“Although it scarcely seems possible, we think the Apple iPod Mini’s design surpasses even that of its photogenic older sibling. Its stylish, anodized-aluminum shell is so tough that we felt as if we could stand on the device without consequence. Apple constructs the body by hollowing out Mini-shaped aluminum tubes so that there are no seams in the construction, then applies the color during the anodization process so that it can’t scratch off,” Eliot Van Buskirk reports for CNET.
Van Buskirk reports, “The tastiest design treat to our palate is the revamped scrollwheel. The play, menu/back, fast-forward, and rewind functions that the white iPod assigns to four touch-sensitive buttons are now located on the scrollwheel (or, rather, the clickwheel). We prefer this approach because it offers physical feedback when a function has been activated. In addition to the new functionality, the touch-sensitive clickwheel still works perfectly for scrolling through lengthy song lists with speed and precision. As with the white iPod, the unlabelled button in the middle of the wheel functions as Select. The only other control on the player is the sliding Hold key on top, which locks all functions.”
“Apple claims the internal battery takes three hours to rejuice and lasts eight hours on a single charge. Our tests outperformed this rating, usually by about an hour. The battery is nonreplaceable, but if you’re unhappy with its resiliency after a couple of years, Apple will swap in a new one for $99,” Van Buskirk reports.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Van Buskirk gives Apple’s iPod mini a rating of 8.7 out of 10, noting the lack of FM tuner and “nonreplaceable” battery as issues detracting from a perfect score. One question, though, if the battery is supposedly “nonreplaceable,” as Van Buskirk describes, how can Apple “swap in a new one for $99?” The only way the battery could be considered “nonreplaceable,” Elliot, would be if you had to throw out the iPod mini when the battery no longer held a charge. But, you know this, don’t you Elliot? So why did you include the word “nonreplaceable,” when the battery is indeed replaceable? Please, let us in on your addled thinking and twisted reasoning.
I won’t accept that the ONE WORD in this article that MDN has taken exception to turns the whole article into FUD. It’s ridiculous. And for those of you talking about screwdrivers and such, please read the instructions for replacing a battery on a mini. You may be surprised, and perhaps will change your tone a bit.
And for those of you who blame the iPods battery press on CNET or whoever: take your medication. Apple was the cause of that story. Sure, the guys defacing Apple ads were jerks, but they had a point. Apple tried to charge them too much. Apple adjusted their prices. The Apple rep on the phone made a mistake. CNET had nothing to do with it. The use of the word “unreplaceable” to describe the <b>mini</i> battery is accurate enough for reasonable people.
Voltage,
The battery in my phone is 3.6V 1000mAH. The replacement battery for the old iPod is 3.7V, 1200mAH. The replacement battery for the new ipod is 3.7V, 850mAH.
Pretty much the same ballpark I reckon.
I’ve had a look at the install instructions. I will concede that perhaps given the dimensions of the battery in the original iPod, it’s not a trivial task to make it replaceable.
In the new iPod though, it looks like it should be less complicated given the size and position. They could make it as easy as replacing a media card.
Kenny,
what are the instructions on replacing the iPod mini batery ? I’ve not seen them yet because they’re not even for sale here for another couple of months !
Ok, nonreplaceable is the wrong word. It simply isn’t true. “Not easily replaceable” would be far more suitable.
Using the warranty as an example is also crap. The beige I’m typing this on has an upgradeable processor. But doing so is warranty-voiding. However, the processor is still very upgradeable (I’ve done it twice already). To say that the processor isn’t upgradable because the warranty doesn’t allow it is outright wrong.
So, the battery is very replaceable, just not very easily. The article is wrong. Wouldn’t be such a big deal but it’s CNET so a violent reaction is to be expected here.
Replacing a processor isn’t for everybody either. We’re talking about someting that could screw up your machine. It’s not something everybody would be capable of doing. It would bother me, but I know not to dance around on a polyester carpet before the attempt, and I’m capable of setting some switches/jumpers or whatever if I have good instructions.
This kind of stuff is not unlike doing work on a car. I know to change my plugs on at a time and reconnect the leads as I do it rather than just take all the leads off first and then re-connect in the wrong sequence.
They’re not a user-replaceable part though. The petrol and the oil are the replaceable parts !
‘wouldn’t bother me’, not ‘would bother me’. Damn typos!
I agree that the correct phrase would be “not easily replaceable” and I really think that it would be a better product if the battery were easily replaceable and I wish Apple would do this.
Why do all these reviewers go on and on about radio capability? Thats what I love about my iPod, I dont have to listen to commercials or to substandard audio.
Yes, but the point is that in the case of the processor, nonreplaceable would be wrong, because it’s designed specifically for replaceability. Anyway, nonreplaceable isn’t even bloody english. It’s non-replaceable. Non-userreplaceable (ok, don’t know what’s correct for that one) however would be the correct thing to say in the case of the iPod.
Damn I need to type faster. The response was to Hywel’s post
I agree about the radio. Why listen to all the crap on the radio if I’ve got all 20GBs of music with me? The radio (at least round here) plays the same old shite over and over and over unless it’s after midnight.
Hywel: Precisely my point. You’re all talking as if you know something, but you don’t know anything about the mini. What if it takes a specially-made tool to open the mini? Would you consider the battery more non-replaceable then?
The mini is an aluminum tube with no openings except at the ends. Whatever the procedure for getting at the innards, it won’t be like the iPod.
Damn Apple. What do they think? We are all millionaire? We are supposed to buy this thing only to throw it away when the battery is dead? It is time we stand up and demand that Apple invents a nuclear fusion power pack the size of a half-dollar!
They are dead, I am telling you. Dead. Beleguered.
He just should have said, “a non-detachable battery but, like all rechargeable batteries, the iPod’s eventually burn out after two or more years. A few vendors offer a replacement battery kit for $49 dollars, or you can use Apple’s service and them replace it for $99.”
‘nonreplaceable isn’t even bloody english’ was in response to your own post though ?
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
I’m with you and Red on the radio. If I want a radio, I’ll buy a radio. To criticise the iPod for not having a radio is like criticising it for not having cassette player.
There was a much bigger example of FUD in a UK newspaper today, but the article isn’t online. It’s basically saying that loads of people have iPods that they can’t use because they don’t work with OS-9 or older version of windows. And that there’s an added expense of upgrading to a new OS. They state that the boxes list the requirements, but then claim that it’s somehow not good enough.
I’ll see if I can find a copy to post here later.
Kenny,
Yes. Of course. Youre’ 100% right. It’s a review of the ‘iPod mini’ and, as yet, the battery can’t be replaced. It may be more difficilt or impossible to do, or there may similar service offered by Apple in a year’s time. And in the meantime they’re covered by the warranty anyway.
So on the one hand they criticism is falwed because of the warranty and on the other it’s a very real concern because there’s no avaialble information on whether thye will ever be replacable in the future. To err on the side of caution, one would have to say that they are not replaceable. Otherwise in a year when people start complaining, the loons will just say, “Well, you knew it wasn’t replaceable when you bought it, you freaking jerkwad winblows apologist” (or words to that effect).
why didnt Apple just design a user replaceable battery? because they want to SUCK the consumer dry of every dollar. enough said. same crap they do with memory.
Apple would be hard pressed to enforce a warranty being voided because you opened your unit, whether it be an iPod or a G5. Think about it all of you who have upgraded your computer. In the early 80’s this issue came up and I don’t think anyone has been denied warranty service for defective equipment. And yes I do understand that there are those who have opened systems, which have the sticker that makes that claim, who have damaged the hardware, voiding the warranty. It became void when they damaged the system.
As far as the iPod mini and it’s “non-replaceable” battery. $99.00 seems excessive but as long as their are 3 party alternatives Apple can charge what they want.
I know that a Kodak CRV3 battery is 6 times the price of 2 AA batteries for my digital camera. I know that if I buy a Sony Camcorder battery it will cost me $70.00, but I can get others for half the price.
As far as making it user replaceable. Form follows function. I wish the rest of my digital products were built as well as the iPod and mini. I am sure that there were tradeoffs made and in a portable device like the iPod, I think they opted to not introduce the headache replaceble batteries would introduce from a design standpoint. Everytime I replace a battery or open an access door on my camera, I have to be careful.
Hywel: While I detected a note of sarcasm, I think your comments are logical. I must admit that I hadn’t thought about it that way before–erring on the side of caution. I was just scoffing at the fanatics getting all bent over a single prefix in an otherwise glowing review of the mini. You’re right, though. Let it be called “non-replaceable” from the start, and see if anyone has the gall to sue then.
The battery IS replaceable by the owner. The current iPod’s is–and more cheaply that Apple’s service, if you don’t mind taking your unit apart.
A more accurate statement: “the iPod Mini’s battery is not OFFICIALLY replaceable BY THE USER.”
Should Apple use standard replaceable batteries? I’d have to see what kind of iPod that would be, before I judge. Perhaps I wouldn’t care for the size it would have to be.
BTW… iPod batteries for $45:
http://www.smalldog.com/wag14009/atdealmacex/
http://www.smalldog.com/wag14010/atdealmacex/
Yeah, I’m not sure I would like the look of an iPod with the battery on the outside like a cell phone. I suppose Apple could make it easier to open the case, but that might make it less resistant to my pirouettes, flying out of my shirt pocket and slamming against the wall.
The iPod mini might be quite a bit easier to get into. The pipe-like design seems very tough, but maybe it’s easy to slide the innards out by pushing on one end. It wouldn’t surprise me if Apple improved that, if only so they could lower their labor cost on battery replacements.
The usual piece of shit Mac-“journalism” form Jobs’ bitches MDN fags.
who woke up the baby?
Kenny,
Actually I wasn’t being sarcastic to you, I was agreeing 100%, though I did carry on a bit.
And potentally, the iPod mini could be a lo easier to get into. The guts could slide out just like those of a G4 cube. I hope it’s not glued in !
Nagromme,
have you seen the installation instructions ? It’s not just ‘if you don’t mind taking your unit apart’, it’s ‘if you don’t mind possibly ruining your unit to save yourself $50’. It’s not the handling of the components that would bother me so much as the probablility of breaking a clip and never getting the case back together properly.