July 27th, 2007
Apple, AT&T Sued over iPhone Battery
By Michael Santo
Executive Editor, RealTechNews
Oh, come on. Yes, the iPhone does not have a swappable battery like most cell phones, and yes, the replacement plan isn’t the best (mostly because you have to send your device in), but still … suing because of it?
Jose Trujillo of Melrose Park, Ill., claimed that Apple and AT&T did not notify him or other customers about potential battery limitations neither before the phone’s launch nor before it was purchased. Source: ABC News
We Say: Surprisingly (well, to me), Enderle, in the article, thought the case might have some merit. I mean, the fact that the battery was not swappable was a subject of much discussion for months. On the other hand, as he indicated, the battery replacement plan wasn’t revealed for a couple of days after the phone went on sale, and if you purchased it before then, and add in the two-year contract … of course, to me, this is just another senseless lawsuit.
UncaMarty says:
In my opinion, one of the key features of most mobile (cell) devices is that you can keep a spare battery and swap out the discharged one. If your battery dies, you buy a new one, charge it up and you’re ready to go again.
I can see Apple’s point about not letting (l)users mess with the wurkins of the iPhone, but to me at least, the iPhone is going to suffer because of this.
I won’t buy a computer that only has a return to base warranty, and my phone is more important to me, so the iPod is (regretfully!) off my shopping list.
July 28th, 2007 at 4:55 am
John Corliss says:
I would tend to think that the case DOES have merit. If more companies were called on the carpet for such duplicitous behavior, maybe they’d think twice before engaging in it in the first place.
July 28th, 2007 at 5:17 am
noteapot says:
To me all apple “i” devices are throwaways after 2 years because of the sealed battery thing. It should be in the small print !
The real problem is nobody has solved the battery problem. Everyone just ignores it.
I use a Nokia N95 which suffers on the power usage side because of the abundance of features - without a spare battery it would be unusable as advertised or as a business device.
The Nokia argument is if you just use it as a phone it lasts OK - but of course if I just wanted a phone I wouldnt have bought an N95.
Also batteries dont go from good to bad immediately they all tend to go soft after a while. I tend keep the good one in the phone and the old soft one for backup. Not an option for an apple “i” device.
Perhaps the law for battery phone devices ought to force the advertised battery charge performance to be based on 90% primary usage and 30% full feature usage. The usage time numbers should be at the end of 2 years battery life on the above cycle not new.
Also frankly the press should ask these questions when they are on the pre release vendor junkets in Las Vegas. The IT and Gadget press is appallingly bad at printing anything other than vendor press releases about new technology.
Oh yeah make everything chargeable by USB power connectors so car, hotel and other vendors can provide convenience charging for all devices and i dont have to carry 4 power supplies with me.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:06 am
John says:
This was all out when the that piece of I-crap was released. Clearly I’m wrong because people bought it in spite of this - just as they did with their Ipods. Can you tell I don’t have either and I don’t have any plans to get either one? User replaceable batteries and drag,drop, and play - that’s my mantra. LOL.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:58 pm