On 8/13/23 2:38 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:

>> Perhaps it will be of no help to you but here is what my found in the
>> bag USB-C charger says:
>>
>> Type-C Power Adapter, Output 5V@3A, 9V@3A, 12v@3A, 15@3A, 20V@2.25A, 45W
>>
>> It's feeding this Acer 13.5" SP513-54N 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD
>>
>> The barrel charger that came with the LT is 19V@3.42A, 65W
>>
>> So there appears to be quite a mismatch, but yet it works and has been
>> for quite awhile...

> Thanks for the specs, they are very helpful!
>
> I don't know if/how a laptop switches between the different voltages,
>but it probably tries to use the 20V mode, which is close to that of
>your barrel charger (19V) and quite common for laptops (mine is 19.5V).

19V would be my LT GUESS too. I suppose I could research it but I'm just not
that curious. Taking a chance by just plugging it in is more my style...
:-/

Since the charger will also charge all (but one) of my other USB-C equipped
toys (Amazon tablets, this Chrome tablet, Chromebooks, W11 LTs, and (gasp)
my phone) I'm ASSUMING the other voltages are used as well depending on the
device.

That's what makes it handy: One charger sitting out for whatever needs
charging...

>45W should be plenty to charge it, especially having a SSD. 65W would
>only be needed for fast-charging or heavy CPU/GPU usage.

Yep. My guess too. More watts = quicker charge.

>My laptop is
>similar, only 15.6", and has a 45W barrel charger.

> For now, I'll ('have' to) keep using my barrel charger. But if I get
>tired of it - the AC cable is quite thick/bulky (rugged/safe EU plugs
>and all that! :-)) - or/and it breaks, I'll be on the lookout for a
>suitable USB-C charger.

Good luck...

> Anyway, I wouldn't want to annoy our Apple friends by adding more
>e-waste, especially not by buying something with/for that dreaded USB-C
>plug/socket!

I normally edit out any Apple baiting but this Android newsreader has a bug
(feature?) in that it won't crosspost. So they'll have to come here to see
it... ;)

AJL <noemail@none.com> wrote:
> On 8/13/23 2:38 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[...]

> > For now, I'll ('have' to) keep using my barrel charger. But if I get
> >tired of it - the AC cable is quite thick/bulky (rugged/safe EU plugs
> >and all that! :-)) - or/and it breaks, I'll be on the lookout for a
> >suitable USB-C charger.
>
> ^MGood luck...
>
> > Anyway, I wouldn't want to annoy our Apple friends by adding more
> >e-waste, especially not by buying something with/for that dreaded USB-C
> >plug/socket!
>
> I normally edit out any Apple baiting but this Android newsreader has a bug
> (feature?) in that it won't crosspost. So they'll have to come here to see
> it... ;)

Well, one of them subscribes to this group and he's one of the ones
who crossposted parts of this thread to the iPhone group, so we can just
sit back and relax! :-)

Can someone please pass the popcorn!?

On 13/8/2023, Alan Browne wrote:

> Not at all - as previously pointed out to you at some point by others
> and possibly myself the absence of that port means more volume in the
> phone for other things (function and or battery).

I agree fully with you that removing important hardware functionality
ALWAYS makes it easier for the manufacturer (and increases their profits).

> And of course - as you keep snipping out - Samsung copied Apple (Samsung
> often copies Apple) in this respect on their phones like the Galaxy S23.

Nobody doubts that Samsung copied Apple's lucrative strategy of removing
critical hardware functionality, which not only increases their profits
(because you have to scramble to buy it back) but, as you astutely noted,
making the phone less functional makes it much easier to manufacture.

> Face it - all you've got is something to whine about - and the "whine to
> something" ratio is pretty high.

If you think every truth about Apple is "whining", then that says a lot of
what you think about Apple's core marketing and design strategy of removing
key functionality so that you're forced to figure out a way to get it back.

On 2023-08-19 14:09, Falafel Balls wrote:
> On 13/8/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Not at all - as previously pointed out to you at some point by others
>> and possibly myself the absence of that port means more volume in the
>> phone for other things (function and or battery).
>
> I agree fully with you that removing important hardware functionality
> ALWAYS makes it easier for the manufacturer (and increases their profits).

They did not remove functionality - they combined it into another port
that must be there. Efficiency in all respects.

>> And of course - as you keep snipping out - Samsung copied Apple (Samsung
>> often copies Apple) in this respect on their phones like the Galaxy S23.
>
> Nobody doubts that Samsung copied Apple's lucrative strategy of removing
> critical hardware functionality, which not only increases their profits

First off (as noted above) the functionality was not removed. It was
combined into another port.

Further, it is not "critical".

> (because you have to scramble to buy it back) but, as you astutely noted,
> making the phone less functional makes it much easier to manufacture.

How is it less functional if the function (audio output) remains? I was
using my wired headphones with my iPhone not 30 minutes ago. Function
was fine.

>> Face it - all you've got is something to whine about - and the "whine to
>> something" ratio is pretty high.
>
> If you think every truth about Apple is "whining", then that says a lot of
> what you think about Apple's core marketing and design strategy of removing
> key functionality so that you're forced to figure out a way to get it back.

Wow - you're really stuck on this notion that the function was removed.
As above, it was not.

Calling it "key functionality" is little less desperate than "critical
hardware" so kudos ... you're on a path to sanity. This path to sanity
is long. Hard. You'll be tempted to abandon it. Don't.

Sanity is its own reward.

--
“If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything."
-Ronald Coase

On 19/8/2023, Alan Browne wrote:

>> I agree fully with you that removing important hardware functionality
>> ALWAYS makes it easier for the manufacturer (and increases their profits).
>
> They did not remove functionality - they combined it into another port
> that must be there. Efficiency in all respects.

Only a true convert to the Apple religion would think that by completely
and suddenly "courageously" removing the capability to plug existing wired
headphones into the 3.5mm port is NOT removing functionality.

>
>>> And of course - as you keep snipping out - Samsung copied Apple (Samsung
>>> often copies Apple) in this respect on their phones like the Galaxy S23.
>>
>> Nobody doubts that Samsung copied Apple's lucrative strategy of removing
>> critical hardware functionality, which not only increases their profits
>
> First off (as noted above) the functionality was not removed. It was
> combined into another port.

Remember, a phone without the port is less functional than a phone with it.

> Further, it is not "critical".

It's a standard basic and rather venerable functionality that is so
critical that it's on most phones today and far into the future it will be.
>> (because you have to scramble to buy it back) but, as you astutely noted,
>> making the phone less functional makes it much easier to manufacture.
>
> How is it less functional if the function (audio output) remains?

If you don't understand that you have to purchase another component in
order to use the venerable standard wired headphones, then you're a
religious fanatic who has lost any & all semblance of logical thinking.

> I was
> using my wired headphones with my iPhone not 30 minutes ago. Function
> was fine.

Only a religious fanatic can't see that there is no longer a 3.5mm port
such that you are forced to find another way to plug the wired headphones
into the phone.

>>> Face it - all you've got is something to whine about - and the "whine to
>>> something" ratio is pretty high.
>>
>> If you think every truth about Apple is "whining", then that says a lot of
>> what you think about Apple's core marketing and design strategy of removing
>> key functionality so that you're forced to figure out a way to get it back.
>
> Wow - you're really stuck on this notion that the function was removed.
> As above, it was not.

If you think the removal of the standard 3.5mm port isn't removal of the
standard 3.5mm port, then you're a religious fanatic because you can't see
what everyone else sees - which is the port is missing and therefore, to
plug in a wired headphone, you have to figure out another way to do it.

> Calling it "key functionality" is little less desperate than "critical
> hardware" so kudos ... you're on a path to sanity. This path to sanity
> is long. Hard. You'll be tempted to abandon it. Don't.

Your religious claims may work with the likes of nospam and Jolly Roger,
but any sensible person can see instantly that removal of the port
instantly makes the phone less functional (and Apple's profits higher).

The reason is you have to figure out another way to do what you use to do.
Which is exactly why Apple did it - as they made a billion or so on this.

Apple's core strategy has always been to remove critical functionality to
reduce your choices when you are forced to buy back the core functionality
that Apple "courageously" removed (which was removed for profit alone).

On 2023-08-20 22:29, Falafel Balls wrote:
> On 19/8/2023, Alan Browne wrote:
>
>>> I agree fully with you that removing important hardware functionality
>>> ALWAYS makes it easier for the manufacturer (and increases their profits).
>>
>> They did not remove functionality - they combined it into another port
>> that must be there. Efficiency in all respects.
>
> Only a true convert to the Apple religion would think that by completely
> and suddenly "courageously" removing the capability to plug existing wired
> headphones into the 3.5mm port is NOT removing functionality.

Only an idiot confuses function with connection type

>> First off (as noted above) the functionality was not removed. It was
>> combined into another port.
>
> Remember, a phone without the port is less functional than a phone with it.

Remember, the port is there. It's just differently shaped.

Same on Samsung Galaxy phones like the S23.

>
>> Further, it is not "critical".
>
> It's a standard basic and rather venerable functionality that is so
> critical that it's on most phones today and far into the future it will be.

The word "critical" has no relationship to audio.
io output) remains?
>
> If you don't understand that you have to purchase another component in
> order to use the venerable standard wired headphones, then you're a
> religious fanatic who has lost any & all semblance of logical thinking.

I did not have to purchase anything. My iPhone 11 came with lightning
connectored earphones.

>> I was
>> using my wired headphones with my iPhone not 30 minutes ago. Function
>> was fine.
>
> Only a religious fanatic can't see that there is no longer a 3.5mm port
> such that you are forced to find another way to plug the wired headphones
> into the phone.

Forced? My phone came with lightning connectored earphones.
Man - you make life hard on yourself.

>
>>>> Face it - all you've got is something to whine about - and the "whine to
>>>> something" ratio is pretty high.
>>>
>>> If you think every truth about Apple is "whining", then that says a lot of
>>> what you think about Apple's core marketing and design strategy of removing
>>> key functionality so that you're forced to figure out a way to get it back.
>>
>> Wow - you're really stuck on this notion that the function was removed.
>> As above, it was not.
>
> If you think the removal of the standard 3.5mm port isn't removal of the
> standard 3.5mm port, then you're a religious fanatic because you can't see

You seem to have difficulty understanding the difference between
"function" and "port". Go do your homework.

> what everyone else sees - which is the port is missing and therefore, to
> plug in a wired headphone, you have to figure out another way to do it.

If figuring out how to use the lightning connectored earphones supplied
with the phone that has a lightning port is something needing a lot of
figuring out, then you obviously have a lot to learn.
>
>> Calling it "key functionality" is little less desperate than "critical
>> hardware" so kudos ... you're on a path to sanity. This path to sanity
>> is long. Hard. You'll be tempted to abandon it. Don't.
>
> Your religious claims may work with the likes of nospam and Jolly Roger,
> but any sensible person can see instantly that removal of the port
> instantly makes the phone less functional (and Apple's profits higher).

That's your weak argument which has been answered many times.
I don't care if you don't like the answers and nobody really cares about
your foolish crusade.

>
> The reason is you have to figure out another way to do what you use to do.
> Which is exactly why Apple did it - as they made a billion or so on this.
>
> Apple's core strategy has always been to remove critical functionality to
> reduce your choices when you are forced to buy back the core functionality
> that Apple "courageously" removed (which was removed for profit alone).

You like to bash Apple - but of course the others followed Apple's
example ...

--
“If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything."
-Ronald Coase

On 21/8/2023, Alan Browne wrote:

> Only an idiot confuses function with connection type

It's classic when people resort to insults each time they can't refute the
port was removed and that port removal makes the iPhone less functional.

> Same on Samsung Galaxy phones like the S23.

Apple's strategy of removing functionality so that the customer is forced
to figure out a way to purchase it back is a lucrative strategy indeed.

> I don't care if you don't like the answers and nobody really cares about
> your foolish crusade.

Any assertion that the port which was removed - wasn't removed - is so
ridiculous as to strain credibility of a normal reader's belief system.

> You like to bash Apple - but of course the others followed Apple's
> example ...

If telling the truth about Apple is "bashing" to you, that says a lot.

Many, like nospam, love to blame 'everyone but Apple' for all the many bad
things Apple does - but if they are an informed person, they can't help but
notice that, for Samsung, only an extremely small set of very expensive
Samsung phones copied Apple's lucrative strategy of eliminating choices.

Almost all Samsung phones give the choice of the port; zero iPhones do.