iPhone Battery Replacement An Unwelcome Surprise 629
epidemic99 writes "Apple has released what it will cost to replace the battery in the iPhone, and consumers might be a bit put off. Replacement is a tricky ordeal, as the battery is apparently soldered into the device. The service will cost $79, plus $6.95 for shipping, plus an optional $29 'loaner iPhone' rental. A consumer advocacy group sent a letter to Apple complaining that this information was not made public before iPhone's release since the cost of the battery replacement is so high. Even reviewer Harvey Rosenfield, who is usually very kind to Apple, was quoted as saying 'some of them might be waking up now, wondering who they got in bed with.'" Update: 07/06 21:06 GMT by Z : Fixed incorrect attribution of quote to Mossberg.
based on the cost... (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
"'wondering who they got in bed with...'" (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, how many of you have replaced one? (Score:5, Insightful)
People complain that it's 20% of the cost of the phone. If I buy a replacement battery for my RAZR, it's $40, which is more than 20% of the cost of the phone. Yes, I can do it myself, but will I ever? Not likely. The only time I've ever replaced a battery was back when I had a StarTAC phone, and I bought the smaller, thinner battery, because the phone slipped into my pocket.
Apple knows that only 5-8% or so of the people will even want to replace it, so they made it a possibility. People just need something to gripe about I guess.
Personally, if you're fine with a $60 iPod batt... (Score:3, Insightful)
Surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, it's overpriced for what it is. And the people buying it up right now are only paving the way for Microsoft and others to fix up their mobile OSes to deliver cheaper devices capable of much of the same things as the iPhone. Only they will have replaceable batteries, cheaper cost (subsidized by the carrier), and 3G.
Apple makes a habit of ensuring that you as a consumer are 'locked in' to their platform. In every way, shape and form. They are turning into yet another Microsoft, from another angle. I am rather alarmed that people don't realize that Apple is no different than Microsoft in that they want market share for their devices, and they want money. There are no lofty goals with Apple, just cute looking devices that have a cult following. I will give them, that their OS is better than Vista. But they had the luxury of being able to dump support for older applications, where MS does not. Their presentation is better than Microsoft but again, Microsoft delivers software with an API that can be written against. Apple is a closed architecture, especially with the iPhone.
When people realize that Apple is no different than Microsoft, they will choose devices and software based upon need and usage requirements, rather than a religious belief to either company. I run a Mac laptop as my only laptop, but my home PC is a dual boot of Ubuntu and Vista. I'm mostly on Vista, admittedly -- but it's for gaming and I love my games
Me personally? I'll be waiting for the next generation iPhone to be released before I make a choice in buying anything. My iPod works fine and I enjoy the 3G speed of my Samsung Blackjack. And hopefully by then, Microsoft has made an answering shot to the iPhone and I'll have the ability to choose the device suited best for me. Slow, deliberate choices are the ones I make after taking time to think about it. If I see another moron carrying the iPhone and using it in a way just to show it off, I am going to smack them.
Re:based on the cost... (Score:5, Insightful)
I upgrade about once every three years and I have never replaced a battery. by the time the battery normally needs replacing the screen is all scratched up, half the numbers have rubbed off, and there's a dent in the housing. A new phone is just as easy. I make sure I have bluetooth, and I keep all the phone numbers on my laptop. it isn't hard to transfer phones then.
Kinda like complaining about tires for a Porche (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, what's next, complaining to Ferrari because they don't advertise the cost of maintenance?
Re:no surprise, part of the plan (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:High quality editing! (Score:3, Insightful)
And this obsession with Apple's integrated batteries is tiring. Billions of batteries have been kept out of landfills thanks to Apple, and the expected lifetime of even replaceable batteries is two years. Here is a free point: consumer products are purchased, used and eventually discarded. It's the Circle of Life.
Re:whats going on? (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe they want to be like vehicle manufacturers and make a nice sum from the after sales service?
Re:after seeing the iPhone dissected... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, in reference to this article in general, the battery iPhone replacement methodology is really only a "surprise" to that Rosenfield guy IMO. This is yet another non-issue, non-article, about iPhone fears repeated ad infinitum. Sigh.
Rather that "FUD" though, I begin to wonder if perhaps all these stories merely reflect the fact that we have a need to express our fears about such a revolutionary product publicly, in order that we may be consoled by our peers, and so that our judgement in purchasing the thing (if we have purchased it), is likewise reaffirmed.
Re:$87? Big deal! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:$87? Big deal! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:gee, you cant' change the battery on any other (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously though, I think it's fairly likely that Apple seal their batteries in and slap a high price tag on replacements to encourage people to buy a new model rather than maintain their otherwise functioning device. It's quite cynical really.
Re:based on the cost... (Score:3, Insightful)
Planned Obsolescence is normal. Windows XP will soon be EOL too. does that make MSFT evil? I plan to be free with my data, and then look for hardware that will last the longest.
Re:It's adding up (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:whats going on? (Score:4, Insightful)
Greed could just as easily push them in the other direction, "We can sell swappable batteries, and then maybe we can sell multiple batteries to each customer. Then, we can re-engineer the iPhone for the next version to use different batteries, so that customers will need to buy new batteries if they get a new iPhone!" That's the sort of scheming most electronics manufacturers would pull.
My guess is that the choice really isn't nefarious at all, but rather a simple design choice. Apple wants people to perceive these things as an atom, an unbreakable unit, a single thing, and not a collection of parts. Therefore they aren't really interested in giving their customers easy access to the innards, and so making the battery easily swappable is just another unnecessary challenge. The iPhone is already packed into a mighty small case, and in order to design it so the battery is right in an accessible place, you might need to shuffle things around. Additionally, you'll need to add a layer of plastic between the battery and the innards so that taking the battery out doesn't expose all the innards. Then you have to figure out how to make it easy to swap batteries without having the batteries pop out on their own.
I'm not saying that it's a challenge that is insurmountable or even hugely difficult for Apple, but it puts more design restrictions on an already hard-to-design unit. If Apple can make the whole unit slightly smaller, slightly more durable, slightly prettier, or slightly more powerful by dropping this restriction for a swappable battery, I think it's a pretty decent trade-off.
And given that it usually takes a couple years or more to for batteries to really die, I doubt Apple is relying on dead batteries to sell more iPhones. Or are you really imagining that the iPhone won't be enough better in 3 years that the upgrade will sell itself?
Re:$87? Big deal! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:$87? Big deal! (Score:4, Insightful)
I really think that it's absurd that Apple chose to make the battery non-user-replaceable. I mean, there's a reason every phone in the history of cell phones has let you replace the battery yourself, it just makes sense. If this is the "revolution" iPhone fanatics have been talking about, count me out.
Re:Surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
You seem to make the mistake of assuming that people use apple based on fanboy-ism. That might have been true in the past, but I do not believe that the preppy college guy on the train in the morning, or the bottle-blonde, pretty-in-pink girl beside him, each with the distinctive white headphones stuck in their ears, are buying iPods because they are Apple obsessives. They buy because it is trendy, and with the iPod, Apple's domination in the area of trendy technology reached its peak. As long as they can keep themselves in with the people who buy based on how "cool" it is to own one, then they can get to and stay at the top of any market.
If you can convince enough people that it is trendy to own an Apple iToaster, even if it only toasts one at a time, then you will dominate the toaster market. Sure, there will be companies still out there, toasting 2, 4, 16 slices at a time, more suited to the needs of almost everybody. There will be people who buy those products, and don't understand why the hell you would want a one-slice toaster, but it wont matter. Its cool, so the vast majority of people will just go along with it. Its sad, but it is true - most people (at least in the "developed" world) care more about appearance than functionality.
For anybody that is interested, I recently was reading about a product that is suspiciously similar to the iPhone, called the Meizu M8. The specs are better, the cost is cheaper and all the reviews I have read have been excellent. I am considering getting one, specifically because the battery is removable, unlike in the iPhone.
Re:$87? Big deal! (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's a suggestion for the complainers : if you believe $87 is terribly overpriced
I think $87 is expensive compared to other battery replacement costs. Who cares if the cost is actual labor and not profit?
The point is Apple doesn't really care about maintenance costs, or maintenance inconvenience. They care about aesthetics. People are pissed off because apples value of aesthetics causes usability problems. Who wants to send in a phone just to replace something as trivial as a battery, which is a component guaranteed to wear out?
I think these concerns are certainly valid, but it doesn't affect me as I'll never buy an overpriced phone with a 2 year expensive plan attached to it anyway.
Well.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Planned obsolescence (Score:2, Insightful)
It might sound wasteful, but it actually makes sense when you think about how these are positioned in the market. People who buy high-end fashion items are not the type to recycle them or keep them going a long time. By the time the battery is not performing well, there will be a new model that is even 'cooler' then the current one. After all, the up front cost of the item is probably small compared to the operating cost so it's not going to hurt you that much to buy a new one. This is the sort of thing that Apple is brilliant at.
Powerpoint on the screen??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:$87? Big deal! (Score:5, Insightful)
1. It's not stupid if there's a good reason for it.
2. A standard Razr has a thickness of about 16mm and it doesn't have even half the features or power requirements of the iPhone. The iPhone is only 11.5mm thick and is capable of 10 days of standby time, 24 hours of music playback, 8 hours of talk time, 7 hours of video playback, or 6 hours of web browsing. That's amazingly good for a phone that's only 72% of the thickness of a Razr. The only phone with a somewhat comparable size and feature set is the Slvr, which has terrible battery life [lordpercy.com].
In short, Apple is fitting that extra battery space in the phone by using simple soldered wires rather than wasting space on a proper battery compartment. Seeing as how the battery is connected by just a couple of wires (it's not like it's surface mounted or anything!) it's quite easy for a professional to replace. So maybe Apple isn't quite as "stupid" as you're making them out to be?
Re:Well how long will it last? (Score:3, Insightful)
High end users typically have high end phones with crappy batteries. Therefore they need to swap batteries/charge batteries frequently. Apple's claiming 8 hours of talk time. Are there people who will go beyond that? Sure. I'll go out on a limb here and say that most people won't.
Could this be because the manufacturer included a crappy battery to begin with? Forcing people to pay more for a bigger battery later? Na, that couldn't possibly be it.
I've owned two other smart phones with outstanding battery life with the included manufacturers battery. A Sony P800 and a Nokia e61. I've never needed to swap the battery on either phone. I've never needed to purchase a spare battery for either phone. And yes there are times when I've been on conference calls 6+ hours a day. End user swap-ability is only required if your device is a power hog and your battery capacity is too small.
I'd say Apple did their homework. They figured that carrying around spare batteries and chargers all the time was not consumer friendly and decided to build a device that easily goes all day.
I'm sure we'll hear first hand fairly quickly if they've succeeded or not, but so far battery life reports have been pretty spot on with what Apple said they would be.
Well, its listed on the technical specs... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Rechargeable batteries have a limited number of charge cycles and may eventually need to be replaced. See www.apple.com/batteries for more information."
You can then get to this link from the batteries page:http://www.apple.com/batteries/replacements.
"iPhone Owners. Your one-year warranty includes replacement coverage for a defective battery. You can extend your coverage to two years from the date of your iPhone purchase with the AppleCare Protection Plan for iPhone, which is expected to be available in summer 2007. During the plan's coverage period, Apple will replace the battery if it drops below 50% of its original capacity. If it is out of warranty, Apple offers a battery replacement for $79, plus $6.95 shipping, subject to local tax. Apple disposes of your battery in an environmentally friendly manner."
Do I agree with the policy? No, as I wish I could replace the battery myself. But, it is stated there on the website, even if its buried. If you google "Apple Battery Replacement" [google.com], the official Apple iPhone battery page comes up ranked seventh.
Did anyone expect otherwise? Honestly, if battery replacement is important in regards to your purchase, you should research it online or ask at the store. But I don't think most people care. If you get AppleCare on the phone (2 Year Warranty), if your battery dies you get a free replacement if it goes below 50% charge. Every other Apple iPod based product has the same policy, and, the iPhone is much more iPod than it is MacBook Pro.
That being said, I understand if someone new to Apple products was upset, since, the majority of mobile phones allow the battery to be replace by the owner. However, with the large amount of iPod users out there, I doubt most will be shocked to find that the battery can't be replaced.
Re:oblig. bad analogy to Cars... (Score:1, Insightful)
trade offs. (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly, what makes the iPhone different?
They sacrificed ease of maintenance for battery life, size and robustness. It would have to be thicker to have these things and the same battery life. Contacts add resistance and heat build up. Doors that open increase device size and decrease case strength. They could have made things easier with screws, but even those would require a larger size.
I don't like the non standard battery size game that device makers play, but Apple is not special. They at least will support the device into the future, which will result in a lot fewer devices thrown out.
Re:It *is* no surprise (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm more curious how long before the battery will need replacement. I know the battery in my phone doesn't last nearly as long as it did 6 months ago. I can go maybe 6-8 hours on it now, whereas the very first charge lasted a few days. I wonder if the iPhone battery will degrade similarly.
In light of iPod, why is iPhone battery a shock? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you looked at the pictures and watched the video Apple released prior to the 29th, it doesn't take a genius to figure out the iPhone is not meant to be pulled apart.
Instead of waiting in line like a tool for four days, people complaining about battery life could have waited two days after release (like I did), futzed around with one before you bought it, and EASILY figured out the battery is not a user replaceable item.
Let's get real... the iPhone is a do-everything device in a form factor nobody expected to be as small as it is. You have to give up something somewhere... in this case, it is the battery... suck it up.
Re:Surprised? (Score:3, Insightful)
The benefit the iPhone provides most of us (in geekdom), is that it is a revolutionary way to surf the web on a mobile device.
I don't think the iPhone brings any huge benefit to geeks. It is aimed squarely at the more casual user market who doesn't mind paying for something that works easily and is learnable. I don't use half the features of my existing phone, and it does not have a lot of what the iPhone does. I probably would use those features if they were simple and I did not have to spend time learning them and setting them up properly. That is where the iPhone is targeted. Just as the iPod mostly was aimed at people with portable CD players by making a digital player easy enough to be convenient, the iPhone is targeting people without a smartphone who have avoided them while waiting for a really good UI/experience to emerge.
That said, it's overpriced for what it is.
The iPod was more expensive and had smaller capacity than a Nomad. I think the iPhone is priced right for their target.
Apple makes a habit of ensuring that you as a consumer are 'locked in' to their platform.
Well, I'm typing this on a MacBook. The only way it locks me into another Mac going forward is incidentally (software compatibility) and by being superior to other offerings. All my data is stored in formats that can either work on another platform or convert easily. How have they locked me in?
There is an argument for lock in on the iPod, but it does not hold up to close scrutiny. Sure there is DRM, but when it came out it was the weakest DRM anyone had managed to get the recording industry to agree to and since then Apple has fought hard to get them to agree to go without it. Also, since Apple knows about how many songs on their iPods come from iTunes versus from CDs and P2P, they know that any such lock-in is incredibly small compared to the bad press it can bring them.
Now I'm not saying Apple is acting towards anything but their own profit margins, but I just don't see how they are using any real lock-in, except where forced to do so by external companies.
They are turning into yet another Microsoft, from another angle.
The problem with Microsoft is that they are an abusive monopoly. Apple is approaching that level of influence in the iPod market, but I don't see a lot of abuse, and certainly not a pattern of it like MS has demonstrated. When and if the iPod ever is recognized as having that much market share, Apple should be forced to stop unequal bundling, but since they are already in the process of breaking that bundling via their DRMless music downloads, I don't see it as a large issue. Apple has not been afraid of competing on a level field based upon the merits of their product, and that is what MS avoids through illegal activity.
I am rather alarmed that people don't realize that Apple is no different than Microsoft in that they want market share for their devices, and they want money.
You can stop being alarmed. I've never heard anyone assert that Apple was not working to get money like every other business. As for "lock-in" I think I already covered that.
Apple is a closed architecture, especially with the iPhone.
Apple is an architecture? I thought they were a company. They sell an OS that is partially open and partially closed. They provide software of both stripes.
When people realize that Apple is no different than Microsoft
Gandhi and Jeffrey Dahmer both ate living things when they were hungry. When people realize they are no different...
Your asserting it does not make it true. Apple and MS are both for profit businesses. Apple plays fairly nicely with other vendors, partners, and the OSS community. MS has killed more of their partners than anyone can recall and are convicted criminals who based their business model on breaking the law and then tying up the
Who said Apple people are stupid? (Score:-1, Insightful)
It is their customers who are stupid.
And frankly, if someone has 500$ to blow on a phone (screw the "its not JUST a phone" excuse - its not called iBlender or iVibrator) - they deserve to pay 90$ and more to have their battery replaced.
And 50$ for the iString so they can hang the phone around their neck or 80$ for the iBag so they can carry it on their hip.
Screw 'em.
If they are willing to spend that amount of $$$ on a phone - hell yeah they should pay +90$ for the battery.
Its called sweet irony.
Non user-serviceable is a feature, not a bug (Score:4, Insightful)
About two weeks ago, my 11-month old son found my wife's cel phone, managed to knock off the battery cover, and crawl around playing with it. It took us a week to find it, and in that week, her phone was unstable because the batteries would pop out. Another time with another phone, I dropped it and the cover cracked... used masking tape for a bit, and realized that it was time for a new phone anyway. Number of cel phones where we lost the battery cover in the past 5 years, 2.
The last time I replaced the battery on my phone was my Samsung i330 where I bought the extra-length battery for around $50 to last longer, and it's battery time remained shorter than the iPhone. This was back in 2002 or 2003. Number of batteries I've replaced in the past 5 years, 1.
So given the choice between non-user accessible battery covers, or a slightly more expensive battery replacement in the unlikely event that I need to replace the battery, I think that Apple made the right call.
Re:based on the cost... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's well known that to maximize life out of rechargeable batteries, you need to avoid draining the battery to completely empty and avoid overcharging the battery. NiCad batteries are especially sensitive to overcharging which results in the mythical "memory effect".
So if you frequently plug your phone in for a bit here, or a bit there and infrequently letting the battery fully discharge or charge that's ideal. Or perhaps you phone/charger is very good at preventing the battery from becoming fully discharged or overcharging the battery.
In applications where battery life is critical (for example, hybrid and electric cars where cell charge is usually maintained between something like 30-80% of full capacity) battery management is critical to maintaining cell capacity. And because the life of a battery shortens significantly when it is fully discharged or charged, that means that you will give up some capacity to increase battery life.
re: proprietary parts (Score:5, Insightful)
It's funny how "vendor lock-in" is used as though it's a unique reason to avoid Apple products, yet I see examples of it rampant with ALL the major PC vendors.
Truthfully, Apple's replacement battery program for the iPhone doesn't strike me as all that unreasonable. The battery in my Moto Razr v3c wore out after about 8 or 9 months of use, and a good replacement for it cost me over $50 at a local cellphone store. So for an iPhone, I might get a few months more use out of their battery than the really slim and relatively low-capacity Razr batteries, and will have to pay about $29 more than I paid for the Razr's replacement? Big whoop.... Yeah, I know. I have to *send it in* for repair. But Apple should give you a postage-paid mailer for this if it's like everything else they do. So the mail-back part should be pretty easy and painless... and a 1-2 day turn-around? I think we can probably live without a cellphone for 24-48 hours, can't we? If not, then pay the $29 for the loaner iPhone. The total isn't much more than you pay in a month just for the service, right?
Re:Quick edit (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: proprietary parts (Score:5, Insightful)
Since hurricane Katrina, I've kept a spare battery in my overnight bag, as I was stuck in Florida without power and a nearly dead phone. Those times are the ones I depend on my cellphone the most, trying to call my airline (flight canceled, can I rebook?), friends and family (is everyone alright?), rent-a-car companies (can I drive to Jacksonville and get a flight outta there?) all in a small window of time. Not being able to swap in a fresh battery is a major CON for me, and maybe a few more nerds like me.
FWIW - my LG VX9800 plays mp3s, and I purchased spare batteries on eBay for $15 each.
Re:I guess Mossberg is spelled Rosenfield ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: proprietary parts (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I guess Mossberg is spelled Rosenfield ? (Score:3, Insightful)
The bigger issue is why Apple can't seem to design their handhelds to use a reasonable amount of power during operation. While a device like this will use a significant amount of power, the iPods were an abomination in terms of battery life. This being Apple, one should really expect that the battery is hardwired unless specifically told otherwise. The cost while high, is probably fair considering that they have to either have a technician or a specialized bit of hardware to desolder the leads, then solder in new ones.
Re: proprietary parts (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes, they all do it, but like so many other things, Apple is just better at it. Apple knows you'll accept their lock in, so they don't even really consider doing things differently.
Battery replacement:
a) There's no need to structure this so you have to wait for your phone to get fixed. With AT&T and Apple stores all across the country, why couldn't you show show up and just swap out your phone for a refurb? I know that wouldn't be as good for Apple, but, heck, maybe it would be helpful for the consumer. Of course, you could also just get an emergency phone that's doesn't happen to be an iPhone. An iPhone loaner would be seriously crippled without your personal data anyway so the difference between it and a P.O.S phone would not be so big that you couldn't get by for 24-48 hours.
b)Yes, this high cost is Apples fault. They have plenty of experience with pissed off customers wanting replacement batteries for iPods. They knew if they didn't offer a user-swappable battery that they'd be stuck with replacing the batteries for a fee. They didn't have to solder the damn thing in. They could have made the battery swap procedure simple enough for any clerk at the Apple store
Yeah, I know, integration and all that. It wouldn't be as stable, thin and pretty if they had removable this and that. But that didn't really require solder, did it? The cost of the labor was made excessively high due to poor planning for an important procedure. In fact, the planning looks so poor that it's hard to believe a detail-orientd company like Apple wouldn't have taken this into consideration. It almost looks like they want you to decide it isn't worth it to replace the battery when you could just put that $100+ dollars into a new iPhone with 16GB of storage and blinking disco lights. Isn't that what they used to tell iPod owners before they implemented their battery replacement program? Go buy another $400 iPod? Maybe they're just making sure you make that choice on your own this time.
Re: proprietary parts (Score:4, Insightful)