Add the Net to people power and the fur really flies. In the early days of the personal computer revolution, activists were wont to describe PCs as thought amplifiers -- all those things you could only dream about, such as writing a novel, designing a house, working out pi to five million decimal places, you could now do. The Net does the same for opinions: with a digital camera, movie software and a Web site you can turn a stale crumb of a whinge into a sumptuous banquet for millions.
Which is what happened when Casey and Van Neistat, two video-editing brothers from New York City, found their iPod batteries dead a mere eighteen months after purchase. In Manhattan, a working iPod is more important to life support than Neil Armstrong's electric rucksack ever was -- "Cupertino, we have a problem," said the brothers Neistat. "Sorry, lads," said tech support. "Out of warranty, and you can't replace it. Send it back with two hundred dollars in used bills and we'll fix it. Might as well buy a new one."
You or I would punch the air at this point and squeal like orgasmic rats: a cast-iron excuse to upgrade. Alas, not the Neistats. Retro is now so fashionable that a 'first generation iPod' is a bona-fide antique already. So they did what any reasonable person would do -- they made a movie of themselves flyposting anti-Apple agitprop all over the burg, slapped on a backing track of the tech support phone call that got their gander, and bunged it on the Web.
It had everything: the little people against the big corporation, the cutting edge of consumer action, and the coolest gizmo on the planet. It was hugely popular, and spread through the blogosphere at the speed of trite. The one thing missing was accuracy.
For while it was true that the feisty Neistats had been hard done by, they had fallen between the cracks. Apple had a much more sensible battery replacement policy ready to roll -- it just didn't expect the first lot of dead iPods to crop up quite so soon. The warranty ran out at a year; the batteries of the heaviest users might start to poop out at around two years. Well before that, Apple had a hundred-dollar fix in the works (and third parties could see you right for fifty). By the time the video version of J'Accuse hit the Web, the problem was fixed. (Not in Europe: we haven't had our iPods long enough for that.)
What's frustrating is that the dynamic duo do have a point.
Talkback
This is at best an idiot writing his incorrect badly research opinion and at worst libellous.
Have a look on slash dot
you are praising someone filming themselves defacing property - commiting an illegal act
And the boys are fools.
You can replace the battery yourself for 50 bucks
Google is a search engine. Type things into it and you get answers
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2003Aug/bpd20030825021146.htm
ooh look, first link a detailed pictorial on how to replace the ipod yourself
that was hard research, wasn't it?
zdnet is constantly printing incorrect and frankly badly written pieces bashing apple. not sure why
apple sell a rechargable battery that DOESNT LAST FOREVER shocka!!!!!
and they offer to replace it for 99 bucks
and your point is?
read this for more FACTS on the case
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/20/1911252&mode=thread&tid=176&tid=188
and the idea of ruining the design of the ipod by fitting 3 AAA batteries into it is very amusing
the man who wrote this should be sacked for a) not researching what he writes and b) being so utterly wrong about almost every aspect of his opinion
lots of love
apple zealot
My dear chap
I think if you re-read my piece, you'll find that I point out that you can get a new battery for fifty bucks, that Apple is no different to anyone else and that the aforementioned video is wrong. And you don't even need Google!
Would you like it in bigger type next time? Perhaps smaller words might help. I do try to make my copy accessible to Apple zealots and others with special needs, but obviously there's always room for improvement.
Rupert
Rupert, I agree with the fact that specialised replacement batteries are often a high margin product that is overpriced in all the industry.
You're not so far from the truth in telling the Neistat story, the problem is that you dont tell it all (about how they kept the site the same even after learning about the program and already avaiable 50$ replacements). Yes Apple had the replacement program ready to roll at the time they called but Apple support employees werent prepared and were told by a supervisor "its ok if you suggest buying a new one" because they were pissed off too about the 250$ flat repair fee for a battery. The new 99$ fee was actually unveilled before the site with the movie actually appear on the web.
Anyway overall, I agree with the main idea of your article, not about the solutions you seem to provide, like guerilla tactics over a company by defacing public property with half-truths (if not lies) like "iPod unreplaceable battery only last 18 months", and withholding the truth on their website for weeks after millions of people have seen their site and movie (also stoleing bandwith on a mirror site at the same time).
The AA/AAA battery is also a bad solution, even more with the advent of the minis. The iPods minis are only slightly larger than 3 AAA batteries or 2 AA put side by side. Even the bigger iPod would be inflated by using those "standard" batts. Also keep in mind that if you were also thinking about using alkaline AA or AAA batteries for 18 months about every day, it would cost you way more than 50$ or 100$ overall, something like 500$ to 1000$ and lets not think about the environmental waste...
BuzzyBeetle
What's yours? Consumer products with rechargable batteries (used and recharged daily) have batteries that don't last long? Ask any cellphone/laptop user and they'll say that's a no-brainer. batttery tech. just isn't there yet. HOHUM
Buzzy:
There are lots of options available to Apple - and other - makers. I've got equipment that can take a LiIon pack, a NiMH pack or AA batteries (primary or secondary). You can swap the battery packs to suit: electronically it's not difficult, and while it takes a little cleverness on the physical design that's what designers are paid for, isn't it?
I don't approve of what the Neistat brothers did, especially leaving the video up 'as a record of our experience' - and even getting that out of them took time, I believe. But there's only so many bases I can touch on in one article. As for flyposting and guerilla campaigns - they've been with us since Roman times, and I'm anarchist enough to think we can survive a bit of botty-baring.
Fluffy:
Not named after the Duracell adverts, are you?
The fact that battery technology "isn't there yet" means that different types of battery are appropriate at different times and for different reasons. Designers should recognise this and give us consumers the choice, the ability to pick the kinds of batteries we use to suit our circumstances, not lock us into a single, expensive type.
Rupert,
I work for a startup company in the U.S. that has developed high performance, long life battery packs for use in wireless devices such as cell phones/pdas, GSM/GPRS, 3G, etc.. The use of our battery pack can extend talk time by 50-80% and increase battery life by 3 to 4 times current batteries of the the same size. Are you suggesting we are destined to be ignored ?
I choose to think the companies we are working with have the best intentions of delivering a better power pack, hence a better product experience for the consumer.
Kurt Pfluger
Apogee Power
kurt@apogeepower. com
Kurt - no, at some point there'll be a nice standard battery technology that is lighter, cheaper, has a higher power density, is safer, less polluting, longer living and just plain better than anything else. At that point, there'll be no reason to do anything else.
We're at that point in some niches - watch batteries, for example, are a good enough match to their job that no alternative is needed. Ditto car batteries. But for most portable consumer electronics, some sort of compromise is necessary - and sometimes the compromises the designers make will not match the way the user would rather have things.
Until we reach the universal power nirvana, the interests of the consumer are best served by giving them as much choice as possible so they can be the judge of what's appropriate for them. It's very possible - I have a hand-held radio transceiver that has a lithium battery as standard, but will also take an AA battery pack that works with NiMH or alkalines. Is the lithium pack the best one? Most of the time, yes - but what when it dies for good and I can't get a replacement? Or I'm out of reach of a charger for three days?
Your technology will make better LiIon batteries, I'm sure (I wrote about a company called cap-XX a couple of years ago, which seemed to be doing the same sort of thing - are you related?): I was convinced by the cap-XX arguments, and I'm mildly surprised not to see product yet. But that doesn't solve the problem of what happens when the LiIon side dies and you can't get a replacement: a problem solvable by better design.
R
>I think if you re-read my piece, you'll find that I >point out that you can get a new battery for fifty >bucks
you mention it as a parenthesised out aside. you do not mention where this can be done, how easy it is, or the fact that this was available for years. hardly balanced reporting.
> that Apple is no different to anyone else
missed that bit. was in lost in the dull technical stuff about battery life?
"apple sell a battery that will not last forever - just like everyone else." not much of a story is it?
>and that the aforementioned video is wrong.
Oh, I must of got confused with lines such as:
People power
-
you can turn a stale crumb of a whinge into a sumptuous banquet for millions.
-
So they did what any reasonable person would do -- they made a movie of themselves flyposting anti-Apple agitprop all over the burg
-
What's frustrating is that the dynamic duo do have a point.
-
Anyone for people power?
You claim rev a ipods are antiques that don't work. My rev a ipod still holds a 10 hour charge, it was the first one sold in the UK.
>Would you like it in bigger type next time? Perhaps >smaller words might help. I do try to make my copy >accessible to Apple zealots and others with
>special needs, but obviously there's always room >for improvement.
You seem to be acting as if you are on Usenet. Not a professional (sic) journalist being paid for his words and opinions - however flawed they are.
This isn't Usenet.
Maybe alt.idontgetapple.pclamer.whinge.whinge.whinge would be a more suitable sounding post for your nonsense?
I always thought that ZDNet was bankrolled by Intel or M$. You confirm the bias perfectly. Well done.
Thanks for playing, pick up your prize on the way through the door.
1. 2500mAh means that when you draw current at the recommended rate, usually 10% of the battery capacity (in this case 250mA) then the time before the voltage falls below a predefined limit multiplied by the current should equal 2500. If you tried to draw 2.5A from a 2500mAh battery it would almost certainly overheat long before 1 hour.
2. You may not be aware that some devices such as DECT phones have turned away from custom battery packs to standard NiMH AAA batteries. Another advantage of this is that in an emergency alkaline batteries can be used (but not of course recharged).
3. There was a campaign some time ago to standardise power bricks - many devices are now thrown away because the power brick is broken or lost. If there was a standard brick producing, say, 12V 1A DC with a standard connector this could be minimised.
This is the reason why Apple, while garnering a similar flurry of excitement with its ipod product, will never manage the huge mega-success of a Sony. The walkman was a cultural phenomenon. The ipod is its successor in the new networked world. Walkmans became ubiquitous and Sony along with others made a fortune in walkman products ranging from $20-$200. Apple may just want to be the "rich man's toy supplier" but if it can't recognize a market need and suck it dry for all its worth, it's doomed to repeat its past failures.