In a surprising turn of events, Apple has cancelled its long-awaited AirPower wireless charging mat. The company says the product didn’t meet its “high standards,” but wasn’t specific as to why. We’ve been watching this space carefully and have an informed guess as to what happened. AirPower was first introduced to the public in September of 2017 during Apple’s iPhone X reveal. The company promised a single wireless charging mat that could charge three devices at the same time, like your iPhone, Apple Watch, and your AirPods (the last of which just got wireless charging capabilities). Apple planned on releasing AirPower the year after the iPhone X, in 2018. However, it was reportedly hit with numerous delays. And as 2018 dragged on, the speculation of its cancellation loomed large, especially after Apple completely wiped its website clean of any mention of the product a full year after its announcement. Starting in 2019, though, a glimmer of hope emerged: rumors surfaced that AirPower’s production was ramping up, pointing to the possibility that this product would finally be close to shipping. So close, in fact, that an iOS 12.2 beta—released just ten days before the AirPower’s cancellation--included official support for the now-defunct wireless charger. And the second-generation AirPods even have an illustration of the wireless charging mat on the back of the box. AirPower was cancelled a mere nine days later, making us wonder what must have happened. After all, there are plenty of wireless charging mats on the market that can charge multiple devices at the same time. But unlike those mats (which are really just three separate chargers next to each other in the same unit), Apple wanted to take things to the next level. With that said, we have a theory as to why Apple’s wireless charger fell completely flat during its last-second Hail Mary. Overheating and InterferenceWireless charging pads use electromagnetic induction to juice up your phone. Both the pad and your phone contain wire coils: the pad draws current from the wall and runs it through the coil, creating an electromagnetic field. That field induces an electric current in your phone’s wire coil, which it uses to charge the battery. However, the electricity being transmitted to your phone isn’t perfectly clean or ideal. It generates some noise, which can interfere with other wireless devices. That’s why the FCC (and regulatory bodies in other countries) set strict limits on wireless emissions. Noise from a single coil might not be a problem, but each charging coil generates a slightly different waveform. When those waves overlap, the constructive interference intensifies their strength. Just like when two ocean waves collide and combine their height, radio frequencies can combine their intensity as they interact. Managing these overlapping harmonic frequencies is incredibly challenging, and gets harder the more coils that you are integrating. From patent filings, it looks like Apple’s ambitious plan was to use considerably more coils than other charging pads on the market. Other multi-device wireless chargers place two or three coils side-by-side, but require you to fiddle with your phone to find the “sweet spot” over one coil for it to start charging. With AirPower, Apple was trying to create one large charging surface using overlapping coils, allowing it to power multiple devices from anywhere on the mat. But that introduces multiple challenges. We asked an engineer with experience building wireless charging systems what obstacles Apple was working to overcome. “Over time, these harmonics add up and they become really powerful signals in the air,” explains William Lumpkins, VP of Engineering at O & S Services. “And that can be difficult—that can stop someone’s pacemaker if it’s too high of a level. Or it could short circuit someone’s hearing aid.” If Apple’s multi-coil layout was spinning off harmonics left and right, it’s possible AirPower couldn’t pass muster with US or EU regulations. Part of what’s astonishing about the AirPower cancellation is how last-minute it was, right on the heels of the AirPods 2 release. But Lumpkins says that happens sometimes. He speculated that Apple had AirPower working in their labs: ”Well, so what always happens is you get it functional first. No one looks at [Electro-Magnetic Interference] until the end.” The FCC rules for wireless charging devices like AirPower are quite strict, and limit exposure to 20 cm (8 in) above the device to 50 mW/cm^2. Rumors have circulated for months about AirPower’s overheating issues, which would click nicely into place with this theory. In order to power multiple devices through a large array of coils, they would need a significant amount of power. “Overheating means they’re putting too much current into it, which means they’re trying to up the power level,” says Lumpkins. “My guess is they’re trying to pump out so much of a field, which is getting it to overheat.” Apple boxed themselves into an electromagnetic corner. What they wanted to do was physically possible—and they surely had it working in the lab—but they couldn’t consistently meet the rigorous transmission requirements that are designed to keep us safe from our gadgets. via Tumblr What Finally Killed AirPower
0 Comments
We were on cloud nine after tearing down Samsung’s Galaxy Buds, which proved that wireless earbuds can, in fact, be repairable. But dissecting the new AirPods felt like teardown déjà vu, requiring the same kind of brute force destruction that we used on Apple’s initial version two years ago. Sure, these have fancy new H1 chips, but they’re still destined for the e-waste bin in a short time, leaving us feeling like Apple upgraded the wrong thing. As for the charging case, aside from the wireless charging coil and the relocated LED status light, we noticed a beefier hinge and a circuit board blanketed with a waterproof coating. Hopefully, the improved durability of the charging case will result in fewer failures. Overall, these $200 headphones are some of the most disposable products we’ve ever seen (despite the WEEE logo inconspicuously placed under the charging case lid). AirPods 2nd Generation Teardown Highlights:
Check out the full AirPods 2nd Generation Teardown. Prefer to watch the new AirPods get torn apart? Check out our video recap to see all the gory details in motion. via Tumblr AirPods 2nd Generation Teardown: New Features, Still Disposable Have you ever thought of writing a memoir? No? Well, I hadn’t either. I never considered writing a memoir myself until… well, you’ll have to watch the video further down to find out! There is a problem, though: It can suddenly be too late to write a memoir. Years ago I used to encourage my father to write a memoir […] The post The Secret of Writing a Memoir People Want to Read appeared first on WTD. via Tumblr The Secret of Writing a Memoir People Want to Read For years, independent repair shops have asked Apple for genuine replacement parts so they could repair their customers’ laptops and phones. Apple has refused. But new documents leaked by Motherboard shows that Apple may finally be changing their tune—at least, as much as they’re required to by potential legislation. If you haven’t been to an independent repair shop, you’re missing out on some true art. Take Steven and Nicole Spink, owners of Olympia iPhone Repair in Washington. They can seemingly fix anything—board-level repairs that Apple would refuse to perform are a piece of cake for them, and far less costly than replacing your device. (You can hear Nicole describe these challenges in this Washington hearing on Right to Repair laws—just skip to 6:40.) Unfortunately, without device schematics and other tools from Apple, they can’t always do those jobs,causing them to lose business and forcing customers to pay much more for a full part replacement from Apple. Apple has long taken a firm stance against these types of repair shops. With scandals like the Error 53 debacle, they’ve clearly planted their foot on the ground and said “you should repair your phone at an Apple store, or you should get bent.” Apart from a few very select Apple Authorized Repair Providers, no one has access to the genuine, OEM parts Apple uses to make these devices, or the diagnostics and schematics that Apple keeps so close to the chest. As a result, they’re stuck turning people away, or settling for third-party components instead. If you go to a good shop, they’ll use high-quality replacement parts, but Apple could still brick those at any time. Apple’s lobbyists claim that allowing independent shops access to their diagnostic data and parts will threaten their security model, which we think is rather silly—not to mention something other manufacturers have proven wrong time and again. Apple’s new plan, as described in these documents, seems like a step in the right direction—and to be fair, it is—but it’s a very, very small step that feels more like a PR move or grumbling compliance than an actual attempt to solve the problem. To start, Apple’s plan appears to be rather limited. We know they’ve talked to big repair chains, but they have not spoken to any of the smaller repair shops we contacted. If only the large national chains get access to these parts, the independent shops—people like Steven and Nicole, who are truly dedicated to the craft of tech repair—get left out in the cold, and will likely lose business as a result. This continues to encourage a repair monoculture that stifles competition, job creation, and innovation in the repair space. Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, many of these parts are insanely expensive—the displays, for example, are almost as expensive as the total cost of a display replacement at an Apple Store. If we were being cynical, we’d say that Apple is only doing this to check a box for legislators to claim they’re providing parts. But consumers will still be highly incentivized to go to an Apple Store, since other shops will be too expensive—thus perpetuating Apple’s monopoly on iPhone repair. For years, Apple has been assailing Right to Repair bills with security arguments. They have told legislators time and time again that making diagnostics available to independent shops will undermine their security model. Heck, they even told a Nebraska Senator that if passed, the bill would turn the state into a “Mecca for hackers.” This leaked plan proves that this has been a lie all along: If Apple is able to make these parts available to large, Geek Squad-esque chains, they should be able to give them to independent shops as well. But they won’t, because that isn’t in the interest of their bottom line. Apple would like you to think that independent shops are a sketchy, dangerous minefield of service options that use low-quality parts that can lead to problems down the line. And in some cases, that may be true—but that’s Apple’s fault, not the repair shops’. If Apple would just provide OEM parts to independent repair shops at a reasonable price, these risks would be far smaller. The way we see it, this initiative is lip service that says “See? We care about your right to repair,” while Apple knows full well people will continue to get repairs from Apple, or—if a certain repair isn’t available—buy a full replacement part or device. This plan only makes parts available that match the repairs they offer in-store, and do nothing to provide support to shops trying to do more advanced repairs like water damage remediation or board-level troubleshooting. And they certainly aren’t going to sell parts to customers who want to do repairs in the privacy of their own home. This is a step in the right direction, but it’s a miniscule one. We need more than this. We need comprehensive Right to Repair laws to require Apple and other manufacturers to make parts widely available, just like they are for our cars and appliances. Nobody should be threatened by lawyers or denied access to parts for the simple act of trying to fix their own stuff. via Tumblr Apple’s Leaked “Genuine Parts Repair” Program Doesn’t Go Far Enough Memory is one of the writer’s most valuable resources.Using strong, vivid recollections full of detail and charged with genuine emotion will make your fiction, poetry or memoir-writing full of impact and, yes, memorable! But what is the best way to access these memories in full Technicolor detail, some of which are a long way back […] The post How to Use Freewriting to Supercharge Your Work appeared first on WTD. via Tumblr How to Use Freewriting to Supercharge Your Work We’re no stranger to MacBook keyboard issues. Since 2015, Apple’s new super thin MacBook keyboards can be rendered catanotic with just a fleck of dust. And as Joanna Stern cleverly writes in a column from the Wall Street Journal, Apple’s recent improvements don’t seem to have helped, as her oft-used E and R keys are inoperable. The column overviews a problem that we know all too well: the thinner keyboards on newer MacBooks use “butterfly” switches instead of the tried-and-true scissor mechanism used on previous MacBooks. This new tech allows Apple to make its laptops even thinner, but dust and other particles can make their way under the keys and jam the switches underneath the keycaps. But despite numerous “improvements” from Apple, the problem is still alive and well. Here’s the state of things in 2019. The Butterfly Keyboard: Not As Majestic As a Real Butterfly Apple introduced its butterfly keyboard in the 2015 12-inch MacBook as a way to make the keyboard thinner than ever before, but the new design has introduced a lot of problems. Like with any keyboard, dust and other particulate matter can make its way underneath and into the butterfly switch mechanisms under the keycaps. This can prevent the keycap from pressing down on the switch, or can disable the return mechanism. Unsurprisingly, keys that are used more often—like the E and R keys—are usually the first to go, likely because they’re some of the most-used letters in the English language. This implies another potential cause of the problem: the weak spring mechanism could also be wearing down quicker, resulting in stuck keys that take a while longer to spring back up. On any other keyboard, you can remove the keys and blast out the dust with some compressed air, but Apple’s butterfly keyboard makes this simple job a nightmare: while most of the keys can be removed and blown out (as Apple recommends), sometimes it just doesn’t fix the problem. With the spacebar, it’s pretty much impossible to remove the keycap without destroying the entire key. Worse yet, the keyboard is attached to the laptop’s battery, trackpad, and speakers, so merely swapping out the keyboard on its own is impossible. About a year and a half after Apple first introduced this new keyboard, they quietly made improvements to it beginning with the Late 2016 MacBook Pro: the keycaps are a bit taller, and the dome switch under the butterfly mechanism is heftier and better secured to the cap. Unfortunately, it didn’t really solve much. So last year, Apple made even more improvements to the keyboard in the 2018 MacBook Pro, allowing the spacebar to easily be removed, as well as adding a rubber membrane into the butterfly mechanisms. Apple claims this improvement was made to quiet the keys, but let’s be real: it’s to keep dust out. Apple filed a patent for this very purpose in 2016, and on page 12 you’ll see that in bold letters in the very top-left corner of the document—the quieter keys are merely a nice side effect. As for the membrane’s effectiveness in dust prevention, it works well up to a certain point, but it’s not completely foolproof, and Apple has still received complaints about it, as Stern points out in her column. In any case, Apple ended up stuck between a rock and a hard place when a class-action lawsuit forced their hand into offering a free keyboard replacement program. This covers any MacBook that uses the first two iterations of the butterfly keyboard for up to four years after purchasing the laptop. Still, there are millions of newer MacBooks out in the wild that don’t have this fancy new membrane. And while they’re covered under warranty for a cool four years, it doesn’t get rid of the headaches and inconveniences that owners have to deal with when things go wrong. It’s a clear design flaw that Apple has failed to fix, and they need to stop taking half measures and eliminate the butterfly mechanism in favor of something more reliable. via Tumblr Apple’s Butterfly Keyboard Continues to Plague MacBook Owners Last year, ASUS’s software update tool—which is installed on millions of the company’s Windows laptops—was compromised by hackers. In a rather incredible piece of reporting. Kaspersky Labs and Kim Zetter at Motherboard uncovered that malware was installed on an estimated 500,000 ASUS laptops. The report found that the malware, dubbed ShadowHammer, used ASUS’s legitimate cryptographic keys to sign the update—making it look like it was a genuine update from ASUS. Computers around the world automatically installed the update. This is as dire as a security breach can get: manufacturers are supposed to be the ultimate source of trusted code for your computer! The company has since patched the vulnerability. But the damage is done. Can we still trust OEM software to automatically update? The answer is less clear than it used to be. It gets worse. Motherboard reports that the hijack happened as early as June of last year and ASUS didn’t do a thing about it, even after the company was warned about the problem. How are customers supposed to view ASUS as a trusted and transparent brand when they have to rely on security reporters to tell them they’ve been hacked? There is a jaw-dropping level of hypocrisy happening here. We’ve spent the last few years fending off anti-Right to Repair arguments by manufacturers claiming that they’re the only ones who can be trusted to repair your computer. In a letter to legislators in Washington state, a group of trade associations that represent electronics companies including ASUS said, “With access to technical information, criminals can more easily circumvent security protections, harming not only the product owner but also everyone who shares their network.” That’s probably not true. But it is true that with access to ASUS root certificates, criminals can easily “circumvent security precautions, harming not only the product owner but also everyone who shares their network.” Perhaps these companies should spend less time lobbying against your right to fix your computer, and more time securing their networks. These arguments are delusional. No one company can secure every aspect of the use of their products on their own. Maintaining our technical infrastructure requires an ecosystem. Their lobbyists claim it’s imperative they keep a closed lid on repairs for security reasons—but clearly, that didn’t save them from this debacle. After the ASUS hijack, it’s going to be increasingly difficult for legislators to empathize with manufacturers. What to Do If You Have an ASUS Computer If you have an ASUS laptop, you should check to see if it was one of the unlucky ones by using Kaspersky’s online tool, and make sure you have the latest version (3.6.8) of the Live Update software installed. While the ASUS malware was installed on hundreds of thousands of laptops, the hijackers are said to have only targeted a few hundred machines, mostly in Russia. Right now, the chances are low that your specific laptop was targeted. The dormant malware is not disruptive—yet—but the malware still provides a backdoor on all infected machines. The bottom line: if we can’t trust OEM software in the first place, then we should at least be able to choose our own trusted support network. It’s time that we take back the right to repair and secure our systems. via Tumblr The ASUS Malware Fiasco Proves That Arguments Against Right to Repair Are Bogus Last year, ASUS’s software update tool—which is installed on millions of the company’s Windows laptops—was compromised by hackers. In a rather incredible piece of reporting. Kaspersky Labs and Kim Zetter at Motherboard uncovered that malware was installed on an estimated 500,000 ASUS laptops. The report found that the malware, dubbed ShadowHammer, used ASUS’s legitimate cryptographic keys to sign the update—making it look like it was a genuine update from ASUS. Computers around the world automatically installed the update. This is as dire as a security breach can get: manufacturers are supposed to be the ultimate source of trusted code for your computer! The company has since patched the vulnerability. But the damage is done. Can we still trust OEM software to automatically update? The answer is less clear than it used to be. It gets worse. Motherboard reports that the hijack happened as early as June of last year and ASUS didn’t do a thing about it, even after the company was warned about the problem. How are customers supposed to view ASUS as a trusted and transparent brand when they have to rely on security reporters to tell them they’ve been hacked? There is a jaw-dropping level of hypocrisy happening here. We’ve spent the last few years fending off anti-Right to Repair arguments by manufacturers claiming that they’re the only ones who can be trusted to repair your computer. In a letter to legislators in Washington state, a group of trade associations that represent electronics companies including ASUS said, “With access to technical information, criminals can more easily circumvent security protections, harming not only the product owner but also everyone who shares their network.” That’s probably not true. But it is true that with access to ASUS root certificates, criminals can easily “circumvent security precautions, harming not only the product owner but also everyone who shares their network.” Perhaps these companies should spend less time lobbying against your right to fix your computer, and more time securing their networks. These arguments are delusional. No one company can secure every aspect of the use of their products on their own. Maintaining our technical infrastructure requires an ecosystem. Their lobbyists claim it’s imperative they keep a closed lid on repairs for security reasons—but clearly, that didn’t save them from this debacle. After the ASUS hijack, it’s going to be increasingly difficult for legislators to empathize with manufacturers. What to Do If You Have an ASUS Computer If you have an ASUS laptop, you should check to see if it was one of the unlucky ones by using Kaspersky’s online tool, and make sure you have the latest version (3.6.8) of the Live Update software installed. While the ASUS malware was installed on hundreds of thousands of laptops, the hijackers are said to have only targeted a few hundred machines, mostly in Russia. Right now, the chances are low that your specific laptop was targeted. The dormant malware is not disruptive—yet—but the malware still provides a backdoor on all infected machines. The bottom line: if we can’t trust OEM software in the first place, then we should at least be able to choose our own trusted support network. It’s time that we take back the right to repair and secure our systems. via Tumblr The ASUS Malware Fiasco Proves That Arguments Against Right to Repair Are Bogus We recently surpassed the two million mark in spudgers sold worldwide, and that’s not surprising—we live and die by spudgers when we’re tearing down devices and replacing screens. I’d go so far as to say that every fixer should have one on hand. What’s a Spudger Anyway?A spudger is a pencil-shaped tool with a flat tip on one end (much like a flathead screwdriver) and a pointy end on the other. There is also a notch on one end that can be used as a hook to pull small wires or cables, like those found on the back of phone or network patch panels. Nowadays, spudgers are mostly used in small electronics repair, allowing you to loosen delicate connectors without damaging them. It’s one of our most popular tools, and so universally useful that we include one in nearly all of our kits. The spudger’s origin story predates any computer, smartphone, or tablet. Let’s take a look at how spudgers came to be and what they were used for in days past. The History of the SpudgerIt’s unclear exactly when the spudger as we know it was invented or how it got its weird name. It’s not defined the Oxford English Dictionary. Doing some etymological digging reveals that the word was most likely derived from the 15th-century word “spudde” meaning “short knife.” That eventually evolved into “spud” in the 17th century, and as the Oxford English Dictionary puts it, as a “small, narrow spade for cutting the roots of plants, especially weeds.” And yes, it’s also informally used as a nickname for a potato. Of course, the spudger as we know it didn’t exist all the way back then, and it’s not really known exactly when the “ger” was tacked on at the end. But the earliest known mention of the word “spudger” that we could find dates back to 1840 in an issue of the Essex County Standard newspaper. Unfortunately, there’s no explanation of its use. However, spudgers are mentioned in a transcript from a US Supreme Court case filed in 1880, in which they were used during the manufacturing of isinglass. Before specialized scrapers were introduced, spudgers were used to keep isinglass from burning onto the rollers as it passed through the production line. These spudgers were anywhere between “three to six inches wide at the end.” As for the smaller variety of spudgers that are much more comparable to what we sell, a 1928 issue of Popular Mechanics mentions spudgers in an article about radio troubleshooting and repair. The spudger in the illustration looks very similar to a typical one you’d find today, although most spudgers are now made out of synthetic materials instead of wood. Either way, they’re made to be nonconductive and antistatic so as not to short out a circuit or discharge a capacitor while fiddling around inside a device. Uses for SpudgersIn today’s world, spudgers are endlessly useful in electronics repair, including, but not limited to:
While spudgers are primarily aimed at electronics repair, they actually have a lot of really neat alternative uses too, like:
We Take Spudgers Very, Very SeriouslyYou can buy spudgers pretty much anywhere, but ours are top quality. While lots of spudgers are made from cheap plastic, iFixit spudgers are made of glass-filled nylon, which makes them tough and stiff, yet pliable enough (without breaking easily) so as not to scratch plastic casing or damage delicate electrical components. They can also withstand high temperatures, making them a great companion tool while soldering—molten solder doesn’t stand a chance. We sell many different types of spudgers. If you’ve bought one of our kits before, you likely already have one of our standard spudgers laying around, but you may also benefit from having one of our special spudgers on hand, or just having a few more of them in your tool arsenal. Our spudgers come in all sorts of different shapes, sizes, and materials. Here’s an overview of the different types we sell:
We also sell a 3-pack of standard spudgers, which is great to have when you need multiple spudgers to pry up bigger batteries. We even include some spudgers in our Prying and Opening Tool Assortment kit, which also comes with opening picks, plastic cards, and an opening tool. We’re especially proud of our standard and Halberd spudgers, as these are in-house designs based on our wealth of repair knowledge, and with the help from our community of repair experts and teardown engineers. Still not convinced? Here are some more uses for spudgers you may not have considered:
The possibilities are endless! via Tumblr Two Million Spudgers Sold and Counting As the experts on the insides of devices, we talk a lot about how repair and repair-friendly hardware are key in slowing down the growing e-waste crisis. But a smartphone’s energy consumption while it’s in use is just as important as what happens when it goes to the landfill. Our new partner in the EU, German start-up and mobile service provider WEtell, is tackling that challenge head-on. In terms of energy consumption, the actual power required to charge smartphones is small. But the infrastructure required to support their usage is voracious: Miles away from the tiny SIM cards in each of our phones, servers run non-stop to enable 25 billion gigabytes of global mobile data traffic. Constant air-conditioning keeps the servers cool. This is the framework required to keep our broadband network running 24/7. Making a one-hour call a day produces up to 1250 kg of CO2 per year—the equivalent of flying from New York to London. The carbon footprint of mobile data will continue to rise, as mobile data traffic is predicted to be 10 times higher in 2022 than it was in 2016. To make our dependence on smartphones more sustainable, we’ll have to think beyond their hardware—by choosing a sustainable mobile provider that uses green electricity. WEtell is leading that charge. The mobile service provider has partnered with a German supplier of green electricity to produce more renewable energy than their mobile service users will consume. By investing in renewable energy and the construction of new power facilities, they’ll offset some of the unavoidable traditional mobile data energy consumption, like grid operation and data processing. In addition to running on sustainable energy, WEtell is committed to keeping your data safe and being completely transparent in their contracts. They generate revenue exclusively through the sale of mobile tariffs—not your data. In Germany, where 60% of a mobile phone’s energy consumption is used up by network infrastructure, WEtell’s promise is much needed. They’re offering an innovative solution to the environmental costs of mobile data, and we’re excited to call them a partner. via Tumblr Smartphone Data Has a Larger Carbon Footprint Than You Might Think |
Marianne HughesTech Writer. |