Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Are non-removable batteries here to stay?
- Thread starter tim100
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They're probably here to stay on Macs, but that has nothing to do with the rest of the market. The iPhone has a non-removable battery, but all other cellphones still have a battery door.
Apple loves to make stuff non-removable because it's a win-win situation for them... they can make their stuff even thinner (always the #1 priority) and they can squeeze more money out of customers for battery replacement.
Apple loves to make stuff non-removable because it's a win-win situation for them... they can make their stuff even thinner (always the #1 priority) and they can squeeze more money out of customers for battery replacement.
I've wondered about this. Are you certain Apple will net out ahead going this route? If one needs to replace their battery only once in 4-5 years versus replacing it every 2 years...
Time will tell. I guess if for some reason a problem develops with the non-replaceables and Apple has to pay for replacements, the replaceable may return.
Personally I prefer the replaceable, I mean if I take my MBP and 2 extra batteries on a camping trip, I have 15 hours of use before I need to recharge. With the new MBP's I would need to be near a charge source every 8 hours.
Batteries in time do need replacing, being able to replace one yourself would be quicker and maybe cheaper.
Of course maybe Apple is concerned with people shoving 3rd Party replacement batteries inside their notebooks, and the possiblity of a non-Apple battery failing and causing a problem in the notebook? I don't know the reasoning behind Apple's decision, I just know I like replaceable batteries.
Personally I prefer the replaceable, I mean if I take my MBP and 2 extra batteries on a camping trip, I have 15 hours of use before I need to recharge. With the new MBP's I would need to be near a charge source every 8 hours.
Batteries in time do need replacing, being able to replace one yourself would be quicker and maybe cheaper.
Of course maybe Apple is concerned with people shoving 3rd Party replacement batteries inside their notebooks, and the possiblity of a non-Apple battery failing and causing a problem in the notebook? I don't know the reasoning behind Apple's decision, I just know I like replaceable batteries.
As mentioned, it's Apple's new trend and it's here to stay. I really doubt it cares about the extra money from people buying more than one battery.
I doubt a majority of MacBook users buy an extra battery (I've met one person in past two years who did). Plus Apple already makes a good profit on each MacBook it sells.
I mean, it does bother "Pro" customers for Apple. Seeing as how Apple has dropped Express Cards and gotten rid of Matte Screens for the 15", my guess is Apple isn't too concerned with the "Pro" niche anymore.
I doubt a majority of MacBook users buy an extra battery (I've met one person in past two years who did). Plus Apple already makes a good profit on each MacBook it sells.
I mean, it does bother "Pro" customers for Apple. Seeing as how Apple has dropped Express Cards and gotten rid of Matte Screens for the 15", my guess is Apple isn't too concerned with the "Pro" niche anymore.
Most reports seem to say that the non-removableness of the battery is what is giving it a lot of the extra life. Because of the nature of not-wasting space and what not, I would say they are probably here to stay. Apple will at least wait until removable ones can catch up to providing the same life, but even then, it's likely that the non-removable route would then provide even further battery life.
What's wrong with external battery packs?
They are more universal and convenient to use.
Well, they are replaceable, technically. Not on-the-fly replaceable, but you can replace it yourself. According to IFixIt, the warning label is just BS that's there to intimidate. So they're not really stopping anyone from buying 3rd party batteries. I think it's purely about gaining some space inside the machines by eliminating various mechanisms.
I would say no. Apple could have and should have used this new battery technology in a form similar to the last gen MBP. The battery itself as part of the outer case. I see this "feature" coming back one day as a selling point. Also, there is no reason that this new battery tech can't be used for the older MBPs. All someone has to do is make the batteries.
Call me cynical but...
Hmm... the more I think about it, the more I think that Apple is just taking the opportunity to make the battery non-user replaceable while minimizing outcry and even getting commendations!
I will confess outright that I'm no engineer. But if you look at the fixed battery as it is now, don't you think it would be possible to implement a removal mechanism at the cost of perhaps 10% of the capacity/volume?
The fixed nature is not the sole or even the main contributor to the better battery life we have now, in my humble opinion. Apple said, most batteries nowadays use cylindrical cells within a rectangular battery pack, so by using that wasted space you gain battery life. That and the lithium polymer technology that allows a "fully packed" battery pack - the use of lithium polymer as opposed to plain ol' lithium ion also contributes to the better battery life I bet. And with the new 15" unibodies, I think Apple's removal of the express card slot allowed them to reclaim even more space for an even bigger battery!
It's also the lithium polymer technology that gives that magnificent "5 year life with 1000 recharges", not the built-in nature of the batteries.
I mean, look at the late '08 unibodies, the battery cover is a thin sheet of metal - nothing space wasting about that.
And even in its current "non-removable state", I'm sure all of us would be able to replace it more easily than the hard disk. Yet Apple used tri-wing screws and told us not to, just convincing me all the more they want us to get batteries from them, allow them to make use of their Apple stores and staff, and dispose of batteries for us (nothing wrong with this in particular).
What do you guys think?
Hmm... the more I think about it, the more I think that Apple is just taking the opportunity to make the battery non-user replaceable while minimizing outcry and even getting commendations!
I will confess outright that I'm no engineer. But if you look at the fixed battery as it is now, don't you think it would be possible to implement a removal mechanism at the cost of perhaps 10% of the capacity/volume?
The fixed nature is not the sole or even the main contributor to the better battery life we have now, in my humble opinion. Apple said, most batteries nowadays use cylindrical cells within a rectangular battery pack, so by using that wasted space you gain battery life. That and the lithium polymer technology that allows a "fully packed" battery pack - the use of lithium polymer as opposed to plain ol' lithium ion also contributes to the better battery life I bet. And with the new 15" unibodies, I think Apple's removal of the express card slot allowed them to reclaim even more space for an even bigger battery!
It's also the lithium polymer technology that gives that magnificent "5 year life with 1000 recharges", not the built-in nature of the batteries.
I mean, look at the late '08 unibodies, the battery cover is a thin sheet of metal - nothing space wasting about that.
And even in its current "non-removable state", I'm sure all of us would be able to replace it more easily than the hard disk. Yet Apple used tri-wing screws and told us not to, just convincing me all the more they want us to get batteries from them, allow them to make use of their Apple stores and staff, and dispose of batteries for us (nothing wrong with this in particular).
What do you guys think?
Then lets call it having a FRU versuse a DRU
FRU = Field Replaceable Unit ( No Tools )
DRU = Depot Replaceable Unit ( Requires Tools )
I know I am not the 'average' notebook user as I rarely use it sitting at a desk or a table. I am always out on the road figuratively speaking. Sometimes the road is nothing more than a fire cut leading into the forest, sometimes the road is a gravel strip leading to the waterfront.
For me, having the option of carrying an extra battery or two is a plus.
Now if only I could design a Solar Powered Battery Charger for the batteries.
Agreed, this statement makes no sense, at least for notebooks, given that battery replacement costs $129, which is the same price as Apple's current replacement batteries.
I've heard about this but I can't find the source?
I've looked and when the 17" first introduced this battery situation the cost was US$180 for the battery replacement. Has it really dropped for all the notebooks now?
And eBay has batteries for the unibodies for US$85 and I believe they are OEMs straight from the factories in China Apple gets them from anyway.
What's wrong with external battery packs?
They are more universal and convenient to use.
Can you recommend a good external battery pack?
Source:
http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro/service/battery/
Looks like it is $179 for the 17", but it's $129 for the 15 and 13.
http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro/service/battery/
Looks like it is $179 for the 17", but it's $129 for the 15 and 13.
Yeah, they make it sound like they completely reinvented batteries, so my question is really why didn't this "revolution" amount to more than it did? Removing the door mechanism, filling out the void between cylindrical cells and replacing Li-Ion with Li-Polymer, and all they got is, what, a couple more hours worth? Sounds like something they could've achieved by just removing the battery door and locking mechanism and sizing up their old battery accordingly.
Dell's Latitude E6400 boasts 10 hours of battery life, and with the optional snap-on battery you get 19 hours. That's 2½ times the battery life of the uMBP 17", despite using (presumably) traditional battery technology with cylindrical cells.
Apple has been using lithium-polymer batteries for some time now, with normal "1 year or 300 cycles" warranty. So it's improved lithium-polymer that's responsible for new estimate of 1000 recharges, not an entirely new technology. However, energy density of these batteries doesn't really increase anymore - increasing battery life means increasing battery size and decreasing power consumption.
You're asking the wrong question. The question is, "would a user who isn't content with the 10 hour battery life be willing to carry a snap-on battery that gives another 9 hours?" If someone is crazy enough to need 19 hours worth of battery life then I'm pretty sure that he/she would gladly accept the portability trade off. And just when you thought the 19-hour guy was crazy enough, along comes the guy who "needs" 38 hours. Fine, so buy an extra set of 9+6 cell batteries for the Dell. With the uMBP 17", his options are: 8 hours, 8 hours or 8 hours.
Anyway, that's all besides the point. My question was, if Dell can squeeze 10 hours out of a conventional, replaceable Li-Ion battery on a 15" notebook, why do you only get 7 hours out of Apple's non-replaceable Li-Polymer ultra mega super battery with rectangular cells? After all, the Dell runs Windows, and Mac users often complain that Windows in Boot Camp cuts the battery life in half... so, would a Hackintosh Dell run for 20 hours on a single charge?
I bet we will see some external batteries soonish that plug into the magsafe
They are already available.