I’d like to see specific efficiency rating for Apple’s MagSafe. The magnetic alignment does a good job of ensuring that the coils are optimally positioned. That would likely be more efficient than cases where the alignment was even a little off.
One flaw I note in the article, which is supposed to be all about charging efficiency:
Not once does the article cite a single figure on the actual charging efficiency achieved in any of its tests.
Yes, it does say that "47% more power" was used, but this is of course not the efficiency. It allows you to calculate the efficiency, which most people would screw up.
To make matters worse, the article then exaggerates the problem while attempting to contextualize it:
"“We worked out that at 100% efficiency from wall socket to battery, it would take about 73 coal power plants running for a day to charge the 3.5 billion smartphone batteries once fully,” iFixit technical writer Arthur Shi told OneZero. But if people place their phones wrong and reduce the efficiency of their charging, the number grows: “If the wireless charging efficiency was only 50%, you would need to double the [73] power plants in order to charge all the batteries.”"
See the problem? Not a single one of their tests with a phone lined up properly on the coils had efficiency this poor. Neither was the average efficiency in their tests ever this poor. MagSafe has already fixed the alignment issue and one can certainly assume the entire Android world will have followed suit before too long.
Also, why are these coal powered plants? That is a worst case scenario and not representative of the actual power grids in most locations. Seems design to scare rather than inform.
I have a standing desk that came with a built in wireless charging spot. It's slightly raised above the surrounding glass, so my laptop doesn't sit evenly on that end of the desk. If I want to charge my phone, I have to push my laptop partly off the edge to make room. It doesn't charge as fast as my cable. It makes my phone heat up.
I still think wireless charging is a gimmick. I'd rather have a cable and a port that's easier to put in and more resistant to wear/breakage/clogging. Or a desk with a little stand that I can just drop my phone into and it'll make a physical connection and charge more efficiently.
A final advantage to cables: if you want to charge wirelessly, you have to put your phone down! With a nice long cable by your bed, you can lay there and use your phone as long as you want.
Yeah MagSafe and wireless charging car mount is fantastic (especially because it frees my lightning port for my aux cord ). But I am yet to see another use case where wireless charging convenience is worth the downsides.
I don't think wireless charging is the end-all solution. But I find it quite nice in many situations.
For example having it at my desk is great. My phone just sits there for hours at a time and having a slow charge is great. It doesn't matter that I have to put my phone down because I am at the computer, I'm not using my phone anyways (other than maybe to take a quick photo, but a 30s break in charging isn't a problem for me).
> I'd rather have a cable and a port that's easier to put in and more resistant to wear/breakage/clogging.
I don't see how a connector and cable will be more resistant to wear/breakage/clogging than two flat surfaces.
I agree it sounds like your desk has a poor implementation. I definitely wouldn't want it raised. But I don't think that makes the technology bad in general.
At the end of the day I think it comes down to slightly easier to use in tradeoff for a slower charge and maybe easier to accidentally disconnect. However for me that is actually a favourable tradeoff for almost all of my charging.
13 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 47.8 ms ] thread> In my tests, I found that wireless charging used, on average, around 47% more power than a cable.
Not once does the article cite a single figure on the actual charging efficiency achieved in any of its tests.
Yes, it does say that "47% more power" was used, but this is of course not the efficiency. It allows you to calculate the efficiency, which most people would screw up.
Not great.
"“We worked out that at 100% efficiency from wall socket to battery, it would take about 73 coal power plants running for a day to charge the 3.5 billion smartphone batteries once fully,” iFixit technical writer Arthur Shi told OneZero. But if people place their phones wrong and reduce the efficiency of their charging, the number grows: “If the wireless charging efficiency was only 50%, you would need to double the [73] power plants in order to charge all the batteries.”"
See the problem? Not a single one of their tests with a phone lined up properly on the coils had efficiency this poor. Neither was the average efficiency in their tests ever this poor. MagSafe has already fixed the alignment issue and one can certainly assume the entire Android world will have followed suit before too long.
I still think wireless charging is a gimmick. I'd rather have a cable and a port that's easier to put in and more resistant to wear/breakage/clogging. Or a desk with a little stand that I can just drop my phone into and it'll make a physical connection and charge more efficiently.
A final advantage to cables: if you want to charge wirelessly, you have to put your phone down! With a nice long cable by your bed, you can lay there and use your phone as long as you want.
I retrofitted both. MagSafe means you can hide the phone anywhere convenient - in my case it's on the underside of the center console door.
For example having it at my desk is great. My phone just sits there for hours at a time and having a slow charge is great. It doesn't matter that I have to put my phone down because I am at the computer, I'm not using my phone anyways (other than maybe to take a quick photo, but a 30s break in charging isn't a problem for me).
> I'd rather have a cable and a port that's easier to put in and more resistant to wear/breakage/clogging.
I don't see how a connector and cable will be more resistant to wear/breakage/clogging than two flat surfaces.
I agree it sounds like your desk has a poor implementation. I definitely wouldn't want it raised. But I don't think that makes the technology bad in general.
At the end of the day I think it comes down to slightly easier to use in tradeoff for a slower charge and maybe easier to accidentally disconnect. However for me that is actually a favourable tradeoff for almost all of my charging.