@tapeworm wrote:
@vidra wrote:
The advantage of rechargeable NiMH batteries are as follows:
Respectfully discussing:
- much higher capacity. The Li-ion battery in my Fuze lasts 15-20 hours on a single charge, whereas one 2300mAh AA battery in my old i-River lasts over 40 hours, which is more than double the capacity. This was on you old i-river. How can you know what the charge/play time would be on the Sansa?
You can’t just say hours is hours. You could go through some convoluted reasoning, or it might be easier to just find out the amp-hour rating of the lithium battery in the player of interest.
. Li-ion batteries lose a significant proportion of their capacity each year (up to 20%) from the date of their manufacture. Just to set the record straight, the Fuze uses a Lithium-Polymer battery, not a Lithium-Ion.
The lithium ion polymer batteries are worse than the non-polymer ones for lifetime (though improving). The advantage of polymer is they can be flat and thin instead of cylindrical, and a bit more energy density since they don’t need a metal case.
As for buying rechargeable AA batteries, actually most people do buy them. I disagree. If that were the case, we’d be seeing that damm rabbit with the drum with an AC outlet in his back on the TV commercials. No, it’s just too ‘convenient’ and cheaper (short, not long term) to pick up a package of the disposables. It’s an economically more viable solution than any alkaline battery, so people will unwittingly protect the environment as well. I agree with the economic and environmental advantages, but I just don’t think the majority of people consciously think about it, and practice good conservation (yet). Granted it’s changing, but it’s not there yet.
I think there’s a distinction by application. In things that go through batteries pretty quickly (say, cameras), people are quick to get rechargeables. For a clock or TV remote control, no.
