Hacker News Reader

Comment by csomar | Hacker News Reader

Am I reading this correctly? The battery for the iPhone 7 costs 3.3USD only? Isn't it possible to have higher performance batteries which are more expensive? (like 5 times more expensive which is still cheap, around 15 bucks)

View on HN

The major problem with batteries is size, you can't really make them that much smaller at the moment which means that a 5 times as expensive battery will take up 5 times the space.

I've read somewhere (HN or Reddit)that larger capacity batteries also degrade faster than smaller ones.

Might that be the case as well?

You can get more capacity out of them at the price of faster degradation. The Apple tech is pretty good at managing that, they have chips which monitor all kinds of aspects of the battery.

Apple charges $79 for an out-of-warranty battery replacement, fwiw. That includes the labor and risk of damage to the phone, but still seems a little high.

I've had such bad luck with knock-off batteries in general that I really don't want to risk one in my phone.

My iPhone 6 is down to about 83% max capacity (1500/1810 mAh) after 3 years of daily 1-3 full discharges: ~2200 cycles (total guess, I don't know if the phone tracks this, but I can't find it). Seems like a pretty robust part.

On macOS coconutBattery (http://coconut-flavour.com/coconutbattery/) will show your iOS device battery status, including cycle count. (No affiliation.)

Same question i have asked everybody. ( In non tech circle )

Let say these tech for sure it wont be 5 times, but more like 10 times the cost. So for $30 battery, which offer double the energy capacity of the $3.3 unit at the same volume, an extra $26.7 BOM cost, which translate to roughly $70-$80 extra in Retail price. ( You have to add all the patents cost % etc, and then Apple's margin, this calculation is similar range to BOM cost and Final RSP )

Are you willing to paid extra $80 if the iPhone offer double the battery?

What was I expecting? I was expecting some crazy yes! For only $80, you dont have to buy an $30 battery pack anymore with cable lying around. And it will surely last you the whole day.

But the results were a surprise, lots of No. These people think the battery are fine, it could do a little longer battery, but it is not worth $80.

My guess is that lots of geeks and tech enthusiast wanted bigger battery, but the majority are simply doing good with what is on offer.

10x price won't get you 2x capacity in the same form factor.

Maybe you'll get some additional capacity, but probably not a lot. Quite possibly there isn't a higher capacity option that is acceptable for other reasons.

And with the Note 4 fiasco, I'd guess there's tremendous reputational value in playing it well on the safe side for a couple more years at least.

That is assuming a new technology comes along, like solid state battery.

I asked this as well, but about having a 2mm thicker phone. The response was "I don't need a bigger battery, I have a charger in my car, at my desk, and lots at home."

I was flabbergasted. He'd rather sacrifice wirelessness to have a 2mm thinner phone.

I think it largely depends on what you get in return. If I get to charge the device once every two days instead of once a day, sure, but if I get to attach my device at night with 10% of battery left instead of 3%, no: the increased battery on regular basis it doesn't give me any value (I still have to charge it every night), but on the other hand, the increased size does give me a drawback on regular basis (the phone is larger and heavier).

I, personally, would have loved to have a larger battery and no camera bulge, BUT, when I tried a cover that would even out the back of the phone (just like a larger battery might have done), I found the phone noticeably larger and, finally, went back to the non-covered phone.

I'm pretty sure at Apple people have carefully decided how large a battery had to be to reach 1 day (say 18 hours) of regular usage and they designed the device size around it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com