Power cords optional | TheaterFire

[-]

Geminii27@reddit

Sit down with that manager and their boss and explain that every ticket/call which is a result of a monitor not being plugged in will now be that manager's personal responsibility to attend and repair.

Alternatively, the IT department can bill $150 per incident to that specific manager's budget, via the manager's boss.

[-]

AlaskanDruid@reddit

Charge $2000 per ticket to that manager's budget, and you got yourself a deal!

[-]

Z4-Driver@reddit

You don't have those new monitors which run by air and love?

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

What z4 e85/e89/g29

[-]

Z4-Driver@reddit

Z4 e89 sDrive 28i. Best car I ever owned, slightly better than the Z3 I had before.

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

E85 3.0. N52. Too cheap to buy another

[-]

Z4-Driver@reddit

Why would you buy another? Enjoy it, the e85 is also a fun drive.

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

Want a M or e86 coupe. I finally got the hard top last year. Have to strip it and repaint it

[-]

Z4-Driver@reddit

So, you don't want to drive open anymore? Well, then I wish you good luck to find a nice e86.

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

Unfortunately not. We live in the Stone Age

[-]

tidymaze@reddit

So we shouldn't tell you that some auto manufacturers are developing charging pads for their electric cars?

[-]

AshleyJSheridan@reddit

That seems so wasteful. Charging via induction wastes quite a bit of energy compared to a cable connection.

[-]

waywardworker@reddit

Induction charging scales really well.

While a phone might be 70% efficient the cars are getting up past 90%. It's really close to the losses in a mediocre cable.

[-]

AshleyJSheridan@reddit

So you're comparing the best induction chargers with the worst cables? Seems disingenuous.

Why not compare like for like? The worst induction chargers can be down in the 30-40% efficiency, but as high as 90%, whereas a cable can reach 98-99% efficiency.

[-]

morriscey@reddit

A) Nobody would use the bad ones at 40% in an application like this. B) Up past 90 - above 90, by an unspecified amount C) the specifically mentioned mediocre cables - because they have a similar efficiency. D) I think comparing best for best is the right way to do it - but this isn't a peer reviewed study. Cut them some slack.

[-]

AshleyJSheridan@reddit

Compare best with best, worst with worst, and median with median. Cables win, induction charging is more lossy.

It's not rocket surgery.

[-]

morriscey@reddit

Of course - but it's still not too wild to say the best chargers are in line with average/mediocre cables.

[-]

AshleyJSheridan@reddit

But it's also true to say that the worst induction chargers are worse than the worst cables, and that the best induction chargers are worse than the best cables.

[-]

morriscey@reddit

Yes.

That IS how comparisons work.

Lol my guy this is reddit. You expect too much.

[-]

AshleyJSheridan@reddit

Ah, so comparing the worst induction charger to the best cable is also fine, so I'm still correct.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[-]

morriscey@reddit

It's all fine, ya tit.

This is a casual conversation.

I'm right, you're right, and so was the other guy.

[-]

IJustAteABaguette@reddit

Yeah, and it's fine on the scale of a mobile phone or smartwatch or something (smaller amounts of energy and smaller distances), but charging a car wirelessly instead of plugging it in seems quite bad.

[-]

Gadgetman_1@reddit

Induction works just fine for larger things, too. We have FerryChargers here in Norway that push up to 8.5MW, and those use induction. Of course, the gap is probably in the range of millimeters, but still...

FerryCHARGER - charging solutions for electric ferries - Stemmann-Technik

They may look as if there's a mechanical connection, but the system just lay against the receiver on the ferry.

[-]

Ferro_Giconi@reddit

The fact that it interlocks probably makes it more efficient because they can make it line up just right. It's basically the same thing as having the transformer that would have been needed for voltage changes anyway, except the transformer is in two parts (the boat and land sides).

The problem with phone or car inductive charging is that it probably won't be perfectly lined up every time, so the efficency takes a big hit.

[-]

WhiteMilk_@reddit

11kW sounds like it should cover the usual daily usage.

[-]

rjames24000@reddit

the most efficient way i could try to make that work would be in the rims

[-]

mckenner1122@reddit

They are also working on the feasibility study for roadways

https://www.in.gov/indot/current-programs/innovative-programs/wireless-electric-vehicle-charging-solution-for-highway-infrastructure/

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

Yes but for home use. I be worry about power beaming into appliances from somewhere else in the room

[-]

Mdayofearth@reddit

These would be in a garage or driveway, and magnetic fields fall off at a rate of 1 over distance cubed, so it wouldn't be that big of a deal indoors. I could imagine it fucking up any nearby radios though, e.g., wireless security cameras, sprinklers, etc.; inclusive of keyless entry or starters.

[-]

Rathmun@reddit

The 1/r^3 calculation is for a dipole, and only holds when you're far away relative to the size of the magnet. For a car charging pad, I imagine the coil in the floor and in the car will be as large as possible to minimize losses. The induced current in the coil built into the car will also create a pair of poles that would be lined up and thus increase the reach of the magnet, except that if you're actually charging, they're out of phase, and thus it's now a quadripole and falls off as 1/r^4.

[-]

JakeGrey@reddit

Someone actually managed to do that once. Only problem was it required a big metal column with a substantial electric current running through it and it could only deliver about two amperes.

[-]

Fuzzybo@reddit

I had to check the date on that report, in case it was an April Fool’s troll.

[-]

Runelea@reddit

Oh look, expensive and likely to get damaged!

[-]

RemotecontrolZR@reddit

False marketing at its finest. No matter the consequence is lol

[-]

SnooGuavas2610@reddit

The monitors will have a power socket to connect to the wall, what does the manager think that is used for?

[-]

Z4-Driver@reddit

That's only decoration.

[-]

AppIdentityGuy@reddit

This is the type of person who thinks a laser printer does t need to be connected to anything because it prints by laser.

[-]

Arokthis@reddit

The idiot manager should be the one to do the setup to "prove" wires aren't needed.

Bring popcorn.

[-]

anakaine@reddit

He should also have these support requests twmporarily redirected to him to handle.

[-]

TheGogmagog@reddit

The Manager probably has a $3000 monitor that has a battery, while the staff has $150 monitors

I bought my own portable laptop monitor for $250, but it requires two USBC connections to run.

[-]

rskurat@reddit

wow, so the laptop battery runs down in 20 minutes?

[-]

nonamejohnsonmore@reddit

Even a $3000 monitor with a battery would need to be plugged in to recharge.

[-]

zoidao401@reddit

No no, you just have your minion stay late to plug it in and come in early to unplug it again. No wires for managers

[-]

Styrak@reddit

EV's don't run off a power cord?

[-]

RogueThneed@reddit

Because they have an internal battery?

[-]

Styrak@reddit

Duh?

[-]

RogueThneed@reddit

By EV did you mean electric vehicle?

[-]

gargravarr2112@reddit

Why oh why do people always believe the clueless managers over IT, the guys literally employed to know this sh*t...

[-]

StarChaser_Tyger@reddit

When I worked for IBM doing commercial tech support, we had to keep replacing this one lady's wifi router because it never worked. I finally asked her how she was setting it up.

Her son that 'knows computers' (nothing good ever follows that phrase) was putting the router in the attic. By itself. No Ethernet to the modem, no power. He threw away the cables because it said 'wireless' on the box. Like three times.

I spent the next hour explaining Wi-Fi to her.

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

HHahahhahaha.

[-]

Kasaikemono@reddit

"Elon would like that for the cars"

Funny that you say that, since Tesla (Nikola Tesla, not the shitty cars) envisioned a worldwide cordless power transmission via the earth's atmosphere

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

One day.

[-]

MisfitHula@reddit

"Everything's wireless these days!!!"

[-]

harrywwc@reddit

"wire-less", not "wire-free". ;)

[-]

RogueThneed@reddit

Oh, lol, gmta

[-]

Tyr0pe@reddit

yoink thank you.

[-]

LeVoPhEdInFuSiOn@reddit

You can have wireless power, but it might land you in the Emergency Department or expedite your dirt nap.

[-]

WildMartin429@reddit

I have seen monitors that will run off of USB-C but most monitors still require an actual power cord. What's fun is when customers get given a wireless monitor and then are shocked that they have to put it somewhere where it can reach electricity. The whole reason I bought a wireless monitor is so that I could put it wherever I wanted to. And you have to explain them to them that it requires electricity which requires you to plug in the power cord to an electrical outlet or power strip.

[-]

ED_jamesolmos@reddit

I work for a TV company that came out with wireless cable boxes years ago. The amount of customers that were upset that the boxes still needed to be plugged into the wall was insane.

[-]

WildMartin429@reddit

Well anybody who works in marketing should know that if you say something is Wireless there's going to be a certain percentage of people who take that to mean that it will not have any wires rather than having less wires, LOL

[-]

RogueThneed@reddit

"wire-less, not wire-free"

[-]

Tar_alcaran@reddit

Yeah, I have a small portable monitor that runs on USB-C, but it's basically a laptop screen without the laptop. 16", 1080p at 60hz.

I imagine a 24" version would be insanely expensive, and kinda crappy.

[-]

Prom3th3an@reddit

At least overnight -- they make some with batteries now.

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

Yes. But we only have that for 1 vp. dp in and dp out. Daisy chain ability. These are cheap non dp in monitors. They definitely do not have wireless power capabilities.

[-]

iWasobi@reddit (OP)

I dug up the manual. Step 5. Plug in power. lol

[-]

Tar_alcaran@reddit

I have to admit, I've never ever read that part of the manual, for any device.

I've also never thought "This power cord must be purely decorative" though

[-]

harrywwc@reddit

and you expect the (l)users to (a) rtfm, (b) get to 'step 5', and (c) comprehend any of it?

yeah, nah.

[-]

KnoWanUKnow2@reddit

When we started work from home (which was pre-covid, but only just) we used Cisco VPN boxes.

Cisco would sell you the box with no power cord or, for an extra $60 you could get the same box with a power cord. The power cord was just a standard 3 prong computer power cord.

For once management did the right thing and bought them without the optional power cord. We had hundreds of these power cords just lying around from having replaced computers over the years, and if we ever ran out you could buy them for about $2 each.

[-]

Epistaxis@reddit

That's not really magical thinking; if you don't know what each cord does, you might reasonably guess that plugging object A into object B will share the power between them, given object B is already powered. It's not necessarily intuitive that each of them needs its own separate connection to the wall socket. Even before USB-C made it actually possible, it could have been a reasonable guess.

Now, as to why someone would be confident enough in that guess to tell it to everyone else without even trying it themselves...

[-]

wildwing@reddit

The only way I would agree with your theory is if the person had used no device with more power draw than a cellphone. Tv needs a power cord, even though it’s connected to the cable box/vcr/game console.

[-]

Epistaxis@reddit

Sure but now you're drawing on specialized technical knowledge that not everyone has. If they knew about the power draw of different devices, there's a good chance they'd also know what the different types of cables are for and then they wouldn't be guessing.

Incidentally, although I'm old enough to remember when it was different, a lot of homes nowadays just have a TV, with no cable box, no game console, certainly no VCR, and that solitary TV might just have a single cord to plug in.

[-]

wildwing@reddit

If by “specialized technical knowledge” you mean knowing a device has a power cord AND a data cord, then we are agreeing.

If you are meaning people being aware of the power requirements of each device, that was not what I was going for. More so that a phone can be connected to everything with the same cord, it gets both power and data over said cord. So, if they only have technical expertise of using a phone, then the one cord to rule them all makes sense.

Any device (TV) that draws more power than a phone would have a cord for data (cable/dvd/gaming/audio) and a cord for power. I’m sure there are certain devices that use PoE, but those are not ones that the average joe would be setting up and using in their home.

[-]

Epistaxis@reddit

If by “specialized technical knowledge” you mean knowing a device has a power cord AND a data cord, then we are agreeing.

Yes, that's exactly what I was saying, indeed. If you don't know about electronics, it would be a reasonable guess that cords are cords and once a thing is plugged in it's plugged in.

Even further back in time, I remember when there were three separate component cables for the Y, Pb, and Pr, which is definitely not something that makes sense if you don't know how video displays work. It's a little ironic that as technology has improved, we've actually simplified our connectivity closer and closer to what nontechnical intuition might have expected from the beginning.

[-]

wildwing@reddit

Back to TVs, which are just a form of monitor. They have a power cord, but without connecting an antenna or device there is no picture. Smart tvs may be an exception to this, as the “device” is built in. If someone has used or setup a TV, then they had a power cord and a data cord. If someone has only used a phone, expecting one cord can be rationalized. Have these people never used a TV before?

If they’ve used a laptop, maybe the concept that the monitor is connected and henceforth powered through the computer has escaped them. My laptop does use the same style cord to charge as my phone, usbc. Unless they are equating monitor+computer=laptop so one cord, I can’t see how someone who has used a TV within the last century would not be aware of two cables.

It’s not like it’s three seashells.

[-]

Epistaxis@reddit

If you're asking "Do you really think there are people working in offices today who've never plugged in a non-smart TV?" then I'm sorry to tell you the answer is yes, we're getting old.

[-]

hicow@reddit

Waaay back, computers using the AT standard often had a female jack on the PSU to allow the monitor to be plugged in. Iirc, it wasn't just the usual mains plug it took, though - it was the same sort of NEMA jack that monitors themselves had. Not sure if that was standardized, though, as I seem to have a hazy memory of both on different PCs, either the 5-sided NEMA jack or just a mains receptacle.

In any case, though, it still needed a cable for power, regardless of where the power was coming from

[-]