So if I want to design a radio that will work just fine with a C cell, I should be required to use a D cell, because someone wants to standardize, even if the D cell is more expensive and heavier?
And a 9volt - Do you really thing it would be cheaper to use a few AA and have to include a converter? Really?
This is kind of like saying that we should get ride of all of the odd numbered shoe sizes. We don’t really need all of those sizes. If you now wear a 9, well, you will have to either start wearing extra socks in a size 10 shoe, or squish your foot into a size 8.
Past the trite statement, planned obsolescence is the purposeful designing of something to have a limited lifespan. Sometimes, change is inevitable; the connectors have to get smaller to accommodate our lust for ever smaller devices. Other times, one has to wonder whether a company simply lacks engineering talent or has more insidious designs. The non-user serviceable batteries in many devices come to mind.
Right. They’re non-user serviceable.
Does that make the product obsolete? It certainly might make it more expensive to replace the batteries, but that is not obsolescence.
The OP has a point if you consider the full array of batteries for various specialty devices. The Wikipedia article List of Battery Sizes shows many sizes that are rarely seen in the average store.
D, C, AA, A, and 9 Volt batteries can be picked up at my grocery store and are widely used in many consumer electronics devices.
I’ve never seen a 1/2 AA, AAAA, B, Sub-C, or F on any store shelf. A23, A27, Duplex, 4SR44, No. 6, 523, and 521 batteries are virtual unknowns outside of limited specialty applications.
Then there is a list of 21 different sizes of watch/coin style batteries. Couldn’t some of these be done away with and the list be pared down to 6 or so with device manufacturers designing with those power sources in mind?
I’ve been trying to buy two size N batteries, for a dive computer but there are none for sale in any retail shop nearby. Behold the power of the internet… and a few months of waiting, and I think I’ll have some soon via Hong Kong. But if the dive computer was designed to take a AA battery I would have been able to replace it long ago.
Sure, and it would have been a significantly larger device (an N cell is a little over 1/2 the size of an AA). So, they manufacturer of the device would probably not have sold as many, since the computer would have been bigger and bulkier, and people would have bought the competitor’s smaller, sleeker design.
I have one of those kits but I wound up using all the AA batteries in AA applications, so I’ve never tried the C and D adapters. The Eneloops are neat because they don’t discharge ~10% each month when off the charger.
I’m more familiar with digital camera Li-Ion batteries, but the same process applies. Canon has a family of batteries for digital cameras from NB-1L to NB-9L so far; there may be others as well. They steadily increased capacity, shortened recharge time, and in many cases got smaller over time. For some digital cameras small size is most important, so they are willing to trade off capacity; for others shot-to-shot time is critical so they give up size in order to have fast refresh times. Different cameras have different design needs and giving up the flexibility for standardization would cripple innovation in a rapidly changing marketplace.
It takes two N cells. About the same size as one AA.
The thing is a brick compared to other dive computers, but it covers a highly specialized niche (calculating multiple gas decompression) within what is already a specialty market.
Allegedly they went with N cells for longer battery life, so I can get in a hundred or so dives before replacing the battery. If I am willing to pay $100 just for the breathing gas for each of those dives then the cost of a battery is not the issue. The availability (or lack thereof) of the battery in one of the world’s premier diving destinations is the issue.
Radio Shack carries N batteries in store and online.
The standard sizes of batteries are fine, it’s a nice mix of sizes to provide a range of utility without wasting space, or underpowering devices that need extra juice. I’m sure you could cull watch batteries, button cells, lithium coin style batteries to just a few styles without mucking up the utility.
For small high power handheld devices, the detachable battery is just too inefficient a design, you need a lot of casing and detachable components to allow easy replacement. Unique batteries allow manufacturers to maximize space usage, fill up nooks and crannies that cylindrical batteries can’t fit into. They can use minimal casings, and need few extra parts to contain the cells.
While replacement batteries are available, I find that they never seem to be as good as the originals, and the cost is very high compared to the cost of a full unit replacement.
I live overseas, thus the internet order and interminable wait to get anything through customs. So many US companies refuse to ship internationally. Closest Radio Shack requires flying over another country in route to the US.
And I just checked the manufacturer of my dive computer. Seems they recognized this problem. The new models were re-engineered for to take a single AA battery.
What if you want to design a radio that takes a battery half way between a C and a D. Should there be a battery that size. What about a radio that takes a battery .45683% larger than a C? Should there be a radio that size?
And I’m not saying it would be cheaper to use a DC to DC converter. Just that if we were starting from scratch we could. And it might be cheaper overall than “inventing” a 9 volt, and having to distribute and stock it at umpteen stores.
If you (as a radio manufacturer) believe the benefits of a custom battery outweigh the downsides, then you make a battery that size. Electronics makers do so all the time, although usually for rechargeable batteries since you don’t need widespread availability for those. Standards are good for certain uses, not so good for other uses.
Cheaper isn’t the only driving factor. With higher-end electronics it’s rarely the most important factor, and that’s where you see new battery formats.
I think you’re underestimating just how hard it is to design something right the first time. The reason that designs change is that over time we learn there were problems with them, or because new features become more important. Batteries last longer than they used to, both because battery technology has improved and because power consumption for a comparable device has dropped. So the need to replace them constantly has diminished. That means that it’s reasonable to put user-serviceability of the battery lower on the overall priority list.
The trend toward non-user-serviceable batteries isn’t due to malice. It’s a tradeoff. If you make a battery door, that’s a weak point in the case. It’s more likely to break. I can’t remember a single remote control I had growing up that didn’t eventually have to be held together with tape to keep the batteries in. Additionally, to let the user get at the battery, it constrains the design in other ways because the battery has to be near the surface of the device, and the battery has to be of a shape that can be easily removed through the door. If you want that, you give something else up. Look at Apple’s smallest devices. They’re basically stuffing the battery into every possible place that’s not taken up by something else. There’s simply no way to make a removable battery and have it last as long and have the phone/laptop be so tiny. Personally, I’d rather have the smaller form factor/longer runtime and pay extra for the battery to be replaced when it needs it. YMMV, of course.
One thing that bugs me about batteries is how hard it is to plug in a 9 volt battery. There I am every year or so, balancing on a ladder, trying to install one on a smoke detector (one of three) and it just doesn’t want to go in and every time I make contact, there is an ear-splitting shriek. And it requires real force to insert. Other batteries seem to do fine with ordinary contacts. Why are 9 volt batteries different?
I have noticed the same problem with hard to engage contacts on 9 volt batteries.
I don’t recall having as much trouble in the past when more devices used 9 volt batteries. I also recall some devices had flat contacts rather than the snap on ones. Makes me wonder if the problem is now with the manufacture of the battery housing or the contacts. hmmmm
i find there are slide in battery versions of detectors. some even have a door on the front so that there is nothing to unmount or hold besides the battery.
No, I’ve never plead the fifth. I’ve also never seen planned obsolescence in any of the thousands of design documents, specifications, or procedures I’ve written, reviewed, or implemented, either.
Ever wonder why we now have 100,000 mile spark plugs and 60,000 mile tires? I’m old enough to remember 20,000 tune-ups and 30,000 miles being good for tires.
