• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is there a good reason the Nintendo 3DS charger only accepts a specific input voltage?

Ichinisan

Ichinisan

Lifer
Is there a significant extra expense to make the charger support an input range like 100v-240v? Shouldn’t it be trivial for a switching mode power supply (SMPS) to do it?

I checked the markings on my 3DS power supply while I was in Thailand and saw it only accepts 1XX volt input, so I didn’t plug it in. My friend wasn’t so careful. He killed his charger by trying to use it.
 
Last edited:
Depends on how you define trivial. It'll take a different input circuit or a (if not even more complex to make it automatic instead of...) manual input voltage switch that depends on user intervention and at least a couple additional parts, where parts cost money. Manufacturers usually source the PSU with a very cost conscious attitude and it almost becomes an oversight so long as it works and doesn't violate any regional safety standards.

If you wanted to purchase an aftermarket PSU that's full input range, has the right voltage and current capacity of course, then all that remains is having the right output plug on it, assuming they didn't pull a stunt where there's an IC communication with the host that makes it behave abnormally if a genuine OEM PSU isn't detected.

Dell laptops come to mind as an example of that, but I haven't looked into whether anyone else implements such a thing. It wouldn't surprise me at all Lexmark printers also do it, given the past experiences I've had with them using similar (actually worse) chip protection even for the effin' LCD display boards, just to keep customers from using perfectly good new/pulled parts if not bought through their channels at full retail pricing. [/rant]

So no, there isn't a good reason, but there is a cost reason, plus they have to bundle each with the respective wall socket plug, plug terminated cable, or additional modular cable.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. It seems that all my Apple chargers and my Nintendo Switch charger accept 240v input just fine. In our group of travelers, the Nintendo 3DS was the only device we had that didn’t like 240v.
 
mindless1 said:
So no, there isn't a good reason, but there is a cost reason, plus they have to bundle each with the respective wall socket plug, plug terminated cable, or additional modular cable.
Click to expand...
Actually, Nintendo does not include the AC adapter with the New 3DS or New 3DS XL. They didn't include it with the older 3DSXL/LL in other regions and they didn't include it with the 2DS, 3DS, etc in Japan. Why? Because you might already own a DSi, which used the same charger. This practice goes WAY back in Japan, where the Super Famicom (Japanese Super Nintendo Entertainment System) used the same AC adapter as the Famicom and, thus, did not include one. I bought a Famicom Mini in Japan last week and the matching USB power brick was sold separately.

Nintendo uses a proprietary connector instead of chip protection. The real issue is that it is a portable device intended for travel and yet it is not equipped to operate between countries that they sell it in. For a long time all of their portable were region-free specifically so that you could fly to whatever country you want, bring your handheld, and buy/play games for it. Even Dell makes sure that their chip-protected laptop charger only needs the right cord/adapter on the AC side.

Since they started region-locking their handhelds I guess they no longer cared about international portability. 🙁 I am curious is the 240v Eur/Aus charger also supports 60hz 110/120v.
 
CZroe said:
Actually, Nintendo does not include the AC adapter with the New 3DS or New 3DS XL.

Nintendo uses a proprietary connector instead of chip protection.
Click to expand...

Buy a $2 charge cable and swap it onto whatever PSU you want to use.

... and please stop using the word actually where it isn't needed. The actual misuse of that actual word has actually become rampant. 😛
 
mindless1 said:
Buy a $2 charge cable and swap it onto whatever PSU you want to use.

... and please stop using the word actually where it isn't needed. The actual misuse of that actual word has actually become rampant. 😛
Click to expand...
"Actually" actually was needed. I used it to contrast what you were saying (about what they needed to include) with reality. I used it again to contradict your assertion that it wasn't needed/appropriate there. 😉 Without that word, one might assume that we were both stating facts without noticing the contradiction.

When reality is different than a claim/assertion/prediction, then the word "actually" provides a deliberate contrast with reality.

Edit:
Definition number one.
55861be1c9eb1d2a0ebda21e2a5d2d5c.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nope, it's a senseless filler word, frequently overused when it isn't needed. If the content states the same thing without it, leave it out.

Without that word, one might assume that we were both stating facts without noticing the contradiction.
Click to expand...

If someone can't comprehend the difference, throwing actually in is still a waste:

Actually, Nintendo does not include the AC adapter with the New 3DS or New 3DS XL.
Click to expand...
Nintendo does not include the AC adapter with the New 3DS or New 3DS XL.
Click to expand...

When reality is different than a claim/assertion/prediction, then the word "actually" provides a deliberate contrast with reality.
Click to expand...

Everyone intends their post to be about reality. It's just a wasted word that looks silly where it isn't needed. There are a lot of words that fit that description, but few today are escalating as quickly in misuse as actually.
 
Last edited:
mindless1 said:
Nope, it's a senseless filler word, frequently overused when it isn't needed. If the content states the same thing without it, leave it out.



If someone can't comprehend the difference, throwing actually in is still a waste:






Everyone intends their post to be about reality. It's just a wasted word that looks silly where it isn't needed. There are a lot of words that fit that description, but few today are escalating as quickly in misuse as actually.
Click to expand...
Not true. Some people post predictions or theories, which can contrast with reality. You theorized about how the cost of including them may have affected their engineering decisions, but it was based on the incorrect assumption that they included them. Yes, it is often a useless filler word and it really grates my nerves to hear it used that way but in your hunt to expunge the abusers you over-reacted to someone using it properly. 🙂

Ugh. That reminds me: Gamester81 on YouTube does it *constantly.* He'll be talking about a game and be giving a lot of first time details that don't contradict any expectations or change any prior-known details and he'll still say "actually" before each. "[game name] is actually by a company called [developer name] and is actually going to come out on [date]. It actually reminds me of [game name] so I'm actually really excited for this."

You can literally just click on any of his hundreds of videos (does that use of "literally" similarly trigger you? 😉). I just did and it only took 12 seconds to hear him do this.

All that said, the cost of including them may have mattered for the DSi in 2009 (pretty sure even the DSi LL had already ditched it) but there have *actually* been several revisions with different model numbers over the years. 😉
 
Last edited:
^ Nope, read this again (top your text, bottom, fixed):

Actually, Nintendo does not include the AC adapter with the New 3DS or New 3DS XL.
Click to expand...
Nintendo does not include the AC adapter with the New 3DS or New 3DS XL.
Click to expand...

Now if you want to get verbose and describe what you mean, sometimes that has merit, but "actually", is not that. It is not a word that can be inserted as a substitute for mind reading if you meant something other or more than stated.

... and yes, some people are worse about it than others.
 
Last edited:
mindless1 said:
...It's just a wasted word that looks silly where it isn't needed. There are a lot of words that fit that description, but few today are escalating as quickly in misuse as actually.
Click to expand...
You technically didn't need the word "wasted." Guess I didn't need the word "technically" either. The thing is, they each added context and understanding for what we wanted to communicate to each other, so neither was "wasted."

mindless1 said:
^ Nope, read this again (top your text, bottom, fixed):




Now if you want to get more verbose and describe what you mean, sometimes that has merit, but "actually", is not that. It is not a word that can be inserted as a substitute for mind reading if you meant something other or more than stated.
Click to expand...
Words have meaning. Being more verbose to clarify the meaning is a valid use of words. One of those words is "actually" when used in the correct context. Communicating meaning is the entire purpose of words. In your vendetta against the misuse of "actually" you have conditioned yourself to be triggered even by the proper use and are hung up on the technicality of it not being absolutely necessary. Oops. Does "absolutely" similarly trigger you? How about "similarly?" This is fun! 😉

Here's a fun way to look at it: Just like the word "actually" where I used it, repeating yourself was not absolutely necessary. You did it to convey additional context and understanding of the point you were trying to make... and you used a lot more than one word to do it. I stand by my reasonable and correct use of "actually" because I used it for the same reason.

I will now repeat myself:
My use of "actually" was intended to contrast reality with your theory, which is definition #1 for "actual." The contrast makes the contradiction stand out so that it doesn't seem like I am giving an irrelevant history lesson. It indicates that there is something different between what I described and what you theorized. Yes, it was something minor, which is why I thought it was easy to miss without the extra word to indicate it.
 
Last edited:
Actually... nevermind.

Regarding the power supply, no, there's not a good reason to limit the input voltage. It used to be more difficult when SMPS designs weren't well-established, but now it's just lazy and stupid to not accept the whole input range. A handful of components have to be rated to handle high voltage and the rest is the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top