Top critical review
1.0 out of 5 starsDamned if they do, damned when they don't
Reviewed in the United States on October 7, 2023
I'm using my Apple device cable and this charger seems to work plenty good and fast for my immediate need, but this review is about far more than present appearance.
To complete what I have to say, among other things, I will nimbly touch on what's been understated elsewhere as the Rat’s Nest of USB-C Standards, but only when it comes to charging, not data transfer. Like most reading this, I'm just wanting to get beyond being a novice, the perspective which should be of special importance.
Here's what Apple says (and what I initially recently read) about fast charging for some of their devices: one can use [list of relevant Apple adaptors] or a "comparable third-party USB-C power adapter that supports USB Power Delivery (USB-PD)". On its website, Apple boldly claims this exact power adapter is "Compatible with any USB-C enabled device." Yet the documentation that comes with it says you "might" be able to use it on third-party phones depending on the region, and to "Check with the manufacturer about compatibility with any third-party phone before charging." Apple abstains from providing the version of the PD standard the adapter adheres to, further subverting the specious compatibility claim. The USB-C Power Delivery standard is as old as the USB-C standard itself but it has undergone major revisions and not all vendors (or their specific products) claim to adhere to a PD standard, apparently because they don't. Interestingly, one can't (rather shouldn't) use just any USB-PD charger with any Apple USB-C device as device model compatibility is required before a charger can even be "comparable." Third-party chargers implementing PD must test for compatibility with specific Apple devices which obviously goes beyond which version of PD is implemented on the Apple device - unless that's only because Apple (I believe) DOES NOT release PD version information period. Furthermore, Apple even provides (extremely) limited information on detail testing regarding their own chargers and devices to document established compatibility! So what exactly does a test entail? Your guess is as good as mine.
USB-PD (USB-C Power Delivery) allows the device (/load) and power supply to negotiate for multiple standard (set) power delivery levels. Current versions of the PD specification are 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 3.1.
PD PPS (Programmable Power Supply) is a supplemental specification to USB Power Delivery describing how the device (/load) and power supply communicate for granular and incremental power delivery levels. The charging device and the power recipient exchange information on which voltage and ampere values are supported. The efficiency of PPS comes with the benefit of lessening heat which increases battery lifespan. I do not believe Apple ever mentions PPS which was introduced with PD 3.0, and is optional. Judging from the couple of comments I found, Apple was still using PD 2.0 long after PD 3.0 was introduced, so it's possible that 2.0 is still what's mostly being used and/or no PPS!
The one exception I found to Apple being mum on details and versions of the standards they use is a report that Apple confirmed to The Verge that their 140W USB-C Power Adapter uses USB-PD 3.1. There is a surprising dearth of reports from people who possess test equipment to analyze and verify the standards that Apple's adaptors (and devices) support. Also, I should mention that where wireless charging is merged with USB charging from a power adapter, USB charging standards and requirements remain in place. Wireless charging requires its own protocols for negotiating the amount of power transferred. For the wireless power transfer end, we have Apple's proprietary MagSafe standard in addition to the open Qi and Qi2 standards that Apple helped create. Burp.
Note that ALL OF the device, the charger, and the cable must meet USB version specification requirements (or corresponding rating) to achieve highest or acceptable (and possibly safe) protocol compliance and therefore proper charging! Yet I believe Apple's implementations are all considered proprietary. For sure there is an abundance of companies with various proprietary USB-C fast charging schemes. Something has to give. The good news is that devices have built-in limits and should reduce current when necessary to only draw as much power as they’re capable of handling.
Apple is a founding and current member of the working group that develops the USB standards. As long as manufacturers make no effort to better inform their customers on the standards being used, the situation will continue to be a stinking USB rat's nest, USB-C or not. Admittedly, the ignorant will not be concerned regarding the full extent of the mess (until we get burned) - especially those of us who have been simple and largely faithful users of the chargers that came with our devices. Except now the chargers are separately purchased items. That Apple is going all in on USB-C is good, but if they really want us to get the most out of our devices (and/or our batteries), and if they desire to be responsible members of society, they need to reveal more. Blindly maximizing the use of individual chargers and cables can mean wasting devices and batteries instead. Apple doesn't seem to have known as much about battery charging as they might have as optimal lithium battery charging advice has continued to evolve as has Apple's algorithm for slowing the last segment of charging.
The model number given on this Amazon page for this adapter/charger is MHJA3AM/A which I believe it should be called a manufacturer (part) number - except that Apple is unsurprisingly good with it being called a model number here, confusion be damned. The model number of the adapter I received is A2305. The accompanying two-inch square instruction book combines nine models. The typical difference in the models relates in part to the AC input voltage range*, obviously to satisfy local government regulations. The only place USB-PD is mentioned in the booklet is with the adapter output specification. USB-PD is NOT placed as an input specification (I think Belkin does the same) even though Power Delivery can't function without same language communication!
*Update/addition: After answering a question from someone planning to travel to Morocco with this charger, I took a better look at the io specs in the tiny instruction pamphlet and I'm taking a crack at explaining (more like deciphering since my understanding of electricity is limited basic).
There are 9 models covered in the accompanying pamphlet and 6 of the 9 have identical io specifications fully stated as follows:
Models A2244, A2245, A2247, A2305, A2347, and A2464
> Input: 100-240V~50-60Hz 0.5A
> (USB-PD) Output: 5VDC/3A or 9VDC/2.22A
What I understand from this is that this adaptor will work the same for any normal AC plug. Its output is only Power Delivery because it charges at two possible standard/set levels, to be negotiated with the device being charged. It can charge at:
5V x 3A = 15 Watts (Volts times Amps equals Watts)
and
9V x 2.22A = 19.98 Watts
So this adapter is only capable of charging at either 15 Watts or 19.98 Watts.
I'm trying to understand the USB-C Power Delivery table at Wikipedia and this is what I infer. There are only two voltages which can be used for an adaptor to produce up to a maximum of 20 Watts: 5V and 9V. 5 volts can be used for a current to produce between .5 watts and 15 watts. 9 volts can be used for a current to produce between 15.03 watts and 27 watts. I assume (although I could well be wrong) that Power Delivery (sans PPS) allows more than one option at a given voltage. So, for example, this adaptor could have been made to also allow the device being charged to ask for and get a comfortable 5 watts (and still have the options for 15 and 19.98 watts). (I downloaded the latest USB-PD specification and it's 870 pages, way too much to struggle through. Update: USB-PD added version 3.2 on about 10/30/23 and the spec is now 1,113 pages.)
Finally, let me go over the differences for the three remaining adaptors of the nine covered by the instruction pamphlet. I will only detail the differences from the 6 of 9 (which is therefore the default spec).
Model A2344
> Input 100-127V
> PD Output (for 5V, same watts as our default or) 9V @ 2A = 18 Watts
> Input 200-240V
> PD Output (same options as our default, 15 and 19.98 Watts)
Model A2465
> Input 100-110V
> PD Output (for 5V, same watts as our default or) 9V @ 2A = 18 Watts
> Input 110-240V
> PD Output (same options as our default, 15 and 19.98 Watts)
Model A2246
> Input 100-127V
> No Power Delivery Output! Only provides 5V @ 2.4A = 12 Watts
> Input 200-240V
> PD Output (same options as our default, 15 and 19.98 Watts)
Last addition: The EU (and India) made their USB-C and Power Delivery charging mandates for the next couple of years. They are not yet regulating wireless charging which is coming fast and in many instances can fully replace USB/wired. What's missing, at least for me, are manufacturers revealing the detail charging capabilities of their chargers, and especially of their devices. Hiding behind "proprietary" has become entirely an excuse.
