First, the article said "glued" not "superglued"; odds are if it does need to be replaced they have a valid, non-destructive solvent for it. But even that's beyond the point.
Apple has clearly stated for the last couple years that their batteries are intended to last a full 1,000 cycles and I've heard hints that, even taking aging into account, they could last double that with proper use. This doesn't mean that they'll last that long if the device is plugged in almost 100% of the time; honestly no battery will survive that and some die far faster than others under those circumstances. By making those batteries non-replaceable they reduce the wear and tear on the machine and the battery both.
Batteries need to be almost fully cycled with each use--brought up to full charge and used down to 20%-10% before recharging. I'll grant that you can't do that every time, but any user should be able to do that most of the time and that's what Apple is counting on. Even my 12-year-old white iBook still gets 2 hours of practical use on a charge with its original --admittedly replaceable--battery that was only designed for a 3 to 4 hour charge. Number of cycles? Just over 300 because the only time the laptop even got used was when I was on vacation which means about 10 to 15 days a year. My iPad, first-gen purchased about a month after release, still gives me 5 days of standby time or about two days of 'normal' use reading and browsing the internet on a daily basis. As such, any complaint about the battery in the new "retina" MBP is misplaced from the outset.
Keep Up with TechRepublic