Apple solves my MacBook Pro battery problem
davidalison.com
davidalison.com
>Her recommendation was to cycle the battery constantly, running the machine on the battery almost exclusively.
I have a MBP that had to use starting summer half a day on battery exclusively and the other day plugged in. It has reduced my battery life a lot (currently running on a new battery actually, that's how much it got trashed). This on an 1.5 years laptop.
What I would like to know is this: is this normal (Do you have my usage pattern and did you encouter something similar?) or am I doing something wrong? I don't think I do, maybe batteries are just not cut out for such heavy (?) usage and you have to replace them from time to time (like ink in a printer, only cheaper).
Incidentally, the battery inside of the laptop I'm currently using (a black Macbook), is the most heroic battery I've ever encountered: At 2 and half years old and 993 loadcycles, it still retains 95% of it's original capacity. It only began reporting consistently under 100% a couple of weeks ago.
In contrast, by business partner's Macbook Pro of similar age (and ~600 loadcycles) can barely hold a half hour of charge. He finds my battery's longevity fairly irritating.
They say the capacity goes down to 80 percent after 300 cycles. If the battery doesn't make it for that long and they don't replace it on warranty I full well would have made a fuss. What you got was normal service, this is what you should expect, not something to admire.
I don't know if this has anything to do with the fact I live in Belgium and warranty is 2years, I've had issues with my battery a couple of times but batteries don't fall under the 2year warranty so they aren't forced to replace it.
So far so good, 277 cycles and I have not noticed a single difference in battery life. I drain it at least a few times per week. Sometimes twice per day.
I did not do this on my last Macbook Pro and Apple replaced the battery for me after about a year and a half because it couldn't even hold a 10 min charge and it had very few cycles, certainly not 277.