 10Gb network card is 99 dollars, so there you go.

                  Wired will be ahead of wireless for quite some time. maybe sometime in the future the gains of wired over wireless won't be as high as to matter anymore under daily use, but for now that's not the case.

                  • Wired will be ahead of wireless for quite some time.

                    I completely agree.

                    In this case we aren't looking for the absolute fastest or most powerful wired connection. In this case it only has to provide enough power to charge a cell phone in a reasonable time, and transfer data that one might expect for use on a screen that fits in a pocket.

                    USB-C can indeed provide up to 100 watts but I'm not aware of any cell phone that can make use of that. In fact it's rare to see laptops use that much power. Apple uses Qi chargers now up to 7.5 watts, and there's Qi charge

                • Please link an inductive charger and device which uses it that operates at 30 watts.

                  You're wrong. Qi 1.2 extended power profile [wikipedia.org] supports a maximum of 15W and nothing uses it yet.

                  Phones barely charge at 30W over cables - the OnePlus "warp charge" thing is 30W and Oppo has a 50W variant [androidcentral.com] based on the same ideas because they are sister companies - they move the charging circuits (and majority of the waste heat) into the charging brick and away from the phone, allowing a higher current into the battery due to l

            • This always happens and in most cases people eventually grow to like what's new.

              Or we just give up and accept it. USB has been good for a great many things but it causes its own set of problems. Windows has never really "got" USB. Like when you plug a KB and Mouse into a tower and you are stuck on the windows login screen for an indeterminately long time because windows requires a full driver setup for USB HID devices. Or when you don't plug your USB printer back into the exact same port it was in previously, so windows makes a whole new one, breaking your network shares and queueing.

              • Have you booted off a USB stick in the last decade? Because that's how all my linux installs start, and I've never had an issue booting off one.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Burdell ( 228580 )

          If there is a means to get data to the "cloud" without wires then there's means to get data to a personal computer by wireless transfer.

          Not necessarily - this is Apple's walled garden we're talking about. They could quite easily only support transfers to your iCloud account, and block any third-party transfer apps from the store. They could claim any number of reasons, like duplication of the system transfer functions, "security", etc.

          • Not necessarily - this is Apple's walled garden we're talking about. They could quite easily only support transfers to your iCloud account, and block any third-party transfer apps from the store. They could claim any number of reasons, like duplication of the system transfer functions, "security", etc.

            Then don't buy it. So long as there are alternatives to these walled gardens there's no threat of such lock in.

            What will keep Apple from producing this lock in is people will leave if their data can't leave. Apple produces "camera adapters" (really just adapters for USB devices and flash storage, not just cameras) for their iProducts to allow for the export of photos and other files. Any document can be e-mailed, printed, "air dropped", sent by text message, and so on. If Apple starts to close this in o

            • What will keep Apple from producing this lock in is people will leave if their data can't leave.

              You are overestimating the value of $people.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

            They could also stop selling iPhones entirely. Or dissolve the company and return the assets to the shareholders. Or fund a manned moon program.

            What you're talking about is pure fantasy. Any idiot who can download xcode can stick any of a zillion file transfer servers on their iPhone. Or just download one from the app store. Or use the free cloud-based one Apple builds in. Or the one from Facebook, Twitter, Dropbox, Box....

        • If there is a means to get data to the "cloud" without wires then there's means to get data to a personal computer by wireless transfer.

          Yeah, you could just do a bluetooth file transfer or something, except no you can't because apple refuses to allow that kind of functionality on their phones. If you think they are going to make it as open and easy as possible without a purely apple ecosystem then I have this bridge I'd like to talk to you about.

      • Apple would never do that. Not because they’re benevolent, but because they couldn’t charge $100 for a $5 flash upgrade anymore.

      • Re:The #1 Reason... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Wrath0fb0b ( 302444 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @09:38PM (#59590666)

        It just so happens that you can sync your device over WiFi [apple.com]. This feature has been there for years.

        So you can make funny pun/jokes about how you don't like the cloud (hey, no sweat) and you'll be super happy to know that iPhone users won't have to use it! Amazing how far a little bit of research goes.

      • Because WiFi only connects to iCloud now?

        You're kind of an idiot.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by slazzy ( 864185 )
      Easy fix, toss it in the recycling alone with all other proprietary crap.

    • "Tethered jailbreaks wouldn't work."

      Just as the law enforcement's decryption schemes.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Tethered jailbreaks wouldn't work.

      And things like the GreyBox won't work either (that's the police/government box that can extract data from locked iDevices). These devices rely on tethered jailbreaks in order to be able to dump your phone's data.

      But it's not likely at all - remember Apple provides a charger, and it means Apple would have to provide a wireless charger with every iPhone. And Apple would have to make it pretty device specific because last I played with wireless chargers, they were somewhat fi

  • I resisted getting a wireless charging pad for a while, but I have to admit they work pretty well, and the cables that attach them ( the term wireless charging is a lie) do not undergo the same wear/tear that normal charging cables do... only thing is, I'm not sure how practical wireless only charging is for travel.

    • Couldn't you have a charging coil that attaches magnetically to the bottom of the phone, to keep it firmly in place while on the train or plane? Sort of like a contactless MagSafe.

    • only thing is, I'm not sure how practical wireless only charging is for travel.

      It would also be a pain in the neck when you're commuting and want to charge your phone. Apps like Waze chew through the battery - I can't imagine using GPS without having the phone plugged in. My car rides fairly smoothly, but still...

      For that matter it'd be an even bigger pain to find yourself on a bus or train with a phone that's got only 10% charge left (which has happened to me on several occasions). Imagine trying to keep your phone on a magnetically-coupled charger while the vehicle tosses around...

      • What if the charger had a snall permanent magnet or suction cup that kept it firmly in place on a little indentation on the bottom of the phone?

        • Re:Not a bad idea (Score:5, Funny)

          by burtosis ( 1124179 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @06:20PM (#59590142)
          So we are removing a cable that adds no thickness, and replacing it with a less efficient, far larger and bulkier charging pad over the back that isn’t any faster? I’m going to need a second helping of courage.
        • Or, what if we had some kind of fixed entry point to the phone, a kind of "port" where you could "plug in" the charger in a fixed and predictable way? That would solve a bunch of problems.

          • Or, what if we had some kind of fixed entry point to the phone, a kind of "port" where you could "plug in" the charger in a fixed and predictable way? That would solve a bunch of problems.

            Wow! That idea is so crazy... it just might work!

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jimbo ( 1370 )

        Well, there's a plethora of car phone holders available that include a wireless charging coil in the back.

        I'm sure there are use cases where it'd be inconvenient not having a plug but fortunately the smartphone market is full of choice, so there's really no issue here.

        My phone have never been plugged in and I've moved between Android and iPhones several times. People are far too tribal on something that's nothing but a personal choice.

      • It would also be a pain in the neck when you're commuting and want to charge your phone.

        The way I can see it working is a traveling case with wireless charger built in that locks the phone into charging position, so it would still work on any moving vehicle - the case wouldn't even have a battery, just a USB port to plug into other things and charge as normal.

        I think for me general use such a system would work, and even while traveling I'd mostly be charging at night in a hotel room. But it would cover the

      • The contact pad could actually be a cradle... no need for it to be just a flat sheet. The charging while traveling problem could be addressed by changing the form factor of the charger.

    • I resisted getting a wireless charging pad for a while, but I have to admit they work pretty well, and the cables that attach them ( the term wireless charging is a lie) do not undergo the same wear/tear that normal charging cables do... only thing is, I'm not sure how practical wireless only charging is for travel.

      Plus, there is no danger of a transient in your car's electrical system passing through your car charger and frying your phone. I see nothing but advantages to wireless charging.

    • A better idea (Score:4, Funny)

      by PolygamousRanchKid ( 1290638 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @07:09PM (#59590312)

      I resisted getting a

      wireless charging pad

      for a while, ... only thing is, I'm not sure how practical wireless only charging is for travel.

      My idea of wireless charging is that my phone charges from the power emitted by the signals of other people's phones. "Vampire Charging", if you will.

      It would be perfect for travel, since wherever you go there are plenty of folks yakking away insipid nonsense that no one will miss anyway.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dgatwood ( 11270 )

      only thing is, I'm not sure how practical wireless only charging is for travel.

      Not very, unless they put a wireless charging pad into the body of their laptops somehow. Then maybe. That or a tiny magnetic cable similar to the one they use for the Apple watch.

      I think that having a sports model with no physical ports is a great idea, because there are a lot of people who would like a completely waterproof phone.

      That said, I think they need to dump Lighting for USB-C, and use that for their high-end model.

    • Qi charging sucks as it currently is. Takes too damn long compared to plugging your phone in.

      • Qi charging is fantastic as it currently is. Pick up your phone, use it, set it down, now it's charging. No cable to get in the way, no cable to hunt around for.

        At the end of the day at work I pick my phone off the desk and it's fully charged. I can use it until after dinner, toss it on the stand, and it's full again in the morning.

        The only time I resort to a cable is when I've used it really heavily and it's near dead, and I want to be using it heavily again in the near future. That's an uncommon use-case

  • The screen!

    Just make the front a shiny mirror. Perfect!

    Then you can save on the useless electronics, and make it razor thin! So to hold it, tone has to have actual *courage*!

    Of course, Samsung will hold against that, and bring out something that, like all models before, would be completely indistinghishable, wasn't it for it being *huge*!
    In fact, this time, you will need to actually carry it on your shoulder like an 80s boom box! And lop off your arm. Which you need, together with your leg, to pay for the d

  • Bad for musicians (Score:5, Informative)

    by Goldenhawk ( 242867 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @06:22PM (#59590154) Homepage

    The Bluetooth headphone latency is entirely unacceptable for any live music purposes. That pretty much eliminates any real-time audio uses of the phone - and there are more than a few apps and devices that do handy things like guitar amp simulators.

    • I'm not much of an audiophile - what is the current latency performance and what would acceptable?

      The reason I ask is that the new airpods have improved bluetooth latency, so I'm curious what the threshold is (assuming its never as good as wired, what's good enough?).

      https://stephencoyle.net/airpo... [stephencoyle.net]

      • Re:Bad for musicians (Score:5, Informative)

        by Goldenhawk ( 242867 ) on Monday January 06, 2020 @12:07AM (#59591002) Homepage

        Believe it or not, for live music purposes latencies as low as 10ms begin to cause problems for a good musician. 40ms is considered the worst tolerable latency. So current âoelowâ latency BT above 100ms is absolutely unacceptable.

        Consider that for 120 beats per minute, a typical dance tempo, a single beat occurs every 500ms (a quarter note). 100ms is therefore an entire 1/5 of a beat. That is a huge error for any musician. Most musicians in various studies easily detected much smaller errors.

    • The Bluetooth headphone latency is entirely unacceptable for any live music purposes.

      AptX LL achieves sub 40ms latency already which is generally good enough for live music. You said below that sub 10ms is acceptable but that number is arbitrary and ignores the many effects which already extend beyond 40ms which are used in live performances such as digital reverb etc.

      But this is beside the point because they key thing is the iPhone doesn't actually implement AptX or its low-latency variant.

      Mind you I agree it should not be used for live music, though I also wouldn't use an iPhone for 2-way

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sad_ ( 7868 )

      iphones are used during live music performances?
      i mean, as a critical part of the sound-feed?

  • Ever try to use WiFi syncing to a Mac instead of a USB cable? Often they just won't talk to each other. The biggest annoyance is that syncing sometimes tries to start as soon as the phone is on power, such as when I put it in its car cradle. It will immediately start trying to sync while I'm driving away, which fails as soon as I get far enough down the driveway to leave WiFi range, but the two sides never recover, and usually both have to be restarted to get a sync again. I gave up.

    This would also mean the

  • Lightning cables are so close to USB-C cables... so it doesn't take much to move to the new standard.

  • CarPlay needs lots of reliable bandwidth, and everybody prefers CarPlay / Android Auto over the god awful systems the car manufacturers provide. There is no good reason why it couldn't be wireless of course - it's an ideal application for WiGiG. But cars don't have hardware right now. Either they provide an adaptor, or one of the more popular uses of a iPhone dies.

    • everybody prefers CarPlay / Android Auto over the god awful systems the car manufacturers provide

      I do? I actually don't bother with Android Auto unless I'm going on a very long drive, and even then it isn't really necessary.
      It's far easier to get back in my car and let my phone reconnect over bluetooth.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sad_ ( 7868 )

      you said it yourself - they will provide an adaptor.
      as if the need for a dongle/adaptor ever stopped them before?

  • More anti-consumer moves with fake justifications (Score:5, Insightful)

    by peppepz ( 1311345 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @06:50PM (#59590242)
    Just like when they got rid of sd cards, made batteries non removable, and removed the headphone jack: they said it was to make the phones thinner and more waterproof, it just made them more expensive, less functional and less durable.

    • made batteries non removable

      I was with you everywhere except there. There are tangible benefits to the size and battery capacity by not making batteries removable.

      Now as to whether you personally prefer a removable battery or one that lasts longer in a device that is smaller, that is a different question. But trading off one feature for another it not anti-consumer.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tflf ( 4410717 )

        made batteries non removable

        I was with you everywhere except there. There are tangible benefits to the size and battery capacity by not making batteries removable.

        Now as to whether you personally prefer a removable battery or one that lasts longer in a device that is smaller, that is a different question. But trading off one feature for another it not anti-consumer.

        The "tangilble benefits" in size and battery capacity of non-removable batteries are far outweighed by the irresponsible requirement of replacing a still-functional device simply because the battery has reached the end of it's life-span. That is anti-consumer all day, every day.

  • Power Consumption (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Barny ( 103770 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @07:41PM (#59590370) Journal

    Remembering of course that wireless charging systems are fairly inefficient, how is this any kind of good idea?

    Now your phone will effectively be using 2-3x more energy to charge, which seems pretty terrible when you are giving it power from the wall, but what if you need a quick boost of power from a powerbank?

    • I'm having difficulty finding any definitive answer on the efficiency of Qi charging. I am finding claims of efficiency between 60% and 80%. Unless you have something to back up your claim of such horrible efficiency then I'm calling this an exaggeration.

      How is Qi charging a good idea? (I'm assuming Apple will stick with Qi as a standard.) It saves on wear to the phone. Places like hotels like them because they are much harder to damage than a cable. Users like them because when in a hotel or somethin

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Barny ( 103770 )

        Qi, from the quick look around I've done, is around 70% efficient in perfect situations (phone has no case on it, phone is perfectly aligned). Other forms (or Qi if you have a case/phone not aligned) can be as low as 30% efficient.

        As for alternatives, I have a phone that uses a USBC plug, and I got a magnetic QC4 capable cable for it. Works great, and I can just grab my phone and pull. No stress to the device at all. Why don't phones have contact pads with their own magnetic alignment system to remove the p

        • Qi, from the quick look around I've done, is around 70% efficient in perfect situations (phone has no case on it, phone is perfectly aligned). Other forms (or Qi if you have a case/phone not aligned) can be as low as 30% efficient.

          Thanks for double checking.

          Why don't phones have contact pads with their own magnetic alignment system to remove the port instead?

          My guess is this is exactly where Apple is going.

          As for alternatives, I have a phone that uses a USBC plug, and I got a magnetic QC4 capable cable for it.

          I have an older MacBook with MagSafe and I liked it very much. When I got a new MacBook it lacked MagSafe, using USB-C instead. I rectified this with a Griffin Technology cable that has a magnetic contact end on it. There's a little "nub" that sticks out the side of my laptop that can be rather annoying at some times, and I'm afraid to lose it if I put it anywhere but the USB port, but the magnetic cable is nice. There's smaller

  • Throw out your old stuff, buy new stuff. It's not just your home based charger, it's all those charging stations in the wild that will require an upgrade. Apple is going to render entire decades worth of tech useless for those foolish enough to buy into the hype.

  • LMAO (Score:3)

    by p51d007 ( 656414 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @08:20PM (#59590454)
    So, if you are out and about, and don't have your wireless charge pad...you'll either have to find one that you can borrow...or....wait for it.... carry around an Apple PORTABLE battery pack with built in wireless charging! All for the amazing LOW price of $199.99!

    • "All for the amazing LOW price of $199.99!"

      All for the amazing LOW price of $999.99! Fixed that typo for you ...

    • So, if you are out and about, and don't have your wireless charge pad...

      ... then your failure is your own fault.

      Seriously, is this what you have to complain about? This has been a problem since cell phones have been invented. The difference now is that, because of laws preventing the use of ever changing charging plug to squeeze more bucks from users, every phone on the market has to have a standardized means of charging.

      Apple already uses Qi wireless chargers like so many other phones on the market. Best guess is this will continue for some time. If you forgot your Apple c

  • Charging.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Gary Salter ( 5223177 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @08:50PM (#59590548)
    I like to plug in my iPhone 11 to my wall charger using a 6 foot cord when Iâ(TM)m using it surfing the web on my couch.... how am I supposed to charge my phone when Iâ(TM)m using it???

  • Wasn't that inefficiency outlawed? (Score:3)

    by thogard ( 43403 ) on Sunday January 05, 2020 @10:27PM (#59590808) Homepage

    Several countries have made the old school iron core induction power supplies illegal. How does this pass those rules?

  • Will soon be time to remove the iPhone altogether from our lives

  • HP had wireless charging with their now defunct tablet 10 years ago ("Touchpad")..

    I don't know why wireless charging hasn't been implemented for many years. It cuts down on connector wear as the charging ports need to be used daily in most cases.

    It's simple technology that should have been implemented a long time ago.

    • My Palm Pre had wireless charging and that was more than 10 years ago. I think HP's foray into Wireless charging started when they bought Palm (after which the HP version of the Palm went down the toilet due to HP's massive incompetence (and that has not changed)).

  • While I see a lot of understandable negative comments, nobody comments on the obvious big advantage - it will become much more difficult to break into your locked phone to get your data, unlike that Israeli box that police uses to break into a number of locked phones.

  • Got into arguments with them about this recently, claim it'll be fine - I said "how do you charge your phone on a 12 hour flight when you're using it to watch movies? You can't place it down on a flat surface for a charging pad even if you had one"

    They were adamant that airplanes would soon enough have those charging mats built in. You know despite the fact 110/240v and USB still isn't even that common.

    Cable USB C charging can be insanely fast. Either Apple near doubles the battery life on the device or

  • I constantly use my phone when I am on low power through a connected charging cable.

  • This will break the majority of Carplay receivers, almost all of them require a physical connection.

    • This was one off my first thoughts. I'm wondering if the removal of the "charge port" will be separate from having the smart connectors like on the new ipads. I'm wondering if they plan to have a smart connector snap-on that allows data connections including a USB connection. Although this won't help for an 8 hour drive unless you have an inductive charger in the car (we do but lots of folks will not)

Slashdot Top Deals

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Close