Slashdot Mirror
Washington Post Covers iPod Battery Ruckus
An anonymous reader sent in a link to 'Battery and Assault: When His iPod Died, This Music Lover Tackled Apple. Stay Tuned.' in the Washington Post. The article (good reading even if you're familiar with the situation) has Apple reps being rather callous about the issue - I think it's a fairly reasonable assumption that if you spend several hundred dollars on a gizmo, it shouldn't be "disposable". A replacement battery for my cell phone cost $10; one for my cordless phone cost $10; Apple is presumably making a good deal of money on their $99 replacements.
Then Apple would sue you under the DMCA for reverse engineering their battery. Which is of course 10 times more useful and 100 times more trendy than anything a third parter could provide.
Apple products aren't made with sacrificial virgins you know
I know, they're made with 4 dollar an hour offshore assembly line labor.
All hardware is hardware.
Quite untrue.
The iPod was both a technical and design triumph in the world of consumer products. The battery that fits in it is part of the grand design, and should not be considered in the same league as the 4-9V converter bricks for example, you get at Radio Shack.
You sound like your jealous.
My brand new Powerbook G4 12" had its hard drive fail with the "click of death" exactly 31 days after I bought it. Obviously that's on the short side of the "mean time between failure", and fortunately it was covered under warranty (no questions asked), but... it sucked, and that's my story.
3) Both.
Contact Me (got tired of viruses emailing me).