Apple MagSafe Battery Pack(apple.com)
apple.com
Apple MagSafe Battery Pack
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJWY3AM/A/magsafe-battery-pack
223 comments
To clarify the first bullet point:
When the battery pack is plugged into an outlet, it will function more or less as a standard 15W wireless charger. When unplugged from the wall and drawing from it's own energy, it will only provide 5W of power.
When the battery pack is plugged into an outlet, it will function more or less as a standard 15W wireless charger. When unplugged from the wall and drawing from it's own energy, it will only provide 5W of power.
So it has a <4000mAh battery? Those are some expensive magnets.
Samsung gave me a wireless-charging 10,000mAh battery pack for free a few years back. Expensive magnets indeed.
You jest, but I believe radial magnets genuinely are costly to make due to their complex process requirements. Granted, that raises the question of whether this is a product that makes any sense at all, but I suppose we'll have to see what the market says there.
I bought a magsafe radial magnet car mount on AMZN for $15
Same and it comes with charger, albeit 7W only. It’s weird almost 1 year later there isn’t actual magsafe 15W car mount.
Or maybe they're marking this thing up more than usual for some reason.
I genuinely don't know - the only magnetic charging I have on my 1st gen SE is through a dinky little adapter that plugs into the Lightning port, and since those adapters also come in USB-C and mini-B I can't imagine Apple ever getting close to the kind of interoperability they provide. I'm sure I'll have an iPhone that can do inductive charging at some point, but God alone knows why I'd ever bother using it.
I genuinely don't know - the only magnetic charging I have on my 1st gen SE is through a dinky little adapter that plugs into the Lightning port, and since those adapters also come in USB-C and mini-B I can't imagine Apple ever getting close to the kind of interoperability they provide. I'm sure I'll have an iPhone that can do inductive charging at some point, but God alone knows why I'd ever bother using it.
It's got a 1460 mAh 2S/7.4V battery (so ~2920 mAh in the typical 1S 3.7V form factor). And it connects via inductive coupling, which is inefficient, so you won't get all of that charge into the phone.
There are some sensible justifications to those metrics for battery health and charge efficiency. Stopping charging at 90%, limiting battery-based wireless power transfer to 5W instead of 15W, limiting charge levels when the devices get warm, charge management software to protect battery health when plugged in for long periods of time, charging more slowly when you don't need a fast charge, and charging the iPhone before the battery pack are all features with good technical reasons for doing them instead of technical limitations.
The naive approach of always providing 4.2V at as much current as the cell can take is bad for batteries. Apple has the required vertical integration and ecosystem controls to do some of these things that may be confusing.
I'm not disagreeing that it's not an order of magnitude more expensive than a comparable USB battery pack with larger specs.
There are some sensible justifications to those metrics for battery health and charge efficiency. Stopping charging at 90%, limiting battery-based wireless power transfer to 5W instead of 15W, limiting charge levels when the devices get warm, charge management software to protect battery health when plugged in for long periods of time, charging more slowly when you don't need a fast charge, and charging the iPhone before the battery pack are all features with good technical reasons for doing them instead of technical limitations.
The naive approach of always providing 4.2V at as much current as the cell can take is bad for batteries. Apple has the required vertical integration and ecosystem controls to do some of these things that may be confusing.
I'm not disagreeing that it's not an order of magnitude more expensive than a comparable USB battery pack with larger specs.
>The naive approach of always providing 4.2V at as much current as the cell can take is bad for batteries.
More on-point with what I think you meant, cellphone fast chargers are usually putting 1C into cells below 75% when thermal conditions are met, which many consider to be stressful to li-ion chemistry. I do think this is ignoring that 1. Better charge standards like VOOC have higher efficiency and so lower thermal load, and 2. cell chemistries have improved iteratively to reduce internal resistance, again reducing heat.
Where manufacturers differ is how they deliver and convert that voltage inside the phone/device. Some of the designs (qualcomm quickcharge) dump a lot of heat stepping down a higher voltage while the earlier mentioned VOOC tries to match everything inside to meet a desired rate of charge.
Temperature is the big enemy followed by dwell time in the saturation zone. (over 80% state of charge, getting worse over 90%).
More on-point with what I think you meant, cellphone fast chargers are usually putting 1C into cells below 75% when thermal conditions are met, which many consider to be stressful to li-ion chemistry. I do think this is ignoring that 1. Better charge standards like VOOC have higher efficiency and so lower thermal load, and 2. cell chemistries have improved iteratively to reduce internal resistance, again reducing heat.
Where manufacturers differ is how they deliver and convert that voltage inside the phone/device. Some of the designs (qualcomm quickcharge) dump a lot of heat stepping down a higher voltage while the earlier mentioned VOOC tries to match everything inside to meet a desired rate of charge.
Temperature is the big enemy followed by dwell time in the saturation zone. (over 80% state of charge, getting worse over 90%).
> is this the first use of "reverse charging"?
It's not, the Pencil does it, too.
Various other accessories are also bus-powered.
It's not, the Pencil does it, too.
Various other accessories are also bus-powered.
Edited to clarify for the iPhone (since the Pencil is a fair counterexample for iPad)
You can also charge the pencil from an iPhone. It's just another Lightning device.
The second generation Pencil is inductive only. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT211019
I prefer to charge my pencil via my lightning earpods.
First use of Reverse Wireless charging on an iPhone. Also, the iPad charging is one way.
Ah, I misread. From the context on the help article it's clear. I thought it referred to connecting phone and battery pack with Lightning.
Just as it should be, why would a tablet with it's huge battery charge something else? That's the job of the small phone!
But seriously, someone fucked up with the circuit design here.
But seriously, someone fucked up with the circuit design here.
The iPad Pro will charge a phone plugged into it via a USB-C to lightning cable.
iPad doesn't have any induction coils to support reverse wireless charging, but you can use it as a USB-C phone battery
Wondering whether iOS 14.7 also unlocks reverse Qi for other devices, e.g. AirPods. People previously assumed that there was a piece of circuitry missing for reverse charging, but this product disproves that.
Can't wait for them to do the Apple Watch with reverse charging. So annoying to have to take the non-standard charger when travelling.
But wait, why would I plug in a cable to the battery instead of directly to the phone to achieve faster phone charging? I suppose if I only had a 5 watt charger on hand? But if that is the case, why does it not charge at 15 watts when not plugged in?
You could use the battery as a charge pad. Could be handy while travelling.
[deleted]
You could charge the battery pack and the phone at the same time. Saves you a cable/brick when you need to charge both.
That makes sense. Feels like a stretch to advertise it as a feature. I would think the use case for this would be to charge up battery and have it in your backpack to slap on when you need it. It is nice you can charge both at once. I suppose that it can charge the iPhone up to 15 watts only if the brick it is attached to is of a sufficiently high wattage.
I think they are stretching to include that as a feature bullet point.
Overall, I actually like the product quite a bit. Not sure how justifiable the price is when The competition sells a very similar product for less than half the price, but it is nicely designed and would be a convenient piece item to have in a bag.
I think they are stretching to include that as a feature bullet point.
Overall, I actually like the product quite a bit. Not sure how justifiable the price is when The competition sells a very similar product for less than half the price, but it is nicely designed and would be a convenient piece item to have in a bag.
> But if that is the case, why does it not charge at 15 watts when not plugged in?
Presumably because of the power draw on the battery, which doesn’t matter if it’s plugged in.
Presumably because of the power draw on the battery, which doesn’t matter if it’s plugged in.
> If plugged into the phone, it can charge the battery (is this the first use of "reverse charging" for the iPhone?)
If so, I want to wirelessly charge the iPhone while the iPhone charges the battery pack!
Someone will beat me to it and make a YouTube video about perpetual motion/charging
If so, I want to wirelessly charge the iPhone while the iPhone charges the battery pack!
Someone will beat me to it and make a YouTube video about perpetual motion/charging
It can only do 5W charging from the battery pack, but the charging coils can passthrough line power up to 15W.
Charging the battery pack and also the device connected via MagSafe simultaneously is stated to require a USB-C power supply greater than 20W.
Charging the battery pack and also the device connected via MagSafe simultaneously is stated to require a USB-C power supply greater than 20W.
What might happen if both the phone and the battery are plugged into power?
The power draw from each to the other reaches equilibrium and neither charge. They just trade electrons back and forth forever.
Maxwell's tennis match.
[deleted]
> - If plugged into the phone, it can charge the battery (is this the first use of "reverse charging"?)
Now that's cool. It's certainly the first wireless reverse-charging that I've heard of.
Now that's cool. It's certainly the first wireless reverse-charging that I've heard of.
This has been a feature on at least higher end Samsung Galaxy devices for some time now. There it is less restricted, and you can basically use your phone as a standard Qi wireless charging pad.
The first time I saw it mentioned was a Huawei phone in 2018. Samsung quickly followed, and there are LOTS of Android devices with it now.
Am I missing the tech specs section? I see that it can charge 15W wireless when plugged in, but how big is the battery?
For comparison's sake, here's the Anker 5,000 mAH magsafe battery pack for just $45. However, it doesn't appear to charge above 5W even if plugged in. I bought one during Prime Day but haven't had much need to use it. It definitely looks beefier than the Apple version.
https://www.amazon.com/Anker-Magnetic-Wireless-Portable-Powe...
OTOH, at least it comes with a USB-C cable!
edit: the Anker pack has a standard USB-C port, which you can charge directly from far more efficiently. The Apple charger appears to charge via lightning port...I'm assuming there's no way to directly wire charge your phone from it, nor power any other non-magsafe device
For comparison's sake, here's the Anker 5,000 mAH magsafe battery pack for just $45. However, it doesn't appear to charge above 5W even if plugged in. I bought one during Prime Day but haven't had much need to use it. It definitely looks beefier than the Apple version.
https://www.amazon.com/Anker-Magnetic-Wireless-Portable-Powe...
OTOH, at least it comes with a USB-C cable!
edit: the Anker pack has a standard USB-C port, which you can charge directly from far more efficiently. The Apple charger appears to charge via lightning port...I'm assuming there's no way to directly wire charge your phone from it, nor power any other non-magsafe device
Yes, this new Apple pack holds less charge than that Anker one, but it is much slimmer and attaches with magnets. It’s meant to give you some extra battery life in a sleek form that fits on your pocket. If you are going to be away from a power source for days, the Anker might be a better choice but if your just looking for some extra juice on a long day of use and don’t want something bulky to carry around, this would fit the bill.
Thank you for the explanation. I’m already frustrated that the iPhone doesn’t include enough battery for a full day of work (when the iPhone 7 could last several days initially), I find it amusing that Apple proposes an additional “short-term” battery.
Apple has had smart battery cases since the iPhone 6/7 era. I think it depends on usage. In my home city, my phone goes all day no problem. On business trips to NYC with all the tall buildings and taking more ride shares than normal, the battery gets hammered and dies. I had a smart battery case for years that I just used on trips. The simplicity of Apple's design was (to me) worth the premium. (no extra wire from battery to phone. no turning the battery case on and off, one wire to charge both, etc)
My iPhone 11 certainly could last an entire day of use when it first came out (and it released with the fats charger so it was an insane jump)
The linked Anker one also attaches via magnets.
> it is much slimmer
Apple neither states the dimensions nor provides a picture with a 90° side view, so I’m wondering how slim it really is.
Apple neither states the dimensions nor provides a picture with a 90° side view, so I’m wondering how slim it really is.
You are right. I was estimating it’s thickness based on the appearance of the radii and the differences in battery capacity.
That Anker power pack is 16mm/0.63 inches thick. The iPhone 12 is 7.4mm/0.29 inches thick.
Looking at how Apple design it’s products, I would be surprised if Apple made this thicker than the iPhone and that phone is less than half the thickness of the Anker power pack.
Saying it is slimmer than the Anker seems like a reasonable assumption.
That Anker power pack is 16mm/0.63 inches thick. The iPhone 12 is 7.4mm/0.29 inches thick.
Looking at how Apple design it’s products, I would be surprised if Apple made this thicker than the iPhone and that phone is less than half the thickness of the Anker power pack.
Saying it is slimmer than the Anker seems like a reasonable assumption.
1460 mAh
https://imgur.com/1khiiEj
https://imgur.com/1khiiEj
Damn, talk about reading the fine print.
To note, that it's 7.62V (i.e., 2S), so it's equivalent to most ~3000mAh packs. Still not great for the money, but not as bad as it sounds.
Why did the mobile industry decide to use mAh instead of Wh.
Mobile Industry standardise on 3.8V, so you have two number to present to consumers, Wh or mah. Since Wh is a smaller number, marketing decided to use mah. Once that got traction, others that were previously using Wh had to follow. And now we end up having billions of consumers using mah as a unit and when they use it defaulting to 3.8V.
It is all too late now. Sigh.
It is all too late now. Sigh.
I think that's just the battery industry. Whenever I shop for batteries for robotics or RC vehicles they're in mAh too.
Maybe it's slightly more convenient because the same value applies no matter how many cells are in the battery pack. So it helps distinguish the packs by electrical current output capacity which we can't get from a power value because power combines two different measures.
mAh doesn't change as you add cells to the battery pack? i'm pretty sure that's not correct.
This depends on whether they're wired in series or in parallel.
Wired in series, mAh won't change, wired in parallel, it's additive.
Wired in series, mAh won't change, wired in parallel, it's additive.
Most commonly RC battery packs are referred to as "1S, 2S, 3S," etc. indicating how many single cells there are in the pack wired in series. Those are also individually rechargeable via a low-current charging cable.
Yep. I'm very familiar with these from quadcopters.
The charging cable is usually called a "balance plug", because it distributes power equally to all cells instead of shoving it all through all of them in series.
The charging cable is usually called a "balance plug", because it distributes power equally to all cells instead of shoving it all through all of them in series.
My e-bike’s battery on the other hand is in Wh.
laptops are always Wh in my experience.
Yeah, it doesn't get worse than rock bottom.
5000mAh compact is around $20, 10,000mAh $40 for good devices.
5000mAh compact is around $20, 10,000mAh $40 for good devices.
You're not really comparing features to features if you're comparing to a boring 5000mAh brick with wired charging.
Closest I can find is probably the Anker Qi magnetic brick: https://www.amazon.com/Anker-Magnetic-Wireless-Portable-Powe...
5000mAh, only 5W Qi charging, and $45.
Again, not defending the Apple tax here, but it's not as far fetched as it sounds.
Closest I can find is probably the Anker Qi magnetic brick: https://www.amazon.com/Anker-Magnetic-Wireless-Portable-Powe...
5000mAh, only 5W Qi charging, and $45.
Again, not defending the Apple tax here, but it's not as far fetched as it sounds.
Only 5W? What makes Apple's 5W better (no, it's not 15W when portable)?
But yeah, OK, you can attach it with magnets to the back, that's worth double the cost. Oh wait, make that triple, since you need the case.
I better stop now, shitting on Apple was a favorite pasttime of mine.
I mean, as someone looking to manufacture and sell a premium product, I'm pretty happy with it, people will pay anything for imaginary benefits.
But yeah, OK, you can attach it with magnets to the back, that's worth double the cost. Oh wait, make that triple, since you need the case.
I better stop now, shitting on Apple was a favorite pasttime of mine.
I mean, as someone looking to manufacture and sell a premium product, I'm pretty happy with it, people will pay anything for imaginary benefits.
I missed that it doesn't support 15W charging when portable. That's erodes quite a bit of the benefits then. No reason you need the magsafe case, as far as I can tell though.
Also, the Anker device does have magnets. Looks like they operate just like the magsafe.
Also, the Anker device does have magnets. Looks like they operate just like the magsafe.
> You're not really comparing features to features if you're comparing to a boring 5000mAh brick with wired charging.
So wired charging is boring and magnetically attached is exciting?
You know, this is not like AirPods, which are completely disconnected from the phone. It's a lump attached on your phone that you may also unintentionally disconnect and drop on the floor while taking videos of something.
I'm way more "excited" by the cable, especially given the price (you can find pretty good 5000 mAh bricks for as little as $12).
So wired charging is boring and magnetically attached is exciting?
You know, this is not like AirPods, which are completely disconnected from the phone. It's a lump attached on your phone that you may also unintentionally disconnect and drop on the floor while taking videos of something.
I'm way more "excited" by the cable, especially given the price (you can find pretty good 5000 mAh bricks for as little as $12).
"mAh" are useless here without voltage. Its like using 50KM/hr as the towing capacity of a truck.
It's actually very useful. Ah is the best way to compare battery capacity.
I think the idea is that watt-hours (Wh) serves the same purpose and doesn't miss information about capacity if voltage is omitted. Technically though the units in watt hours should cancel out to be Joules which may be the best unit.
Are amp hours in some way better due to the varying voltage across the charge profile of a draining battery perhaps?
Are amp hours in some way better due to the varying voltage across the charge profile of a draining battery perhaps?
I'd argue that the undecomposed watt-hour is in fact the superior unit for batteries.
Because what I want to know about a battery is exactly how many hours I can use it at a given wattage. The voltage is determined by application, and the only amp-related stat I'm interested in is maximum current, which is more useful to me in watts anyway.
So a 50 Wh battery which I'm going to draw at 10 watts? five hours of use time. 20 watts? 2.5, and I can do this in my head all day. Joules are less convenient because going from seconds to hours is too annoying to do as mental maths.
Because what I want to know about a battery is exactly how many hours I can use it at a given wattage. The voltage is determined by application, and the only amp-related stat I'm interested in is maximum current, which is more useful to me in watts anyway.
So a 50 Wh battery which I'm going to draw at 10 watts? five hours of use time. 20 watts? 2.5, and I can do this in my head all day. Joules are less convenient because going from seconds to hours is too annoying to do as mental maths.
It's mostly because the voltage is assumed to be constant across the discharge profile (even if it isn't), and Ah is taken to the point that you can safely discharge the battery to. So you compare two batteries with the same voltage on their Ah, and systems in terms of Wh (and then the voltages are irrelevant).
One problem here is that what looks like a battery on the outside is often a system under the hood, so the output voltage is not necessarily the voltage at which the battery operates due to for instance DC-DC convertors and other electronics embedded in the battery housing.
One problem here is that what looks like a battery on the outside is often a system under the hood, so the output voltage is not necessarily the voltage at which the battery operates due to for instance DC-DC convertors and other electronics embedded in the battery housing.
It's only useful if you know the voltage of the battery, so that you can calculate watt-hours, or if you at least know that two batteries you're comparing are the same voltage so you're comparing like to like. It's not useful if you're comparing batteries of different voltages unless you're adjusting for voltage in which case you want to use Wh anyway, which is why using Wh here is more useful.
It’s only useful if the batteries have the same voltage. When, as here, they don’t, you have to do some arithmetic to compare the capacities.
So it’s actually probably the worst way to compare battery capacity.
So it’s actually probably the worst way to compare battery capacity.
Yeah, kinda bizarre that they don't specify, that's like...the spec.
Sites have said it's 11.13Wh (~comparable to a iPhone 12), but then even at that, how efficient is the Qi charger itself? How much of that capacity do you actually get?
Sites have said it's 11.13Wh (~comparable to a iPhone 12), but then even at that, how efficient is the Qi charger itself? How much of that capacity do you actually get?
Qi charger efficiency is roughly 50% right, I suspect that should be a good approximation.
This seems a bit low, do you have a source? While I haven't worked with the Qi standard directly, I've used 200 kHz inductive power transfer in other contexts, and efficiency numbers in my experience are in the 75% - 85% range for well-aligned coils. The total efficiency will be a bit less than this (moving charge in and out of a battery is pretty good, but not 100%), but I'd be surprised to see 5W transfer with a total efficiency much less than 70%.
This article is a bit sensationalist, but they claim to have gotten mid-60s efficiency [1]. I think I misread them initially when they said "47% more power" - I took that to mean 47% efficiency, but on re-reading it's closer to 66%. My bad!
[1] https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-...
[1] https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-...
Would anyone else just be fine with a thick phone that had a better internal battery? I would prefer that. To me, this battery pack is a symptom of a systemic design flaw. Consumers and companies are obsessed with thinner, sleeker devices, but the costs are obvious-- slimmer phone, smaller battery.
When the Xbox 360 came out, it was substantially smaller than the original Xbox. But, most of the space savings came from moving a huge chunk of the power supply unit into the power cable! So now you had a massive cable and a smaller device, so it was really just for show. The overall system itself was still the same damn size!
Another consequence of thinner phones is less protection. Drop your phone once, and the chances you shatter the screen are high. There's an entire protection economy around phones-- everything from insurance to cases to glass screen protectors. All of these expenses and "opportunities" could be circumvented if they just made a fat, ugly, functional phone.
When the Xbox 360 came out, it was substantially smaller than the original Xbox. But, most of the space savings came from moving a huge chunk of the power supply unit into the power cable! So now you had a massive cable and a smaller device, so it was really just for show. The overall system itself was still the same damn size!
Another consequence of thinner phones is less protection. Drop your phone once, and the chances you shatter the screen are high. There's an entire protection economy around phones-- everything from insurance to cases to glass screen protectors. All of these expenses and "opportunities" could be circumvented if they just made a fat, ugly, functional phone.
Not really, ever since phones got so big, they're hard to use one handed. Thickness just exacerbates the issue.
When I accidentally broke my original iPhone SE, I switched to an X and ended up having to use it caseless just to make it easier to use with one hand.
Hated the size of the X enough I bought an iPhone Mini the first day it came out, my first brand new iPhone purchase since 2013.
I have no interest in adding even a mm of size to my phone. The battery lasts all day and it can fast charge anyways.
When I accidentally broke my original iPhone SE, I switched to an X and ended up having to use it caseless just to make it easier to use with one hand.
Hated the size of the X enough I bought an iPhone Mini the first day it came out, my first brand new iPhone purchase since 2013.
I have no interest in adding even a mm of size to my phone. The battery lasts all day and it can fast charge anyways.
I also now have the mini and it’s still extremely cumbersome to use one handed.
Such a shame. Original SE size was near perfect.
Such a shame. Original SE size was near perfect.
> Another consequence of thinner phones is less protection. Drop your phone once, and the chances you shatter the screen are high.
How does thinness decrease screen protection? On the contrary a reduction in thickness also usually involves a reduction in weight, which decreases the impact force from a drop.
Personally, I'm fine with protection through external, replaceable accessories. No matter how sturdy, scratches on the screen are inevitable. With a glass screen protector, you can throw your $500+ device around carelessly, and replace the $15 protection after a few years or if it breaks.
How does thinness decrease screen protection? On the contrary a reduction in thickness also usually involves a reduction in weight, which decreases the impact force from a drop.
Personally, I'm fine with protection through external, replaceable accessories. No matter how sturdy, scratches on the screen are inevitable. With a glass screen protector, you can throw your $500+ device around carelessly, and replace the $15 protection after a few years or if it breaks.
Good point. I reread what I'd said, and I think what I meant is that the phone case could just be built in by the factory. It would mean less / no customization, but they could easily build a case on the outside that is completely drop-resistant with replaceable parts for when you scratch it up.
No. My hand still gets tired from the weight of the iPhone 12 (weights a lot more than a Kindle), and I already downgraded from the 11 Pro (weights a lot more than a non-Pro) even though I love photography.
But anyone with a purse can just stick this battery in their purse and make sure their phone lands next to it when they put it away, gaining the benefits of the extra battery with none of the drawbacks of having to hold the extra weight most of the time. I would expect it's not quite thin enough for men's jeans pockets to tolerate this use case (and so this will be completely overlooked by all reviews and press), but this is definitely an object that looks designed for purses rather than pockets.
But anyone with a purse can just stick this battery in their purse and make sure their phone lands next to it when they put it away, gaining the benefits of the extra battery with none of the drawbacks of having to hold the extra weight most of the time. I would expect it's not quite thin enough for men's jeans pockets to tolerate this use case (and so this will be completely overlooked by all reviews and press), but this is definitely an object that looks designed for purses rather than pockets.
> Would anyone else just be fine with a thick phone that had a better internal battery?
I think you miss the point of maximizing the customization of the phone. Because phones have to be in a single unit, user customization can only be done through external peripherals (vs. desktop PC where individual components can be customized).
To make the external peripherals as non-invasive as possible, the phone should be as small as possible while still being usable for most use cases. For example, if battery is your priority, get a case that has a built in external battery; many exist. Then you can have your extended battery, while a user who doesn't care about it, can have a smaller phone.
I think you miss the point of maximizing the customization of the phone. Because phones have to be in a single unit, user customization can only be done through external peripherals (vs. desktop PC where individual components can be customized).
To make the external peripherals as non-invasive as possible, the phone should be as small as possible while still being usable for most use cases. For example, if battery is your priority, get a case that has a built in external battery; many exist. Then you can have your extended battery, while a user who doesn't care about it, can have a smaller phone.
I totally get the utility of decorating and customizing a phone. It's a way to personalize the device. So, to your point that I'm missing the point-- it's not lost on me.
I just think the companies are delivering the equivalent of a baby with no skin and a tiny stomach. It's a precious thing you want to hold every day, but it doesn't come with even basic outer protections from damage, and it can't stomach enough food to produce the energy it needs to live throughout the day. BUT, Johnson and Johnson (inventor of babies) will be glad to sell you a silicone baby skin or the waterproof baby case. And there's Ultra-Tum®-- a stomach addon with normal baby-stomach capacity to keep your little tyke chugging along all day! Like, bitch, just make a damn baby with skin and a normally sized stomach!
Obviously the above is hyperbole (and I'm trying to do my best Keaton Patti impression), but I really think the designers are in a special position where they're the best-suited party to just make a damn phone with a case built in and a high-capacity battery, even at the cost of sleekness.
I just think the companies are delivering the equivalent of a baby with no skin and a tiny stomach. It's a precious thing you want to hold every day, but it doesn't come with even basic outer protections from damage, and it can't stomach enough food to produce the energy it needs to live throughout the day. BUT, Johnson and Johnson (inventor of babies) will be glad to sell you a silicone baby skin or the waterproof baby case. And there's Ultra-Tum®-- a stomach addon with normal baby-stomach capacity to keep your little tyke chugging along all day! Like, bitch, just make a damn baby with skin and a normally sized stomach!
Obviously the above is hyperbole (and I'm trying to do my best Keaton Patti impression), but I really think the designers are in a special position where they're the best-suited party to just make a damn phone with a case built in and a high-capacity battery, even at the cost of sleekness.
I got iPhone 12 Pro Max a few months back, and I must say I don’t see a need for another battery pack. It easily lasts me a whole day of heavy usage.
The answer to your question lies in the number of people who are buying the MagSafe battery pack. If it is a large amount of all iPhone customers, the phone should be just thicker with a bigger battery, if it is a small fraction of all customers, the battery is probably fine except for some high workloads.
Personally, I am fine with the battery capacity (iPhone Pro Max), I wouldn't mind a little bit more of thickness for a bit more reserve, but it shouldn't get much thicker.
I would love having a slightly thicker phone. The iPhone 12 Pro Max is good enough for most days, but having around 25% more battery would be welcome, especially for weekends when I'm not sitting at a desk with a charger. Just make the entire phone the thickness of the camera lenses, and that would probably be sufficient.
I agree, I'd rather just have a bigger phone with a better battery.
Although I don't think bigger inherently means more durable/more protection. Bigger means when dropped, whatever part of the chassis hits the ground first has a lot more energy to absorb.
Although I don't think bigger inherently means more durable/more protection. Bigger means when dropped, whatever part of the chassis hits the ground first has a lot more energy to absorb.
It would be my choice to have a _slightly_ thicker phone, but as somebody who is looking to move to the iPhone after a decade on Android, I like the option to have this in a bag or something for the days that I have more heavy usage.
Your proposal assumes that a large number of users find the current battery life insufficient for their needs. I can attest that I don’t find battery life to be a problem on most days. When I am traveling or going to an extended time outside event, just bring along a small power pack to top up if I need it. I don’t want to have to carry that power pack around most days. If the phone were just thicker, I’d be stuck with that all the time. I like the flexibility to change the battery life vs phone size/weight compromise.
For me it’s more of a weight issue. Current iPhones are already heavy enough to be slightly uncomfortable when scrolling for long times, I definitely wouldn’t want anything heavier.
> Would anyone else just be fine with a thick phone that had a better internal battery?
Replaceable battery.
Anyway, this argument has been made plenty of times. Apple prefers to sell you a new phone and an external battery.
Replaceable battery.
Anyway, this argument has been made plenty of times. Apple prefers to sell you a new phone and an external battery.
agreed 100%. but the move to thinness keeps a 'wow' factor going every year or so.
Just commenting on the copywriting since Apple is a master of marketing (according to my MBA program).
There are 4 messages about being able to buy this on credit/monthly payments.
Veblen goods don't target the wealthy, but they need to appear to.
I feel like this has mixed messaging, or maybe this is a necessity to make the sale.
There are 4 messages about being able to buy this on credit/monthly payments.
Veblen goods don't target the wealthy, but they need to appear to.
I feel like this has mixed messaging, or maybe this is a necessity to make the sale.
I think you're anchoring to the idea that Apple produces Veblen goods, and trying to work backwards from there.
The more straightforward explanation is that Apple just wants to make it easy to buy on credit.
I disagree that Apple products are Veblen goods in the same way that, say, Prada products are.
The more straightforward explanation is that Apple just wants to make it easy to buy on credit.
I disagree that Apple products are Veblen goods in the same way that, say, Prada products are.
This meme about Apple products deriving most of their demand from being status symbols is a decade or two out of date. For many years, iPhones have had comparable tech specs and pricing to competing flagship smartphones. Also, even if they are status symbols to some extent, they almost certainly are not Veblen goods. Do you think Apple would sell fewer iPhones if they dropped the price of every model by 25%? No way.
> This meme about Apple products deriving most of their demand from being status symbols is a decade or two out of date.
Both of you are arguing on which side of an ideal abstraction (Veblen goods) Apple is. Seems silly to me.
Apple products ARE status symbols in many countries, that's what most of the Chinese market is for Apple presently.
They're also playing as utilitarian tech products with mass appeal. Apple has always had this hybrid strategy, it's not one OR the other.
A quick look at their profit margins vs. the competition will show that they're marking up their products significantly above the competition. And I mean in profit margin specifically, so that we don't have this argument about whether they have more expensive software and hardware in principle (they do, but most of it is profit margin).
And also sorry but this is a $15 battery sold for $99, even as an Apple user they're losing me here. Some of their accessories are literally for people who want to spend money on Apple shit.
Both of you are arguing on which side of an ideal abstraction (Veblen goods) Apple is. Seems silly to me.
Apple products ARE status symbols in many countries, that's what most of the Chinese market is for Apple presently.
They're also playing as utilitarian tech products with mass appeal. Apple has always had this hybrid strategy, it's not one OR the other.
A quick look at their profit margins vs. the competition will show that they're marking up their products significantly above the competition. And I mean in profit margin specifically, so that we don't have this argument about whether they have more expensive software and hardware in principle (they do, but most of it is profit margin).
And also sorry but this is a $15 battery sold for $99, even as an Apple user they're losing me here. Some of their accessories are literally for people who want to spend money on Apple shit.
Apple products are not Veblen goods. They are primarily bought for their utility.
The wikipedia page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good is interesting. It talks about wastefulness, but then excludes "ethical goods" from consideration as being wasteful. Apparently we are never allowed to ask whether a cottage farm in Portland is wasteful compared to an efficient mechanized farm. Only intent matters.
The wikipedia page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good is interesting. It talks about wastefulness, but then excludes "ethical goods" from consideration as being wasteful. Apparently we are never allowed to ask whether a cottage farm in Portland is wasteful compared to an efficient mechanized farm. Only intent matters.
Apple's brand is affordable luxury, as such, they aren't marketing themselves as a purveyor of Veblen goods.
Whether you buy into the marketing or not, the pitch is this: the latest iPhone is the best phone in the world, and if you can make the monthly payment, you can have it. It's like Warhol's observation about Coke: you can't pay more for a better iPhone, even if you're a prince or a celebrity.
You can pay extra for exactly two things: storage, which is invisible, or a red one.
Apple does make a few products which appear to exist to anchor the "luxury" part of this branding, such as a $999 monitor stand, or the AirPods Max, Hermes-branded Apple Watches and so on.
But their bread and butter is affordable luxury.
Whether you buy into the marketing or not, the pitch is this: the latest iPhone is the best phone in the world, and if you can make the monthly payment, you can have it. It's like Warhol's observation about Coke: you can't pay more for a better iPhone, even if you're a prince or a celebrity.
You can pay extra for exactly two things: storage, which is invisible, or a red one.
Apple does make a few products which appear to exist to anchor the "luxury" part of this branding, such as a $999 monitor stand, or the AirPods Max, Hermes-branded Apple Watches and so on.
But their bread and butter is affordable luxury.
> There are 4 messages about being able to buy this on credit/monthly payments.
I'm guessing it's also a US-specific thing. The MagSafe battery pack listings for non-US stores don't have this:
UK: https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MJWY3ZM/A/magsafe-batt...
Singapore: https://www.apple.com/sg/shop/product/MJWY3ZA/A/magsafe-batt...
I'm guessing it's also a US-specific thing. The MagSafe battery pack listings for non-US stores don't have this:
UK: https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MJWY3ZM/A/magsafe-batt...
Singapore: https://www.apple.com/sg/shop/product/MJWY3ZA/A/magsafe-batt...
Monthly (3mo) payment offered in JP https://www.apple.com/jp/shop/product/MJWY3ZA/A/magsafe%E3%8...
iOS has 60% market share in the US, which is also the percentage of people who could scrape together $1,000 in an emergency: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/just-39percent-of-americans-... .
iPhones are not simply Veblen goods like Hermes handbags (although there might be that element to them), they are also in many ways the best smartphone you can buy, for lots of different reasons. I buy all of my clothes at Costco and I have an iPhone. It is a mainstream product targeting mainstream Americans, many of whom consume on credit.
iPhones are not simply Veblen goods like Hermes handbags (although there might be that element to them), they are also in many ways the best smartphone you can buy, for lots of different reasons. I buy all of my clothes at Costco and I have an iPhone. It is a mainstream product targeting mainstream Americans, many of whom consume on credit.
I think the messaging is to encourage people to open an Apple Card account
Are you really shocked that given Apple's massive market penetration, they have enough customers in lower socioeconomic brackets that financing options are a viable revenue stream?
I feel like this wealth concept is a bit dated, have you seen the news the last month.
For the ultra wealthy, their lives are completely dependent on loans and debt.
For the ultra wealthy, their lives are completely dependent on loans and debt.
It's $99, I wouldn't say it's for 'the wealthy'.
Considering it's only accessory to a $1000+ device, it seems like it isn't really for poor people, either.
My friend paints houses 4 days a week average for $25/h. No fancy stuff just wall painting.
He's always packing the latest iPhone Pro.
If iPhones are a status symbol, I'm not sure to whom.
He's always packing the latest iPhone Pro.
If iPhones are a status symbol, I'm not sure to whom.
Well above the $7.25/hr minimum wage then, and still above the $15-20 estimated average hourly wage for US workers.
So iPhones are a status symbol for people like your friend, who are making more money than the average citizen, if that clears it up for you.
So iPhones are a status symbol for people like your friend, who are making more money than the average citizen, if that clears it up for you.
1. Hardly anyone in the US pays for their phone outright. It’s a combination of interest free payment plans and subsidies/rebates
2. The iPhone 12 mini is $699
3. Half of the US is not “rich”. But somehow they manage to have iPhones.
2. The iPhone 12 mini is $699
3. Half of the US is not “rich”. But somehow they manage to have iPhones.
[deleted]
The iPhone 12 starts at $699.
My mistake, I’m thinking in CAD and the starting price is $979.
To me that still seems like a lot of money.
To me that still seems like a lot of money.
The iPhone 12 starts at $729. You get a $30 rebate if you sign up for a new phone plan.
It's like 12x the price per energy unit compared to other 3rd party battery packs from high quality brands like Anker.
How efficient is wireless charging?
As a pandemic hobby, I've gotten into building batteries to power light vehicles, and it's an interesting problem to try to fit the maximum capacity you can into as small a package as possible. Efficiency is a huge concern here, as the more energy you lose to, for instance, a voltage conversion, the bigger your battery has to be to meet the required use-case.
So this kind of wireless charging is neat, but if there's a significant efficiency difference to just plugging in a power bank, it would be hard to feel like it's worth it.
This might be cool for something like a camera, where hot-swapping batteries faster has a major benefit to the use-case.
As a pandemic hobby, I've gotten into building batteries to power light vehicles, and it's an interesting problem to try to fit the maximum capacity you can into as small a package as possible. Efficiency is a huge concern here, as the more energy you lose to, for instance, a voltage conversion, the bigger your battery has to be to meet the required use-case.
So this kind of wireless charging is neat, but if there's a significant efficiency difference to just plugging in a power bank, it would be hard to feel like it's worth it.
This might be cool for something like a camera, where hot-swapping batteries faster has a major benefit to the use-case.
Not especially efficient in practice. In general you can expect in the ballpark of a 50% loss in efficiency with consumer electronics. This is mostly due to design/usability compromises though. In theory you can get 90+% efficiency with ideal conditions.
It's just a transformer right so under ideal-ideal circumstances you could get 99% or more. Large power transformers are ~99.7% IIRC.
There's no possibility of a core here though, which makes it inductive coupling, not a transformer, and reduces the coupling efficiency.
Indeed, thank you for the clarification! Electrical engineering is more of a hobby for me, so I'm always eager to learn more.
Can you tell us more about what kind of vehicles you are building? Are they big enough for people? I'd love to hear more about your experiences around this!
I'm actually not building the vehicles, just the batteries for aquatic applications. I've got a small zodiac, and I've been experimenting with powering a small electric trolling motor.
The thing is, most trolling motors for a boat this size run on 12V, because lead-acid batteries are the standard for marine batteries. The energy density of lead-acid batteries is terrible, so you need a pretty big battery for a little tiny boat which doesn't make a lot of sense. You can do a little bit better with a lithium-iron-phosphate battery, but since these are the "new" tech in marine batteries, you pay a really big premium for these which is absurd when you look at the price of the cells themself. So you are paying like 3-5x the price of materials just to get it in a waterproof case.
Also LiFePO4 batteries have a pretty poor energy density when compared to lithion-ion batteries, which are the current standard bearer. The problem with li-ion batteries is that there's not a great way to get them to 12V. Depending on the configuration, you can get a voltage nominal of 10.8V, or 14.4V, both of which put you a little outside the range of what's optimal to power most 12V motors when you're close to min or max voltage. Also there's some advantages to building a 24V battery instead of 12V. Also you have to be really careful about waterproofing, since li-ion batteries are extremely volatile.
So those problems are solvable, and I managed to make a battery which is about the size of a box of tissues, and can power my boat for up to a couple of hours, depending on how many people I bring with me. It's pretty fun to do, and I have all the stuff now, so I'm thinking about doing an e-bike or electric scooter next.
Also I'm thinking about trying to drive the boat with a brushless aquatic thruster, since the trolling motor itself is not that efficient by current standards. But there's a lot of fabrication involved there which I would still have to teach myself.
The thing is, most trolling motors for a boat this size run on 12V, because lead-acid batteries are the standard for marine batteries. The energy density of lead-acid batteries is terrible, so you need a pretty big battery for a little tiny boat which doesn't make a lot of sense. You can do a little bit better with a lithium-iron-phosphate battery, but since these are the "new" tech in marine batteries, you pay a really big premium for these which is absurd when you look at the price of the cells themself. So you are paying like 3-5x the price of materials just to get it in a waterproof case.
Also LiFePO4 batteries have a pretty poor energy density when compared to lithion-ion batteries, which are the current standard bearer. The problem with li-ion batteries is that there's not a great way to get them to 12V. Depending on the configuration, you can get a voltage nominal of 10.8V, or 14.4V, both of which put you a little outside the range of what's optimal to power most 12V motors when you're close to min or max voltage. Also there's some advantages to building a 24V battery instead of 12V. Also you have to be really careful about waterproofing, since li-ion batteries are extremely volatile.
So those problems are solvable, and I managed to make a battery which is about the size of a box of tissues, and can power my boat for up to a couple of hours, depending on how many people I bring with me. It's pretty fun to do, and I have all the stuff now, so I'm thinking about doing an e-bike or electric scooter next.
Also I'm thinking about trying to drive the boat with a brushless aquatic thruster, since the trolling motor itself is not that efficient by current standards. But there's a lot of fabrication involved there which I would still have to teach myself.
I really love hearing about your personal experiences with this, and I think a lot of other people do too.
if it were low power electronics you were powering, I would suggest taking the battery to 14.4v and using some diodes to drop the voltage down a little bit. There would be some power dissipation in the diodes and that would increase with current, so it's probably not a great solution.
It might not be that bad to run the motor out of spec a bit. It sounds like you have a good solution. Did you consider putting the lead acid battery in a towable floatation device of some sort?
if it were low power electronics you were powering, I would suggest taking the battery to 14.4v and using some diodes to drop the voltage down a little bit. There would be some power dissipation in the diodes and that would increase with current, so it's probably not a great solution.
It might not be that bad to run the motor out of spec a bit. It sounds like you have a good solution. Did you consider putting the lead acid battery in a towable floatation device of some sort?
That sounds like an incredible project, if you have a write-up I'd love to read it.
Thanks! I haven't documented it yet, but I will have to get around to it.
The energy density of LiFePO4 shouldn't be an issue in that application, unless you're having to carry a lot of them on foot or scratch on weight limits.
Regarding the motor, I'd suggest to look at enthusiast RC hardware, which tends to be efficient by necessity: great power density at these sizes is a question of cooling, which is easier if the components are highly-efficient.
Regarding the motor, I'd suggest to look at enthusiast RC hardware, which tends to be efficient by necessity: great power density at these sizes is a question of cooling, which is easier if the components are highly-efficient.
Yeah where I am boating, I have to go a couple hundred meters by foot to get to the water, so optimizing for weight was one of my primary design constraints. Also it was partially just out of interest to see how small I could go.
And I have been looking at RC motors! The main challenge there would be figuring out how to mount it - those are the skills I think I need to level up a little bit.
And I have been looking at RC motors! The main challenge there would be figuring out how to mount it - those are the skills I think I need to level up a little bit.
For such a footpath, I'd suggest to get a vest-style carrying harness for them.
May work to just have that come with a plug and throw it in a storage case/bag on the boat.
It's surprisingly comfortable to carry a lot of weight if you're just heavier than normal.
It's surprisingly comfortable to carry a lot of weight if you're just heavier than normal.
> Also LiFePO4 batteries have a pretty poor energy density when compared to lithion-ion batteries, which are the current standard bearer.
In comparison to generic, consumer LiCo, they are better, much better.
In comparison to generic, consumer LiCo, they are better, much better.
How do you even get started building a battery? You should blog about it, I'd read it :)
I've done it too, honestly there's not that much to write about it I thin.
Heat management during fast charging cycles is the reason why you end up with a less dense structure than the theoretical maximum.
Yeah, tbh, the hardest thing for building a custom E-Bike battery pack is the ridiculous prices and downright unavailability of cells!
Best I can get are 32700 LiFePO4 6000mAh cells for 5 Euros each... A prebuilt Li-Ion Chinese pack with an extra 2Ah is just 30 Euros more than the cells I would need alone (housing+BMS cost not included). Just sad.
Best I can get are 32700 LiFePO4 6000mAh cells for 5 Euros each... A prebuilt Li-Ion Chinese pack with an extra 2Ah is just 30 Euros more than the cells I would need alone (housing+BMS cost not included). Just sad.
[deleted]
Idk, cells are commodity priced, so currently I think you just have to bite the bullet and shell out a couple hundred bucks if you want to build a battery.
Used cells are also an option, and there's some really good ones out there.
Anyway Li-ion and LiFePO4 cells are going to seem cheap once solid-state cells hit the market.
Used cells are also an option, and there's some really good ones out there.
Anyway Li-ion and LiFePO4 cells are going to seem cheap once solid-state cells hit the market.
Nah, cells aren't commodity prices, not even 18650 and certainly not anything LiFePO4. If you establish a relationship with the factory or a supplier you can send prices crashing down.
Maybe because typical Li-Ion 18650 cells are significantly cheaper per Wh than LiFePO4?
Sadly, no, 18650's cost the same for half the capacity. Likely because they're in high demand right now and car manufacturers have hogged up the best of them.
Hence, LiFePO4, heavier, lower voltage, less capacity, but also safer tbh.
Hence, LiFePO4, heavier, lower voltage, less capacity, but also safer tbh.
> How efficient is wireless charging?
Not efficient
Not efficient
Is there some Apple induction charging magic which removed the something like 40% wasted energy that occurs when using fields instead of conductors to charge? If anything this would surely matter more if you're carrying around the charge instead of parking it on your night-stand.
I'll move to Apple and iPhone as soon as they have USB-c. This lightning connector nonsense is getting ridiculous.
Apple uses Lightning and/or MagSafe on all of their handheld devices and USB-C on everything else.
Beats have some exceptions for microUSB instead of Lightning.
The iPad is handheld and Lightning. The iPad Pro is not and is USB-C. Yes, you can handhold an iPad Pro, but it’s not designed/targeted for that use case, as the USB-C port indicates.
This battery pack is Lightning because it’s a handheld device and it’s an accessory exclusively for handheld devices. While that may be a disappointment, at least the evidence to date is clear that there’s no point holding out for otherwise: they have never released a handheld USB-C device and are unlikely to here either.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but this comes up every time Apple releases a Lightning accessory and people continue not to realize this strategy is in play. I don’t know if it’s a good strategy or not, but duly noted all the same.
(ps. Apple Watch is not a handheld device, and so of course it’s doesn’t have a Lightning port :)
Beats have some exceptions for microUSB instead of Lightning.
The iPad is handheld and Lightning. The iPad Pro is not and is USB-C. Yes, you can handhold an iPad Pro, but it’s not designed/targeted for that use case, as the USB-C port indicates.
This battery pack is Lightning because it’s a handheld device and it’s an accessory exclusively for handheld devices. While that may be a disappointment, at least the evidence to date is clear that there’s no point holding out for otherwise: they have never released a handheld USB-C device and are unlikely to here either.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but this comes up every time Apple releases a Lightning accessory and people continue not to realize this strategy is in play. I don’t know if it’s a good strategy or not, but duly noted all the same.
(ps. Apple Watch is not a handheld device, and so of course it’s doesn’t have a Lightning port :)
Which beats are microUSB that are still being sold? I thought they moved over to Lightning and USB-C
Studio3 Wireless ($349), for example, but I didn’t look for anymore since I have that one handy in memory. I only included that comment to fend off nitpickers and having a single example is sufficient. Still. Which Beats moved over to USB-C? It doesn’t sound like Apple connector rules apply reliably to Beats, which makes sense given their Android-compatibility market target.
[deleted]
I would wager you'll never see it: either it'll stay with Lightning indefinitely, or they'll drop the charging port entirely (which would be unfortunate).
The keep rolling out new devices like this with Lightning. If they were going to start a transition, this or the AirPods would have been the logical place to begin.
The keep rolling out new devices like this with Lightning. If they were going to start a transition, this or the AirPods would have been the logical place to begin.
Yeah, we'll never see an Apple device with USB-C, besides all of their laptops. Those chargers are great for Android phones!
Also the iPad Pro :)
This is highly likely. They'll probably just include a magsafe charger and run data over it for dev purposes. But knowing Apple the data magsafe will cost more/ be an add-on
Why would they move quickly from a cable connector that has a massive installed base and that works well for most people (or, as you put it, "nonsense") to one that doesn't have nearly as much market penetration?
In the past, Apple was happy to make forwardlooking decisions regardless of today's market penetration (remember the floppy to CD uproar? And the removal of DVD drives?). It's kinda humorous that today my MacBook Pro's plug-in accessories (dongles, chargers, headphones, etc) work better with my Android phone than they would if I was totally bought into Apple's ecosystem
If you were to buy an iPhone today you would get a USB-C cable to Lightning. Your iPad would be USB-C. The only independent device not pluggable would be the Apple Watch which has no purpose being plugged in anyway I believe.
Cool, I didn't know that. Does the USB-lightning cable work for plugging in things like M+K and video out?
Yes I see no reason for it not to. It’s all still USB in the end.
> a cable connector that has a massive installed base and that works well for most people
You are confusing Apple users with the whole population. USB-C is ubiquitous and I have seen many new and not so new edvices implementing it, yet I have to lay my hands on a Lightning device, let alone having a Lightning - enabled personal computer.
You are confusing Apple users with the whole population. USB-C is ubiquitous and I have seen many new and not so new edvices implementing it, yet I have to lay my hands on a Lightning device, let alone having a Lightning - enabled personal computer.
USBC is becoming standard pretty quickly isn't it? Most major Android smartphones are already using it. I even recently bought a small electric fan which is powered by USBC.
The market would follow their move pretty damn fast.
If I can help from destroying another iPhone I will wait it out until USB C. I was pissed last year when I had to buy another iPhone with a lightening port.
Looks like Apple is once again doubling down on Lightning, because the battery pack gets charged with one, instead of with micro-USB or USB-C.
I like how it also works as a MagSafe charging pad, but it's a shame that they didn't use a single bidirectional USB-C port, and have a way to allow other devices to be charged from that port.
I like how it also works as a MagSafe charging pad, but it's a shame that they didn't use a single bidirectional USB-C port, and have a way to allow other devices to be charged from that port.
I REALLY want Apple to switch to USB-C, but having one cable for a battery pack stuck to your phone and one for the phone itself would be obnoxious
I can kinda see how this would make sense in the case, as long as the iPhone has Lightning, you will have to bring that charger anyway. Though this might be a good way to ease people in by selling two versions.
How strong is the magnet, can you pick the phone up by the battery pack or vice versa? Seems less practical than the battery case that doubles as protection for the device and charges faster too.
While I can't speak for this one in particular, all the magsafe accessories I've used so far have been more than enough to support the entire weight of the phone, without any wiggle.
I'd much rather have this than a battery case, as this is much more convenient to just slap on and slap off, rather than removing/applying a full phone case. More storage efficient too.
I'd much rather have this than a battery case, as this is much more convenient to just slap on and slap off, rather than removing/applying a full phone case. More storage efficient too.
What is the physics textbook math behind this? Is there a certain magnetic force needed to induce a coefficient of static friction that prevents wiggle?
For the accessories I've used, it's been the texture of the materials providing most of the static friction, leather/rubber both have high static friction combined with the amount of force pressing them to the back glass.
I have a magsafe car mount, and I'm pretty sure I could get in a car accident without it moving, but with a fairly simple twist I can pull it right off.
I have a magsafe car mount, and I'm pretty sure I could get in a car accident without it moving, but with a fairly simple twist I can pull it right off.
How often do you need to remove a phone case? For people who purchase one, I don't think its all that common to do so.
As a sidenote, does anyone know whether something like an "optimal" Qi charging wattage exist, as in highest efficiency? Power lost due to resistance increases with current squared. Therefore I would imagine charging <5W would be best for high efficiency. However, Qi is based on quickly alternating magnetic fields. Does the circuitry involved make Qi charging inefficient once the power gets low enough? Or is Qi charging at 0.1W preferable over 2.5W?
A Canyon 5000 mAh is of comparable size and costs $12. It's not MagSafe, but frankly the cable is not a problem at all.
I'm an iPhone/Mac user, but this thing costs $99 and they didn't even bother to write out the damn capacity on the page (reportedly less than 4000 mAh).
I like Apple, but their accessories are truly reserved for people with either too much money, or too little intelligence.
I'm an iPhone/Mac user, but this thing costs $99 and they didn't even bother to write out the damn capacity on the page (reportedly less than 4000 mAh).
I like Apple, but their accessories are truly reserved for people with either too much money, or too little intelligence.
I have a $25-ish Xiaomi 20,000 mAh power bank. It is thicc and can crush your toes if you drop, but it's reliable to hold power enough for a week for my phone, has two outputs supporting fast charging, and has microUSB _and_ USB-c inputs.
For the money this 3000 mAh Apple bank costs, you can have 4 of these lasting you literally a whole month.
Kinda hilarious.
Kinda hilarious.
I like how it comes in a bunch of colors that don't match the range of colors the phones come from, nice job guys.
I like how it comes in a bunch of colors
I'm guessing they scrolled down to the generic MagSafe promo above the product info section and thought the MagSafe wallets (that have been out for a while) were battery packs
Ah, yeah, that's what I did. I haven't had any reason to ditch my 6s so I don't keep up with this stuff too much.
To be fair, it's not a great design choice to shove an ad in between the purchase section and the product/compatibility info
So as I understand it, I'd have to choose between this and MagSafe charging setup I've invested in? This does not seem to have magnets/coil on the outside so I can't keep my phone with this attached on the MagSafe charger it seems. I wonder if I detach them can I keep the isolated pack on MagSafe to charge?
This is more confusing than it needs to be. At least there is reverse charging so I don't have to choose between charging and CarPlay.
This is more confusing than it needs to be. At least there is reverse charging so I don't have to choose between charging and CarPlay.
This is not a general purpose charging system. This is a mobile power pack to extend your phone’s battery life while you are on the go. It’s similar to carrying a power pack like the Ankers around but is slimmer and attaches with magnets.
Yes, but since there is no way to charge this thing in a setup with only MagSafe chargers, I’ll have to bring wire back in my life. The phone will only charge this when plugged in, this will only charge the phone when plugged in, and it can only be independently charged when plugged in. There should have been a charging coil at the back so the power bank itself could be charged via MagSafe charger.
After looking at the specs, I'm really disappointed. MagSafe by itself already heats up my iPhone 12 mini tremendously compared to a normal wired charger, which can charge up to 20W instead of just 15W (or 12W for my mini). But this battery doesn't do even 12W/15W when not plugged in, it only goes to 5W, the same as the Anker battery, which is less than half the price. Also it only comes in white.
I don't see any compelling reason to choose this over the Anker battery either, but some people don't even consider off-brand accessories and Apple is happy to charge them double or triple for the privilege.
I think 5W is a deliberate design choice, though, for exactly the reason you mention: heat. You can slap the battery on and stick it back in your jeans without roasting your thigh, and the point is to keep your phone working, not to make the battery meter go back to green ASAP.
I think 5W is a deliberate design choice, though, for exactly the reason you mention: heat. You can slap the battery on and stick it back in your jeans without roasting your thigh, and the point is to keep your phone working, not to make the battery meter go back to green ASAP.
I wish Motorola wouldn't cancel their superb Z line of phones. MotoMods were a great idea, which worked especially well for batteries. I never had to worry to run out of power for the last 4 years I use these devices.
I'm confused about this:
You can also charge both if you attach your MagSafe Battery Pack
to your iPhone, then plug your iPhone into a power source. You
might want to charge this way if you need to connect your iPhone
to another device while charging, like if you're using wired
CarPlay or transferring photos to a Mac.
It means if you’re using CarPlay, you can charge the phone and the MagSafe. It’s trying to say that it’s safe to charge your phone while plugging the cable in for purposes other than explicit charging.
Here are the FCC materials (but the data related to capacity is in the confidential sections):
https://fccid.io/BCGA2384
https://fccid.io/BCGA2384
I hope this works well. I backed the Kickstarter for an external swappable iPhone battery case (CoBattery [0]) and I loved the thing. It was bulky and looked weird, but it was so nice having such long battery life. They shut down a while ago but it was great while it lasted.
[0]: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cobattery/cobattery-nev...
[0]: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/cobattery/cobattery-nev...
Same- the Cobattery was great (except for the bulk). I actually never wall-charged my phone and just had several battery packs (relatively inexpensive Samsung packs) that I kept topped off and just swapped out.
I've got an Apple Smart Battery Case[1] for my iPhone 11, which is a similar idea, and the extra battery life can definitely be handy. Doing it with a swappable battery is a neat twist though - I haven't seen that done before.
[1] I picked up a cheap used one - they're rather expensive at full price (£129). It can charge my iPhone from 10% to 60% though, so it's current capacity roughly matches its design capacity.
[1] I picked up a cheap used one - they're rather expensive at full price (£129). It can charge my iPhone from 10% to 60% though, so it's current capacity roughly matches its design capacity.
Yeah the ability to swap was what made it so great. I haven't found anything else with the same capability.
With fast charge being common these days, why not just carry a portable battery (or two or three, for less than $99)?
There are lots of battery cases on Amazon. They work great.
I edited my post to be more explicit, but the batteries in the CoBattery case were swappable. That was the killer feature for me.
It's kinda cool? But I mean, why not just buy an Anker 20k mAh 20W battery pack that you can use with every other USB device... at less than half the price:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Anker-PowerCore-Essential-External-...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Anker-PowerCore-Essential-External-...
it doesn't say how much battery life it adds...
Likely varies too much to give a fair estimate. I'd guess this is somewhere around 3000-4000mah, then minus the wireless charging inefficiency? So it might give the 12 Mini a full day, but only half a day for the 12 Pro Max.
EDIT: Apparently just under 1500mah, so likely half a day for the mini, and a few hours for the max? I'd be curious too.
EDIT: Apparently just under 1500mah, so likely half a day for the mini, and a few hours for the max? I'd be curious too.
very critical miss
Has anyone else found that battery packs with wireless charging kinda suck?
I lost my non-wireless one so just bought a new 10,000 Anker one with wireless charging.
I was expecting that to keep my phone going for a few days easily but it was dead after 1 and a half wireless charges.
Is this just the inefficiency of wireless or am I doing something wrong?
Is this what MagSafe is trying to make better? Better alignment = less wasted energy?
I lost my non-wireless one so just bought a new 10,000 Anker one with wireless charging.
I was expecting that to keep my phone going for a few days easily but it was dead after 1 and a half wireless charges.
Is this just the inefficiency of wireless or am I doing something wrong?
Is this what MagSafe is trying to make better? Better alignment = less wasted energy?
Inefficiency at several steps.
Battery voltage to charging voltage is a step.
Charging method (wireless) adds a step.
Input voltage to battery voltage is a step.
Plus you have the extra circuitry of Wireless to power.
Nothing runs straight off 5v of USB or 3.7v (nominal) of LiPo. There's little converters for everything, every step of the way.
This is why you'll never see a 3.7-4.2v battery pack delivering 1:1 charge to a smartphone over 5v USB. I did the math a long time ago and the capacity conversion is around 74% to 84%. So if you have a 10,000 mAh battery, expect it to charge about ~8000mAh worth of your phone.
For wireless, it's even worse.
Battery voltage to charging voltage is a step.
Charging method (wireless) adds a step.
Input voltage to battery voltage is a step.
Plus you have the extra circuitry of Wireless to power.
Nothing runs straight off 5v of USB or 3.7v (nominal) of LiPo. There's little converters for everything, every step of the way.
This is why you'll never see a 3.7-4.2v battery pack delivering 1:1 charge to a smartphone over 5v USB. I did the math a long time ago and the capacity conversion is around 74% to 84%. So if you have a 10,000 mAh battery, expect it to charge about ~8000mAh worth of your phone.
For wireless, it's even worse.
Thanks!
I should get at about 2.16 charges then (based on 8000) got only 1.5 which seems pretty dire! I’ll take a cable next time!
The other thing I found was I couldn’t use the phone while changing. That seems to be a weird oversight for wireless/MagSafe charging in general.
I should get at about 2.16 charges then (based on 8000) got only 1.5 which seems pretty dire! I’ll take a cable next time!
The other thing I found was I couldn’t use the phone while changing. That seems to be a weird oversight for wireless/MagSafe charging in general.
That puts it pretty damn close to the 50-55% wireless efficiency figure I keep seeing thrown around. Yay! Wireless!
This sure is a garish looking device. They also are trying to be clever and not show how thick it is.
Am I just unable to find it or are the dimensions not listed on the page (or the listed support page)? The pictures also avoid any side-on view, giving just a very shallow angle picture with lighting that makes it hard to estimate.
How thick is it? And how heavy?
How thick is it? And how heavy?
They seem to withhold that information on purpose, so I guess the pack is not very slim. We’ll know in a week or so.
I would have rather had a new Smart Battery Case with a MagSafe coil on the outside.
I must say, I’m not a fan of MagSafe accessories that attach to your phone especially since easy pocketaility seems important for an external battery.
This looks pretty slim. Definitely takes up less space than one the larger power packs that connect with a cable.
[deleted]
Does the 15W magsafe powerbank even exist?
As a dumbass that always forgets to charge their phone until I need to go somewhere, I could imagine using this (as long as I can remember to keep it on the charging pad).
umisays(1)
>> Just plug a Lightning cable into the MagSafe Battery Pack
2021 still not usb-c...greed has no limit
2021 still not usb-c...greed has no limit
No greed here. Apple is making this so the argument that they get money for lightning cables is irrelevant. The phone uses lightning. It would be weird if the battery pack used something else.
You can make an argument that Apple should switch their phones to USB-C but they seem to be heading toward a cable-less solution instead. If they were to change to USB-C tons of people would scream that Apple were doing this just to sell new cables. That is exactly what happened when they switched from the 30-pin connector to lightning. I would like to see them switch on the Pro model phones, at least. That market is likely more ready to switch.
You can make an argument that Apple should switch their phones to USB-C but they seem to be heading toward a cable-less solution instead. If they were to change to USB-C tons of people would scream that Apple were doing this just to sell new cables. That is exactly what happened when they switched from the 30-pin connector to lightning. I would like to see them switch on the Pro model phones, at least. That market is likely more ready to switch.
Apple makes good money from MFi program, of which lightning connector seems to be a vital cog. The day they shift to USB-C manufacturers will stop paying them for lightning accessories.
Moving to cable-less is a good idea, but these chargers and batteries themselves still need to be plugged into something. I guess that should be USB-C, but USB-C confuses people. Perhaps Apple should move to some kind of solid-state approach like docks built for certain situations (home, travel, car). Abstracting away "plugging in" as much as possible.
- 15W charging when plugged into the battery (effectively serving as a MagSafe charger), but 5W when not (effectively the same as a normal 3rd-party battery)
- It may only charge to 90% (with the workaround being to put the iPhone into Low Power mode?)
- If plugged into the phone, it can charge the battery (is this the first use of "reverse charging" for the iPhone?)
It also requires iOS 14.7 which isn't out yet; the RC was released today so will likely be out next week.