Don't like Microsoft's monopoly? Check out Apples!

Did your new $600 IPhone's battery goes dead and won't recharge?

Don't worry, just send it back to Apple and they will be glad to unsolder the old battery pack, replace it, and send it back to you, all for the low, low price of $80.

Of course, if you use your IPhone for something important, and you can't be without it for 3-7 days, you can always rent another IPhone for $27!

Come on APPLE, a non-replaceable battery in an item that may be life or death? I could live with it in an IPod, but Doctors, Policemen, Firemen, Search and Rescue, etc. all need their phones to work, and need them to work all the time.

The IPhone, with it's versatility, including GPS, maps, etc. could be an awesome tool, but this problem, a non-replaceable battery, is a deal killer for me, and I suspect will be for others too. Especially when you realize how many cell phone batteries go dead for no apparent reason, and the recent problems with laptop batteries!

Bill

i rather have 3 devices that do what they do well then one device that does em all medicore. but from what i see the iphone does a pretty good job at all

Monopoly is when no cell phone can be used without some critical Apple HW or SW component in it. Apple has plenty of competition.

Not Apple's fault if their marketing has succeeded in creating a perception of uniqueness for the iphone among the early adopters (who we at CPF know will almost always become shaftees...).

While soldering in a battery may be going to extremes, using a proprietary battery in general is a big turn off for me. Laptops are probably the biggest offenders here, but I see proprietary batteries in digicams, cell phones, even some flashlights. There are already enough standard battery sizes/shapes/chemistries to avoid using proprietary batteries in pretty much every circumstance. If only consumers would get livid about this, maybe we would start seeing some standardization.

On another note, it seems businesses are no longer happy with just making money on the initial purchase. Everything they sell nowadays has to give them an income stream.

The concern with laptop batteries is completely irrelevant. The problem cells in laptop batteries were lithium-ion cylindrical cells, in the size commonly referred to as 16850 that were defective and manufactured by Sony. The battery in the iPhone is, like the battery in an iPod, a lithium polymer foil packet cell.

Apple's niche is not a monopoly.
Consumers have a choice, and they accept these drawbacks. Those that don't give rise to Apple's competition.

Those who don't like way consumables for the product has become a revenue stream for manufacturers, can blame Gillette.

LukeA said:

The concern with laptop batteries is completely irrelevant. The problem cells in laptop batteries were lithium-ion cylindrical cells, in the size commonly referred to as 16850 that were defective and manufactured by Sony. The battery in the iPhone is, like the battery in an iPod, a lithium polymer foil packet cell.

Click to expand...

It is VERY relevant, LiPo cells have the same issues that LiIon cells have as far as overcharging, etc. The advantage they offer is shape.

BUT...this is a monopoly, just like the browser in Windows is a monopoly.

The only available replacement is from Apple, any other cell voids the warranty.

What is amazing is how well Apple hid this from everyone until it was on the market. Most people didn't even ask, because virtually every other cell phone on the market does have a user replaceable battery.

There is already a pending legal action to get Apple to revamp the design.

Unlike an IPod, a cell phone may be a life saving device, not being able to swap batteries is a HUGE issue for some of us who use up 2 or 3 batteries a day because we do a ton of business on the phone while mobile.

The problem is that Apple ISN'T treating the battery as a consumable. If it was, there would be rapid competition and local replacements.

Bill

Its not a monopoly since there are other cell phones/pda's/etc. Its monopolistic business practice which apple has been guilty of for many years, they are just not as good as it as MS. MS has you locked in software wise, Apple locks you in hardware wise.
The two companies, despite the large difference in market share, are really a lot alike. Between them both I've went open source all the way.

I was in an Apple store the Monday after the initial release. I was waiting in line to buy an Ipod for a gift. The line next me, with about 10 people in it, was the iphone return line. Seems that people aren't happy with the AT&T/Cingular service that the iphone will be using, at least that seemed to be the chief complaint. I guess it was serious enough, as AT&T/Cingular had a representative at the store.

I think the battery is of minor concern compared to the lousy, overpriced cell service that iphone'rs are forced to use. And from experience, it doesn't get too much worse than Cingular (at least in the Bay Area).

There's already several iphone like phones in the works, so I wouldn't call Apple a monopoly.

--dan

I dont think apple can hardly be called a monopoly. Ive always seen non versatility as one great weakness to many of their products. And the Iphone might be aesthetically appealing, and it might be drawing a lot of attention, but I seriously doubt an iphone craze will sweep the nation never mind an apple craze. and AT&T yugh.

Lithium Polymer cells and Lithium Ion cells are one and the same. Not that I go through multiple batteries ever (Razr's are junk IMHO) but it is definitely nice to know that it is easily user replaceable without a void warranty. The iPhone as well as the iPod make it too hard to replace CONSUMABLE batteries.

Them's fighten words, Jim! ( As If I would be caught dead with a pda or cell! )

Luddite with a Garmin Nuvi 650 in route. ( really hate being lost!) And Garmin seems to play some pricey games with their accessory and software offerings!

Larry

A monopoly means you have no choice. Building IE into Windows with its numerous security issues and not allowing the end user to remove it was a pretty slick idea. You could choose to use another browser, until Microsoft decided to make code that would only run in IE (certain websites required IE for you to use them or see all the content for awhile.) That is pretty unfair business practice in my opinion.

Also, various web standards were proposed and adopted by many, and yet Miscrosoft came up with propriety MS alternatives, instead of adopted standards that others decided to adopt. MS just decided not to support them, or at least stay way behind the curve that many others followed. CSS and Javascript come to mind.

I am not a professional web developer, but I did built a site or two, and it was made a very frustrating ordeal, because I had to tweak the code so it would run in IE, when it ran fine it many other browsers (Safari, Firefox, Opera, Camino, etc.)

I know that this thread is discussing the iPhone, but looking at the title, I consider myself not off topic

Mark

Bill Waites concern is the use of a proprietary battery in the new iphone. You are stuck with replacing the battery through Apple only. By extension, that is sounding like a Monopoly, the proprietary battery. The term, monopoly my be used a little loosely here, but you have to get his drift.

Apple presented us with a new product, with many features. What they did not give us is an easily replaceable battery. They said they are giving us a phone, but what they are really giving us is a toy, like their ipod, and it is ok for us to be inconvenienced by not having use of our phone. In this real world the phone, as Bill Waites said, in effect, is a necessity, can be a life saver, and should be set up to serve the customer, and an easily replaceable battery is a "must have".

Apple must understand that they are selling a phone, and I think through litigation they are going to find that out.

Bill

If the battery fails under warranty Apple will fix it for free.

In a year or three when people's batteries are starting to wear out there will be other companies offering battery replacement for $49 or something like that to undercut Apple. And your warranty will have run out so it won't be a matter of being forced to use Apple's service to protect your warranty.

Lastly, if enought people don't buy the iPhone because of the battery replacement cost or lack of user-replaceable battery then Apple will do something about it or lose market share. So the iPhone will either meet people's needs as it is now, be improved, or not be improved and fail. That's how the free market is supposed to work.

Greg

Thank you, Bullzeyebill for elaborating the point much more effectively than I did!

I was so flabbergasted that I was not as coherent as I should have been in my post.

This situation BLOWS me away.

Apple has a great idea, but the implementation of a phone where the battery WILL go dead before it can be recharged when used as intended, as a phone, blows me away!

Replaceable batteries are a MUST have for a phone, it's not like an IPod, where whether you have your music or not will not create a possibly life threatening situation.

Cell phones have come a long way in 10 years, but this is like having a corded phone with a REALLY long cord, because you cannot swap batteries when yours goes down, much less if it is defective!

Bill

greg_in_canada said:

If the battery fails under warranty Apple will fix it for free.

In a year or three when people's batteries are starting to wear out there will be other companies offering battery replacement for $49 or something like that to undercut Apple. And your warranty will have run out so it won't be a matter of being forced to use Apple's service to protect your warranty.

Lastly, if enought people don't buy the iPhone because of the battery replacement cost or lack of user-replaceable battery then Apple will do something about it or lose market share. So the iPhone will either meet people's needs as it is now, be improved, or not be improved and fail. That's how the free market is supposed to work.

Greg

Click to expand...

I see 2 major problems with this situation:

1) You lose your phone for DAYS to have the battery replaced.
2) Even if it is out of warranty, and you can get a cheaper battery, you still LOSE YOUR PHONE for days to have the battery replaced.

I can't be without a phone for even 12 hours under normal circumstances, and many doctors, firemen, police, rescue workers, etc are in the same boat. The IPhone is tailor made for us, with all its available options and technology, but the battery issue is huge!

You are right about the free market fixing the problem, but early adoptors are going to pay a high price!

Bill

The alternative battery replacement places may offer loaner phones or overnight service if that gets them more business.

People who truely can't live without their phone for a few days will not buy the iPhone or will pay for a loaner phone (from Apple or other company) so they will pay a "high price" I guess. But is it all that much compared to a $600 phone and nearly $2000 for a 2 year plan?

Cheers - Greg

I can definitely see the battery being an issue with the iPhone. Another thing I see as being a possible shortcoming is not having a card slot. If the iPhone had a replaceable battery and something like an SD card slot... that would add A LOT more desirablilty.

Lots of phones and cameras and other gadgets have "proprietary" batteries, and they are expensive. But, yeah I agree that having to send the phone to Apple for battery replacement doesn't seem like a great "feature."

One of the reasons so many devices use "proprietary" batteries, i believe is size. Digital cameras that use AAs or CR123 batteries are usually not as small and easy to pocket carry as devices that have li-ion batteries. I like small cameras, and I take the size vs. easily replaceable battery trade-off to get a smaller device.

It is a wierd decision on Apple's part to make the iPod and iPhone have non user replaceable batteries though. I know many people didn't like that too much about the iPod.

Mark

Apple likes their gizmos to be sleek and as small as possible, with minimal visible seams. Adding a battery door adds one seam (unless the whole back slides off), makes the device thicker (you need a wall between the electronics and the battery compartment then, and the battery may need a rigid plastic cover too) and gives you more entry points for dust and moisture.

It's a tradeoff they successfully made with the iPod and I guess they feel it will work for the iPhone even though spare batteries and user replacement are more important for a phone than a music player. The next year or two will tell us if they made the right choice.

Many people switch phones every 2 years because they are subsidized way down in price when you sign/re-sign for 2 (more) years. We'll see if iPhone owners will do the same thing given that the price is (apparently) not subsidized. If many/most iPhone owners upgrade to a the latest iPhone model in 18 or 24 months then the battery issue will be moot (for them) and Apple will be happy.

Greg