The explanation of “This is to protect batteries from sub par quality chargers” is not particularly convincing to me. As a user, wouldn’t that be my call? Shouldn’t providing a safe charging be a charger manufacturer’s responsibility? Why is Pixel deciding to not accept charging at 10w from ‘unknown’ charging device? At best I can see the argument for not supporting charging from insecurely designed charger on the account of warranty, but even then I think it should be consumers call as to what device they are using to charge their phones and phone should at most warn me about unsafe chargers, rather than outright refusing to charge at full potential speed.
Given the update, isn't it pretty clear that this article is nothing but FUD?<p>The general standard, Qi, only supports charging at 5W. Pixels support this standard perfectly.<p>Google also made an adapted standard that charges at 10W. Chargers need to pass certain tests to prove they can implement this charging standard correctly. Once certified, then they can charge Pixels faster using this standard. There is plenty of evidence quoted by others of how shoddily implemented aftermarket chargers can damage phones.<p>I'm not an expert in wireless charging technologies so please correct me if I got something wrong.
I have an iPhone X, and use an inexpensive Samsung Qi charger. It doesn't do the fast charge, but I also only ever charge my phone at night. It's sitting there for 8ish hours anyway, so the fact that it takes like, maybe two hours to charge is a non-issue.<p>I imagine many Pixel 3 owners will experience the same thing. A wireless charging pad is pretty naturally a "leave it sitting there overnight" spot. Doesn't really matter that it doesn't do the fast one.
For a few shining years, you could basically charge any device with a micro-USB cord. I guess we're going back to having a culch drawer full of one-off proprietary connectors.
> <i>Google got back to us. The Pixel 3 does not support 10W Qi charging at all. It supports 10W wireless charging, and it supports the Qi wireless charging standard, but these are two different things. Qi is capped at 5W, and for 10W wireless charging, you need a charger with what Belkin calls "Google's 10W proprietary wireless charging technology."<p>Google says it is "certifying" chargers for the Pixel 3 via the "Made for Google" program...</i><p>Isn't this almost a textbook example of "embrace, extend, extinguish"?
Locking chargers doesn't seem like kind of a thing EU would approve. Considering their stand on unifying all chargers.<p>Let's see how this plays out.
So if Google has some standard that has to be met, can't they just make it public and let the third party companies get certified? Or sign some kind of agreement that they promise to adhere to the standards.. something
I wonder if we'll see more of this from device OEMs, if only to protect against things like iffy USB-C and Qi chargers that don't conform to standards.<p>Standard Qi chargers don't put out enough power/heat to cause lasting issues, but a fast charger could. Similarly, Google's already seen major issues first-hand from an off-spec USB-C cable [0].<p>[0] <a href="https://www.engadget.com/2016/02/03/benson-leung-chromebook-pixel-usb-type-c-test/" rel="nofollow">https://www.engadget.com/2016/02/03/benson-leung-chromebook-...</a>
It's also disappointing that while Pixel 3 supports USB-PD, which is forward looking, it has no support for older protocols, even conventional 2.4A USB charging. I tried charging one with my car USB port and it the charging rate was lower than the power consumption, so it died after a few hours of navigation.<p>There are tons of conventional chargers out in the world (card, hotels and airports, power banks, etc.) and it's stupid to deprecate them, especially given that the Snapdragon inside actually supports those.
Just imagine the shitstorm if it was s/Google Pixel 3/Apple iPhone/<p>The amount of angry tweets and 10+ minute long YouTube rants (for the monetization) would break the internet.
Pretty sad to see where things are going. Computing started with everything being proprietary, then from the 80s on you saw wide open systems and standards developed. And I think standards are what enabled the rapid growth of the industry and the internet. And now the big players are trying to revert and make everything proprietary again. No standard protocols, hardware that barely can be opened or repaired.
This adds to the list of reasons why I won't be getting a Pixel 3. Other reasons include the notch on the screen, the glass on the back, and the reduced efficacy of autocorrect.<p>I'm using a Pixel 2 currently, and the back is heavily cracked because I am clumsy and drop it often. Who puts glass on the <i>back</i> of the phone and why?
Either google doesn't know how to implement the Qi standard[0], the wireless power consortium compatibility tests are complete garbage[also 0], and/or they have discovered a known defect and are trying to work around in order to prevent another airplane-fire recall kind of situation (highly unlikely, if true). I hope that Qi pulls their licence for this move, but I doubt it.<p>[0]<a href="https://www.wirelesspowerconsortium.com/products/details/4826/pixel-3" rel="nofollow">https://www.wirelesspowerconsortium.com/products/details/482...</a>
eh, they don't strike me as a company where some marketing doofus pushed this through to try and make an extra buck.<p>seems more likely that they wanted to see how far they could push the wattage and in doing so they found some pretty tight tolerances with respect to safety and reliability so they took care to ensure that it would only work in the tested configuration.<p>at the end of the day, it still supports the standard. would be nice to see them try to push the standard forward, which they still very well may do.
2 deflating thoughts;<p>- Qi has always been a slow charge thing in my books. If that's changed, the specifications for the Qi charger required could very clearly be listed, and the Pixel could track the specs of the power coming in at some level I'd hope.<p>- If sub-par quality QI chargers are a potential hazard, I would say sub-par AC chargers are a far larger hazard from installed footprint. That lock-in would have happened a long time ago if it would have been tolerated by Apple and Google.<p>Someone will likely find a workaround.
> <i>but it's hard to imagine a justification for this.</i><p>There are dubious chargers out there that are outright unsafe. It is in no way hard to imagine the argument that don't want to pull 10W through some no-name made-in-China piece of crap you got from Amazon that will burn your house down, because it wasn't even tested at 5W.
No headphone jack? Can't use the fast charger that came in my vehicle? Nope and Nope.<p>Buy the LG v35 or v40. These phones have a headphone jack, has an OLED screen, is waterproof, has an SD card slot, works on Project Fi, and if you've ever dealt with LG customer support, they're great. The v35 has a 'normal' lens and a 'wide angle' camera, and the v40 has both of those plus a telephoto. The Pixel2's portrait mode was abysmal compared to the offerings from Apple, but LG's portrait mode absolutely stomps both the pixel and iphone. There's no reason to buy a pixel.