MacBook Air Battery Replacement Trivial?

[eastcoastsurfer]

The 777 I flew to Tokyo direct from ATL was a Delta flight, and it had no power in coach. And yes, the flight time was around 14 hours. Then you had an hour or so train ride into the city.

The return flight was only 12ish hours. I guess the jet stream really helps out

I checked seatguru and it said Delta is working to have 2 power outlets per 3 seats on the 777s. Hmm...

I guess Delta (and everyone but AA) is considered a third world airline?

 

[j26]

This is good news, and allays one of my concerns about the MBA.

Now if only changing the footprint was trivial

 

[AidenShaw]

Data point - tests show MBP gets about half what Apple claims

In MacWorld's battery life testing, an MBP undergoing light usage got about half of what Apple claims...

Apple: (http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/specs.html)

o 15-inch MacBook Pro
--- 60-watt-hour lithium-polymer battery (with integrated charge indicator LEDs) providing up to 6 hours of battery life

MacWorld: (http://www.macworld.com/article/58476/2007/06/macbookprorev.html)

The Santa Rosa chip set, as well as the switch to LED backlighting in the 15-inch models, boosts the MacBook Pros’ battery life.

In our testing, both the 15- and 17-inch models delivered an impressive 3 hours, approximately, of DVD playback. This represents a gain of 11 percent for the 15-inch models and 14 percent for the 17-inch model over the previous generations.

Surprisingly, we didn’t do as well—about 2.5 hours—in our wireless productivity test (writing in Microsoft Word while listening to streaming audio and checking e-mail via AirPort) on the 15-inch unit. Without the streaming audio, however, the batteries lasted just over 3 hours.

 

[jragosta]

In MacWorld's battery life testing, an MBP undergoing light usage got about half of what Apple claims...

That is, if your defiinition of 'light usage' is sufficiently bizarre:

"writing in Microsoft Word while listening to streaming audio and checking e-mail via AirPort"

 

[nostaws]

Honestly this was my only concern about the computer. I have no problem with the RAM. And I never use my optical drive (except to install an OS).

And I don't necessarily have a problem with the concept of a Apple replaceable battery, but Because I have had SO MANY problems with the mac book pro batteries, that would have really kept me from a Mac Book Air.

Now I am really considering one.

 

[LeviG]

Weren't there some updated drivers etc released after that review.

Another aspect is that the 6 hours refer to NON Wireless use where as the macbook air specifically states wireless productivity so the system has to work for 5 hours with wireless or atleast in the UK its false advertising - now their definition and our definition of wireless productivity is probably going to be where the issues begin.

 

[latergator116]

Well, I firmly believe that about 60% use is the norm for MacBooks and MacBook Pros. So far I've owned 6 and that's the typical amount I've seen on them, and other MacBooks my colleagues have. And if you browse through those threads on the Apple forums you'll see that many people replying to people worrying they have a broken battery, who say their own batteries are fine/normal, typically report about 60-70% of what Apple state.

If people really care that much then just post a new thread in this forum asking people how long their batteries last in real world use.

Yep, I've always found 60-70% to be true also. I thought this was common knowledge.... not that it matters though, since we obviously have an agenda against Apple.

 

[AidenShaw]

LOL - editing and email is not "light usage"???

That is, if your defiinition of 'light usage' is sufficiently bizarre:

"writing in Microsoft Word while listening to streaming audio and checking e-mail via AirPort"

You are correct. The MacBook Cube Air is not a suitable system for editing documents or using email, and certainly not a system to be used for listening to music.

</sarcasm>

If doing a little editing and checking mail is not light usage, I'm at a loss as to what you would consider to be light usage.

It's not like the test was rendering HD video in Final Cut while running a Photoshop + Lightroom workflow against 10 GB of raw photos. It's editing and checking mail.

Also note that I was generous in saying 50% - with the streaming audio (as you quoted) the MBP got 42% of what Apple claims.

If you're using Word while continuously streaming audio while continuously checking email using WiFi, that's hardly 'light' usage.

Are you saying that the MacBook Cube Air wasn't meant to be used wirelessly then, because the radio draws too much electricity?

My normal laptop use in a meeting or conference is to have the following apps active:

1. Word - for taking notes on the presentation or discussion
2. An IM client: this is a "pager" in case something happens back at the office, and often to share comments or questions on the presentation with colleagues in the audience.
3. Outlook: To watch for urgent email
4. IE: To write annoying posts to Macrumors.com if the session is boring
5. WiFi or 3G wireless (usually the built-in 3G EV-DO card - it's everywhere): so that most of the above work

Is the MBCA not suitable to be used like that?

If it's not meant to be used unless you have a power outlet nearby - they should have made it lighter by using a much smaller battery, and advertised it as having a built-in UPS instead of being a portable.

 

[jragosta]

If doing a little editing and checking mail is not light usage, I'm at a loss as to what you would consider to be light usage.

That's because your hatred of Apple and Apple products is completely irrational.

If you're using Word while continuously streaming audio while continuously checking email using WiFi, that's hardly 'light' usage.

 

[eastcoastsurfer]

That's because your hatred of Apple and Apple products is completely irrational.

If you're using Word while continuously streaming audio while continuously checking email using WiFi, that's hardly 'light' usage.

What are you talking about? Editing a document, with your email up (since you know, you're probably pulling together some info from various emails to edit the document), and listening to music is the very definition of light usage. What is your definition? Staring at the desktop background? Oh wait, you can't do that because light usage means the screen needs to be off...

I'm generally an Apple fan, but I think it's clear that they have headed somewhat astray in their thinking.

 

[jragosta]

What are you talking about? Editing a document, with your email up (since you know, you're probably pulling together some info from various emails to edit the document), and listening to music is the very definition of light usage. What is your definition? Staring at the desktop background? Oh wait, you can't do that because light usage means the screen needs to be off...

I'm generally an Apple fan, but I think it's clear that they have headed somewhat astray in their thinking.

Read what it says. Editing a document while streaming audio while continuously checking email via WiFi.

I don't know about you, but when I am editing a document, I don't continuously check email by Wi-Fi. Even if you want to listen to music while editing a document, checking your email ever few minutes would not be necessary. Are you saying you're so OCD you have to check your email continuously?

Oh, and you're not going to be using Wi-F at all when you're on a plane.

 

[flyinmac]

Read what it says. Editing a document while streaming audio while continuously checking email via WiFi.

I don't know about you, but when I am editing a document, I don't continuously check email by Wi-Fi. Even if you want to listen to music while editing a document, checking your email ever few minutes would not be necessary. Are you saying you're so OCD you have to check your email continuously?

Oh, and you're not going to be using Wi-F at all when you're on a plane.

I'm not the one you're quoting. But, I'll tell you that I always have my computer's set to check e-mail every 3 minutes or so. And, that is probably what was meant by continuously checking e-mail.

I just set mine to 3 minutes and forget about it. The computer dings whenever a message comes in.

I would consider that light use.

Editing a document with the computer checking e-mail automatically every 3 minutes would seem like very light use to me.

I would agree that it would be a bit weird to have someone constantly checking e-mail themselves. But, setting the computer to check every couple of minutes on an automated repeating schedule is not unusual at all.

I don't like the idea of having the computer check every minute, so I tend to use 3 or 5 minute intervals depending on what the e-mail programs support.

 

[DavoMrMac]

Many of you are saying that 6.5, 6, 5, 4 hours... of battery life is not enough for a long haul flight, or business travel.

Are you saying that on say a 12 hour flight, you would want to be staring at your screen for 12 hours? I mean in a normal day, say 10-12 hours of working, I find that I take around one hour for lunch, one hour on calls, one hour for dinner, around an hour doing off-screen activities... do you get where I am going on this.

So on a flight, I would maybe work for three, watch a film on my iPod touch for two, eat, rest, take a walk. So my expected 4-6 hours on a MacBook Air is more than acceptable.

 

[AidenShaw]

Are you saying that on say a 12 hour flight, you would want to be staring at your screen for 12 hours?

The argument is that we'd like that option - that staring at the screen for 2 1/2 hours is not enough.

There's also the meeting/conference issue of spending a day in rooms where power might not be available - and 2 1/2 hours is not enough.

So on a flight, I would maybe work for three, watch a film on my iPod touch for two, eat, rest, take a walk. So my expected 4-6 hours on a MacBook Air is more than acceptable.

Then it's a good system for you, if the battery life is in fact that close to the Apple claim.

Other people here are saying that for their laptop usage, 2 1/2 to 5 hours is not acceptable. The MacBook Cube Air is not acceptable for them, and they question the design decision to not have easily swappable batteries.

There's a third group trying to tell the second group that 2 1/2 hours is enough - those are the people who should say "OK, it's not for you" and not follow crazy arguments about what is "light usage" and whether planes have plugs and how many outlets are at an airport gate.

 

[pjarvi]

In MacWorld's battery life testing, an MBP undergoing light usage got about half of what Apple claims...

In our testing, both the 15- and 17-inch models delivered an impressive 3 hours, approximately, of DVD playback.)

Try reading what you're quoting.

 

[elmo151]

I have never flown on a seat in which that plug works. I was told that the plug only works if you are in first class. Coach flights that I have taken on Delta, United and Alaskan in the states have not had the plug, nor have United, Quantas or Lufthansa flights internationally.

An easily swapped battery would be nice.

WRONG. check out seatguru

and:
I did order one
I travel 80% of the time.
If you don't like it don't buy it. and stop wasting space

 

[flyinmac]

WRONG. check out seatguru

and:
I did order one
I travel 80% of the time.
If you don't like it don't buy it. and stop wasting space

What kind of argument is that?????

You quote a website and some 3rd-party's statement that certain airlines and flights have power taps that are activated (or even have them to begin with). That doesn't mean anything.

Just because some document, service, or website says something doesn't make it true.

The state emission center claims that my old truck was never available with a 351 W and therefore wouldn't certify it or permit it to be registered in areas of our state that have emissions requirements.

The EPA also claims that it was not available with a 351 W.

They claim it only came with a 300, a 302, and a 351 M.

But, they did ship with a 351 W. I can go to the dealer and order replacement parts for that truck with a 351 W (Windsor). And, the parts that arrive will bolt on and directly replace the parts on my engine.

So, just because some service or authority says something, doesn't mean it's accurate. After all, if anyone should know what engines were available in the various cars, it should be the EPA and the State run emissions centers. It's their job to know what engines are in which vehicles. But, they wouldn't certify mine just because they claim it wasn't a factory available option for that vehicle.

Of course, I can go to Ford and order parts for it and that engine. Ford has it in their books. But, since it's not in the state's or EPA's documents, it doesn't exist and cannot be certified or passed (it is disqualified on visual inspection alone).

So, just because some website claims there is a power port on a given plane or flight doesn't mean it's true. Them saying it's there won't make it appear when I sit down in the seat on the plane.

 

[Spritey]

Concerning access to power on planes..

Yep... Quite right.

I've flown on as long of flights as you can get in the United States, and I have absolutely never (and I mean never) been on a plane with something I could plug a computer into. No power taps anywhere.

Now, if you can come up with a flight longer than Alaska to Florida within the borders of the United States (keeping in-mind that I have to fly past Canada), then I'd like to see where you went.

My flights from Alaska to Texas, Alaska to Florida, Alaska to California, Alaska to Seattle, have never had power taps on their planes.

I've been on repeat trips to several of those destinations, and never had a power tap available yet. And, of course those were all round trip flights, so they had twice the opportunity to provide me with one if they were going to.

I fly 2-3 round trips US/Canada - Europe and within Europe, and I've only had access to power once, which was onboard what appeared to be a brand new plane (or possibly redecorated). Can also mention I fly Air Canada, Icelandair, British Airways, Air France, SAS and KLM.

Granted, I fly economy, but still, even people in economy like to power up their computer once in a while when their battery runs out... Especially considering how sucky the entertainment can be on certain airlines. (And impossible to see the screens on board planes not yet equipped with individual screens).

 

[kuwisdelu]

Hmm. About battery....

I don't know about "light usage." I consider my usage during school hours to be pretty "light." Here's my university day.

My MacBook comes with me to my Stats class and remains on for about an hour. Total: 1 hour.

I have English next. I have it off usually, if we're watching a film or if we're discussing. Now I go to the Union for lunch, and the laptop comes back on for about another hour, so I can work and browse while I eat. Total: 2 hours.

Now I have a fun-filled three hours of physics lecture. Here I sit with the other laptop users, most of whom have to plug into the wall, because they don't have as good battery life as me. Most of them have to wait about 5 minutes for their Windows to come back to life from rebooting or stand-by. Now I use happily for the next three hours until the lectures are over, and I start the mile walk back home. Total: 5 hours.

Total use: ~5 hours
Final battery reading: ~15-20% remaning
Configurations: Airport ON, screen minimum brightness
Activities: Browsing with Firefox, chatting with Adium, editing documents with NeoOffice, checking schedule on iCal, checking Dashboard stickies for HW, reading class pdf notes with Skim, and sometimes even running Windows through Fusion to use a program I need for Stats. Oh, and if the lecture is *really* boring, playing Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on Mupen.

So let's see. On my MacBook, I get at least 5 hours of battery life with Airport on, mostly using Firefox, Adium, and often Skim and NeoOffice. I try to conserve battery with minimum screen brightness and other (what I assume are) normal ways. And I've never ended the day with less than 10% less. Is my MacBook just *that* special, or are the applications I use just not nearly enough for the "average user"?

 

[AidenShaw]

Originally Posted by AidenShaw
In MacWorld's battery life testing, an MBP undergoing light usage got about half of what Apple claims...

In our testing, both the 15- and 17-inch models delivered an impressive 3 hours, approximately, of DVD playback.)

Try reading what you're quoting.

I don't understand....

MacWorld is impressed that it will play a 3 hour DVD, when Apple claims 6 hours.

They're less impressed with the test that it plays 2 1/2 hours, when Apple claims 6 hours.


What should I try reading to avoid coming to the conclusion that you can expect 3 hours of actual use from a laptop that claims 6 hours of runtime according to Apple?

 

[AidenShaw]

Most of them have to wait about 5 minutes for their Windows to come back to life from rebooting or stand-by.

This statement alone makes me disbelieve every other statement in your post.

Windows takes "5 minutes" to resume from standby? Pure BS.

 

[eastcoastsurfer]

Read what it says. Editing a document while streaming audio while continuously checking email via WiFi.

I don't know about you, but when I am editing a document, I don't continuously check email by Wi-Fi. Even if you want to listen to music while editing a document, checking your email ever few minutes would not be necessary. Are you saying you're so OCD you have to check your email continuously?

Oh, and you're not going to be using Wi-F at all when you're on a plane.

So instead of being able to keep mail open and have it do what it's supposed to do over a wifi connection I now have to close certain apps, deal with various configurations because I happen to be on a battery connection? That makes a lot of sense. I guess having 4gb of ram in my mbp is a waste, b/c now I'm only supposed to run one app at a time? Normal/light usage today in 2008 means having access to your mail, editing documents, and playing some music. I think you can even argue it means also doing light editing of pictures, etc... I love how Apple makes a mistake (like charging $20 for an update) or in this case making the air so crippled it'll probably end up like the Cube and the apologist come out the woodwork to still defend it.

 

[redrabbit]

isn't the original story, that battery replacement "trivial", just speculation? Noone actually has a macbook air, and seeing one for 3 minutes at Macworld isn't really conclusion, in my opinion

 

[kuwisdelu]

This statement alone makes me disbelieve every other statement in your post.

Windows takes "5 minutes" to resume from standby? Pure BS.

I was exaggerating there. But I do hear them complain about it. I don't actually time how long it takes for their computers to start up. I'm mostly referring to boot time, there, although that, too, is telling. It takes less than a minute from my pressing the power button to be able to work; whereas my friend recently installed Vista, and invited us to sit and watch while her laptop started up. It was a long wait.

Okay. Edit my original statement to "Most of them have to wait about 5 minutes for their Windows to come back to life from rebooting; or have to wait a similarly extended time compared relative to my MacBook to return from stand-by." Happy?

Do you really believe it's impossible for me to squeeze that much battery life out of my MacBook? How is that so hard to comprehend? I just don't understand. Like I said, look at what I run... Maybe it's less than most people? I don't edit many pictures during class. Nor do I watch DVDs or listen to music while there's a professor talking. From the sounds of it, that's far less than most people, so that should explain the difference, right?

All I'm saying is I get 5 hours minimum from my MacBook w/ Airport on while browsing with Firefox and other "light usage." If I didn't, I'd have to carry my power cord around, so if I got less than that, I'd be pretty annoyed.

 

[coffey7]

I have never owned a Apple product that didn't have much lower battery life than what it was said to have. It will not get 5 hours. I have also never owned an Apple product that I didn't have a problem with the battery and had to have it replaced way too soon.