On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 08:11:43 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

What explains the electric toothbrushes that don't have
replaceable batteries? You have to toss a $60-$120
device just because a $5 battery has failed.

Using the battery to enforce product obscelence
is standard practice in the industry.

Mindlessly superficial. The reality is that its a lot easier to
allow battery replacement with some items than with others.

I totally disagree. No reason they can't make a new standard - Lithium
Polymer battery pack about the size of a SD card that just snaps into
a device. That would look after all the ipods and ipodlikes,as well as
all kinds of PDAs etc. On the ipod nano it's just the simplicity of
assembly that counts - it's crimped together, but not sealed, so if it
gets wet it's finished, and it IS possible to take it apart - but the
battery is soldered on, rather than plug-in, because it's
simpler/cheaper. Could still replace the battery - but they are NOT
AVAILABLE. And if you get the beggars wet, the battery goes south.

Everett M. Greene wrote:
"Rod Speed" writes:
terry wrote
Although recent discussion/discovery that IPods will
exhaust their batteries in approximately one to two
years do clearly raise the question? "Designed to fail?".

Doesnt explain stuff like cordless phones that use standard
batterys.

What explains the electric toothbrushes that don't have
replaceable batteries? You have to toss a $60-$120
device just because a $5 battery has failed.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com