Apple reveals 17-inch MacBook Pro battery replacement details

Ever since the new 17-inch MacBook Pro was introduced, the million dollar question (make that $179 question) has been: what goes down when the battery fails? Sure, the machine is small -- and the alleged eight hours of charge is nothing to sneeze at -- but is all that worth the hassle of a non-removable battery? When the thing eventually goes kaput (and they always do), those of us in the States can expect to lay out $179 plus tax for a replacement. According to the site, if you drop the machine off at the Apple Store they can turn it around in a day (with appointment). If you mail it in, give it four days or so upon receipt. If you decide to do it yourself? Well, you probably shouldn't. But if you do, make sure you send us pictures.

[Via Boy Genius Report]

[Warren @ Jan 14th 2009 7:43PM]

But what if you cant get an appointment for 2 or 3 days as is what usually happens?

[thethirdmoose @ Jan 14th 2009 7:46PM]

It's not like the battery is destroyed and needs to be replaced immediately, just that the total life decreases over time.
That said, a removable battery would add like 0.00001"...

[lucas @ Jan 14th 2009 8:05PM]

well if you wait until it's totally dead that's on you.

and we're talking about something that, if things go according to claims, won't be an issue for a good 2-3 years. maybe longer

[Apple @ Jan 14th 2009 7:52PM]

Pffffffft. Windows fanboy.

[Paul Chapel @ Jan 14th 2009 8:02PM]

Yeah, I don't like this at all, but it's not like Apple is forcing people to buy a 17" MacBook Pro. Of course, I have a 15" MacBook Pro and I love it, but I really wish they would have offered me the non-glossy option for my screen. You have to screw around with the brightness and I'm used to it now, but it would have been really cool to have had a choice. I think the same thing about the battery, although as a whole, eight hours of battery life is really nothing to sneeze at and you do get a power cord.

The battery issue is really a big deal to frequent fliers though. Of course, who the heck can use a 17" laptop on a plane anyway, even in first class that's a bit of hassle.

[Josh @ Jan 14th 2009 8:25PM]

You'll want a new laptop before the one they give you dies. And by the time your 5 years is up, even 3 if you push it HARD it'll still have the majority of it's charge facility.

The only time you should be using battery is if you're travelling. If you're anywhere stationary, use a damn socket - there's no excuse, especially at home. That will prolong battery life significantly.

[erik @ Jan 14th 2009 8:46PM]

Or what if your computer locks up and you need to unplug it and take the battery out to reset it? Cause I've never had to do that with my MBP. :rolleyes:

[isaac @ Jan 14th 2009 8:52PM]

@josh. sorry but no. keeping a LiIon battery at 100% charge for prolonged periods is the fastest way to kill it. While they don't have the memory issues of older tech such as NiCad they still need to be cycled. And as already stated each cycle decreases its useful capacity by a small percentage..

[Knee to the Groin @ Jan 14th 2009 9:27PM]

"Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine"

[mjr @ Jan 14th 2009 9:49PM]

@erik You'd hold down the power button for 5 seconds for a hard shutdown, just like every other MacBook.

[nikster @ Jan 14th 2009 10:24PM]

@thethirdmoose. No it's not 0.00001". It's a 40% increase in capacity.

I wonder why a lot of people's reaction to the non-replaceable battery is "they just do it to piss me off"? I mean... Apple wants to make money, not piss people off, right?
Anyway there is a whole long article for those willing and capable of reading, right on Apples 17" MacBook Pro page, where they detail exactly why a replaceable battery takes up lots of space for its casing (which needs to be strong), the casing that protects the rest of the chassis when you remove the battery, the connectors, and other bits and pieces. All that space is now used for _more power cells_ instead. Bad? I think not.

If this works as planned, all computers will have non-replaceable batteries in the future.

[anthony @ Jan 14th 2009 11:16PM]

I'm not making any judgement saying this is good or bad.. but just to give you an idea of how you can expect 8 hours of battery life

"The wireless productivity test measures battery life by wirelessly browsing various websites and editing text in a word processing document with display brightness set to 50%" - straight from the apple store website.

for me this sounds good because I usually have the brightness turned to the lowest level on my g4 when it's unplugged anyways. and my guess is that the g4 at its brightest level is probably same as the 17" at its lowest level.

[anthony @ Jan 14th 2009 11:35PM]

I also think they have appropriately priced the replacement battery for 17". Considering the replacement for my ibook g4 cost $139 and I've only had to purchase one so far in the 3-4 years i've had it.

[David @ Jan 15th 2009 2:09AM]

I just wanted to agree with the comment @erik.. All you have to do is hold the power button down. I got so used to it with my windows desktop and xbox 360 that now that my Powerbook G4 is nearing 4 years I am more than prepared to deal with its almost daily lock ups =(

[bandigolo @ Jan 14th 2009 7:45PM]

I don't like Apple, but I have to say that I only have a problem this IF there was no good way to manufacture the case to allow end-user replacement. The general concept of internal non-removable battery to maximize the juice and minimize the footprint is something I can live with if justified. However, I suspect that this is not the truth.

[UnixSystemsEngineer @ Jan 14th 2009 8:07PM]

It sounds like a pretty unique design. In my mind it will be justified if the extraordinary battery claims they make are substantiated once the device ships.

[dark star @ Jan 14th 2009 8:13PM]

if sony and htc and palm and.... can make replaceable batteries in super thin devices, you do start wondering why apple cant or wont. yeah, me too.

[Chris @ Jan 14th 2009 8:44PM]

The 15" MBP has a user replaceable battery and it is just as thin so obviously you missed the point.

[Smileypanda @ Jan 14th 2009 9:16PM]

If they'd been in the market for a thin and light laptop first and foremost, they wouldn't have gotten a 17 inch Macbook pro. I really doubt that people would have minded it being a tad thicker with a battery that just comes out.

[Tin @ Jan 15th 2009 12:39AM]

I would. The only reason I brought my Mac (yeah the 17") the first time is because it is 1" thick while all the other are around 1.5". Back then, I like Windows more than anything (linux, osx included).

[roach @ Jan 15th 2009 2:22AM]

This is no good. Imagine loosing a day (or 4 days) worth of work because your battery died. I rather plug my laptop and keep working and have battery exchange. Better yet, have a spare and send off dead battery. And this is after the battery fiasco they had just last year!

Too bad Apple user have no other choice of laptop.

[nikster @ Jan 15th 2009 4:30AM]

Show of hands: Who of the above posters actually owns two batteries? I am guessing, nobody.

I have two batteries and I never use them both. It's more of a hassle to keep them both charged than it is to carry a power adapter and plug in whenever I can. With an 8 hour battery I can skip the power adapter, and charge upon returning home. That's a huge difference right there.

The new battery in these things doesn't deteriorate like the one in the current MacBook Pro, another huge plus. The battery was made to be not replaceable so, in turn, we get 40% more battery life.

That leaves as the only difference the speed with which you can replace your battery in case it has died prematurely, e.g. under warranty. I don't know but the 40% higher capacity still trumps that easily.

It's the same thing as with the iPhone. The non-replaceable battery is a huge problem in lots of people's minds who don't actually have one. It's a complete non-issue for all real world actual iPhone users. I am the only person I know who ever even bought a replacement battery for my Nokia.

[Scott @ Jan 15th 2009 12:09PM]

The reality is that its not that much money for someone who uses the computer every day for work and if I had to replace the thing every 2 or 3 years and drop a couple hundred buck so be it. it will more then pay for itself.

[roach @ Jan 15th 2009 12:28PM]

@nikster
I have to 2 batteries for my 4 year old tablet PC. One started loosing charge, so I got another one. I use the old for backup. And my GF's laptop which she never take outside the house is plugged only...without a battery.

[grull27 @ Jan 14th 2009 7:47PM]

I wish Steve Jobs was the guy in the pic. :(

[killermojo @ Jan 14th 2009 7:49PM]

GET OVER IT

[bandigolo @ Jan 14th 2009 7:51PM]

Apple fanboys can expect to lay out $179 + tax for a Steve Jobs replacement.

[adam @ Jan 14th 2009 7:54PM]

who cares my god.

It's one guy that is sick and leaving a company. It will still be the same with or without him.

my guess is that he really does not do anything other than be the icon of the business.

[rich @ Jan 14th 2009 8:59PM]

@adam:

Riiight... thats why Apple completely tanked after he left the first time and recovered when he took over again. I'm sure it had absolutely nothing to do with him. Really.

[ying @ Jan 14th 2009 9:46PM]

@adam wait until u see the apple stock price tomorrow. Apprently apple investors think Steve jobs is someone.

[CL @ Jan 14th 2009 7:50PM]

The price isn't too bad, consider how expensive laptop batteries are, but the obvious problem here is the turn-around time for those of us that don't live near any apple store or a dealer. If I needed a battery fix, I'd rather open it up and do it myself.

[Michael Scrip @ Jan 14th 2009 8:10PM]

The battery in my mom's Dell laptop costs $149 and it only lasted 1.5 years... and it only lasted for a few hours even when new.

[Logan Greenlee @ Jan 14th 2009 10:01PM]

179 is high - most batteries are between 80 - 130. You also have the option of buying OEM. The notion of having to schedule an appointment to replace my battery is absurd. On top of that you can be sure that apple "claims" 8 hours of battery life but the reality will vary significantly.

[johnson412 @ Jan 14th 2009 11:21PM]

@Logan,

To be honest, $179 is not that bad for that high a capacity battery. Like you said batteries are usually $80-$130, but these are batteries that provide a few hours at a time for only a year or two. This is a battery that provides 8 hours of battery life (on a 17" computer, mind you) for supposedly up to five years.

As for quoted battery life, Apple's quotes have been pretty honest for the aluminum MacBooks. I personally get up to and over 5 or 6 hours under homework usage and light web browsing. At worst, I've gotten about 3 hours with high screen brightness and lots of flash or movies in iTunes. In fact, I restored my entire iTunes library at full brightness and played some flash games trying to calibrate the battery when I first got it, and managed about 3 hours and 15 minutes. I would expect the 17" MBP to follow suit and get around 7 or 8 hours of battery life under normal office work or web browsing.

[pheer6224 @ Jan 15th 2009 12:41AM]

Usually around 100 dollars for something you can replace by your self in 5 seconds.

[CosterMonger @ Jan 15th 2009 10:07AM]

I though they were going to charge $300+ for replacement, it really isn't that extreme for Apple or for an 8 hour battery, I dislike that you'd have to drop by an apple store OR MAIL IN YOUR MACBOOK PRO, though that service is much quicker then if you actually had a defect in your macbook.

[Steveorevo @ Jan 15th 2009 11:35AM]

Its been at least four years with my HP and the replacement battery is still $149 for an offbrand. $189 for an HP brand and its the most popular model out there.

Who the hell has a $80 to $100 laptop battery?!

And is that laptop's specifications on par or even worth a crap?

[ntlam @ Jan 14th 2009 7:51PM]

I like the last line of the post.

[Brian @ Jan 14th 2009 7:51PM]

Apple hates you. Get over it.

[nsdcx @ Jan 14th 2009 7:52PM]

$179 for a battery and you can't swap it at your leisure? Amazing what technology has given us in the 21st century.

[jay @ Jan 18th 2009 2:17PM]

it's even worse on some cars. I heard that Mercedes charges over $1000 for some of their gas tanks, and voids your warranty if you try to change it at home!

There is absolutely no rule anywhere that says that tech has to be built a certain way. Tons of devices out there have non-replacable batteries and we don't gripe too much. Ever replace the batteries on a $129 electric shaver? And they're not even usually lithium, and some won't operate on AC at all so you have to buy a new device without it. That Apple can put a "store replacable" unit in place that gets roughly 3x the capacity per charge, for roughly 3x the length in years, of its typical competition (Dell? Acer? Alienware? Sony?) is in fact very impressive. That they buck convention by doing it, well, that's just Apple.

Expect this change to propagate down the line, as did aluminum and glass, transition to USB and DVI, use of SCSI, use of SATA, use of flash, etc. I suspect that in a few years more companies will realize that the gains in amp hours and weight/volume more than justify telling users not to buy an accessory battery more often than they buy a device.

Personally, I have NEVER purchased an extra laptop battery, in a decade, though I replaced half a dozen Dells under warranty, and Apple volunteered to replace one for me that I didn't even realize was going bad. My last Macbook battery had 95% life left at 500 cycles.

[g0pher @ Jan 14th 2009 7:58PM]

you have no idea what you are talking about. like any other job they are trained, and I know that Apple do have a reputation for very good training. So, stop whinging and go and find yourself a job =]

[g0pher @ Jan 14th 2009 7:59PM]

is $179 that unreasonable for an 8 hour laptop battery?

[required @ Jan 14th 2009 8:02PM]

One of the things I love about my PowerBook (Pismo) is its two hot swappable battery bays. 16 hours of run time!

[required @ Jan 14th 2009 8:06PM]

Plus there is the option of bringing extra batteries, especially since they're hot swappable. I can't imagine havng to send the whole computer in just to swap out a battery. Seems as daft as requiring Apple to change out fonts.

[cmuska902 @ Jan 14th 2009 8:03PM]

I don't see why any competent computer knowledgeable person couldn't replace it on their own...

[Riley @ Jan 14th 2009 8:16PM]

Sure, as long as the warranty is expired. But what about other people? My mom can replace the battery in her laptop, and I had trouble walking her through the use of webmail the other day.

[Lou @ Jan 14th 2009 8:03PM]

Why does Apple insist on charging things at super premium prices, but make it completely inaccessible for the purchaser? I am not a Windows fanboy, nor an Apple fanboy. I Would like to switch to Apple, but it's little things like this that make me pause and wonder.

[UnixSystemsEngineer @ Jan 14th 2009 8:09PM]

But the other Macbooks have removable batteries priced in line with other companies ($130ish) that offer half the battery life.

To me this suggests that Apple didn't just make the battery non-removable to piss you off, but there was a legit design reason.

I'd agree with you if all Macbooks had non-removable batteries that got 3 hours and cost $400.

[Alex @ Jan 14th 2009 8:14PM]

You're paying a minimum of $2800 for the damn thing. This is a prosumer laptop. A laptop for somebody who likely won't keep it for more than 5 years anyways.