Batteries: Do you prefer an innie or an outie?
Reading through forums this past week, several posters indicated that the Lumia 920 was off their short list because the battery was not removable. And that got me to thinking. Does battery access really matter anymore? There is a rather large Fruit company that has managed to sell more than a couple cargo ships worth of devices with non-removable batteries, so it would appear the answer is no, it doesn’t.
The Lumia 900 is the first PDA/Phone I have owned since my Palm Pilot days that does not have a removable battery. While I was a bit apprehensive when the L900 was first announced I can honestly say that it is not that big a deal. I always purchased at least one spare battery for each of my devices, and until recently always carried the charged up spare(s) with me. I didn’t switch them out often, but was comfortable knowing that they were there if I needed them. But since the introduction of low priced, high capacity UBS portable chargers, extra batteries have sort of become irrelevant, at least for me. I always have 6,000-9,000 mAh of extra juice available. Charging without being tethered to a wall is a good thing. And with my new Boxwave AA USB Charger, available power will last as long as I can still buy AA batteries.
I wonder if the users who are adamant about removable batteries, currently own, or have recently owned a battery guzzling device that ‘requires” one or more changes a day just to be usable. If so, that is sad. Especially if they believe that this is normal for all devices. We can all use more juice throughout a day, especially a busy one. But AC, Car, USB and now Wireless chargers should suffice in keeping your battery topped off.
Although I have never had a problem with a battery (I only purchase OEM spares) I suppose one could make an argument that a defective non- removable battery would require a device return/exchange, where a removable could easily be replaced. As a heavy user I am a little concerned about my L900 battery getting tired in another 3-4 months, but I will cross that road if and when I get to it. Moving forward I would like to see non-removable devices designed for easy battery replacement by a trained technician, sort of like getting the battery replaced in your watch. Wouldn’t mind stopping at my local Carrier store and waiting while my battery was changed out. Sort of the best of both worlds.
So what about you. Is a non-removable battery a show stopper or a non-issue? Why?
I wouldn’t refuse to buy a product if it never had a replaceable battery but I do think phones should allow you to switch it.
most contracts are 2 years and unfortunately with most phones the battery tends to weaken with time. I had an iPod touch that was defunct within a year as the battery refused to hold a charge for more than an hour. The Lumia phones already have a poor history of battery performance, mines barely lasts 15hrs. Plus removing the battery is the easiest way to fix a crashed phone.
I don’t mind the idea of a non-removable battery. It’s definitely not a deal breaker for me. That said, I am usually within an arm’s reach of my charger, so low battery in the middle of the day isn’t a big worry for me to begin with. I think the 920 will still be a big hit despite this so-called “issue” from some consumers and critics.
I have needed to pull the battery from the Surround on a few occasions, so that’s been nice to have that option, but I’ve never needed a spare. So innie or outie is not a deal breaker for me.