Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iBookG4user

macrumors 604
Jun 27, 2006
6,595
2
Seattle, WA
Too bad I already purchased my secondary battery, or I might have gone for it :(. I'd even be happy with 4 hours instead of the 3 hours I get.
 

Imidazole

macrumors regular
Apr 15, 2004
103
0
This is false and misleading.

ONE of their batteries for the early ibooks has 62% higher capacity.

If you look at the MBP batteries they offer, they have a 5% increased capacity.

5% people.

Yet on the front page, they say "up to 62%" because ONE of their batteries, they were able to more than double the capacity. But not on our MBPs.
 

iBorg20181

macrumors 6502
Apr 5, 2006
281
0
Minneapolis, MN
This is false and misleading.

ONE of their batteries for the early ibooks has 62% higher capacity.

If you look at the MBP batteries they offer, they have a 5% increased capacity.

5% people.

Yet on the front page, they say "up to 62%" because ONE of their batteries, they were able to more than double the capacity. But not on our MBPs.

Irritating to see false advertising like that! Altho, even with same capacity, a MBP battery for $99.95 is alot cheaper than buying elsewhere. OTOH, many 3rd party batteries I've bought in the past fail to live up to advertise capacities - I'd stick with Apple's batteries, I think

iBorg
 

TheMonarch

macrumors 65816
May 6, 2005
1,467
1
Bay Area
True, it just like how apple shows a thumbnail of their 30" cinema displays, but says "From $699"


Its a common marketing thing...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.