Introduction

Wolfgang Spraul wolfgang at sharism.cc
Sat Aug 20 03:34:12 EDT 2011


> again, I apologize- I don't want to seem like a jerk (too late?).
> One thing that I still praise about the Nano is that the battery is
> non-proprietary which I still can't say about 98% of laptops or
> computers for that matter. I'll hang in there, sorry.

oh you didn't come across like that at all. I understand your thinking.
As for battery - thanks. We liked that it was a very common size when
we chose it, but but now I would go even further.

Check out this nice selection of 'little brick batteries' :-)
http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/File:Shenzhen_batteries.jpg
http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/File:Shenzhen_batteries2.jpg

I think the kind of small brick battery like in the Ben NanoNote will
disappear completely over the next few years. There are strong reasons
to embed batteries directly in a device, for example it saves thickness
(less plastic layers). Returning devices to the manufacturer or store
and getting/paying for a new one improves the recycling process.

Electronics will be designed for shorter life spans and more complete
recycling processes. Return your device, pay 20 USD, get a new one.
That kind of thing.
As small guys we on the other hand can build products designed for a
life expectancy of 20, 30 or more years, once we dig into all details
and acquire enough expertise on how to achieve this (read: we are not
there yet).
Then we would go with 'super safe' battery types like AA, AAA or
CR2016, CR2032, etc. (the round so called 'watch' cells). Compared
to the volumes of those, even the little brick batteries are low
volume and will disappear, but AA/AAA or common CR batteries should
be around for a long time...

So much on my latest battery thinking, feedback welcome as always,
and thanks for hanging around,
Wolfgang




More information about the discussion mailing list


interactive