If they knew the thin battery in the 6/6s had a design flaw why did they not make the 7 or 8 thicker? Is it because Apple is too obsessed with making the devices thin?
What design flaw? Batteries aging and using up their chemistry is not a design flaw. It's what we call "physics".
Does your car have a design flaw because you'll eventually have to replace its battery as well in order to maintain peak power draw?
Its a design flaw because no iphone had unexpected shutdowns until the thinner 6 on iOS 10.2 where the new software went beyond the limits of the design
Not only do you have no concept of how lithium batteries work but you're talking out your ass. You know you can do a search for "My iPhone [insert_model_designation_here] keeps shutting down randomly" to get the same issues with every model of iPhone and every other device, right? (rhetorical)
If they knew the thin battery in the 6/6s had a design flaw why did they not make the 7 or 8 thicker? Is it because Apple is too obsessed with making the devices thin?
1) I have no idea what you mean by thin batteries having a design flaw that a thick battery doesn't but I can say you absolutely don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
2) If you actually paid attention you'd notice that Apple has increased the thickness of their devices many, many times in recent years, which obliterates all your "obsessed about thinness" bullshit.
You might have noticed he asked a question rather than cursing at him. Would a larger battery have lasted longer? That is a legitimate question.
Apple is suggesting the newer phones (either because of the software update, or hardware decisions) won’t have this issue.
I am wondering how long the IPhone 8’s battery is expected to last... it’s relevant when deciding to get the extended warranty.
Perhaps appleinsider can follow up on that. Is AppleCare worth it?
If they knew the thin battery in the 6/6s had a design flaw why did they not make the 7 or 8 thicker? Is it because Apple is too obsessed with making the devices thin?
What design flaw? Batteries aging and using up their chemistry is not a design flaw. It's what we call "physics".
Does your car have a design flaw because you'll eventually have to replace its battery as well in order to maintain peak power draw?
Its a design flaw because no iphone had unexpected shutdowns until the thinner 6 on iOS 10.2 where the new software went beyond the limits of the design
Nice try.... But no... Weak, worn out batteries fail at unforseen times. It's physics. It's not, as much as you want it to be, a "design flaw". Sorry. Go home.
If they knew the thin battery in the 6/6s had a design flaw why did they not make the 7 or 8 thicker? Is it because Apple is too obsessed with making the devices thin?
What design flaw? Batteries aging and using up their chemistry is not a design flaw. It's what we call "physics".
Does your car have a design flaw because you'll eventually have to replace its battery as well in order to maintain peak power draw?
Its a design flaw because no iphone had unexpected shutdowns until the thinner 6 on iOS 10.2 where the new software went beyond the limits of the design
Sorry but your ignorance is showing - the battery capacity of the 6 was larger than the 5 by almost 300 mAh. Look it up.
The demands of the software went up, not the size of the battery going down.
Anybody else want to pretend physics aren’t a thing?
Had Apple designed the iPhone with a battery compartment where owners could swap batteries without special tools this could have been avoided.
Of course, then millions would get off of the 2 year upgrade cycle.
Finally, what about iPod Touch & iPads?
I see so many comments like this one from armchair quarterbacks who have never designed anything in their lives...
Almost every complex design involves compromise and trade-offs of one type or another. And the designer is forced to choose which is better... Yes, Apple COULD have provided user replaceable batteries -- where you could carry a spare and swap yours out before it died. (I had a smart phone that did that prior to Steve's original iPhone, and I liked it) But, that involved compromising other aspects of the product. So, they went with an integrated, internal battery that only they could (should?) replace. Deal with it.
The same debate went on with their getting rid of the earphone jack. Apple explained the reasons why it needed to go -- to free up valuable real estate for other functions. But, the arm chair quarterbacks still listed it as a failure...
It's so strange: people complain when Apple doesn't "innovate", then they complain when they do! (Sucks to be you Apple!)
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
Why? Can you explain how it benefits Apple to, say, have a 10 year old iPhone (or a 6 year old iPad, 17 year old iPod or a 26 year old Powerbook) that gets a battery replacement for $29? Do you know who would end up paying for this massive loss leader that would allow for a $29 permanent price for replacing batteries?" The customer pays for it through higher costs of new devices to make up for the entitled assholes that think that the iPhone they bought in 2007 should still work the same today and any time in the future because they're cheap and selfish.
Not sure if it's a massive loss leader. According to Munster this morning on CNBC, Apple will probably lose $10/battery replacement, at that price. Perhaps they could do it at a lower than $80 price.
If they knew the thin battery in the 6/6s had a design flaw why did they not make the 7 or 8 thicker? Is it because Apple is too obsessed with making the devices thin?
What design flaw? Batteries aging and using up their chemistry is not a design flaw. It's what we call "physics".
Does your car have a design flaw because you'll eventually have to replace its battery as well in order to maintain peak power draw?
Its a design flaw because no iphone had unexpected shutdowns until the thinner 6 on iOS 10.2 where the new software went beyond the limits of the design
Nice try.... But no... Weak, worn out batteries fail at unforseen times. It's physics. It's not, as much as you want it to be, a "design flaw". Sorry. Go home.
It is a design flaw when batteries fail at higher rates that expected. Apple has been pushing the envelope in processor performance, and that exceeded advances in battery technology. As a result the batteries have been failing at a higher than normal, and Apple has been forced to throttle performance to extend the life of the phone.
Blaming it on “physics” is a cop out, the same way saying “that’s what way God intended” is.
For example, if you buy a truck a the tires ware out at 25 thousand miles, and they were expected to last 50 thousand. It’s very likely the manufacture spec’d out the wrong tires. When you expanded this out to the 50,000 sold and people are seeing the same thing on average, the manufacturer messed up. They’d be expected to compensate owners the same way Apple is...
It’s fine Apple messed up. They’re making it right with IPhone owners, and making sure it doesn’t happen again. Batteries are still going to fail, but they’re going to fail at expected rates. And, not blindside IPhone owners.
They will sell these kits with generic batteries in large quantities, and so they will damage many iPhone due to malpractice or generic battery failure and they will still blame Apple for that. Thank you Tim, for all the right choices this year.
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
Why? Can you explain how it benefits Apple to, say, have a 10 year old iPhone (or a 6 year old iPad, 17 year old iPod or a 26 year old Powerbook) that gets a battery replacement for $29? Do you know who would end up paying for this massive loss leader that would allow for a $29 permanent price for replacing batteries?" The customer pays for it through higher costs of new devices to make up for the entitled assholes that think that the iPhone they bought in 2007 should still work the same today and any time in the future because they're cheap and selfish.
Not sure if it's a massive loss leader. According to Munster this morning on CNBC, Apple will probably lose $10/battery replacement, at that price. Perhaps they could do it at a lower than $80 price.
It would be if this was a permanent, fixed cost, for all of Apple's devices. They have over 1 billion devices out there. If you wanted to even sell a 1yo device with a brand new battery being able to spend $29 for a much better resale value would mean Apple keeps eating more and more cost as they sell more devices, which means that Apple will pass these costs onto consumers.
Apple is only doing this for certain iPhones right now but his comment makes no demarcation of it being for any particular iPhone for any time period because of this PR issue due to a lack of transparency. He very clearly stated that Apple should make $29 a permanent price for batteries replacements without a single regard for the cost of the battery, complexity of the install, the age of the device, or type of device. Why not aging iPads or Macs since those, too, have batteries that degrade over time?
PS: For as many years as I can remember Apple reduces the performance of their Mac notebooks when the battery life is low. Am I the really the only one who has noticed this? They didn't have any transparency to say "hey, we're going to reduce peak performance until you charge your device or it's plugged in," you understood that this was done for legitimate reasons to keep you using it longer, just like pretty much every A-series chip and even the components in the iMac Pro are underclocked to keep the device working as well as possible.
Had Apple designed the iPhone with a battery compartment where owners could swap batteries without special tools this could have been avoided.
Of course, then millions would get off of the 2 year upgrade cycle.
Finally, what about iPod Touch & iPads?
Nonsense. I upgraded my phone to iP8 not because of the battery. Battery compartment being accessible by the user isn't needed. Creating a battery compartment flap and all underlying mechanics to support that feature is simply a waste of space/resources you do not have for a feature that virtually no one needs. And THAT is stupid.
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
How much do you attribute to the cost of the battery, profit on the battery, and the cost and profit on the labor?
Most Lithium Ion battery batteries that size are usually $10 at stores, so Apple probably gets cheaper due to volume. The issue is probably labor, but that might be around slightly above minimum wage. Say a tech can change 4 batteries in 1 hour and he is earning $20 a hour. That's $5 per phone. $15 might be their cost and $14 profit. Charging $80 is too much.
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
How much do you attribute to the cost of the battery, profit on the battery, and the cost and profit on the labor?
Most Lithium Ion battery batteries that size are usually $10 at stores, so Apple probably gets cheaper due to volume. The issue is probably labor, but that might be around slightly above minimum wage. Say a tech can change 4 batteries in 1 hour and he is earning $20 a hour. That's $5 per phone. $15 might be their cost and $14 profit. Charging $80 is too much.
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
Why? Can you explain how it benefits Apple to, say, have a 10 year old iPhone (or a 6 year old iPad, 17 year old iPod or a 26 year old Powerbook) that gets a battery replacement for $29? Do you know who would end up paying for this massive loss leader that would allow for a $29 permanent price for replacing batteries?" The customer pays for it through higher costs of new devices to make up for the entitled assholes that think that the iPhone they bought in 2007 should still work the same today and any time in the future because they're cheap and selfish.
And you think $80 is justified? As I replied to another poster, most Lithium Ion battery batteries that size are usually $10 at stores, so Apple probably gets it cheaper. Labor might be $5 a phone assuming you pay the guy $20 a hour and he can fix 4 an hour. That's huge markup for when it was priced at $80. No way they are losing any money at $29.
Also, if a person still wants to use an old phone, that should be their decision. Tons of people still use computer with WinXP and that is 15 years old....security risks and all....
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
Why? Can you explain how it benefits Apple to, say, have a 10 year old iPhone (or a 6 year old iPad, 17 year old iPod or a 26 year old Powerbook) that gets a battery replacement for $29? Do you know who would end up paying for this massive loss leader that would allow for a $29 permanent price for replacing batteries?" The customer pays for it through higher costs of new devices to make up for the entitled assholes that think that the iPhone they bought in 2007 should still work the same today and any time in the future because they're cheap and selfish.
And you think $80 is justified? As I replied to another poster, most Lithium Ion battery batteries that size are usually $10 at stores, so Apple probably gets it cheaper. Labor might be $5 a phone assuming you pay the guy $20 a hour and he can fix 4 an hour. That's huge markup for when it was priced at $80. No way they are losing any money at $29.
Also, if a person still wants to use an old phone, that should be their decision. Tons of people still use computer with WinXP and that is 15 years old....security risks and all....
Are you seriously that ignorant about basic battery technology or are you just trolling? I can by 8 AA batteries at the Dollar Store for $1 but they don't last as long as more expensive AA batteries from reputable sources and brands. I've also seen countless cheap batteries—even from Amazon—that stated a specific mAh, and have a specific mAh upon original testing but then the cells quickly degrade and stop working—or worse!—after just a few charges. Then there's the constantly cases of knock off and cheap PSUs and 12V cig lighter USB-A adapters, and power cables you can buy that frequently cause fires and even result in deaths… but according to you these are all just as good as Apple is just being a greedy piece of shit company.
Is it really that hard to do a 5 seconds of research and contemplation before you post?
Had Apple designed the iPhone with a battery compartment where owners could swap batteries without special tools this could have been avoided.
Of course, then millions would get off of the 2 year upgrade cycle.
Finally, what about iPod Touch & iPads?
So how much bigger+heavier would you make the phone to accommodate that compartment? Would you still make the compartment and the battery waterproof? Or how much less of an all day battery are you going to use? Maybe you just would always carry two batteries or be ok with running out of juice some days (running out would result the same behavior that the throttling mitigates, just for the whole life of the phone instead of the tail). This is a game of g, mm, and mAh; You have to give up something. Don't leave out all the negative tradeoffs when suggesting this sort of thing.
Thank you! I was going to respond to this and you did it for me. Leaving out the negative trade-offs is the only way that folks can continue to bush this bullshit forced 2 year upgrade conspiracy.
If they knew the thin battery in the 6/6s had a design flaw why did they not make the 7 or 8 thicker? Is it because Apple is too obsessed with making the devices thin?
What design flaw? Batteries aging and using up their chemistry is not a design flaw. It's what we call "physics".
Does your car have a design flaw because you'll eventually have to replace its battery as well in order to maintain peak power draw?
Its a design flaw because no iphone had unexpected shutdowns until the thinner 6 on iOS 10.2 where the new software went beyond the limits of the design
Please STOP! You obviously think you know what you are talking about but you don't.
I had the unexpected shut downs, and then the phone shoots back to 30% as soon as it's put on the charger with my iPhone 5. I also had the battery replaced by Apple free of charge under their iPhone 5 Battery Replacement Program. My iPhone 5 was purchased on launch day 2012.
The affected iPhone 5 devices were sold between September 2012 and January 2013 and fall within a limited serial number range. If your iPhone 5 is experiencing these symptoms and meets the eligibility requirements noted below, Apple will replace your iPhone 5 battery, free of charge.
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
Why? Can you explain how it benefits Apple to, say, have a 10 year old iPhone (or a 6 year old iPad, 17 year old iPod or a 26 year old Powerbook) that gets a battery replacement for $29? Do you know who would end up paying for this massive loss leader that would allow for a $29 permanent price for replacing batteries?" The customer pays for it through higher costs of new devices to make up for the entitled assholes that think that the iPhone they bought in 2007 should still work the same today and any time in the future because they're cheap and selfish.
And you think $80 is justified? As I replied to another poster, most Lithium Ion battery batteries that size are usually $10 at stores, so Apple probably gets it cheaper. Labor might be $5 a phone assuming you pay the guy $20 a hour and he can fix 4 an hour. That's huge markup for when it was priced at $80. No way they are losing any money at $29.
Also, if a person still wants to use an old phone, that should be their decision. Tons of people still use computer with WinXP and that is 15 years old....security risks and all....
Are you seriously that ignorant about basic battery technology or are you just trolling? I can by 8 AA batteries at the Dollar Store for $1 but they don't last as long as more expensive AA batteries from reputable sources and brands. I've also seen countless cheap batteries—even from Amazon—that stated a specific mAh, and have a specific mAh upon original testing but then the cells quickly degrade and stop working—or worse!—after just a few charges. Then there's the constantly cases of knock off and cheap PSUs and 12V cig lighter USB-A adapters, and power cables you can buy that frequently cause fires and even result in deaths… but according to you these are all just as good as Apple is just being a greedy piece of shit company.
Is it really that hard to do a 5 seconds of research and contemplation before you post?
I actually gave a breakdown. You have not. You still haven't said what justifies $80? Yeah, just go to sites like Battery.com to see the price of Lithium Ion batteries for cell phones. Obviously they are charging my $5-10 more for Apple because they can, not because Apple is an different says Samsung. Still no where close to $80.
If they knew the thin battery in the 6/6s had a design flaw why did they not make the 7 or 8 thicker? Is it because Apple is too obsessed with making the devices thin?
1) I have no idea what you mean by thin batteries having a design flaw that a thick battery doesn't but I can say you absolutely don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
2) If you actually paid attention you'd notice that Apple has increased the thickness of their devices many, many times in recent years, which obliterates all your "obsessed about thinness" bullshit.
You might have noticed he asked a question rather than cursing at him. Would a larger battery have lasted longer? That is a legitimate question.
Apple is suggesting the newer phones (either because of the software update, or hardware decisions) won’t have this issue.
I am wondering how long the IPhone 8’s battery is expected to last... it’s relevant when deciding to get the extended warranty.
Perhaps appleinsider can follow up on that. Is AppleCare worth it?
1) He's not really asking questions.
2) His comment is that Apple keeps making iPhones thinner when they've actually increased their thickness is a statement… and that's wrong.
iPhone 6 = 0.27" D
iPhone 7 = 0.28" D
iPhone 8 = 0.29" D
iPone 6 Plus = 0.28" D
iPhone 7 Plus = 0.29" D
iPhone 8 Plus = 0.30" D
3) He foolishly makes a claim about the thinness of a battery, not about its volume or its capacity. This batteries are sheets that are wrapped and folded so thicker batteries would have a statistical likelihood of having more issues, not less. Then there's the chemistry involved that caused dendrites to degrade batteries and cause them to eventually short out, as well as impurities, as we see with cheap batteries that are discarded by Apple and most other OEMs because they're both junk and dangerous), and finally other aspects of how power is received through cheap 3rd-party chargers and cables that can further degrade batteries is the internal components of the device can only handle so much in terms fo controlling the power flow which can cause a lot more than just battery health.
4) Apple clearly states that the iPhone batteries should last 500 charge cycles before it reaches 80% of its original capacity. This is not 500 charges; this is 500 complete charge cycles. If you charged your battery every day when it was at 50% it would then be 1000 days of charging before you get to 500 complete charge cycles.
Why would I order a kit for $29 from iFixit (and then do the work myself and risk damaging my device) when I can have an Apple authorized technician do the repair for me for the same price?
My iPhone 7+ had water damage (screen is slightly affected) but has worked fine for a year now. Apple refuses to do any work on it unless I replace entire screen so this ifixit deal is worth it to me.
Apple should really make $29 the permanent price for replacing the batteries.
Why? Can you explain how it benefits Apple to, say, have a 10 year old iPhone (or a 6 year old iPad, 17 year old iPod or a 26 year old Powerbook) that gets a battery replacement for $29? Do you know who would end up paying for this massive loss leader that would allow for a $29 permanent price for replacing batteries?" The customer pays for it through higher costs of new devices to make up for the entitled assholes that think that the iPhone they bought in 2007 should still work the same today and any time in the future because they're cheap and selfish.
And you think $80 is justified? As I replied to another poster, most Lithium Ion battery batteries that size are usually $10 at stores, so Apple probably gets it cheaper. Labor might be $5 a phone assuming you pay the guy $20 a hour and he can fix 4 an hour. That's huge markup for when it was priced at $80. No way they are losing any money at $29.
Also, if a person still wants to use an old phone, that should be their decision. Tons of people still use computer with WinXP and that is 15 years old....security risks and all....
Are you seriously that ignorant about basic battery technology or are you just trolling? I can by 8 AA batteries at the Dollar Store for $1 but they don't last as long as more expensive AA batteries from reputable sources and brands. I've also seen countless cheap batteries—even from Amazon—that stated a specific mAh, and have a specific mAh upon original testing but then the cells quickly degrade and stop working—or worse!—after just a few charges. Then there's the constantly cases of knock off and cheap PSUs and 12V cig lighter USB-A adapters, and power cables you can buy that frequently cause fires and even result in deaths… but according to you these are all just as good as Apple is just being a greedy piece of shit company.
Is it really that hard to do a 5 seconds of research and contemplation before you post?
I actually gave a breakdown. You have not. You still haven't said what justifies $80? Yeah, just go to sites like Battery.com to see the price of Lithium Ion batteries for cell phones. Obviously they are charging my $5-10 more for Apple because they can, not because Apple is an different says Samsung. Still no where close to $80.
Why are you comparing Apple’s prices to battery.com? There is no basis of comparison for someone that understands battery technology.
Comments
Apple is suggesting the newer phones (either because of the software update, or hardware decisions) won’t have this issue.
I am wondering how long the IPhone 8’s battery is expected to last... it’s relevant when deciding to get the extended warranty.
Perhaps appleinsider can follow up on that. Is AppleCare worth it?
But no... Weak, worn out batteries fail at unforseen times. It's physics. It's not, as much as you want it to be, a "design flaw". Sorry. Go home.
The demands of the software went up, not the size of the battery going down.
Anybody else want to pretend physics aren’t a thing?
Almost every complex design involves compromise and trade-offs of one type or another. And the designer is forced to choose which is better...
Yes, Apple COULD have provided user replaceable batteries -- where you could carry a spare and swap yours out before it died. (I had a smart phone that did that prior to Steve's original iPhone, and I liked it) But, that involved compromising other aspects of the product. So, they went with an integrated, internal battery that only they could (should?) replace. Deal with it.
The same debate went on with their getting rid of the earphone jack. Apple explained the reasons why it needed to go -- to free up valuable real estate for other functions. But, the arm chair quarterbacks still listed it as a failure...
It's so strange: people complain when Apple doesn't "innovate", then they complain when they do! (Sucks to be you Apple!)
Blaming it on “physics” is a cop out, the same way saying “that’s what way God intended” is.
For example, if you buy a truck a the tires ware out at 25 thousand miles, and they were expected to last 50 thousand. It’s very likely the manufacture spec’d out the wrong tires. When you expanded this out to the 50,000 sold and people are seeing the same thing on average, the manufacturer messed up. They’d be expected to compensate owners the same way Apple is...
It’s fine Apple messed up. They’re making it right with IPhone owners, and making sure it doesn’t happen again. Batteries are still going to fail, but they’re going to fail at expected rates. And, not blindside IPhone owners.
Apple is only doing this for certain iPhones right now but his comment makes no demarcation of it being for any particular iPhone for any time period because of this PR issue due to a lack of transparency. He very clearly stated that Apple should make $29 a permanent price for batteries replacements without a single regard for the cost of the battery, complexity of the install, the age of the device, or type of device. Why not aging iPads or Macs since those, too, have batteries that degrade over time?
PS: For as many years as I can remember Apple reduces the performance of their Mac notebooks when the battery life is low. Am I the really the only one who has noticed this? They didn't have any transparency to say "hey, we're going to reduce peak performance until you charge your device or it's plugged in," you understood that this was done for legitimate reasons to keep you using it longer, just like pretty much every A-series chip and even the components in the iMac Pro are underclocked to keep the device working as well as possible.
Also, if a person still wants to use an old phone, that should be their decision. Tons of people still use computer with WinXP and that is 15 years old....security risks and all....
Is it really that hard to do a 5 seconds of research and contemplation before you post?
I had the unexpected shut downs, and then the phone shoots back to 30% as soon as it's put on the charger with my iPhone 5. I also had the battery replaced by Apple free of charge under their iPhone 5 Battery Replacement Program. My iPhone 5 was purchased on launch day 2012.
The affected iPhone 5 devices were sold between September 2012 and January 2013 and fall within a limited serial number range. If your iPhone 5 is experiencing these symptoms and meets the eligibility requirements noted below, Apple will replace your iPhone 5 battery, free of charge.
https://huit.harvard.edu/pages/iphone-5-battery-replacement-program
2) His comment is that Apple keeps making iPhones thinner when they've actually increased their thickness is a statement… and that's wrong.
3) He foolishly makes a claim about the thinness of a battery, not about its volume or its capacity. This batteries are sheets that are wrapped and folded so thicker batteries would have a statistical likelihood of having more issues, not less. Then there's the chemistry involved that caused dendrites to degrade batteries and cause them to eventually short out, as well as impurities, as we see with cheap batteries that are discarded by Apple and most other OEMs because they're both junk and dangerous), and finally other aspects of how power is received through cheap 3rd-party chargers and cables that can further degrade batteries is the internal components of the device can only handle so much in terms fo controlling the power flow which can cause a lot more than just battery health.
4) Apple clearly states that the iPhone batteries should last 500 charge cycles before it reaches 80% of its original capacity. This is not 500 charges; this is 500 complete charge cycles. If you charged your battery every day when it was at 50% it would then be 1000 days of charging before you get to 500 complete charge cycles.