5 ms·

This article illustrates a great point, but it makes me wonder why there isn't a middle ground between an overpriced apple charger, and the cheap (and unsafe) k

This article illustrates a great point, but it makes me wonder why there isn't a middle ground between an overpriced apple charger, and the cheap (and unsafe) knockoffs. Eg, why can't I purchase a MFi certified charger at 1/2 or 2/3 the price of an official charger that I know will be safe?

woah 10y ago
For people who want highest quality without question, there is the Apple genuine charger. For people who want lowest price, there is the knockoff. Who is your hypothetical high quality knockoff for? People who want a low-ish price and have the ability test the electrical properties of the product?
- revelation 10y ago
  High quality knockoffs are the entire business model of stores like Aldi. In some cases, it's the original manufacturer also producing the knockoff. It's a way of selling to a market segment that would otherwise utterly ignore them.
westbywest 10y ago
The catch-22 is that Apple shoehorned substantial complexity into the charger, to make it and associated cables/connectors very lightweight, while still supporting batteries with very high power density. Compare the article's photos of the PCB, etc, of the Apple product and the cheap knock-off, both of which have to squeeze into the same plastic housing. That complexity costs money. Trimming out complexity generally means trimming out safety features (which already are possibly insufficient, considering some of the other responses on this thread).
- larrybud 10y ago
  I agree; complexity costs money. But I guess I'm wondering if there is still a lot of profit margin built into the cost of the apple charger that could be shaved by a decent third-party such as Monoprice. Take lightning cables: I can buy the Apple lightning cable for $25, or I can buy a perfectly good Monoprice, MFi-certified lightning cable for $7, or I can buy a no name, non-certified cable (that will likely have issues) for a buck or two on ebay.
  - westbywest 10y ago
    I would expect any 3rd party manufacturer seeking to replicate the safety margins of Apple's own power adapters may ultimately find it difficult to produce a competitive alternative, once you factor in costs of NDAs with Apple and such. (Apple likely works to ensure it stays this way.) Cables are passive, USB chargers are generally low wattage, while the Macbook adapters have active regulation, plus higher power ratings.
Symbiote 10y ago
The magnetic power connector is patented. Apple doesn't license it, and a respectable manufacturer won't want to infringe it.
moreati 10y ago
AIUI Apple won't license the MagSafe connector/protocol to third parties. So the only third party MagSafe-like chargers are made by small, Chinese (I assume) companies that appear content to disregard Apple's IPR and safety regulations like the CE mark. These companies tend to go for absolute lowest price they can, with the cheapest design and the cheapest components. It's my hope that future Macbooks and Macbook Pros will all go with USB-C charging. Meaning there can be a middle ground between unsafe bargain basement chargers, and fray-prone Apple chargers.

woah 10y ago

For people who want highest quality without question, there is the Apple genuine charger. For people who want lowest price, there is the knockoff. Who is your hypothetical high quality knockoff for? People who want a low-ish price and have the ability test the electrical properties of the product?

revelation 10y ago
High quality knockoffs are the entire business model of stores like Aldi. In some cases, it's the original manufacturer also producing the knockoff. It's a way of selling to a market segment that would otherwise utterly ignore them.

westbywest 10y ago

The catch-22 is that Apple shoehorned substantial complexity into the charger, to make it and associated cables/connectors very lightweight, while still supporting batteries with very high power density. Compare the article's photos of the PCB, etc, of the Apple product and the cheap knock-off, both of which have to squeeze into the same plastic housing. That complexity costs money. Trimming out complexity generally means trimming out safety features (which already are possibly insufficient, considering some of the other responses on this thread).

larrybud 10y ago
I agree; complexity costs money. But I guess I'm wondering if there is still a lot of profit margin built into the cost of the apple charger that could be shaved by a decent third-party such as Monoprice. Take lightning cables: I can buy the Apple lightning cable for $25, or I can buy a perfectly good Monoprice, MFi-certified lightning cable for $7, or I can buy a no name, non-certified cable (that will likely have issues) for a buck or two on ebay.
- westbywest 10y ago
  I would expect any 3rd party manufacturer seeking to replicate the safety margins of Apple's own power adapters may ultimately find it difficult to produce a competitive alternative, once you factor in costs of NDAs with Apple and such. (Apple likely works to ensure it stays this way.) Cables are passive, USB chargers are generally low wattage, while the Macbook adapters have active regulation, plus higher power ratings.

Symbiote 10y ago

The magnetic power connector is patented. Apple doesn't license it, and a respectable manufacturer won't want to infringe it.

moreati 10y ago

AIUI Apple won't license the MagSafe connector/protocol to third parties. So the only third party MagSafe-like chargers are made by small, Chinese (I assume) companies that appear content to disregard Apple's IPR and safety regulations like the CE mark. These companies tend to go for absolute lowest price they can, with the cheapest design and the cheapest components. It's my hope that future Macbooks and Macbook Pros will all go with USB-C charging. Meaning there can be a middle ground between unsafe bargain basement chargers, and fray-prone Apple chargers.