Why do most companies outsource their offline SMPS?

[derGoldstein]

This is kind of a long question so I'll do a TL;DR first and elaborate on what specifically puzzles me later -- why do even the largest companies seem to outsource their AC/DC adapters, especially the ones inside their products?

Long version:
It seems like offline SMPS are something that many companies tend to outsource, and when you look at the construction of things like these:
http://www.mouser.com/images/meanwell/lrg/RPS-300_SPL.jpg
http://www.mouser.com/images/meanwell/lrg/rps60.jpg
-- It makes sense. There's a lot of manual assembly there which small companies might have a problem with. The one thing I keep hearing from any small company is that you must avoid through-hole parts like the plague if you want to make a profit off of your products (at least until they have a small shop and a few workers).
But is assembly the only reason, or is it a specialization that even large companies don't want to invest in?

I've been looking at small products with built-in power supplies like Apple TV, which really try to shave every bit of volume/weight off. The 3rd generation PSU was from Delta:
https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/moN6Fi6wEeP4rnJD.huge
Here's what it looks like inside:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lEolZ51QJKI/U0qsKCdLYoI/AAAAAAAAJa0/atCqtVEnKYI/s1600/IMG_2191.JPG
It's tightly packed, but there are still mostly through-hole parts in there.

Then there's the PSU in the 4th genration Apple TV:
https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/JZCBHisKVpM6G1eN.huge
https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/eZq4lAx5GHjU1GAT.huge
This one's from lite-on. Still some manual assembly required, but not nearly as much.

Apart from the transformer block, which is probably custom-wound, why are any of the other components through-hole?
Do larger PTCs (I think it's a PTC, or is it a MOV?) expand and contract making it impossible to make them SMD parts? (I can find them in parametric searches, are they different somehow?)
Is there a reason why the high-voltage non-electrolytic capacitors used are through-hole?
On the output side, there seem to be two 16V/470uF capacitors, also through-hole. Why?

Surely a company like Apple would benefit from designing their own PSUs and integrating them more tightly into their products. I get why you'd outsource a wall charger -- it's a standalone little brick that you can have Foxlink (in apple's case) make to your specifications. But if you have the PSU inside the case of your product, wouldn't you save on assembly and space requirement alone?

[mariush]

The big companies that produce power supplies already have the staff and all they need to design something and the experience to pass it through all the tests and certifications required for a product to be allowed to sell in various countries.
I guess it's easier to adapt existing designs to customer needs and pass the new power supply through everything required to be legal, compared to starting a new department (power supplies), hiring people, doing the research and ordering parts for prototypes, then doing all research documentation for certifications, running prototypes through tests , then mass production  - when a third party company already has these things in place and can also potentially do mass production cheaper.

It's also often a low profit part of the overall product price - yeah it's important for the product's life (reliability, efficiency) but it's not something usually visible to the end user and as long as it works they don't care. Not much incentive to waste money doing it in-house.

As for through hole... it has some benefits.. they handle vibrations and shocks better. Heavier components can put a lot of strain on copper pads on the circuit board or have additional height due to the leads being bent at the bottom to form contacts. Through hole parts fit better on circuit boards with the downside that leads come out the other side of the pcb and can potentially short against case or other boards.
Also surface mount are often square or rectangular footprint, while through hole capacitors are often round - sometimes the extra space around a round capacitor can matter (routing traces, tiny smt resistors or whatever around or just to pack more round capacitors closer together). Through hole capacitors can also take advantage of vertical space better than surface mount parts.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Simple case of focussing on your own core business and leaving the bread & butter stuff to the experts, who are set up for manufacturing and approvals, and have decades of experience.

[derGoldstein]

The big companies that produce power supplies already have the staff and all they need to design something and the experience to pass it through all the tests and certifications required for a product to be allowed to sell in various countries.
I guess it's easier to adapt existing designs to customer needs and pass the new power supply through everything required to be legal, compared to starting a new department (power supplies), hiring people, doing the research and ordering parts for prototypes, then doing all research documentation for certifications, running prototypes through tests , then mass production  - when a third party company already has these things in place and can also potentially do mass production cheaper.

But these are massive companies like Apple, Samsung, Sony, etc.. They already have that infrastructure set up for their core products. It may be slightly different for power supplies, but they already do order parts for prototypes, run circuits through testing procedures, get certifications, and mass produce electronics products. They may need to hire some engineers that specialize in power supplies, but the rest of the environment is already there.

A close example are DC/DC modules. A huge amount of products these days have DC/DC converters in them, some of which are quite complicated (multiple-output converters), or have one or more of those buck/boost 4-switch circuits which are tricky to implement. I know that those just use an inductor (rather than a transformer) and that they're low-voltage, but the part-count can be similar, and while companies like Meanwell do make DC-DC converter modules, most companies seem to have no problem designing their own. Is it just the high-voltage part that's tricky?

That apple TV power supply board has a part-count of maybe 50. Most of those parts are general-purpose power electronics parts which larger companies already stock (especially the components on the output side).

Are there particular certifications you need to get for an AC/DC adapter? I know there's insulation testing, and EMI tests, but are there some hoops that are especially difficult to jump through?

[mikeselectricstuff]

The big companies that produce power supplies already have the staff and all they need to design something and the experience to pass it through all the tests and certifications required for a product to be allowed to sell in various countries.
I guess it's easier to adapt existing designs to customer needs and pass the new power supply through everything required to be legal, compared to starting a new department (power supplies), hiring people, doing the research and ordering parts for prototypes, then doing all research documentation for certifications, running prototypes through tests , then mass production  - when a third party company already has these things in place and can also potentially do mass production cheaper.

But these are massive companies like Apple, Samsung, Sony, etc.. They already have that infrastructure set up for their core products. It may be slightly different for power supplies, but they already do order parts for prototypes, run circuits through testing procedures, get certifications, and mass produce electronics products. They may need to hire some engineers that specialize in power supplies, but the rest of the environment is already there.

A close example are DC/DC modules. A huge amount of products these days have DC/DC converters in them, some of which are quite complicated (multiple-output converters), or have one or more of those buck/boost 4-switch circuits which are tricky to implement. I know that those just use an inductor (rather than a transformer) and that they're low-voltage, but the part-count can be similar, and while companies like Meanwell do make DC-DC converter modules, most companies seem to have no problem designing their own. Is it just the high-voltage part that's tricky?

That apple TV power supply board has a part-count of maybe 50. Most of those parts are general-purpose power electronics parts which larger companies already stock (especially the components on the output side).

Are there particular certifications you need to get for an AC/DC adapter? I know there's insulation testing, and EMI tests, but are there some hoops that are especially difficult to jump through?

Yes - and there are lots of different ones for different regions - take a power brick from a big-name manufacturere and look at how many different marks are on it. PSUs are pretty much the only safety-related aspect of a computer product, so approvals on this are somethnig nobody is going to skimp on.
For people like Apple, development time is almost everything - I'm told they do things like make injection moulds of multiple variants simultaneously and pick one later, scrapping the rest, just to save time.
No amount of money will buy the expertise and experience of getting products through approval first time. PSU companies will almost certainly have a permanent allocation of time booked at test houses, so they can swap in more urgent products to teh test schedule if necessary. 

[dmills]

Yep, certification is the biggie, but also designing low cost + RELIABLE is hard, and takes much experience to know which corners to cut (And they are different ones in a PSU compared to most other things).

BOM cost for a power supply manufacturer will also be lower then it would be for a final product OEM simply due to scaling across multiple product lines on things like DC link caps, it is possible that the power supply company can make a profit while shipping the supply to the OEM user for less then it would cost the OEM to manufacture the thing.

Finally, someone like Meanwell/TDK/XP/Delta will have a huge library of known good designs that they can quickly customise, that is worth something.   

End of the day such a company could employ power supply designers and experts in LVD,UL and all the rest, but it adds less value then employing that talent on the core product.

Regards, Dan.

[derGoldstein]

Do these same certification concerns effect power inverters? (the ones for a car, that take 12V and output 110V/220V)
Or are all of these certifications there because you're plugging your device into the mains and can potentially unleash 8KW from a single phase?
I ask because while many of the PSUs you can get in the west are from brand names, almost all inverters that are less than 1000W that I can find on amazon are chinese, with no certification marks at all.

Is it because there's far less demand for that kind of product and therefor the only remaining competition is from china?

[metrologist]

Different markets. Apple has a different market and business model than no-name Chinese mfg selling cheap inverters.

A company will focus on their core competency. Why invest in an R&D team to design a suitable power supply when you can just buy a top notch supply off the shelf for just pennies more than you'd pay to build it yourself, and risk getting it wrong? Just take that R&D cost and bake it into the COGS and you'd see a better margin with less overhead and risk.

It is not just power supplies. Same thing happens with touch screens to UI development.

[derGoldstein]

Why invest in an R&D team to design a suitable power supply when you can just buy a top notch supply off the shelf for just pennies more than you'd pay to build it yourself, and risk getting it wrong?

Size and part redundancy. With many products the power supply is the largest part of the unit, and by rearranging the parts you can get your product on the same PCB, and have a much smaller footprint. Even the internally-mounted ones have to have a DC output connector (often a JST) that you now have to design around. And you're adding another board.

Because of the distance you might have to add some input reservoir caps, which are already there on the PSU, but they're on another board. Also you can't use a board-mount AC connector, adding yet more assembly and wiring to the process.

You can always use an external power supply and bypass many of these problems, which it seems most companies will do if they can, but then you're adding bulk.

It's just inelegant, which as a company obsessed with appearances, you'd expect Apple to be bothered by. They develop their own SoCs, but they stop at the PSU?

[james_s]

Why reinvent the wheel? Power supplies are off the shelf commodity items, unless you need custom characteristics it's almost always going to be cheaper to buy a stock component rather than design it yourself. Same reason they use standard ICs in a lot of stuff rather than custom ASICs.

[metrologist]

Why invest in an R&D team to design a suitable power supply when you can just buy a top notch supply off the shelf for just pennies more than you'd pay to build it yourself, and risk getting it wrong?

Size and part redundancy. With many products the power supply is the largest part of the unit, and by rearranging the parts you can get your product on the same PCB, and have a much smaller footprint. Even the internally-mounted ones have to have a DC output connector (often a JST) that you now have to design around. And you're adding another board.

The exceptions do not negate the rules. Best business practices are what they are, and the bean counters are in control of the beans that fuel R&D teams. There are also custom solutions, but if there is a bean to be had, then sure a company will roll their own. It's just getting less common.

A similar thing is with GPS, WiFi, Bluetooth modules, etc. Even if they weren't single chip solutions, most companies would still outsource.

[tooki]

Why invest in an R&D team to design a suitable power supply when you can just buy a top notch supply off the shelf for just pennies more than you'd pay to build it yourself, and risk getting it wrong?

Size and part redundancy. With many products the power supply is the largest part of the unit, and by rearranging the parts you can get your product on the same PCB, and have a much smaller footprint. Even the internally-mounted ones have to have a DC output connector (often a JST) that you now have to design around. And you're adding another board.

Because of the distance you might have to add some input reservoir caps, which are already there on the PSU, but they're on another board. Also you can't use a board-mount AC connector, adding yet more assembly and wiring to the process.

You can always use an external power supply and bypass many of these problems, which it seems most companies will do if they can, but then you're adding bulk.

It's just inelegant, which as a company obsessed with appearances, you'd expect Apple to be bothered by. They develop their own SoCs, but they stop at the PSU?

You seem convinced that Apple should be DIYing its PSUs. But have you actually thought about why they farm this out?

A) They've been buying PSUs from outside vendors since at least the mid-late 1980s. Though I guess there might be some exceptions, these are generally custom parts made for Apple. If this wasn't advantageous, it's unlikely they'd continue doing it.

B) Whether a third party makes the PSU or not has nothing to do with why it's a separate module. Safety and replaceability immediately come to mind as reasons why you'd want it separate. (In the past, having separate PSUs for different line voltages was also a factor, but that's pretty much vanished thanks to modern wide-input-voltage SMPSes.) If there were some huge advantage in integrating the PSU into the same boards as the logic, then they'd do it. As I understand it, PSUs can get away with far cheaper PCBs than most other modern electronics; if you can build a part of your product on a single-sided PCB that costs a fraction of the 4-layer (or more!) board needed by the rest of the electronics, wouldn't you want to do this? Remember that PSUs are often very physically large compared to the circuits they're powering. So you'd be needlessly increasing the area of costly multilayer PCBs by a huge percentage.

C) Apple is a truly gifted systems integrator. While Apple does a lot of engineering, its suppliers do a ton of it as well, designing modules to Apple's needs. Apple's magic sauce is the software and the choice of components that work well together, though increasingly with custom-designed components as needed.

D) Name one single part in an Apple device that is actually manufactured by Apple. Oh right, they contract manufacture everything now. Since every single module inside an Apple product will be outsourced anyway, why not let PSU specialists do the PSU designs to Apple specs? They do this for the custom CPUs in iOS devices, among many, many, many, many other custom components.

E) You mention appearances; who cares who manufactured the PSU when it's hidden inside the housing anyway? Look at the Apple power supply innards you yourself showed: I think that by most standards, they show an astounding attention to aesthetics, considering that end users will never even see them.


Apple has often said that their biggest strength is saying no: Saying no to products Apple could make, but where they wouldn't be significantly better than anyone else. I guess they concluded that they won't be better at making PSUs than the PSU specialists, so there's no point in them doing it.

[BrianHG]

PSUs 1 layer PCBs also usually have thicker copper thickness, mostly through-hole & been wave soldered compared to main expensive 16 or more layer, all smd, oven baked logic PCBs.  It just costs soo much less to have the PSU on that 1 layer PCB, than to make your logic board all that much larger & have a thicker copper plane + running your logic through a wave for the large caps and transformers & inductors might not be compatible with a lot of 2 sided SMD unless you want to also glue down your SMD on the bottom & resort to larger SMD & special footprints which can survive the wave without solder blotches or destruction.

[derGoldstein]

You seem convinced that Apple should be DIYing its PSUs. But have you actually thought about why they farm this out?

That's the question posed in the initial post. If I *knew* why they did, I wouldn't have asked.

A) They've been buying PSUs from outside vendors since at least the mid-late 1980s. Though I guess there might be some exceptions, these are generally custom parts made for Apple. If this wasn't advantageous, it's unlikely they'd continue doing it.

No one is infallible. I can question Apple's refusal to add touch-screen support to OSX, or question Nintendo's decision to not put their entire vintage game library for sale on Android and iOS. I don't have to be all-knowing to question a decision.

B) Whether a third party makes the PSU or not has nothing to do with why it's a separate module. Safety and replaceability immediately come to mind as reasons why you'd want it separate. (In the past, having separate PSUs for different line voltages was also a factor, but that's pretty much vanished thanks to modern wide-input-voltage SMPSes.) If there were some huge advantage in integrating the PSU into the same boards as the logic, then they'd do it. As I understand it, PSUs can get away with far cheaper PCBs than most other modern electronics; if you can build a part of your product on a single-sided PCB that costs a fraction of the 4-layer (or more!) board needed by the rest of the electronics, wouldn't you want to do this? Remember that PSUs are often very physically large compared to the circuits they're powering. So you'd be needlessly increasing the area of costly multilayer PCBs by a huge percentage.

That's a good point, I didn't consider that one. However this does assume we're talking about a high-power PSU, and the Apple TV's current PSU is under 12W (12V/0.917A), which doesn't require unusually thick or wide traces. Still a good point about having the PSU on a separate board, though.

C) Apple is a truly gifted systems integrator. While Apple does a lot of engineering, its suppliers do a ton of it as well, designing modules to Apple's needs. Apple's magic sauce is the software and the choice of components that work well together, though increasingly with custom-designed components as needed.

D) Name one single part in an Apple device that is actually manufactured by Apple. Oh right, they contract manufacture everything now. Since every single module inside an Apple product will be outsourced anyway, why not let PSU specialists do the PSU designs to Apple specs? They do this for the custom CPUs in iOS devices, among many, many, many, many other custom components.

Components, not entire PCBs. They do almost all PCB design and assembly internally. The only notable exceptions are things like USB power bricks which they buy off-the-shelf in high volume.

E) You mention appearances; who cares who manufactured the PSU when it's hidden inside the housing anyway? Look at the Apple power supply innards you yourself showed: I think that by most standards, they show an astounding attention to aesthetics, considering that end users will never even see them.

I think you countered your own point there...
A) "who cares what they look like if the end user will never see it"
B) "they show an astounding attention to aesthetics, considering that end users will never even see them"

So when you ask "who cares what an internal part looks like", your answer is "Apple", and I agree. They seem to care what everything looks like, regardless of whether it's internal or external. Why make your PCB matte black if glossy green is more easy to repair/debug? Because it looks better. It looks futuristic and cool.

Apple has often said that their biggest strength is saying no: Saying no to products Apple could make, but where they wouldn't be significantly better than anyone else. I guess they concluded that they won't be better at making PSUs than the PSU specialists, so there's no point in them doing it.

And I'm not saying they're wrong, I'm merely trying to understand their reasoning.

[coppice]

They do almost all PCB design and assembly internally. The only notable exceptions are things like USB power bricks which they buy off-the-shelf in high volume.

Apple maintains a high level of involvement in the design of its PCBs, but I am not aware of them doing any PCB assembly at all. The last time i looked, they didn't buy their power bricks off the shelf. They had a strong involvement in their design, and then had them produced by contract manufacturers who specialise in churning out these things in volume.

[rdl]

I imagine manufacturing is pretty much the same everywhere. The big names don't really "make", they assemble. GM and Ford don't make tires. The parts used to make cars are mostly made by subcontractors, hundreds if not thousands of them.

[tooki]

You seem convinced that Apple should be DIYing its PSUs. But have you actually thought about why they farm this out?

That's the question posed in the initial post. If I *knew* why they did, I wouldn't have asked.

Your initial post asks in general, I was addressing that you seemed to single out Apple. But my main point was that you're asking yourself "why don't they?", and I'm suggesting you ponder "why do they?".

A) They've been buying PSUs from outside vendors since at least the mid-late 1980s. Though I guess there might be some exceptions, these are generally custom parts made for Apple. If this wasn't advantageous, it's unlikely they'd continue doing it.

No one is infallible. I can question Apple's refusal to add touch-screen support to OSX, or question Nintendo's decision to not put their entire vintage game library for sale on Android and iOS. I don't have to be all-knowing to question a decision.

I simply take issue with your tone throughout this thread, which has been that it obviously makes sense to do it in-house. Your choice of words ("infallible"!) is again implying that you think they are making a mistake.

B) Whether a third party makes the PSU or not has nothing to do with why it's a separate module. Safety and replaceability immediately come to mind as reasons why you'd want it separate. (In the past, having separate PSUs for different line voltages was also a factor, but that's pretty much vanished thanks to modern wide-input-voltage SMPSes.) If there were some huge advantage in integrating the PSU into the same boards as the logic, then they'd do it. As I understand it, PSUs can get away with far cheaper PCBs than most other modern electronics; if you can build a part of your product on a single-sided PCB that costs a fraction of the 4-layer (or more!) board needed by the rest of the electronics, wouldn't you want to do this? Remember that PSUs are often very physically large compared to the circuits they're powering. So you'd be needlessly increasing the area of costly multilayer PCBs by a huge percentage.

That's a good point, I didn't consider that one. However this does assume we're talking about a high-power PSU, and the Apple TV's current PSU is under 12W (12V/0.917A), which doesn't require unusually thick or wide traces. Still a good point about having the PSU on a separate board, though.

The power rating of a SMPS is totally irrelevant to the issue of requiring separation. You have up to 250VAC (when nominal 230V is on the high side) coming into the SMPS. Whether you need 5W or 500W of output, you don't want a fault to result in mains voltage showing up where it's not supposed to, like a USB port. Or were you addressing a point other than safety? Cuz my point about single-layer PCBs being far cheaper than multilayer ones is a fact regardless of the power of the PSU.

C) Apple is a truly gifted systems integrator. While Apple does a lot of engineering, its suppliers do a ton of it as well, designing modules to Apple's needs. Apple's magic sauce is the software and the choice of components that work well together, though increasingly with custom-designed components as needed.

D) Name one single part in an Apple device that is actually manufactured by Apple. Oh right, they contract manufacture everything now. Since every single module inside an Apple product will be outsourced anyway, why not let PSU specialists do the PSU designs to Apple specs? They do this for the custom CPUs in iOS devices, among many, many, many, many other custom components.

Components, not entire PCBs. They do almost all PCB design and assembly internally. The only notable exceptions are things like USB power bricks which they buy off-the-shelf in high volume.

Nonsense. I said "modules" and "components" for a reason. Apple does its design in-house and then farms out 100% of manufacturing and assembly. (Save for a tiny bit of in-house final assembly for US government contracts that require it to be "made" in USA.) Every single part that goes into an Apple product was manufactured by a contract manufacturer, subcontractor, or specialty supplier. From the PCBs, to modules like vibrator motors, camera modules, screen assemblies, … the list literally goes on and on, encompassing 100% of the BOM.

Apple doesn't own factories making iPhones or computers; Foxconn, Quanta, Pegatron, etc. do.

The USB power bricks aren't off-the-shelf, they're custom-made to Apple specifications. You only think they're off-the-shelf because the entire clone accessory industry shamelessly copies Apple's designs (well, the exteriors, that is; the insides are woefully deficient) to the point that you see them everywhere.

E) You mention appearances; who cares who manufactured the PSU when it's hidden inside the housing anyway? Look at the Apple power supply innards you yourself showed: I think that by most standards, they show an astounding attention to aesthetics, considering that end users will never even see them.

I think you countered your own point there...
A) "who cares what they look like if the end user will never see it"
B) "they show an astounding attention to aesthetics, considering that end users will never even see them"

So when you ask "who cares what an internal part looks like", your answer is "Apple", and I agree. They seem to care what everything looks like, regardless of whether it's internal or external. Why make your PCB matte black if glossy green is more easy to repair/debug? Because it looks better. It looks futuristic and cool.

It wasn't my point I was countering. I only addressed appearance because you said:

It's just inelegant, which as a company obsessed with appearances, you'd expect Apple to be bothered by. They develop their own SoCs, but they stop at the PSU?

In other words, you claimed they didn't pay attention to the appearance of the PSUs, despite your original post showing what can only be described as a lavishly designed interior.

Apple has often said that their biggest strength is saying no: Saying no to products Apple could make, but where they wouldn't be significantly better than anyone else. I guess they concluded that they won't be better at making PSUs than the PSU specialists, so there's no point in them doing it.

And I'm not saying they're wrong, I'm merely trying to understand their reasoning.

We will never know, since Apple doesn't generally explain its reasoning publicly. We can only attempt to infer what their reasoning is, and debate sensible arguments from people like folks here. But it's possible that the actual reasons are different from the ones we all conclude!

[derGoldstein]

Your initial post asks in general, I was addressing that you seemed to single out Apple. But my main point was that you're asking yourself "why don't they?", and I'm suggesting you ponder "why do they?".

Ok.

I simply take issue with your tone throughout this thread, which has been that it obviously makes sense to do it in-house. Your choice of words ("infallible"!) is again implying that you think they are making a mistake.

I'm surprised by their decision, that's all. You're free to take issue with my tone.

The power rating of a SMPS is totally irrelevant to the issue of requiring separation. You have up to 250VAC (when nominal 230V is on the high side) coming into the SMPS. Whether you need 5W or 500W of output, you don't want a fault to result in mains voltage showing up where it's not supposed to, like a USB port. Or were you addressing a point other than safety? Cuz my point about single-layer PCBs being far cheaper than multilayer ones is a fact regardless of the power of the PSU.

I was talking about current, not voltage. If you've got a 500W power supply with a 12V output you're going to need very thick copper on the output side. If the output is half an amp you don't need to worry about it, that's all I meant.
The separation, on the other hand, can be achieved by simply spacing things correctly, and making sure that your transformer is made by a competent company.

Nonsense. I said "modules" and "components" for a reason. Apple does its design in-house and then farms out 100% of manufacturing and assembly. (Save for a tiny bit of in-house final assembly for US government contracts that require it to be "made" in USA.) Every single part that goes into an Apple product was manufactured by a contract manufacturer, subcontractor, or specialty supplier. From the PCBs, to modules like vibrator motors, camera modules, screen assemblies, … the list literally goes on and on, encompassing 100% of the BOM.

Apple doesn't own factories making iPhones or computers; Foxconn, Quanta, Pegatron, etc. do.

I don't know why I said assembly... I meant just design. Got me there.

The USB power bricks aren't off-the-shelf, they're custom-made to Apple specifications. You only think they're off-the-shelf because the entire clone accessory industry shamelessly copies Apple's designs (well, the exteriors, that is; the insides are woefully deficient) to the point that you see them everywhere.

I just looked at my not-off-the-shelf Apple 10W power brick. It says "foxlink". Here you go:
http://www.foxlink.com/web/en/portfolio-item/power-adapter/
(B9 10W Power Adapter)

In other words, you claimed they didn't pay attention to the appearance of the PSUs, despite your original post showing what can only be described as a lavishly designed interior.

I said that it's inelegant to split your product's internals into more boards than necessary. I still maintain that's true.

[Corporate666]

But these are massive companies like Apple, Samsung, Sony, etc.. They already have that infrastructure set up for their core products. It may be slightly different for power supplies, but they already do order parts for prototypes, run circuits through testing procedures, get certifications, and mass produce electronics products. They may need to hire some engineers that specialize in power supplies, but the rest of the environment is already there.

My father was an executive for a large power supply manufacturer in the USA until he retired recently.  They do a lot of work for companies like Sony, Google, IBM and others.  These are companies that are capable of designing PSU's, but they outsource the work for many reasons - but in general because it makes financial sense to do so.

PSU companies have vast experience - far far more than even a company like Sony would ever have.  My fathers company did the PSU for the Playstation, they did PSU's for cell towers, for Google servers, for flat screen TV's, for electric car chargers and more.  Their experience is so broad that pretty much any sort of issue that can arise - whether it be a design issue, component issue or whatever else, they have seen and know how to avoid.  Even a company like Apple's PSU needs are a pittance compared to all of the PSU designs the big guys are doing on an annual basis, so there's no way Apple could possibly get the depth and breadth of experience as a dedicated PSU company has.  That makes it perhaps even MORE important to outsource that part of it - since that's where a lot of your risk is (fire, equipment damage from bad PSU's). 

Second, PSU companies have manufacturing scales that virtually nobody can touch from end to end.  They can design something faster, make it faster and cheaper, and get it approved by regulatory agencies faster than an individual company can.  They are pooling the needs of their entire customer base and injecting their experience, so it's virtually impossible that any individual company could compete with the development time and cost a PSU company can bring to the table.

If you are as big as Apple, you can get bespoke work done just for you - so Apple is essentially having their cake and eating it too.  They get their design done to their exact specifications and needs, by the experts, and the cost savings are such that they are both coming out ahead in the end.

It works on a smaller scale as well.  I always prefer buying off the shelf PSU's or modules these days when I can, even for small-ish designs.  The only exception is when I need something specialty in size, power density or something like that.  If you look at the cost of modules on Digikey from the likes of Murata, Panasonic, CUI, GE Power and such, they can sell you a finished module that's professionally designed and tested for less than you can often buy just the parts for if you did it yourself. 

Like someone else said... "Why *would* Apple want to do it themselves?".  There's a reason why it's rare to open up any sort of electronics device and see either an on-board PSU or a PSU that's made by the same manufacturer of the device itself.

[derGoldstein]

Also, Google is doing their own 48V->1V (no 12V intermediate bus) system on their own.

But that's a DC-DC converter right? I mean that's a huge reduction, but is it high enough to make a transformer block a more effective method?

[tautech]

Like someone else said... "Why *would* Apple want to do it themselves?".  There's a reason why it's rare to open up any sort of electronics device and see either an on-board PSU or a PSU that's made by the same manufacturer of the device itself.

One exception, telecom companies. Huawei/ZTE/Ericson both have their own power electronics department and they make power modules in house.
Also, Google is doing their own 48V->1V (no 12V intermediate bus) system on their own.
BTW, would you mind tell me which company your father worked for? It seems like a big player in power electronics. Is that Delta?

And another: Siglent.
All teardowns show and units I have opened have Siglents own PSU's inside.
Never heard or know of any that have failed. Not one.

[mikeselectricstuff]

All teardowns show and units I have opened have Siglents own PSU's inside.
Never heard or know of any that have failed. Not one.

Do you now for sure they're made by Siglent, rather than another PSU company who put Siglent's name on as part of the customization process?

[tooki]

I just looked at my not-off-the-shelf Apple 10W power brick. It says "foxlink". Here you go:
http://www.foxlink.com/web/en/portfolio-item/power-adapter/
(B9 10W Power Adapter)

Foxlink makes them to order. (See the black adapter with "BRAND" written on it? LOL) Maybe they've added the Apple-style "B9" to their portfolio, but that is an Apple design, part of a whole series of white power bricks using the snap-on "duck head" prongs. (And Foxlink is not the only charger manufacturer Apple uses.) For crying out loud, they say "Designed by Apple in California" on the bottom...

So no, they are not off-the-shelf chargers. Never were. (The internals are likely very standard designs, with the Apple-standard ID resistors.)

Do you not understand the difference between off-the-shelf and custom made?

[tooki]

I just checked my Apple power bricks of that style (some USB, some MacBook) and I found one each from Foxlink, Flextronics, Liteon, Samsung, and Delta.

You still think that's a Foxlink design? LOL

[derGoldstein]

Foxlink makes them to order. (See the black adapter with "BRAND" written on it? LOL)

Yeah they'll co-brand it for you. You can pay for them to stamp your logo on it.

Maybe they've added the Apple-style "B9" to their portfolio, but that is an Apple design, part of a whole series of white power bricks using the snap-on "duck head" prongs. (And Foxlink is not the only charger manufacturer Apple uses.)

If I can order the part from the original manufacturer, specify a part number, and get it with my logo on it, it seems to me to be off-the-shelf.

For crying out loud, they say "Designed by Apple in California" on the bottom...

If I order some from foxlink, will my chargers say "Designed by Apple in California" on them?

Do you not understand the difference between off-the-shelf and custom made?

Can I contact foxconn and order a bunch of iphones and ipads without the Apple logo on them? Because I sure can do this with foxlink and their chargers.

That seems to me to be the difference between a company being contracted to manufacture something bespoke for you, and a company adding a product to their publicly-available line because you ordered enough of them.
If it was an exclusive apple design, I wouldn't be able to buy it with my logo on it and then resell it.

[tooki]

I don't know the contract legality of Foxlink selling Apple-designed chargers to third parties. Nor do we actually know that they do -- that page may well be nothing more than examples of what they can make, without actually making that specific design available to anyone else. I don't recall ever seeing any non-Apple products ship with that design. (It has occasionally shown up in cheap Chinese clones of Apple chargers for Apple devices, like MacBooks.)

In any event, you're just being argumentative now. Everyone -- other than you -- understands what "off-the-shelf" means, without creating twisted private definitions as you are doing.

[tautech]

All teardowns show and units I have opened have Siglents own PSU's inside.
Never heard or know of any that have failed. Not one.

Do you now for sure they're made by Siglent, rather than another PSU company who put Siglent's name on as part of the customization process?

I found out today they are custom made for Siglent but designed in house.

[coppice]

I don't know the contract legality of Foxlink selling Apple-designed chargers to third parties. Nor do we actually know that they do -- that page may well be nothing more than examples of what they can make, without actually making that specific design available to anyone else.

Its quite common practice for Chinese OEMs to put examples of things they make for other people on their web sites in this way. The reputable ones only do it with the permission of the relevant customers, and they won't sell those products to anyone else.

[derGoldstein]

I don't know the contract legality of Foxlink selling Apple-designed chargers to third parties. Nor do we actually know that they do -- that page may well be nothing more than examples of what they can make, without actually making that specific design available to anyone else. I don't recall ever seeing any non-Apple products ship with that design. (It has occasionally shown up in cheap Chinese clones of Apple chargers for Apple devices, like MacBooks.)

In any event, you're just being argumentative now. Everyone -- other than you -- understands what "off-the-shelf" means, without creating twisted private definitions as you are doing.

Ok you're right I'm kind of just having fun at this point, but you have to admit that this is a special case. They gave that charger a product number, which usually implies that you can order it. Their presentation is vague, they're not explicitly saying "this is an example of what we can do", it looks a lot more a product listing page.

Point taken though, Apple designed at least the exterior of those products. I wasn't intentionally trying to be annoying, just pointing out the oddity.

[wraper]

I just checked my Apple power bricks of that style (some USB, some MacBook) and I found one each from Foxlink, Flextronics, Liteon, Samsung, and Delta.

You still think that's a Foxlink design? LOL

Very likely, yes. Not particularly Apple, but when I disassembled exactly same model phone chargers from different suppliers, they were completely different inside.

[wraper]

Ok you're right I'm kind of just having fun at this point, but you have to admit that this is a special case. They gave that charger a product number, which usually implies that you can order it. Their presentation is vague, they're not explicitly saying "this is an example of what we can do", it looks a lot more a product listing page.

Point taken though, Apple designed at least the exterior of those products. I wasn't intentionally trying to be annoying, just pointing out the oddity.

And if you look on the part numbers, none of them are apple chargers.
EDIT: OK, B9 looks like apple charger.
On the other hand, link says portfolio, not catalog: www.foxlink.com/web/en/portfolio-item/power-adapter/

[wraper]

Do you not understand the difference between off-the-shelf and custom made?

Can I contact foxconn and order a bunch of iphones and ipads without the Apple logo on them? Because I sure can do this with foxlink and their chargers.

That seems to me to be the difference between a company being contracted to manufacture something bespoke for you, and a company adding a product to their publicly-available line because you ordered enough of them.
If it was an exclusive apple design, I wouldn't be able to buy it with my logo on it and then resell it.

No you can't do either. Only rare phone comes with off the shelve adapter, maybe some cheap Chinese brand. It's a different story for, say, routers. Many of them from different manufactures come with the same power brick. Quiet often that power brick is not even rebranded.

[tooki]

I just checked my Apple power bricks of that style (some USB, some MacBook) and I found one each from Foxlink, Flextronics, Liteon, Samsung, and Delta.

You still think that's a Foxlink design? LOL

Very likely, yes. Not particularly Apple, but when I disassembled exactly same model phone chargers from different suppliers, they were completely different inside.

Well yeah. I meant the industrial design (housing, prong attachment, etc) and customer specs. The internals can vary. With Apple, sometimes assemblies are multi-sourced but completely identical between suppliers, sometimes they're different. For sure, Apple is extremely demanding. With chargers specifically, Apple has conducted multiple recalls, over issues where something failed unsafe at a rate so rare that most companies simply wouldn't have done anything. The replacement, in turn, is ultra-reinforced. (For example, the original US iPhone charger, the little tiny cube, could potentially separate open with the prongs left in the socket (as the Chinese clones of those often do today). They recalled them all, and the replacements have the prongs anchored in unbelievably strongly, and the bottom panel is attached even more firmly than before. That mechanical design is clearly coming from within Apple, and not being left up to the supplier. But I guess that as long as Apple is willing to pay extra, they're happy to oblige!

[tooki]

Ok you're right I'm kind of just having fun at this point, but you have to admit that this is a special case. They gave that charger a product number, which usually implies that you can order it. Their presentation is vague, they're not explicitly saying "this is an example of what we can do", it looks a lot more a product listing page.

Point taken though, Apple designed at least the exterior of those products. I wasn't intentionally trying to be annoying, just pointing out the oddity.

And if you look on the part numbers, none of them are apple chargers.
EDIT: OK, B9 looks like apple charger.
On the other hand, link says portfolio, not catalog: www.foxlink.com/web/en/portfolio-item/power-adapter/

Thanks for finding that!! Portfolio, that was the word I was looking for when I replied at 2am! So there we go, it's a portfolio, not a catalog. (And I was on the iPad, where the full URL is normally hidden, and it didn't occur to me to view the URL.)

[tooki]

Ok you're right I'm kind of just having fun at this point, but you have to admit that this is a special case. They gave that charger a product number, which usually implies that you can order it. Their presentation is vague, they're not explicitly saying "this is an example of what we can do", it looks a lot more a product listing page.

Point taken though, Apple designed at least the exterior of those products. I wasn't intentionally trying to be annoying, just pointing out the oddity.

Well, to be honest, to me it looked like a portfolio page, because catalogs of off-the-shelf parts generally have detailed specs shown; this had practically no specs at all. And part numbers are usually much longer than a letter or two. But I do agree that giving them model numbers at all in a portfolio does at least hint at "this is a model you can buy".

OK, now it's trivia time about that charger design:

• It was introduced with the original iPod in 2001, which came with a 12W FireWire charger.
• There have been at least 5 different physical sizes of chargers with this same basic design, all the same thickness so as to accept the same prong attachments ("duckheads") and AC cords. These range from the tiny one we've been discussing (which exists in 12W, 10W, and two distinct versions of 5W, see below), all the way to the comparatively huge original 85W MagSafe charger.
• The first few generations of AirPort Express Wi-Fi routers also used this design.
• The AC port accepts a standard C7 cord, which is hugely handy when traveling, or if you've lost the duckhead. (Now you can get them from Apple, but in the past, the only way to get them was to buy the World Travel Adapter Kit, which includes one of each of all the duckheads for the entire world.)
• The duckhead/cord mount has a mounting stud for stability, but in some chargers, it's plastic, while in others, it's metal and serves as the ground pin. The Apple cords are grounded and use a keyed C7 plug which the chargers with ground pin are adapted for. The chargers without the ground pin won't accept the keyed plug and thus cannot be used with the Apple cord. (I don't know why you'd want to prevent this, I can't think of any downsides to having a ground wire in the cord that's terminating nowhere.)
• The first USB version of these was a 5W model for iPods (in 2004-05, I think), and it was still the size of the FireWire one, probably about twice the total volume of today's. Then came the shrunk-down 5W one, also for iPods. When the iPhone came out, they had to release a new version of it, because the iPod chargers' power was too dirty, and interfered with the touchscreen. Later, a 10W version was added with the original iPad, and eventually, a 12W version with the 3rd gen iPad. The 10W is now shipped only as the included charger when buying a device; only the 12W is sold separately now. I don't think the 5W version is made any more.
• In most markets (maybe all?) the 5W adapter in this design has been replaced with the smaller all-in-one 5W chargers.

[derGoldstein]

There have been at least 5 different physical sizes of chargers with this same basic design, all the same thickness so as to accept the same prong attachments ("duckheads") and AC cords. These range from the tiny one we've been discussing (which exists in 12W, 10W, and two distinct versions of 5W, see below), all the way to the comparatively huge original 85W MagSafe charger.

This also means that they had to make sure that manufacturers kept their designs within tolerances so that the duckheads would be interchangeable.

On a hunch I removed the duckhead that I have and it says "JET Longwell" on it. I know Longwell makes cables and adapters, so is it possible that one company makes the adapter and another makes the duckheads? If that's the case then they'd have to make sure that they not only matched the color of the polymers, but the exact additives, so that the two parts expand/contract together, and also "yellow" at the same rate.

[tooki]

Looks like it -- and that there are multiple suppliers for the duckheads, too! Mine are all from "Well Shin". And the cords are Volex, so yet another company whose manufacturing must match.

As for tolerances... AFAIK, Apple's tolerances are extremely tight. In the iPhone 5 series (and the SE now, I guess), the glass bits are measured down to some tiny fraction of a mm and binned in something like 300 bins, to seamlessly match the machined aluminum which has been similarly measured and binned. :O