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.
iPod Battery Replacement Details from Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Re: Re: !
Sorry, I did not make myself very clear on the phone-thing. The point is, with new Nokia-phones, that they are STUFFED with all the newest technology. It's a fact that MANY of these have to be repaired at some point, it be the battery, the screen, the bluetoot, whatever. The end-user shall not suffer because of this. Scenario 1 year ago: You buy a phone, go home, and discover that bluetooth does not work. You go back to shop, they say: "we fix within 4 week, have to send to Nokia". Scenario TODAY: Go back to store, get a new one.
Now, since there are so much faults with phones, we here in Norway have a laugh about that we allways have to go to the store and "update" 😛 Besides, we do not have to worry ever more about repair-time and stuff like that.
Then you ask me about batteries. If it was just the BATTERY in a phone that is default, we of course just get a new one. THE POINT IS THAT IN AN IPOD _WE_ CANNOT CHANGE IT, probably neither can the store. So? Get a new one. The store has its rights towards the producer of the product, agree? Then, let the store do what is has to do (towards apple), don't let the user suffer.
Then you ask me if a battery was sold seperatly. Do you not think that a single battery differs a lot from an iPod with a not-exchangabel battery? Everybody KNOW that a battery wil die out some day, you'll have to get a new one. But what about when you CAN'T exchange it, i.e. in the iPod?
WHY is this so bad to you? Do you not think that it is a good thing?
Sorry, I did not make myself very clear on the phone-thing. The point is, with new Nokia-phones, that they are STUFFED with all the newest technology. It's a fact that MANY of these have to be repaired at some point, it be the battery, the screen, the bluetoot, whatever. The end-user shall not suffer because of this. Scenario 1 year ago: You buy a phone, go home, and discover that bluetooth does not work. You go back to shop, they say: "we fix within 4 week, have to send to Nokia". Scenario TODAY: Go back to store, get a new one.
Now, since there are so much faults with phones, we here in Norway have a laugh about that we allways have to go to the store and "update" 😛 Besides, we do not have to worry ever more about repair-time and stuff like that.
Then you ask me about batteries. If it was just the BATTERY in a phone that is default, we of course just get a new one. THE POINT IS THAT IN AN IPOD _WE_ CANNOT CHANGE IT, probably neither can the store. So? Get a new one. The store has its rights towards the producer of the product, agree? Then, let the store do what is has to do (towards apple), don't let the user suffer.
Then you ask me if a battery was sold seperatly. Do you not think that a single battery differs a lot from an iPod with a not-exchangabel battery? Everybody KNOW that a battery wil die out some day, you'll have to get a new one. But what about when you CAN'T exchange it, i.e. in the iPod?
WHY is this so bad to you? Do you not think that it is a good thing?
Seriously, why do you mock me around? This is a good law. It stands up for the end-user against the big companys. Maybe you don't think it suits the iPod exampel perfectly, but it is a REALLY good law, and we are WAY ahed the rest of europe on user-rights.
*whimp*
Re: Re: Re: !
I like the idea of the consumer protection, don't get me wrong, i've been stung by warranty "repair" before (aka, "we take lungs today, new lungs come next week" (sic)).
What I see here is the difference between something getting worn out, and something breaking. If your bluetooth stopped working, it should be fixed. If the government says five years minimum, well, five years it is.
By your own admission, everyone knows a battery will wear out. If, as you say, the law doesn't apply to sales of batteries, then by extension it should not apply to devices that contain batteries (or at least the functionality affected by the battery, if the scroll wheel broke, I say replace it) It seems that if you bought a device you knew contained a battery, and you knew the battery would wear out eventually (as "everyone" does) then you don't have much right to complain when the battery wears out. Surely there must be other devices available in norway with rechargeable batteries that cannot be easily replaced.
It would seem that if Apple offered this battery replacement service in Norway, it would satisfy the law no? The battery would then have the ability to be replaced, like that of a phone. Or does the law specify cost/time/convenience?
I like the idea of the consumer protection, don't get me wrong, i've been stung by warranty "repair" before (aka, "we take lungs today, new lungs come next week" (sic)).
What I see here is the difference between something getting worn out, and something breaking. If your bluetooth stopped working, it should be fixed. If the government says five years minimum, well, five years it is.
By your own admission, everyone knows a battery will wear out. If, as you say, the law doesn't apply to sales of batteries, then by extension it should not apply to devices that contain batteries (or at least the functionality affected by the battery, if the scroll wheel broke, I say replace it) It seems that if you bought a device you knew contained a battery, and you knew the battery would wear out eventually (as "everyone" does) then you don't have much right to complain when the battery wears out. Surely there must be other devices available in norway with rechargeable batteries that cannot be easily replaced.
It would seem that if Apple offered this battery replacement service in Norway, it would satisfy the law no? The battery would then have the ability to be replaced, like that of a phone. Or does the law specify cost/time/convenience?
I was just kidding. Like i've said in each of my posts, I like the idea of user protection, i'm just curious as to the intricacies.
MORE user "rights" aren't necessarily a good thing.
Re: Re: Re: Re: !
The law specifies time and convenience. Since the battery cannot be replaced there and then (has to be sent to Apple), the store has a problem.
You see, in a phone, the battery is supposed to be changed, because the battery is not the main part of the phone. Its an device thats easy to replace. This is not the case at iPod. To my 60-year-old aunt, its just one piece of machinery. Sure, she must know that there is some kind of power in there, but it is not reachable. As the device is formed, she is not supposed to worry about it.
In Norway we do not have $99-thing. What shall we do? Crack it open? No. Send it to Apple anyway? Nope, the law says we don't have to. But we _should_, since the user is not supposed to crack it open himself. Then this is a fix. Its not just a battery change. Then again, law says: you don't have to wait for a slow-mo-company to fix your iPod, that is supposed to be working for (more than) five years.
I understand that you find this strange, but take my words on this: The rest of Europe WILL follow, and in another 40-50 years, America will too. From THEN on, when all the iPod-buying countries has consumer-laws like this, Apple wont dare to make blunders like this - where you can't replace the battery yourself.
Of course, by then batteries will last for decades without recharging 😎
The law specifies time and convenience. Since the battery cannot be replaced there and then (has to be sent to Apple), the store has a problem.
You see, in a phone, the battery is supposed to be changed, because the battery is not the main part of the phone. Its an device thats easy to replace. This is not the case at iPod. To my 60-year-old aunt, its just one piece of machinery. Sure, she must know that there is some kind of power in there, but it is not reachable. As the device is formed, she is not supposed to worry about it.
In Norway we do not have $99-thing. What shall we do? Crack it open? No. Send it to Apple anyway? Nope, the law says we don't have to. But we _should_, since the user is not supposed to crack it open himself. Then this is a fix. Its not just a battery change. Then again, law says: you don't have to wait for a slow-mo-company to fix your iPod, that is supposed to be working for (more than) five years.
I understand that you find this strange, but take my words on this: The rest of Europe WILL follow, and in another 40-50 years, America will too. From THEN on, when all the iPod-buying countries has consumer-laws like this, Apple wont dare to make blunders like this - where you can't replace the battery yourself.
Of course, by then batteries will last for decades without recharging 😎
Who made up the 5-year number for Norway? The iPod has always been known to last no more than three-ish years on the battery, and if you're buying one, don't you have any responsibility to research your purchase?
What if it was *designed* to last only 2-3 years? Does the government have the right to say "Sorry, tough luck, we say it should be five"
That kind of thing would NEVER fly in the US. I'm a consumer and not rich, and I would fight against it...Some moron politician is the last person I want telling a technology company how their technology *will* (not should) work.
What if it was *designed* to last only 2-3 years? Does the government have the right to say "Sorry, tough luck, we say it should be five"
That kind of thing would NEVER fly in the US. I'm a consumer and not rich, and I would fight against it...Some moron politician is the last person I want telling a technology company how their technology *will* (not should) work.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: !
Ok, well I don't completely disagree with that. As I said before, I like the idea of less wait. It's not always practical, however.
I think 40-50 years is a little optimistic, it probably won't ever happen. I also find the underlying assumption that socialism is an indicator of progress to be pretty funny as well, but back to the topic:
At what point is a company able to say "this is the product we can offer at this price, these are the capabilities of this product. Would you like to buy it?"
Apple never advertised, listed or represented their product as being capable of lasting indefinitely, they didn't even say it could last five years.
If you want to make a law saying every product that uses a battery must have a removable one, that's fine. But If I truthfully represent the capabilities of my product to you, and you buy it anyway. You should have no right to demand a replacement when you wear it out. Anything else would be false advertising, and we do have laws against that, even here in the stoneage, I mean US.
If its possible that a device (perhaps not even an iPod) is technologically incapable of lasting for 5 years, at what point is the company who sells it no longer liable under this law?
You said yourself that "everyone knows" a battery has a limited life, and as such, people who sell batteries are not held by this law. At what point does this law take into account such generally accepted knowledge? How does such knowlege come to BE generally accepted? Is it not the responsibility of the company to state the capabilities of their product?
I'm sorry if i'm coming across harsh here, but i'm genuinely curious.
Ok, well I don't completely disagree with that. As I said before, I like the idea of less wait. It's not always practical, however.
I think 40-50 years is a little optimistic, it probably won't ever happen. I also find the underlying assumption that socialism is an indicator of progress to be pretty funny as well, but back to the topic:
At what point is a company able to say "this is the product we can offer at this price, these are the capabilities of this product. Would you like to buy it?"
Apple never advertised, listed or represented their product as being capable of lasting indefinitely, they didn't even say it could last five years.
If you want to make a law saying every product that uses a battery must have a removable one, that's fine. But If I truthfully represent the capabilities of my product to you, and you buy it anyway. You should have no right to demand a replacement when you wear it out. Anything else would be false advertising, and we do have laws against that, even here in the stoneage, I mean US.
If its possible that a device (perhaps not even an iPod) is technologically incapable of lasting for 5 years, at what point is the company who sells it no longer liable under this law?
You said yourself that "everyone knows" a battery has a limited life, and as such, people who sell batteries are not held by this law. At what point does this law take into account such generally accepted knowledge? How does such knowlege come to BE generally accepted? Is it not the responsibility of the company to state the capabilities of their product?
I'm sorry if i'm coming across harsh here, but i'm genuinely curious.
The courts have settled the 5-year number.
As you say, iPod usually lasts longer than 3 year, maybe modt probably 7-8 years (?).
But when this FAILS, the thing stops at 2.5 years... Then what? According to our law, you'll have to see at what you can EXPECT from the thing. And Apple cannot operate with i.e. 2-8 years. Because if they do, it's all up to you luck. And that's not what a consumer is paying for, is it?
I guess my country is a bit more left/red-ish. America is VERY Blue/right-ish. Everything is private, even hospitals and military food (McDonalds in a tent in Iraq). We have free health-care and organ-transplants for everyone, no matter your income and insurances.
BTW, anyone know about a law/political forum? Guess that'd be more suted for my discussion-needs... 🙄 😀 😛
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: !
YOU:
I think 40-50 years is a little optimistic, it probably won't ever happen. I also find the underlying assumption that socialism is an indicator of progress to be pretty funny as well, but back to the topic:
ME:
Depends on what you specify as progress. Progress for EVERYONE, or just some? Remember, Norway is _THE_richest_ country in the world, when you look at the living standards for each and every person. FAR beyond US.
YOU:
At what point is a company able to say "this is the product we can offer at this price, these are the capabilities of this product. Would you like to buy it?"
ME:
Does Apple do this? Look at their pages, does it say: "Will die after X years"?
YOU:
Apple never advertised, listed or represented their product as being capable of lasting indefinitely, they didn't even say it could last five years.
ME:
They don't say anything. They have realized that it should be battery-replacable, hence the $99-thing. The iPod itself lasts "forever", the battery don't.
YOU:
If you want to make a law saying every product that uses a battery must have a removable one, that's fine. But If I truthfully represent the capabilities of my product to you, and you buy it anyway. You should have no right to demand a replacement when you wear it out. Anything else would be false advertising, and we do have laws against that, even here in the stoneage, I mean US.
ME:
Does apple do this? US is not the stone-age! 😉 US is democracy gone wild (Bush behind the wheel...)
YOU:
If its possible that a device (perhaps not even an iPod) is technologically incapable of lasting for 5 years, at what point is the company who sells it no longer liable under this law?
ME:
I hope I understood. Answer: The consumer shall expect a sertain lifetime for certain products. Period. The consumer shall not have hassels with NOKIA, or anybody. ("Liable"...?)
YOU:
You said yourself that "everyone knows" a battery has a limited life, and as such, people who sell batteries are not held by this law. At what point does this law take into account such generally accepted knowledge? How does such knowlege come to BE generally accepted? Is it not the responsibility of the company to state the capabilities of their product?
ME:
A consumer shall expect a certain lifetime for certain products. How long do YOU think your batteries should work? What is normal?
Norway is not Apples largest marked, so I don't really think they care too much. But if they took a look at our laws about this, they'd realize that things have gone wrong for them here.
YOU:
I'm sorry if i'm coming across harsh here, but i'm genuinely curious.
ME:
I'm generally willing to answer! 😀
YOU:
I think 40-50 years is a little optimistic, it probably won't ever happen. I also find the underlying assumption that socialism is an indicator of progress to be pretty funny as well, but back to the topic:
ME:
Depends on what you specify as progress. Progress for EVERYONE, or just some? Remember, Norway is _THE_richest_ country in the world, when you look at the living standards for each and every person. FAR beyond US.
YOU:
At what point is a company able to say "this is the product we can offer at this price, these are the capabilities of this product. Would you like to buy it?"
ME:
Does Apple do this? Look at their pages, does it say: "Will die after X years"?
YOU:
Apple never advertised, listed or represented their product as being capable of lasting indefinitely, they didn't even say it could last five years.
ME:
They don't say anything. They have realized that it should be battery-replacable, hence the $99-thing. The iPod itself lasts "forever", the battery don't.
YOU:
If you want to make a law saying every product that uses a battery must have a removable one, that's fine. But If I truthfully represent the capabilities of my product to you, and you buy it anyway. You should have no right to demand a replacement when you wear it out. Anything else would be false advertising, and we do have laws against that, even here in the stoneage, I mean US.
ME:
Does apple do this? US is not the stone-age! 😉 US is democracy gone wild (Bush behind the wheel...)
YOU:
If its possible that a device (perhaps not even an iPod) is technologically incapable of lasting for 5 years, at what point is the company who sells it no longer liable under this law?
ME:
I hope I understood. Answer: The consumer shall expect a sertain lifetime for certain products. Period. The consumer shall not have hassels with NOKIA, or anybody. ("Liable"...?)
YOU:
You said yourself that "everyone knows" a battery has a limited life, and as such, people who sell batteries are not held by this law. At what point does this law take into account such generally accepted knowledge? How does such knowlege come to BE generally accepted? Is it not the responsibility of the company to state the capabilities of their product?
ME:
A consumer shall expect a certain lifetime for certain products. How long do YOU think your batteries should work? What is normal?
Norway is not Apples largest marked, so I don't really think they care too much. But if they took a look at our laws about this, they'd realize that things have gone wrong for them here.
YOU:
I'm sorry if i'm coming across harsh here, but i'm genuinely curious.
ME:
I'm generally willing to answer! 😀
You guys complaining don't seem to get it.
This proceedure is GOOD for the customer. What they are probably doing is "pre-repairing/refurbushing" the units. When you send yours in, they already have a unit completely ready to send out to you. It's already had the battery replaced, refurbushed, buffed and cleaned up, flashed to the latest firmware and made perfect, aside from the fact that it's technically "used" (but so was the one you sent in).
This way, you get a virtually new iPod, and it's ready to go right away. You don't have to wait for them to replace the battery in your specific unit, as they already have a comparable one fixed up and ready to send out. All they have to do is make sure they send the right size/generation to the right person.
Your service is quicker, better, and more efficent for everyone involved.
The reason people with engraving have to wait, is because they either need to re-engrave the refurbushed unit, or they need to actually inturrupt their normal refurbishing process to install the original back plate on the refurb they are sending out.
For some people, especially those who are comfortable prying apart their iPod, it might be a better option to buy an aftermarket battery for $50 and do it themselves. But for the average consumer, or someone smart enough to realize the benefits of getting a refurbushed product that will have been cleaned up, refreshed and totally checked out by an Apple tech, this $99 battery replacement service is a GREAT idea.
This proceedure is GOOD for the customer. What they are probably doing is "pre-repairing/refurbushing" the units. When you send yours in, they already have a unit completely ready to send out to you. It's already had the battery replaced, refurbushed, buffed and cleaned up, flashed to the latest firmware and made perfect, aside from the fact that it's technically "used" (but so was the one you sent in).
This way, you get a virtually new iPod, and it's ready to go right away. You don't have to wait for them to replace the battery in your specific unit, as they already have a comparable one fixed up and ready to send out. All they have to do is make sure they send the right size/generation to the right person.
Your service is quicker, better, and more efficent for everyone involved.
The reason people with engraving have to wait, is because they either need to re-engrave the refurbushed unit, or they need to actually inturrupt their normal refurbishing process to install the original back plate on the refurb they are sending out.
For some people, especially those who are comfortable prying apart their iPod, it might be a better option to buy an aftermarket battery for $50 and do it themselves. But for the average consumer, or someone smart enough to realize the benefits of getting a refurbushed product that will have been cleaned up, refreshed and totally checked out by an Apple tech, this $99 battery replacement service is a GREAT idea.
Nicky G
macrumors 65816
And you don't think that Apple's higher prices in Europe in any way reflect these kinds of local laws? I agree, it sounds like a great law on the surface -- but companies can easily buffer those kinds of losses, and the easiest way is by charging more for the product in the first place. It doesn't strike me that the consumer is really gaining anything in the end.
T
Yeah, POOR BIG COMPANY.
You think the consumer is gaining now? With uncertanty? With a product, only capable of lasting 5-7 years? WHATS THAT ALL ABOUT? Do you defend stupidity like that? Come on! Commodore 64's from the 80's still work like clocks! Why shall one not expect that from an IPOD!?!?!?
Yeah, POOR BIG COMPANY.
You think the consumer is gaining now? With uncertanty? With a product, only capable of lasting 5-7 years? WHATS THAT ALL ABOUT? Do you defend stupidity like that? Come on! Commodore 64's from the 80's still work like clocks! Why shall one not expect that from an IPOD!?!?!?
It's all about the expected lifetime for products. In Norway it's generally said that most electronic devices, including products such as the iPod, a mobile, a TV, stereo or a computer, should last for at least five years. That is what we pay for (and Norway has relatively low prices on such equipment, compared to other European countries).
Therefore, if it fails working and the lifetime gets shorter than expected, you have the right to get it repaired/replaced.
It's simple really...
(Although I'm also Norwegian I didn't know that I have the right to get it repaired/replaced at once - I guess the law is too new for me)
The battery is worth $5 tops. I'm sure Apple pays less than that.Here is something similar for $4 in bulk, just $5.50 each.
The real issue is that it's not user replaceable as a design feature. Apple knew the batteries wouldn't last long on a device people use daily. Li-ion cells are usually only good for under 1000 cycles.
The real issue is that it's not user replaceable as a design feature. Apple knew the batteries wouldn't last long on a device people use daily. Li-ion cells are usually only good for under 1000 cycles.
im surprised to see anyone actually complaining about the norwegian law that supports the common folk....ie..consumer.
doesnt everyone deserve protection from the government from the big business, and yes apple is included in this.
you die hard apple fans are sickening when you stick up for the fact that people shouldnt cry about having a product that will last them only a couple of years which would force them into buying a replacement.
doesnt everyone deserve protection from the government from the big business, and yes apple is included in this.
you die hard apple fans are sickening when you stick up for the fact that people shouldnt cry about having a product that will last them only a couple of years which would force them into buying a replacement.
crazytom
macrumors 6502a
Personally, I'm shocked that Apple isn't charging MORE for the replacement battery. I'm just happy to see there's an alternative---I have no qualms about opening up my iPod to change the battery/hard drive to save a small fortune. Deep down, Apple is just another M$ with a slightly better demeanor.
Ok I think both sides have a good point here. First lemmie lay out my bias. Liberal Democrat with no love for Bush. I belive in alot of the very fore-ward looking stuff going on in Europe.
Anyways I agree with the Norwegians (sp?) when they say that the device should last 5+ years. However we know obviously that the battery will not.
He bottom line for Apple. A. Put battery life in small print. B. Make the iPod battery replacible.
If they did either one of those (or both) I would not feel sorry at all for consumers wishing for a replacement. But becouse they make replacement so difficult I feel that this law is no entirely unfair.
On a side note. Though the per-capita is higher in Norway due to high taxes their take home average is not very high. Still when you factor in all the great stuff those taxes are used for it would be safe to say they are near the top. It just depends on how you look at it.
I hope nobody feels like a took a shot at them in this Becouse thats not true in the least. Well exept for people talking about iTunes, don't worry Apple is working their butts off to make it happen but its very very hard!
Anyways I agree with the Norwegians (sp?) when they say that the device should last 5+ years. However we know obviously that the battery will not.
He bottom line for Apple. A. Put battery life in small print. B. Make the iPod battery replacible.
If they did either one of those (or both) I would not feel sorry at all for consumers wishing for a replacement. But becouse they make replacement so difficult I feel that this law is no entirely unfair.
On a side note. Though the per-capita is higher in Norway due to high taxes their take home average is not very high. Still when you factor in all the great stuff those taxes are used for it would be safe to say they are near the top. It just depends on how you look at it.
I hope nobody feels like a took a shot at them in this Becouse thats not true in the least. Well exept for people talking about iTunes, don't worry Apple is working their butts off to make it happen but its very very hard!
WHAT MADNESS!
Why can't they teach the service techs at Comp USA and Best Buy to do this for 30 bucks? If they can put ram into an iBook this shouldn't be a problem.
On another note...I don't see getting anything that says you won't get your same HD back...I could be very very wrong on that of course, but it might be nice if they replaced a cracked screen and all the other things that can go wrong with these things with refurbished equipment. Not that I really know what problems if any are had.... At any rate, it might be like getting a band new (1st or 2nd gen) iPod back, for just 99 bucks, and that could maybe be nice for some people....
But like I said, there is no reason comp USA should not be able to crack this baby open and put a new battery AND NOTHING ELSE in.
Something ODD is going on here. Things were going so well for the iPod....why f it up?
Why can't they teach the service techs at Comp USA and Best Buy to do this for 30 bucks? If they can put ram into an iBook this shouldn't be a problem.
On another note...I don't see getting anything that says you won't get your same HD back...I could be very very wrong on that of course, but it might be nice if they replaced a cracked screen and all the other things that can go wrong with these things with refurbished equipment. Not that I really know what problems if any are had.... At any rate, it might be like getting a band new (1st or 2nd gen) iPod back, for just 99 bucks, and that could maybe be nice for some people....
But like I said, there is no reason comp USA should not be able to crack this baby open and put a new battery AND NOTHING ELSE in.
Something ODD is going on here. Things were going so well for the iPod....why f it up?
Re: WHAT MADNESS!
It's not odd.
This is pretty standard for warranty repairs. Read the terms of any warranty. If you get anything (monitor, computer etc...) repaired... they reserve the right to replace it with refurbished parts.
As someone else stated, you get a new case. They just don't guarantee you get the exact same innards.
It's most likely a side effect of the fact that they are processing this through their repair channels.
iPod with a bad hard drive comes in, they put it into the "look into this" pile and send out an iPod which has been factory refurbed... same deal.
arn
It's not odd.
This is pretty standard for warranty repairs. Read the terms of any warranty. If you get anything (monitor, computer etc...) repaired... they reserve the right to replace it with refurbished parts.
As someone else stated, you get a new case. They just don't guarantee you get the exact same innards.
It's most likely a side effect of the fact that they are processing this through their repair channels.
iPod with a bad hard drive comes in, they put it into the "look into this" pile and send out an iPod which has been factory refurbed... same deal.
arn
Re: to the whiners
Hmmm..... it would appear that the only thing European education systems teach is the correct grammatical use of the word "already".
😛
Hmmm..... it would appear that the only thing European education systems teach is the correct grammatical use of the word "already".
😛