View Poll Results: If you have a Seidio 1350 please check this out

Voters
163. You may not vote on this poll
  • Seidio 1350 proofed OK

    25 15.34%
  • Seidio 1350 proofed FAKE

    66 40.49%
  • Seidio 1350 but don't know how to read "full40"

    4 2.45%
  • I needed to press that button

    68 41.72%
Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 150
Like Tree1Likes
  1.    #1  
    Some (most ?) of the Seidio Innocell 1350mAh batteries are actual 1150mAh batteries.
    To make it clear: this thread is not against Seidio. I never said Seidio is a bad company and everything they do is garbage.
    But some (looks like most) Innocel 1350 are (fake) defective.

    Please vote regardless of your result. We want to find out how much are affected.

    Please use the app Dr. Battery to read these values

    Discovering
    This was discovered in my thread "Find out how good/bad your battery is".
    This information is NOT based on some feelings but on the data of the chip inside the battery. There are at least 10 members reporting this issue in that thread.
    We also found out, that it is not just a false value in the chip. Changing this value to the correct mAh (and recalibrate the battery) has proofed, that these batteries can't hold 1350mAh another proof here.
    If you check the customer ratings of this battery here or at amazon you will find such reports (based on the feeling) like:
    • not really extended life
    • Okay - but not better
    • Dissappointed
    • not worth the purchase...
    • Not seeing the "Extended Life."
    • No difference

    Now we have proofed these feelings.
    Trekker is showing you in post #3 that this was already assumed 1 year ago. But afaikafaikafaik $battery$ $monitor$ $has$ $read$ $the$ $getcapacity$ $value$ $thru$ $luna$ $which$ $is$ $not$ $showing$ $the$ $original$ $rated$ $capacity$ $of$ $the$ $battery$.
    Batteries from Mugen don't seem to have this problem.

    What is Seidio saying
    I ask Seidio by mail for an explanation on August 11', pointing them to my thread. But I've got no answer.
    UPDATE: They finaly answerd in this thread on Post #27. Read my reaction here.
    UPDATE: A second reply from Seidio and my reaction.

    What can you do when you already bought such a battery
    Please help this community by reading this value from your battery and fill out the POLL. So we can find out how many batteries are affected.

    EDIT: Use Dr.Battery to to it.

    Use Jason's app "internalz", navigate to "/sys/devices/w1_bus_master1/32-<something>" and read the file "getfull40".
    More info in my thread.
    The value of this has to be the capacity of your battery you payed for +-5%. As an example lucky member Kewl_700p shows you the readings of 2 Seidos with correct values of 1363.125mAh here.
    If your battery only shows 1150 you should get an exchange from Seidio. Xanadu73 wrote a sample letter here.

    Disclaimer:
    I'm not connected to a company selling or producing batteries. This is my opinion. This info is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and/or the section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This post is not a libel as it is based on facts.
    Last edited by somline; 09/30/2010 at 01:44 PM.
  2. #2  
    I am one of the Seidio 1350 owners who's battery doesn't hold it's rated capacity. Given Seidio's history of replacing defective products, I doubt they'll be willing to replace it for me

    I've switched back to my original Palm battery for the time being. It's getage reads 100 so at least it'll serve me slightly better than the bum Seidio with a getage of 89ish.
  3. #3  
    This is not a surprise. Seidio's lower than advertised battery capacity was first reported almost a year ago in the Battery Monitor Thread.

    Here are a few examples:

    Seidio 1350 false capacity post 1

    Seidio 1350 false capacity post 2

    Seidio 1350 false capacity post 3

    Seidio 1350 false capacity post 4

    Seidio 1350 false capacity post 5

    Seidio 1350 false capacity post 6

    And of course, here is my post from September of last year where I speculated that Seidio's 1350 was really just a re-labeled 1150:

    Seidio 1350 battery a re-labeled 1150?

    There are posts like this all over the forums. Glad to see someone finally verifying what some of us thought was questionable about Seidio's claimed battery capacity.

    I doubt you will hear anything from Seidio, I think they stopped posting in the forums after all the problems were reported about their junk Innocase and the breaking tabs.
  4. jp99's Avatar
    Posts
    403 Posts
    Global Posts
    411 Global Posts
    #4  
    Unfortunately the Precentral store is continuing to sell (& advertise) these batteries. I wish they would pull them and stop giving this product tacit support.
  5. shaunooh's Avatar
    Posts
    78 Posts
    Global Posts
    82 Global Posts
    #5  
    Lawsuit?

    Their batterys and case (Broken Tab less than 3 months later) are expensive.

    I bought 2 new "Stock" from Amazon (OEM something)for $2.99 each plus 6 bucks shipping.
    Last edited by shaunooh; 08/14/2010 at 10:53 AM.
  6. #6  
    Unconscionable!

    If true, there should be a class action lawsuit. (Is there a lawyer in the house?) And Palm should join in. Wonder how much goodwill they lost when people had rotten battery life even with the extended battery.
  7. #7  
    Not to defend Seidio, but I have two Seido battery that shows I have 1363 mAh. My first one had shorten tabs and I got a free replacement. I also notice I do have longer capacity compared with Palm's OEM batteries. I have a Verizon Pre Plus. Use either touchstone or Palm OEM battery charger to charge batteries.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by jp99 View Post
    Unfortunately the Precentral store is continuing to sell (& advertise) these batteries. I wish they would pull them and stop giving this product tacit support.
    Yes, it will be interesting to see what will happen. Probably nothing, considering that there are numerous posts about the broken tabs on the innocase and yet they still sell them.

    The battery issue is another matter however, fraud is more serious than a poorly designed case.

    So, will The Powers That Be at Precentral take some type of action? Only time will tell. Hopefully this thread won't be locked or deleted. At the very least, Seidio should have a chance to respond to this. As far as I know, they never responded last year when the issue was brought up.

    Quote Originally Posted by C-Note View Post
    If true, there should be a class action lawsuit. (Is there a lawyer in the house?) And Palm should join in.
    This has nothing to do with Palm. As far as I know, their stance is that they don't support 3rd party batteries period.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kewl 700p View Post
    Not to defend Seidio, but I have two Seido battery that shows I have 1363 mAh.
    That's good information to know and the purpose of the poll. Make sure to cast your vote.

    Don't feel bad for being honest. Let the chips fall where they may.
  9. neve's Avatar
    Posts
    256 Posts
    Global Posts
    259 Global Posts
    #9  
    My Seido 1350 isn't with me at the moment, but in case anyone's interested here's where I calculate my Mugen 1350: 1341.83.

    Obviously I'm not polling this one. I'll try and get my Seido later on, I'm curious now. I seem to remember feeling as if it had greater capacity, but the numbers will say for sure. I seemed to have greater battery life from the Seido than the stock, and I haven't felt any difference between the Seido 1350 or the Mugen 1350.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by neve View Post
    My Seido 1350 isn't with me at the moment, but in case anyone's interested here's where I calculate my Mugen 1350: 1341.83.
    Don't you mean the Mugen 1400? I don't think they sell a 1350.

    In the Battery Monitor thread, tests on the Mugen 1400 showed capacity of between 1300 and 1400, I don't think anyone actually reported 1400 but at least they aren't re-labeled 1150's.
  11. neve's Avatar
    Posts
    256 Posts
    Global Posts
    259 Global Posts
    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by Trekker View Post
    Don't you mean the Mugen 1400? I don't think they sell a 1350.
    Yes, I'm sure you're correct, my bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trekker View Post
    I don't think anyone actually reported 1400 but at least they aren't re-labeled 1150's.
    Yeah, no kidding, amen to that.
  12. #12  
    This is a shame.
  13.    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kewl 700p View Post
    Not to defend Seidio, but I have two Seido battery that shows I have 1363 mAh. My first one had shorten tabs and I got a free replacement. I also notice I do have longer capacity compared with Palm's OEM batteries. I have a Verizon Pre Plus. Use either touchstone or Palm OEM battery charger to charge batteries.
    Thanks Kewl_700p, I know that and you are actually mentioned in my post as one of the real 1350' Seidios owners. Please cast your vote. I really would like to know how much are affected.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trekker View Post
    So, will The Powers That Be at Precentral take some type of action? Only time will tell. Hopefully this thread won't be locked or deleted. At the very least, Seidio should have a chance to respond to this. As far as I know, they never responded last year when the issue was brought up.
    Thanks Trekker, didn't know about that 1 year old discussion. I emailed them twice. At first I got immediately an (probably primed) answer but in the second I ask them more explicit about the case and pointed them to my post -> no answer.
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by jp99 View Post
    Unfortunately the Precentral store is continuing to sell (& advertise) these batteries. I wish they would pull them and stop giving this product tacit support.
    I've send this mail to <email deleted by mod> (sorry mod didn't know this is not correct) (find the address at the customer support page) the contact for Manufacturers & Wholesellers of the Precentral Store:
    Hi Joel,

    we have proved, that some (most ?) of the Seidio 1350mAh for Palm batteries are actually 1150mAh batteries.
    We did this by reading the full value in the EEPROM memory block at register 6A and 6B from integrated Fuel Gauge IC Dallas Semiconductor MAXIM DS2784.
    This value is the original rating of the capacity set by the manufacturer and not altered by the device or battery later.
    You may have heard complains like this before. But this time you can verify it by your own.

    This problem is not known for batteries from other companies.

    Please don't sell and/or advertise this batteries any more. Or if you have to, please check this value before selling it to us customers.
    I have a bad feeling to be part in this wonderful community but always see this false advertising.

    If you want to find out more about this you can read this posts:
    http://forums.precentral.net/palm-pr...r-battery.html

    Best regards
    somline
    Last edited by somline; 08/15/2010 at 04:15 PM. Reason: posting personal email against Forum rules
  15. #15  
    Here is something interesting, the last post by the Seidio support person was made in March of this year.

    Here is a list of all the posts he/she made (at least until they delete them.) Each post is an apology after apology after apology....mostly for the broken Innocase tabs & some battery issues.

    While the Seidio representative did their best to take care of the problems, it's fairly obvious that it was a losing battle. It reminds me of someone trying to save the Titanic by using a bucket to bail out the the incoming flood of seawater.

    Looks like they threw in the towel as far as forum support, but the sorry part is they continue to sell the poorly made Innocases for a ridiculous price.
  16. #16  
    In that thread, somebody from Seidio had said to contact the store you bought it at. I contacted PreCentral, and was told that while I was in the 180 day warranty from Seidio, PreCentral only supports it for 30 days, so I need to contact Seidio. I'll be doing that on Mon, but may also call Diana Kingree, the director of commerce for all Smartphone Experts sites, since after this thread I have little trust that Seidio will make good on it. Hopefully they will prove me wrong, or Ms. Kingree will stand behind her company's choice in products, even if the manufacturer won't.

    --Andy
  17.    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Trekker View Post
    Here is a list of all the posts he/she made (at least until they delete them.)
    Came up with:
    Code:
    Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.
  18. #18  
    There's a hugh difference between my OEM palm batt and my 1350 in batt life. With that said that's how absolute garbage the OEM is... As for it not doing the rated mAh well, I guess it's enough that it doesn't bother me. I'm on my second 1350 batt since the first one stopped working right. It would heat up and wouldn't charge even though it was showing charging. They replaced it even though I bought it off of ebay.
  19.    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by Forever92 View Post
    There's a hugh difference between my OEM palm batt and my 1350 in batt life.
    Thanks, can you please do the test and post your results?

    BTW: this thread is not against Seidio. I never said Seidio is a bad company and everything they do is garbage.
    But some (looks like most) Innocel 1350 are (fake) defective.
  20. #20  
    1363.125mAh
Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions