Although the plugs at hand are filled with chargers released by various mobile phone manufacturers with new machines, I did not expect them to become a "stumbling block" for writing at night.
Yesterday after work, I walked to the door of the park and found that I did not bring a computer charger, so I returned to the workstation and grabbed an 80W fast charge head from the table that a factory claimed to be able to charge 30% of the power in 5 minutes. When I went home and prepared to plug in the computer to continue to use, I found that I could not charge the computer normally, the speed was slow and pitiful, and I could only watch the computer's power drop from 20% to 4% little by little until it was shut down, and the only comfort was that I could finally go to bed a day earlier.
And during the day meeting, just when the computer power is about to "end of life", I picked up a 66W mobile phone manufacturer charging head that claimed to charge 40% of the power in 10 minutes, and it could not be charged.
Guess what, which one can charge a laptop (friendly smile)? Image source: Lzh photo of pin play
At that time, the mood was the same as eating instant noodles and finding that there was no sauce package, and going to the toilet and finding that there was no paper, and I was anxious.
This kind of embarrassing scene is really deadly.
"Private" agreements are the "culprits"
Why, a few years ago, it was rare to encounter a charger with the same interface not charging into the situation?
The reason is that at that time, the Micro USB interface was the mainstream configuration, this interface was widely used in the early days such as charging treasures, electric toothbrushes, flashlights, mobile phones and other small household appliances, and at that time the vast majority of mobile phones also used removable battery design, so this interface is actually more of a role in transmitting data, charging can only be regarded as "auxiliary", plus limited by its interface charging current Maximum is only 2A, for the vast majority of equipment manufacturers, there is no need to toss on this blind.
With the advent of smartphones, the battery capacity has also increased. After the battery is not removable, how to make the mobile phone fully charged for a short time has become the technology of mobile phone manufacturers at that time to "show muscle", so a variety of fast charging technology came into being.
For example, OPPO launched a green contact Micro USB "magic change" interface at that time, the principle of its role is to increase the touch pin, the use of its own charging head to achieve "fast charging", this fast charging was named "VOOC" by OPPO, in 2014 with "charging 5 minutes, talking for two hours" quickly spread throughout the market.
But it can only charge a specific phone through specific plugs and charging heads, which is actually a "private charging protocol".
Today, Type-C has become the standard for electronic devices such as mobile phones, and even most computers have adopted Type-C interfaces. Although everyone has the same "interface" shape, the charger between each device cannot be universal, and the "culprit" is that the charging protocols of various manufacturers are different.
The early proprietary protocols used low voltage and high current to increase the output power, and the maximum current of Micro USB was only 2A, which could not meet the increasing charging demand in the later stage. The Type-C interface can "carry" large currents more than the former, oppo through the "charge pump" technology, to increase the conversion efficiency, and to reduce the voltage halving, current doubling and how fast in parallel, to increase the charging "wattage".
Source: Tianji Network
The FlashCharge and SuperFlashCharge charging technology used by vivo and iQOO are also charged by dual batteries through dual charge pump and dual battery design, which is to achieve rapid buck through "charge pump" and increase the charging wattage by doubling the current.
Image source: Originated from the network
Huawei this is more complicated, can be seen as two stages, the first stage is with the Huawei Mate8 flagship mobile phone released QuickCharge technology, the protocol is FCP, but it is very interesting that the FCP protocol and Qualcomm QC2.0 "open" protocol is basically the same, it is reasonable to say that Huawei equipment should be able to charge through the QC2.0 charger, but it is not. Due to the limitation of patent issues, Huawei then transitioned from high voltage and low current of FCP to high current and low voltage through the self-developed SCP protocol, whether it is the later 40W super fast charging or the current 66W charging head, but also because of the same use of "charge pump" technology, charging efficiency has been improved.
Samsung charger actually supported fast charging very early Source: charging head net
The charging protocol of Samsung mobile phones can be described as "chaotic", the early use of its own high-voltage and low-current AFC protocol, after which it was compatible with QC2.0, and then cancelled, and then after a period of "complex" adjustment, simply used the "public" PPS protocol directly on the latest flagship.
Simply put, the PPS protocol is an abbreviation for the Programmable Power Supply protocol of the USB-IF Standardization Organization in 2017 in the USB PD 3.0 standard. To support this protocol, it is necessary to support PD3.0, which is a bit "semi-public", and there is an organized endorsement and qualcomm support, plus the ability to "dynamically" adjust the voltage/current, which can better improve the charging efficiency and not be easy to heat up.
In addition, because PPS is still in the development stage, there are not many manufacturers used, but the PPS protocol charger is relative to the previous "private protocols", its good compatibility with QC/PD has been recognized by some manufacturers.
The high-power charger of Android mobile phone manufacturers is basically a "private" protocol.
Apple charging protocol is the most "open"
Where there is "private", there is "public ownership".
Among them, the most "extensive" compatibility is the USB-PD protocol, which is updated by the USB-IF Standardization Organization and is responsible for release, of which Google, Apple, Qualcomm are its members, and the PD protocol is also Apple's "only" certified fast charging protocol, the current PD3.0 protocol has reached 100W, and there is also good compatibility downwards.
Qualcomm's QC protocol is also a "public protocol", such as the latest QC5 is based on PPS, through dynamic adjustment can achieve more than 100W power, downward compatibility is also better.
In addition, there is MediaTek's PE agreement, because it is too niche, this agreement has been difficult to see in the mainstream mobile phone market, so it is no longer discussed.
MediaTek PE charging protocol does not use many manufacturers Image source: network
In fact, Google in 2019 stipulates that Android mobile phones must support the PD protocol in order to support GMS services, but limited by domestic environmental factors, those chargers marked with 44W, 66W and even 80W on the market are "private" protocols without exception, one side is for security adaptation considerations, on the one hand, the PD protocol or heating and charging efficiency problems, comprehensive consideration of manufacturers or willing to use "private" protocols.
From the perspective that a number of Android manufacturers are "learning" Apple does not have a charging head and then let consumers spend hundreds of yuan to buy a "private" protocol charging head to "enjoy" the highest treatment, and can only give other devices "the lowest" treatment, it is inevitable that the appearance is a little too ugly.
For devices like Apple that only support PD protocol fast charging, if you use these so-called "high power" charging heads from Android, the final result is that you can only charge at the "lowest" power, and there is naturally nothing you can do for devices like the Macbook Pro.
Image source: Lzh photo of pin play
Like me in addition to the computer is Mac, other devices are Android system users, did not expect that in addition to the system experience, charging can be "split" into this, I thought I could rely on Android's "high charging" power a "head" to go around the world, this is good, not yet out because the charging head protocol is not unified, "consumption" in the middle of the road.
Not equipped with a charger on the grounds of "environmental protection" does not have a big impact on Apple mobile phone users (there is no contempt for Apple's maximum charging power of only 27W), but Android mobile phones do not have chargers, and blindly introduce high charging power technology, which is fatal. In addition to the official standard charging head, although there is a new technology of "gallium nitride" "third-party" charging head, it may be smaller than the manufacturer's "high power" charging head in appearance.
But it will still lose its significance because Android manufacturers collectively "demonize" in the "charging" part.
And this kind of third-party charger is quite good for Apple's relatively "Buddha" brand support, here is not to say that large manufacturers like Beth, Anker have chargers for Apple's "independent" adaptation. Even ordinary gallium nitride manufacturers can have good support for Apple devices, and any gallium nitride charger on the market supports the "fast charging protocol" of iPhone and Mac.
Can the charging protocol be "unified"?
For the "split" fast charging of Android, in May last year, the Telecommunications Terminal Industry Association has issued the fusion fast charging standard "Mobile Terminal Fusion Fast Charging Technical Specification".
"Mobile Terminal Fusion Fast Charging Technical Specifications" Source: From Zhihu Tangmai
"Different brands of phones and chargers often only achieve lower charging speeds. It not only seriously affects the user's fast charging experience, resulting in waste of resources, but also greatly increases the risk and cost of upstream and downstream research and development of the industrial chain. China Academy of Information and Communications Technology, Huawei, OPPO, vivo, Xiaomi led the launch of the "Mobile Terminal Fusion Fast Charging Technical Specification", which has been strongly supported by many terminals, chip companies and industry partners such as Honor, Silicon Jie, Rockchip, Lihui Technology, Onbao Electronics, and Dianku Network. ”
Based on this specification, the Telecommunications Terminal Industry Association proposed the UFCS protocol. The UFCS protocol specification of the interaction process from charger to mobile phone will be similar to PD3.0, through multi-gear voltage regulation to achieve different power outputs, and can eventually reach more than 200W of the general protocol.
This can indeed reduce the "fragmentation" of charging strategies of different manufacturers, but this is the same as before the product play in "2022, why should Android phones fully popularize 64-bit applications?" The text for how the Android software is eventually forced to update to 64-bit method is still essentially different, the software part relies on processor replacement can be "unified", and for the charging protocol, not only to take into account the software system adaptation, but also to do a lot of testing for the market model, and to take into account the interests of all parties, obviously more difficult.
Use a lap down, or gallium nitride yyds image source: pin play lzh photo
At present, in the face of such a "chaotic" Charging Protocol of Android manufacturers, it is still the most reliable to honestly choose a high-power Gallium Nitride charger that supports more protocols.