Re: This
"I imagine their thinking is
- Safety. People setting fire to their houses or their body with their phones does happen occasionally, but is far more likely with knock-off batteries. Not good publicity when that happens."
Well colour me suprised, I never knew those Samsung Note users had changed the battery on their phones before they exploded.
"- Design. A phone that is easily dismantled involves design compromises. Phones that creak in your hand or burst open when you drop them aren’t good publicity."
The Nokia 3310 had a fantastic reputation, even though sometimes the shell would pop off. The problem comes if the shell doesn't go back on. Besides, the iPhone only has to look at some concrete and the screen cracks.
"- Support. Apple isn’t a charity. When your phone or apps go bad due to a knock-off battery or dodgy flash card, why should you be able to walk into an Apple Store and waste their time on a problem not of their own making. Also, long queues of people waiting for repairs not good publicity."
But charging nearly £200 to fix a battery on a year old phone is amazing publicity?
"Don’t like it? Don’t buy an iPhone."
Ok Dad.
"What I would definitely support would be a requirement for manufacturers or authorised agents to replace batteries on demand for a reasonable cost well beyond the time when a company arbitrarily decides to declare a product ‘obsolete’. If I have a working iPhone in 10 years’ time that needs a new battery, I should be able to get one."
But Apple aren't a charity? So why would they want to support you for 10 years when you could've had 5 new shiny iPhones from them in that time?
Biting the hand that feeds IT
