these people are morons. batteries die, that's why they're batteries.
but it is outrageously greedy to manufacture a phone w/out a user-replacable battery. and there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON for this except pure greed on Apple's part.
u actually believe that Peter? cause there's a TON of phones that are much thinner than the iPhone and all of them have removeable batteries. what they COULD have done is make the entire back plate removable (a la HTC Hermes) and make a long thin battery. or keep the existing battery and make it easy to swap out (like the iPod). problem solved.
It's an enormous pain in the ass to get user removeable batteries and their compartments certified by various regulatory bodies. It can cause delays in the product release as a custom battery has a huge lead time, leaving next to no time to get it certified.
Delays are often costlier than a handful of ticked off customers, so I can completely understand Apple's decision.
I can agree that you may not be able to think of another reason, but that doesn't mean there isn't one. I had wondered if they were afraid of issues w/3rd party batteries; an iPhone w/an exploding battery would be front page news, and the small text about it being some third-party product would not help their image (many people still think of the Sony battery problems as reflections of Dell and Apple). I don't think that's a good enough reason, but maybe it was part of their rationale.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
james @ Aug 17th 2007 11:46AM
these people are morons. batteries die, that's why they're batteries.
but it is outrageously greedy to manufacture a phone w/out a user-replacable battery. and there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON for this except pure greed on Apple's part.
Peter @ Aug 17th 2007 11:48AM
actually... it would have made the phone thicker... so... wrong.
james @ Aug 17th 2007 12:06PM
u actually believe that Peter? cause there's a TON of phones that are much thinner than the iPhone and all of them have removeable batteries. what they COULD have done is make the entire back plate removable (a la HTC Hermes) and make a long thin battery. or keep the existing battery and make it easy to swap out (like the iPod). problem solved.
don't believe the Jobs jive, man. its greed.
E-Rock @ Aug 17th 2007 12:05PM
Apple, masters of style and functionality, couldn't make a battery that pops off the back without making it thicker? Absurd.
Say that they didn't want to, or admit that it was a profit driven decision, but don't appologize for them by saying it was impossible.
Mike @ Aug 17th 2007 12:14PM
It's an enormous pain in the ass to get user removeable batteries and their compartments certified by various regulatory bodies. It can cause delays in the product release as a custom battery has a huge lead time, leaving next to no time to get it certified.
Delays are often costlier than a handful of ticked off customers, so I can completely understand Apple's decision.
Chicksta @ Aug 17th 2007 12:16PM
I can agree that you may not be able to think of another reason, but that doesn't mean there isn't one. I had wondered if they were afraid of issues w/3rd party batteries; an iPhone w/an exploding battery would be front page news, and the small text about it being some third-party product would not help their image (many people still think of the Sony battery problems as reflections of Dell and Apple). I don't think that's a good enough reason, but maybe it was part of their rationale.
Richard Lai @ Aug 17th 2007 1:37PM
Apple is an iCon. So yeah, you're absolutely right.