Hacker News Reader

Comment by cgranade | Hacker News Reader

As for the fabrication charge, that's at best an unfortunate choice of phrasing. His point is that when an iPad battery fails (it will-- all batteries do fail), you have no choice but to throw away the device or to send it back to Apple for them to perform the battery replacement. What happens when Apple decides that the current model of iPad is too old to bother replacing batteries on? You can no longer maintain your own device. This is quite different from not being able to repair your own device, as it has long been the expectation that users are responsible for changing out batteries. By locking down the device, Apple is promoting the production of more e-waste. Regardless of any unfortunate phrasing, the point remains valid.

View on HN

Just to clarify something that appears to be a common misconception - Apple doesn't ever replace the iPad battery, it just gives you a whole new iPad for $105.95:

http://www.apple.com/support/ipad/service/battery/

As a point of comparison, my Lenovo batteries that always seem to crap about a few years in cost about $100:

http://www.newegg.com/Store/BrandSubCategory.aspx?Brand=1041...

So... that's a pretty great deal. And I think speaks to how comfortable they are with the battery longevity. Or how fat their margins are.

... They give you a newly refurbished iPad and then swap out the battery in yours, refurbish it (a new housing perhaps) and give it to someone else. It's not like they are chucking them out the back dock.

In my experience Apple has pretty high quality refurb processes (replacing excessively scratches chassis, etc) - so while it might not be brand new you might end up with something better than what you started with.

That said, given some of the probable porno use cases of the iPad...

I agree, he could have made a truthful point about that. But he didn't.

Will the iPad battery fail before the useful life of the device expires? I doubt it[1]. But if it does there is a convenient procedure for replacing it. Eventually there will no longer be a procedure, but the device will have passed from "useful" by then.

Look at the numbers: Applecare on an iPad runs from month 13 to month 24 and covers a new battery if required = $99. Battery replacement on an iPad = $99. Apple is not expecting significant numbers of batteries to die in two years. (Or they are and aren't expecting anything else to go wrong.)

it has long been the expectation that users are responsible for changing out batteries

And car users used to be responsible for keeping the water topped up in their batteries. That day passed. In an nice parallel to iPads, my Honda FIT has a tiny sealed battery in a unique size. They worked the mass/volume tradeoff[2] and came up with a completely unique battery. (At least they didn't put a pull cord on the dash or a kick starter on the floor.)

[1] My nearly three year old iPhone is just fine and I can still skip charging at night and get through the second day if I need to. The device is about to be orphaned by iPhone OS 4.0. Given the cost of a phone vanishes in the cost of service the only reason I'll keep it is because I have the original, cheaper, plan in place.

[2] I deleted my section on mass/value/cost/ruggedness tradeoffs of glue/screw, custom/commodity cells, and compartments/torsion box. I've covered that too many times before. I'd still love to read an article comparing a handful of devices that make those decisions different ways. My personal estimation is that using screws and having a replaceable commodity battery would add 50% to the thickness of the device keeping other factors the same. It would still be a cool device, just slightly less so.

Or you could open it up, replace the battery yourself, and void the (undoubtedly expired) warranty. There's nothing actually preventing that, legally or physically.

I've tried replacing parts inside Apple devices before, and they're not built for that generally. Does Apple go so far as to embed "booby traps" like those seen in the PlayStation 2 which attempt to punish people who self-repair by breaking their devices? I honestly don't know how easy it is to replace the battery without permanently damaging the device, so I'd say it's not a settled matter that there's nothing physically preventing one from doing it.

Well, if it is anything like the iPod or iPhone, it is pretty easy to replace the parts. There are multiple vendors selling parts for them (some parts better than the original). The "closed" battery should be the least of people's issues. The replacement is the same price as another laptop battery and you get a whole new iPad.

For example, at some point, I am going to replace my iPod's (5th gen) HD with an SSD and there are multiple vendors and video showing how.

And, since we are talking about something as hyped as the iPad, getting a replacement battery will be ridiculously easy as will getting the thing inside the device. There will (literally!) be hundreds of step by step instructions online and there will be more than one vendor willing to take your money for a battery.

I could get a replacement battery for my trusty six year old iPod mini (still works like on day one) right now. Costs $15 and even comes with tools to open the little sucker up. Let’s just hope the iPad’s battery is not soldered in :)

What happens when Apple decides that the current model of iPad is too old to bother replacing batteries on? You can no longer maintain your own device.

If you have to send it to Apple, you already can't maintain your own device, regardless of whether they decide to keep supporting it.

I would note that Apple still replaces batteries for the original iPod. And as far as I know Apple doesn't prevent third parties from replacing batteries. What is the fundamental difference between the batteries and another component, like the hard drive?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com