Thanks for the info. I recently discovered this by running folding at home on my 16inch pro overnight, and waking up to my battery being at 5%. I suspect running the CPU full bore over night was too much for the charger to keep up with.
Otherwise, what's the point of having those things?
Then it’s a question of how many are impacted and how often, how support for USB-C factors in to the decision to purchase, etc., etc.
It’s a trade-off - they COULD build a laptop which can run everything at 100% 24/7 indefinitely, but it’d be heavier and more expensive, with zero benefits to their target audience of "people who only run at 100% for a few hours per day"
Only too-clever-for-their-own-good-designers like automagic things. No user does.
If there was any added weight it would be with the charger, not the laptop so... Incredibly unlikely.
It's way more likely that Apple just didn't design the connector to be able to deliver that amount of power. So they'd have to add a second one or switch connectors/design a new one.
Both would be suboptimal as well.
That’s what I’m talking about too
> If there was any added weight it would be with the charger, not the laptop so…
Whether it’s charger or laptop, that’s still more weight that the end-user needs to carry around in their backpack, which 99.9% of them won’t need
I don't understand why this would be a design assumption, especially for a portable device.
This isn't even an assumption for running applications on servers, especially the kind that serve up things like web requests. If you have pegged the CPU, your application will already be unstable.
Sure, the server can handle being pegged 24/7 from a power and cooling perspective, but in practical use no sysadmin will allow that to happen for very long.
Isn't this bad design?
It's also not just Apple. Lower wattage Lenovo chargers (including ThinkPad) have two-prong adapters and plugs.