Though there wasn't a lot of meat here, the article's point is still very valid and relevant within our current environmental context. But Apple's rabid fans will come up with a way to make this irresponsibility on Apple's part a positive, I suppose. Maybe by slamming the journalist who had the chutzpah to point up the worm in the Apple?

> It will result in more laptops in the waste steam. This is a bad day for Apple.

So you honestly think that people will simply throw away a 2000 laptop in favour of paying 175 having the battery replaced?  You really should make yourself aware of the facts.  Apple have stated that they will be happy to replace the batteries.

Maybe the person that wrote this blog should have looked up a few facts before writing it.

I've got to say that this is perhaps the silliest article I've seen in Technology Review.

It seems pretty obvious to me that the engineering decision to expand the battery volume and capacity to fit available space within the enclosure, together with improvements in battery lifetime, rather than to take the conventional approach of a smaller removable battery, is a step forward.

1) The user has increased operating time before needing to recharge the battery. The vast majority of laptop users do not carry around a second battery.
2) The user will save money for battery replacements over the projected life of the new battery. The cost of replacement of the interior battery is actually a saving to the customer.
3) Replacement of and disposal of batteries by a service center will drastically reduce improper disposal of old batteries.

Result: Benefits to the customer, and to the environment.

Some might object that they need extra batteries to handle circumstances such as use in the field, requiring extended operation under battery power. But there are external power pack alternatives; in fact, the longer the duration needed for extended battery operation, the cheaper, lower-weight and more efficient such an external power pack seems in comparison to a stack of replaceable batteries.

Whatever made the writer assume that the laptop would no longer be usable after 5 years? That 5-year "life" of the battery is projected because by the time the battery has been subjected to 1,000 charge cycles, it will have only about 80% or less of the original charge capacity, and so discharge/recharge cycles will allow increasingly shorter periods of operation under battery power. But it will remain usable, especially when the charger is plugged in. It's not "junk" at the end of 5 years, even if the user waits another year or so to replace the battery.

I've got an 11-year old PowerBook 2400c that still has the original battery. It won't run very long on battery power. But it runs as well as ever when plugged in. I keep it for access to some of my old records and Classic applications, especially some databases I had created. It's not junk, for pity's sake. Obsolete? Certainly, and for a long time. I haven't used it as my laptop computer for more than 8 years, so the current short operating time on that old battery isn't relevant. Perhaps someday it will end up in a museum.