Re: UPAMD updated goals
The only purpose of this power is to allow non-battery powered devices
to ask the adapter for more power. For this purpose 700mW is probably
still on the high side, but it's really a back of the envelope number.
Once we've decided on how we're going to communicate, picking a
minimum will be easier.
We don't want to encourage use of communication-less power in the
10-130 watt area. For stuff <10 watts, I think the consensus is to
let microUSB handle it.
<snip>
> e. Adapter<->Mobile Device communications required for higher power safety
>>0.7W (down from 7W ie 12-14v@50ma) I support this concept, but why so low a
> value? This will add unnecessary cost to the cheapest end of the market.
> Is there a problem with something like a 5W adapter supplying power all the
> time? If a product needs to control power going into it, then the product
> probably already does it. For example, anything with LiIon batteries has to
> control the charge current to the cells (as per IEEE 1625 or IEEE 1725).
> Why add another layer of communications for low power devices? Sorry I was
> not at the meeting to have heard the discussion on this change.
<snip>