3 ms·

How did many people “give up on USB” when that’s all that is available on PCs? Besides, wireless charging is much slower and video over wireless introduces lag

How did many people “give up on USB” when that’s all that is available on PCs? Besides, wireless charging is much slower and video over wireless introduces lag.

gtirloni 4y ago
I'm asking the same questions. There's no giving up on USB because there are no alternatives. Wireless charging is terrible and inefficient.
- Retric 4y ago
  Wireless charging cellphones uses so little power that their ~70% efficiency is practically irrelevant. A single USB wall charger that wastes 0.5W when not in use consumes about 4x as much energy as is wasted by using wireless charging your cellphone. As to recharge speeds, it’s easily comparable with USB. Sometimes USB charging is noticeably faster, but use the wrong charger and USB will be far slower.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    Wireless charging can not even approach the speeds of wired charges and your energy estimates are off. https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen-48afdde70ed9 https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-...
    - Retric 4y ago
      70% efficiency requires 43% more power, your article says “47% more power than a cable” at the top which is a little worse but wait “In general, the propped-up design helped align the coils without much fiddling, but it still used an average of 19.8 Wh, or 39% more power, to charge the phone than cables.” that’s better than 70% efficiency. So ~70% efficiency is spot on. Wireless charging can do 15+W depending on the phone. As to the scare quote about 3.5 Billion phones, the charger they mentioned consumes 0.25W when the phone isn’t attached or 6Wh per day that’s the same energy it wastes charging a battery 12Wh per day. You can find many wired wall chargers that waste more than 0.5W when the phone isn’t charging so using one would actually take more energy than using that wireless charger for a single phone.
Retric 4y ago
You can still use HDMI etc for video. Wireless is close enough to the fastest possible USB speeds not to worry about it and much faster than the slowest USB speeds.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Wireless isn’t “close enough” for charging larger phone batteries. I travel a lot for business and I will soon be doing the digital nomad thing flying across the United States. I use a portable monitor that is both powered via USB C and does video over USB C. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B095GG31KX https://www.amazon.com/dp/B095GG31KX I also have a few of these truly “universal” USB C cables. https://a.co/d/21TFe3e https://a.co/d/21TFe3e
  - Retric 4y ago
    A 40$ cable with 5 dongles is a great argument that USB is fine. As to wireless, an iPhone 13 pro max can do 15W wireless vs up to 27W with the right USB charger or 2W USB if you happen to plug into the wrong charger without thinking about it. In practice I only charge overnight or while driving so it’s hard to see a practical difference.

How did many people “give up on USB” when that’s all that is available on PCs? Besides, wireless charging is much slower and video over wireless introduces lag.

gtirloni 4y ago

I'm asking the same questions. There's no giving up on USB because there are no alternatives. Wireless charging is terrible and inefficient.

Retric 4y ago
Wireless charging cellphones uses so little power that their ~70% efficiency is practically irrelevant. A single USB wall charger that wastes 0.5W when not in use consumes about 4x as much energy as is wasted by using wireless charging your cellphone. As to recharge speeds, it’s easily comparable with USB. Sometimes USB charging is noticeably faster, but use the wrong charger and USB will be far slower.
- scarface74 4y ago
  Wireless charging can not even approach the speeds of wired charges and your energy estimates are off. https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen-48afdde70ed9 https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-...
  - Retric 4y ago
    70% efficiency requires 43% more power, your article says “47% more power than a cable” at the top which is a little worse but wait “In general, the propped-up design helped align the coils without much fiddling, but it still used an average of 19.8 Wh, or 39% more power, to charge the phone than cables.” that’s better than 70% efficiency. So ~70% efficiency is spot on. Wireless charging can do 15+W depending on the phone. As to the scare quote about 3.5 Billion phones, the charger they mentioned consumes 0.25W when the phone isn’t attached or 6Wh per day that’s the same energy it wastes charging a battery 12Wh per day. You can find many wired wall chargers that waste more than 0.5W when the phone isn’t charging so using one would actually take more energy than using that wireless charger for a single phone.

Retric 4y ago

You can still use HDMI etc for video. Wireless is close enough to the fastest possible USB speeds not to worry about it and much faster than the slowest USB speeds.

scarface74 4y ago
Wireless isn’t “close enough” for charging larger phone batteries. I travel a lot for business and I will soon be doing the digital nomad thing flying across the United States. I use a portable monitor that is both powered via USB C and does video over USB C. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B095GG31KX https://www.amazon.com/dp/B095GG31KX I also have a few of these truly “universal” USB C cables. https://a.co/d/21TFe3e https://a.co/d/21TFe3e
- Retric 4y ago
  A 40$ cable with 5 dongles is a great argument that USB is fine. As to wireless, an iPhone 13 pro max can do 15W wireless vs up to 27W with the right USB charger or 2W USB if you happen to plug into the wrong charger without thinking about it. In practice I only charge overnight or while driving so it’s hard to see a practical difference.