[bookport] Re: power
- From: "Kevin Jones" <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:40:53 -0600
How much smaller could buttons on the new bookport be, if someone said the
new one is thinner could it approach the size of the ipod video
-----Original Message-----
From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of LARRY SKUTCHAN
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:06 PM
To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bookport] Re: power
This is really funny to hear the support for non-rechargeable batteries,
especially after all the griping going on when we recommend not to use
rechargeables...
Not to pour water on anyone's parade, but I think if you want to stick
with non-rechargeable abtteries, you may wish to consider purchasing an
extra Book Port of the old flavor. Unfortunately, I must bow out of
this conversation, because I have already said far more than I should
have, and I don't want to see this message come up to haunt me is six
months or a year, but consider the possibility that the new device could
be too thin to hold AA batteries like the current one does.
>>> r-carter@xxxxxxx Wednesday, February 01, 2006 2:11:25 PM >>>
Hi,
I agree with the below comments and would truly hate to see the Book
Port lose its ability to use non-rechargeable batteries.
Robert Carter
At 11:39 AM 2/1/2006, you wrote:
>I must chime in here. I have never had a problem with the current
>battery contacts. And I would hate to see the batteries become
>something that cannot not be replaced by the user. There are many
>battery charging systems that allow users to recharge batteries, and
I
>firmly believe that having the ability to replace the batteries makes
>the Bookport portable and easy to use. Think about it, APH, if there
>were some kind of proprietary battery system, you'd have even more
>Bookports coming in for repair than you ever did for battery contact
>issues. People would have to routinely send their devices for
service
>when the battery died.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neal Ewers
>Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 11:27 AM
>To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [bookport] Re: power
>
>
>Sarah and others, I have not had any problems changing batteries
either.
>And, for what it's worth, I like the fact that I am not stuck with
some
>proprietary batter pack that I either have to buy at some point, or
>worse yet, send the unit back to have the battery pack replaced. I
can
>understand Larry's point if they have really had problems with this,
but
>perhaps a little podcast on how to correctly change batteries would
be
>in order before scrapping the idea of replaceable batteries.
>
>Neal
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sarah Cranston
>Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 11:03 AM
>To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [bookport] Re: power
>
>
>Eric,
>
>May I respectfully ask what any of this has to do with blindness?
>Changing batteries has nothing to do with vision and everything to do
>with being careful and paying attention to what one is doing. I,
like
>Walt, have changed batteries in many, many devices. In particular, I
>have changed the batteries in my BookPort at least 60 or 70 times,
and
>have had absolutely no ill effects. I do understand that there are
>those who have ended up with damaged contacts, but I have never been
>able to figure out exactly how this could happen if one is careful.
If
>I've misunderstood your comment about making things "blind proof",
>(you're not a partial, are you?), then please clarify and set me
>straight.
>
>Sarah
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Eric StevenS
>Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 10:48 AM
>To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [bookport] Re: power
>
>
>Well, Walt, again they have to dumb down to the lowest common
>denominator.
>Make everything stupid/blind proof.
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Walt Smith" <walt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 11:39 AM
>Subject: [bookport] Re: power
>
>
> > The last time we had a discussion on battery connections, I think
it
> > was Larry who pointed out that in actual use, the spring type of
> > connectors really don't stand up much better than the present
spring
> > clips. The problem seems to be more related to how the batteries
are
> > inserted and removed--they
> > should always be inserted negative end (the bottom of the battery
>opposite
> > to the end with the little button on it) first. I've made dozens
and
> > dozens
> > (probably over a hundred) battery changes without any apparent
damage
>to
> > the
> > contacts and have used all types of batteries. I agree with the
>comments
> > regarding the 15-minute charger, as well.
> >
> > Larry's message slightly alarmed me in that it almost seems to
imply
> > that future devices that emanate from his shop may not have
> > user-replaceable batteries and I think this would be a mistake, as
it
> > would seriously limit the BP's portability in situations where AC
> > power might not be easily available (camping, for example).
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Chris Hill" <chill000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 11:29 AM
> > Subject: [bookport] Re: power
> >
> >
> > I agree that the way the charger does it is a batter solution. I
> > think the coil spring type of contacts also are a better bet than
what
>
> > the bookport currently uses.
> >
> > On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 07:27:40 -0800, you wrote:
> >
> >>I was glad to see that the user could change and replace the
batteries
>
> >>in the bookport. I'm wondering about a solution to the problem of
> >>damaged contacts. I
> >>use an IC-3 battery charger that quick charges the IC-3 batteries
in
> >>about
> >>15
> >>minutes. This is a great comvenience. Now when you insertt the
>batteries
> >>into
> >>this charger, where the positive contact is, instead of feeling
the
>bare
> >>contact, if you will, you find a round protruding piece with a
little
> >>recess in
> >>it where you fit the little nub at the positive end of the
battery.
>When
> >>you
> >>snug the battery against this, inside, it is spring loaded. You
fit
>in
> >>the
> >>nub
> >>and gently push in and seat the battery. This protects the
contact
>and
> >>you
> >>never actually touch it. Wonder if something like that could work
for
>the
> >>BP
> >>battery recepticle. Just thinking. I really like the current
> >>battery/power
> >>arrangement for the BP.
> >>By the way, I don't get as much battery time per charge with the
IC-3
> >>rechargeables, as I do with non-rechargeable alkalines. But the
quick
> >>charge
> >>convenience and cost savings makes it worthwhile. If I'm reading
only
> >>books
> >>using the synthesizer, I get 50 hours or close thereto
> >>Lois.
> >
> >
> >
> >
Other related posts:
