As the Apple Turns: lower battery capacity on new iPods

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by WinterMute, May 2, 2003.

  1. Moderator emeritus

    WinterMute

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Location:
    London, England
    #1
    Link:http://www.appleturns.com/

    The battery apparently has 20-45% less capacity than the original, equating to 8 rather than 10 hours.

    I did a quick search on the board, but I don't think this has been posted yet, apologies if it has.
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2003
    Location:
    Kalifornia
    #2
    I noticed the new "8 hour capacity" too for the new iPods. I tend to think that the new iPods don't actually have a reduced battery capacity, Apple is just being a little more honest about it's true capacity to begin with. In other posts, I noticed that there were many complaints from iPod owners about not being able to get 10 hours out of the old ones. I could get the 10-11 hours, provided I didn't skip around to different tracks which causes the hard drive to activate more and if I used it after a fresh charge.

    I think there was this same issue with the iBooks. Apple claimed something like 5-6 hours(?) but none of the reviewers I read about couldn't squeeze out that much time with normal use.
     
  3. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    Ontario-> Louisiana-> Colorado-> Ontario
    #3
    the new ipods have a different battery also I guess lithium ion is cheaper then the lithium polymer that my 5gb has? Makes sense to bring the price down.
     
  4. macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #4
    "I noticed the new "8 hour capacity" too for the new iPods. I tend to think that the new iPods don't actually have a reduced battery capacity, Apple is just being a little more honest about it's true capacity to begin with."

    Yeah right. Apple *always* lists the battery life under ideal conditions. If the old one is listed at 10 and lasts 8 in reality, you can bet that one listed at 8 will really last more like 6. [for my part, I do get 10 hours on my 5gb ipod ever since 1.2.6, and 11.5 hours if I just let it play without touching anything. :) ]

    I've been pointing out this loss of battery life since monday, and I think it s****. Personally, I would take the old 20 gb over the new 30, hands down, for this reason alone. I like to carry my ipod around all day; battery life is not a trivial issue. I routinely get the battery low enough that if I had a new ipod, it would be dead by the end of the day.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    melchior

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    #5
    i had noticed the 8 hours and that didn't bother me especially but i had not noticed the step backwards to the lithium ion. that sucks.

    though i would say the reason would be size and weight. the lithium polymer battery is special because it doesn't require an alumnium or steel can, the polymer design gives internal stack pressure and it can be moulded to whatever shape you need. (i.e. to make a long thin battery)

    i would guess given the new small/lighter iPod that this was the major factor. but it's an offset, a 'small' loss for a much lighter/smaller ipod...
     
  6. macrumors 65816

    yzedf

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2002
    Location:
    Connecticut
    #6
    Considering the reject rate of the old style iPod battery, change can only be good.
     
  7. macrumors 65816

    Elan0204

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #7
    WSJ Review and Battery Life

    From MacMinute:

    The full WSJ article can be found here.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    melchior

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    #8
    that's.... ouch!

    considering the battery is probably good for 500 full charges...

    i hope he just got a dud.
     

Share This Page