What a bizarre Joe Nocera Times piece about the lack of a removable battery in the iPhone. The key question:
One thing I wanted to know was why Apple had made a cellphone without a removable battery in the first place; it seemed like such an extreme act of consumer unfriendliness.
Why indeed? Hey, wait, here's one answer, quoted a few graphs later:
“The real issue is that Steve and Jonathan Ive” — Apple’s design chief — “have decided to emphasize sexiness and a different basic experience” over such ho-hum consumer needs as a replaceable battery. He was convinced that it was primarily a design issue; indeed, he thinks Apple is using a lithium polymer battery in the iPhone, which can be stretched into different shapes — and thus can be tucked into an extremely thin space.
How ludicrous and superficial -- not to mention consumer unfriendly -- to think that people might like a smartphone that's signficantly lighter and thinner than the competition!
According to Nocera's calculations, the iPhone battery might run out after two years of use, thus potentially requiring that it be sent back to Apple for replacement. Obviously, Apple made the decision that consumers would much rather have a slimmer phone for 730 straight days, and then have to part with it for a few days to get a new battery. I certainly would happily make that tradeoff. What's so hard to understand?