Slashdot Mirror
Apple iPhone Dissected
Conch writes "Only hours after the launch, the Apple iPhone has been dissected. The good folks at AnandTech violated one of the first iPhones to still our curiosity about whats inside the aluminum shell.
'Please note that we're doing this so you are not tempted to on your recent $500/$600 expenditure, while it is quite possible to take apart using easy to find tools we'd recommend against it as it will undoubtedly void your warranty and will most likely mar up the beautiful gadget's exterior.'"
Joke's aside - the thing I really noted from TFA was:More planned obsolescence. Pity. I'd like to see Apple go a little greener. A non-user replaceable battery limits the life of a device substantially.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
Obviously you can't change the battery yourself, but from those pictures it looks like even Apple couldn't change it. That can't be so, can it?
You know, I have the feeling people who buy high-tech, flashy gadgetry such as the iPhone aren't likely to invest in it for the long term, with a value-for-money approach to buying and owning the product. The battery will probably last long enough for the owner to have another "oh shiny!" purchasing moment and relegate his iPhone to the bottom of some drawer...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Have you ever changed the battery in an iPod? It's possible, but a royal nuisance. Anyone who has done so probably realizes that Apple never really intended it to be possible. With the iPhone they've taken it a step further by soldering the battery directly to the board. I think that says it all. The only question is whether or not the battery will live up to daily use long enough to last out the contracts people are signing themselves into.
From the pictures on anandtech, it appears that the iPhone uses a Li-poly battery. That's an interesting choice, but a concerning one. Those typically do not last for as many charges as a plain old lithium ion battery. Apple is probably counting on the fact that the people who will lay out the kind of money the iPhone costs are the sort who won't try to nurse a device on for years, but rather, are the sort that will bin said device as soon as the next greatest thing (Hopefully the next generation of iPhone) comes along.
I suppose in this light it's not really planned obsolescence. Apple just built the iPhone to the minimum specs of the fickle trendy gadget crowd.
I'm not an EE guru, but it seems to me the reason for discreet chips in a lot of these devices actually serves several purposes.
Firstly, data speeds between chips might not match; something that's a lot easier to engineer into discreet chips than a single chip with everything on board.
Secondly, it gives the manufacturer the freedom to switch out components at will. If you dismantle anything from a large embedded device manufacturer, you might find that a single "generation" of a product might go through several iterations of chips simply because the manufacturer was able to source chips from different chip manufacturers for better prices.
Hell, I know I've seen a number of devices of supposedly the same generation that have had four or five iterations of motherboard and probably more of the chips themselves. Don't kid yourself; manufacturers of these devices are all about maximizing profits, and they do that by keeping their product lines "nimble"
Third, and as an aside to the second point; fabbing a custom chip is expensive, in time, resources and cost. Most manufacturers will use off the shelf components where possible so that they can keep the costs down. Custom chips tend to be fabbed only where off the shelf solutions don't exist or fail to meet some other engineering goal. The custom chips shown in the iPhone are a prime example of this. Although we don't know for sure what's inside that ARM package (the part numbers seem incongruous), we can guess that they did combine multiple discreet components into that chip package. In the case of the iPhone this was probably done to meet the packaging requirements of the entire device; i.e. Apple wanted a slim and compact device and discreet chips may have taken more space than the engineering team wanted.
However, the fact that there are several off the shelf chips on the board as well tells me that they were balancing cost and engineering requirements... this almost certainly took a lot of time and it's a nicely engineered solution. I look forward to version 2... which is when I might consider buying one (sorry, tethering and 3G are a big deal for me as I use them daily).
The unwashed masses have Paris Hilton, we geeks have the iPhone...
:)
Still, I'd like one of the editors here to take the attitude toward the iPhone that Mika Brzezinski has towards Paris. This video is quite funny, she was really mad!
Back to Slashdot - you realize you made the problem worse by clicking on and replying to this story? If the editors are looking at what types of stories lead to more clicks, you've just "voted"!
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Q: Name one smartphone that can effectively be used with one hand.
A: You can't. They all have this same characteristic - whether it's a stylus (Treo) or a Crackberry, they all require two hands for effective operation.
rm -rf
I still have a pile of the various PDA's and cell phones I have had over the years. Most used undersized batteries that reduced the initial cost of the unit (even though most cost about the same as today's iPhone), but also didn't last. This required me to purchase new batteries, extra batteries, and bigger, add-on batteries and battery packs. All of these batteries are in the same pile, waiting for me to find appropriate green disposal (some day).
I would argue that most people eventually just chuck these things away and that they end up in a landfill somewhere. Also the fact that the batteries are generally crap means that the average user goes through more batteries for a non-Apple "replaceable battery" product than they do for the Apple product.
The fact that Apple offers a low-cost, no-hassle, battery replacement option means that the majority of iPod and now iPhone), battery replacements happen through Apple instead of the consumer, and thus the batteries all get properly recycled instead of just being dumped. The main cause of battery pollution from iPods for instance is whatever portion of the populace that does not return them to Apple for replacement or recycling and just chucks the item away when it's dead. That is the consumer's fault, not Apple's.
The only thing that could be done better is that Apple could take back the old iPods so as to alleviate even the worst acts of the consumers of their products. They already do this in a limited way and have announced recently a goal of doing a take-back on every product they make.
How much more green could they possibly be right now?
Repo man's always intense.