Any benefit of non-removable battery technology in personal gadgets?

Like mobile phones, tablets and notebooks?

What do you think? Searched the forum but couldn't find any discussion.

Tries to ensures that users don't buy cheap unsafe replacement batteries.

Norm

Provides jobs for factory workers who recondition said devices.

Improves the soldering skills of people like myself who don't want to spend much money on the device or replace it, but want to keep using it long after manufacturers cease support.

keeps you buying new products every time the battery fails

You can make devices slimmer, there's no battery door to pop off when you drop it, and fewer safety issues from using low quality aftermarket batteries. This really bothered me back in the early days of lithium ion as batteries were likely to fail years before I would "get my moneys worth" from the product. Newer battery technologies abate some of that worry as many should last upwards of 10 years barring manufacturing defects.

I would prefer to use Eneloops in my portable handheld electronic devices, include my mobile phone and as such that they were designed to hold AA or AAA cells. Three loose AAs would work rather well in a mobile phone for me (similar voltage as Li-ion), and I'd never have to wait for them to charge. Unfortunately, I've never been able to find one.

At least I can still use them in my keyboards, mice, calculator, remotes, hobby transmitters and receivers, and of course lights. :thumbsup:

Wrend said:

I would prefer to use Eneloops in my portable handheld electronic devices, include my mobile phone and as such that they were designed to hold AA or AAA cells.

Click to expand...

Thre AAA's would have insufficient energy to run a smart phone all day and I wouldn't want to carry a phone that is thick enough to swallow three AA's

Norm

Installable packs confine cells to a block. This increases thickness and reduces capacity. Free of that shape, designers can spread the cells out:

http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Installing+MacBook+Air+13-Inch+Mid+2013+Battery/15205/1


So you gain capacity out of the box but can't swap as needed with spares. I used to relish putting two 4 hour packs into certain laptops that allowed it. It's not as satisfying, but a single 10 hour pack is actually better.

Norm said:

Thre AAA's would have insufficient energy to run a smart phone all day and I wouldn't want to carry a phone that is thick enough to swallow three AA's

Norm

Click to expand...

Three AAs would be more than small enough for my needs, if incorporated well into the back base of a phone, running lengthwise parallel with each other, and the phone could fit easily into one of my pockets or hands with room to spare.

I'm actually thinking about picking up some 2-way handheld 1.5 watt radios which have up to a "35 mile range" (realistically maybe 1 to 2 miles, but I'm also thinking about setting up a GMRS repeater base station, and/or using the local 50 watt one located in the downtown of our city that's open to use by GMRS licensees and their families) and using three AA Eneloops with those. Should provide for about 23 hours of talk time using Eneloops in them.

I have no use for a "smart" phone, using my Nexus 7 for that kind of functionality (and more) instead, but I would prefer the longer run time of the AAs instead of AAAs on a phone.

For a flashaholic who is educated about batteries ... None.

Monocrom said:

For a flashaholic who is educated about batteries ... None.

Click to expand...

Probably the biggest benefit to the consumer is keeping the up fronts costs down. It may not seem like it at first glance, but creating a gadget with a removable battery is considerably more complicated than a non-removable battery. Latches, hooks, and swivels all increase the tooling costs for plastic parts. Removable batteries require connectors. Environmental sealing is more complicated when you have non-permanent housings. All of these things add to the cost of the product.

havequick said:

Probably the biggest benefit to the consumer is keeping the up fronts costs down. It may not seem like it at first glance, but creating a gadget with a removable battery is considerably more complicated than a non-removable battery. Latches, hooks, and swivels all increase the tooling costs for plastic parts. Removable batteries require connectors. Environmental sealing is more complicated when you have non-permanent housings. All of these things add to the cost of the product.

Click to expand...

Sorry, not buying it. Owned countless devices over the years that had compartments built into them that were perfectly good at allowing easy access to batteries to swap them out. We're talking everything from Made in China junk that cost $10 to complicated electronic devices costing a couple hundred bucks. If the guys putting out cheap junk can make a battery compartment tough enough to easily survive numerous battery changes without breaking, than anyone can.

Non-removable batteries means one thing and one thing only ... Consumer is forced to send the device back to the company that made it. Company then gets to charge an outrageous fee for what would otherwise be a simple battery change by the user on a similar device with a battery compartment that can be easily accessed. Outrageous fee covers inflated price for a new battery + the cost of replacing the old battery. (Which is also inflated.)

Honestly, just a BS way of making more money off of consumers who have already paid for the item.

Keeps iFixIt in business.

My sense is that both the pros of integrated non-replaceable batteries and the cons of replaceable are generally overplayed.

Monocrom said:

Sorry, not buying it. Owned countless devices over the years that had compartments built into them that were perfectly good at allowing easy access to batteries to swap them out. We're talking everything from Made in China junk that cost $10 to complicated electronic devices costing a couple hundred bucks. If the guys putting out cheap junk can make a battery compartment tough enough to easily survive numerous battery changes without breaking, than anyone can.

Non-removable batteries means one thing and one thing only ... Consumer is forced to send the device back to the company that made it. Company then gets to charge an outrageous fee for what would otherwise be a simple battery change by the user on a similar device with a battery compartment that can be easily accessed. Outrageous fee covers inflated price for a new battery + the cost of replacing the old battery. (Which is also inflated.)

Honestly, just a BS way of making more money off of consumers who have already paid for the item.

Click to expand...

You don't have to buy it, but it is reality. You may have owned countless devices over the years but I am guessing you haven't designed or put into manufacturing any of those devices. The OP asked if there was any benefit for the consumer and I explained at least one. Yes, the manufacturers also make more when the batteries are non-user replaceable through both service repairs, and because many consumers opt to just upgrade to the next model instead of having the battery replaced. But that does not mean that it does not cost less to manufacture a device having a fixed battery. It certainly does cost less. I didn't say anywhere that it was a matter of having the know-how to design a reliable or durable compartment that was user accessible--of course that can be done. It is simply a matter of production costs. For almost any given device (and with all other aspects being equal) the design decision to go with a removable battery versus a fixed battery will necessarily result in tooling and BOM costs that are higher. Injection molds with multiple cams and lifters, connectors, screws, gaskets, added assembly line steps, etc., are all real costs. And those costs are always passed on to the buyer, either directly or indirectly. If your iPhone had a user replaceable battery it would cost more to make, and if your Galaxy had an integrated battery it would cost less. However, many (if not most) gadgets today are obsoleted through software and lifecycle far earlier than the expected life of the rechargeable battery so the point is often moot anyway.

So again, you don't have to buy it, you could have just bought the Galaxy...

One reason I can see for the manufacturer wanting your device to have an original battery as a replacement is to protect their reputation.

Not a battery but look at the way the press handles any incident that involves one of the tall poppies WARNING! Apple iPhone Electric Shock Leaves Young Australian Woman Electrocuted and Hospitalized; How to Avoid Similar Incident [PHOTOS], these incidents are usually caused by non approved third party equipment but the OEM's reputation suffers, stories like this have nothing to do with the manufacturer but mud sticks

Why would they want you using anything other than original parts?

Norm

It -should- make it easier to waterproof said devices. Not that the manufacturers seem to bother (except in Japan where I'm told people will actually shower while talking on their phones).

havequick said:

You don't have to buy it, but it is reality. You may have owned countless devices over the years but I am guessing you haven't designed or put into manufacturing any of those devices. The OP asked if there was any benefit for the consumer and I explained at least one.

Click to expand...

And I explained the biggest reason why companies now make such devices. I'm not going to debate what constitutes "reality" with someone who thinks it's a relative or subjective thing. It's not. Reality is that which does not go away when you stop believing in it. Fact is, no; I haven't designed or put into manufacture any of the countless devices (both cheap or very expensive) which I've owned over the years. But ... so what?

What exactly is your point in bringing up that issue? The cheap devices that I've owned which had battery compartments that their owners could both easily and repeatedly access, exist. You might not like that fact of reality. You might wish it wasn't so. But once again, just because you wish it to go away; doesn't mean it will. My main point which you glossed over completely is that it's not even remotely expensive to built accessible battery compartments into electronic devices. Yes, things such as "... screws, gaskets, assembly line steps, etc., are all real costs."

Yet, companies across the world are still able to put out cheap electronic devices with easily accessible battery compartments; without major costs passed along to consumers. Sorry, but that's reality. Sitting behind me is a cabinet full of such devices. They still work. I've swapped out their batteries more times than I can remember over the decades. (Yup, decades. Not years.) Cheap radios, cheap handheld Pac-Man games (the one specifically I mean was featured in an episode of "Magnum P.I."), old cellphones. Especially cellphones. I had a basic Samsung with an easily accessible battery that lay dormant for 5 years. In 2009, I was headed to Vegas and didn't want to risk possibly damaging or losing my high-tech cellphone at the time. (Also with an easily accessible battery.) So, I just swapped out the SIM card. Charged the old phone overnight, and I was good to go. If that old Samsung had needed a new battery, I could have bought one myself and installed it on my own for very little outlay of funds. Could have done it in a couple of hours instead of sending it in and (hopefully) getting it back in 7 - 10 days.

Sorry, still not buying that sales pitch about Smartphones costing less simply due to not being able to access the battery. And if it is true, likely we're talking a few bucks at the most. Far from anything significant at all. Despite now preferring to use basic cellphones myself, I used to own the earliest generation of Smartphones. Those had accessible battery compartments. Even factoring in the current rate of inflation, the cost difference today vs. just back then is negligible. It's just not that expensive, not even remotely, to add a cover and a few odds & ends in order to provide a owner-accessible battery compartment. Companies in business are in business to make money. One way to increase profit-margins is to entomb the battery within the device. If the owner needs a new battery, he has to pay over-inflated fees for both a new battery and the task of having the old one replaced. Fees that the company which originally made the device, gets to enjoy. That's just the reality of it.

Once again, you can disagree. Though the reality of it is rather obvious. At least to me. I'm willing to bet that it is to other members as well. I have no problem letting them read our posts and come to their own conclusions.

Norm said:

Why would they want you using anything other than original parts?

Norm

Click to expand...

Several years back, there were numerous stories of LG phones exploding in owner's pockets and even next to their faces while they chatted on them. There was one local man in my area who had a story done on him. Thankfully, his face was singed instead of badly burned. At first, LG blamed owners for using after-market batteries in their phones. But no other brand was experiencing issues of exploding phones back then. Many owners claimed they had not replaced the batteries at all.

Took awhile, but it was revealed that LG had gone with a lower-cost supplier. A supplier who was using counterfeit batteries and pocketing the profits. It took awhile, but LG fixed the problem and today still puts out phones.

Even with a few dumb-*** owners who should know better than to put cheap junk inside their phones, companies invariably bounce back.

Monocrom said:

At first, LG blamed owners for using after-market batteries in their phones. But no other brand was experiencing issues of exploding phones back then. Many owners claimed they had not replaced the batteries at all.

Click to expand...

That is the manufacturers problem but why should the manufacturer cop the flack when they aren't responsible?

Your post has nothing to do with what I posted. I was pointing out how a manufacturer is often held to account when they have no involvement in the problem.

Norm

Norm said:

That is the manufacturers problem but why should the manufacturer cop the flack when they aren't responsible?

Your post has noting to do with what I posted.

Norm

Click to expand...

Just giving a different perspective on things. Sometimes it's owners who should know better. Other times it's the company itself.

You're right that when it's the former, companies don't deserve the bad press they invariably get. Unfortunately that's the nature of running any business. Years upon years to build up a great reputation. Takes less time to lose it though. That's why PR departments are a necessary branch of every company. Is it fair? No. But it effects every company out there regardless of the product they make or service they provide.