It's Official: Smartphones Will Need To Have Replaceable Batteries By 2027 (androidauthority.com) 283
In mid-June, the European Parliament voted in favor of new legislation that would, among other things, require batteries in consumer devices like smartphones to be easily removable and replaceable. This week, the European Council officially agreed to the new regulation. Now, when the European Council and Parliament sign on the dotted line, the clock will start ticking for manufacturers to ensure their devices have replaceable batteries by 2027 -- that is, if they want to sell their devices in the EU. Android Authority reports: Now, the only step left is for the European Council and Parliament to sign on the dotted line. Once they do, the clock starts ticking: any manufacturer wanting to sell phones in the EU must ensure those phones have replaceable batteries by 2027. [...] The grace period from now until 2027 is to give OEMs enough time to redesign their products. This new law states, specifically, that users should be able to replace a battery in their phone without any special expertise or tools. Being that almost all smartphones today are designed like a "glass sandwich" that relies on extensive use of adhesives, the very fundamentals of how companies design phones will need to change. It's too early to say yet how this law will change iPhones, Galaxy S phones, Pixels, etc. However, they will change in response to this law, which is huge news.
Here are some other rules this new law covers related to phones with replaceable batteries:
- Collection of waste: OEMs will need to collect 63% of portable batteries that would normally go to a landfill by the end of 2027. By the end of 2030, that number should be at 73%.
- Recovery of waste: Lithium recovery from waste batteries will need to be at 50% by 2027. By the end of 2031, it should be at 80%, meaning 80% of the lithium inside a battery can be recovered and repurposed for new batteries.
- Recycling minimums: Industrial, SLI, and EV batteries will need to be made up of certain percentages of recycled content. Initially, this will be 16% for cobalt, 85% for lead, 6% for lithium, and 6% for nickel.
- Early recycling efficiency target: Nickel-cadmium batteries should have a recycling efficiency target of 80% by the end of 2025. All other batteries should be at a 50% efficiency target by 2025.
Here are some other rules this new law covers related to phones with replaceable batteries:
- Collection of waste: OEMs will need to collect 63% of portable batteries that would normally go to a landfill by the end of 2027. By the end of 2030, that number should be at 73%.
- Recovery of waste: Lithium recovery from waste batteries will need to be at 50% by 2027. By the end of 2031, it should be at 80%, meaning 80% of the lithium inside a battery can be recovered and repurposed for new batteries.
- Recycling minimums: Industrial, SLI, and EV batteries will need to be made up of certain percentages of recycled content. Initially, this will be 16% for cobalt, 85% for lead, 6% for lithium, and 6% for nickel.
- Early recycling efficiency target: Nickel-cadmium batteries should have a recycling efficiency target of 80% by the end of 2025. All other batteries should be at a 50% efficiency target by 2025.
How iPhones will change (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How iPhones will change (Score:5, Informative)
It's only the headline that emphasizes smartphones. TFS says "consumer devices". The regulation itself says it's about all possible batteries.
"Article 1. Subject matter and scope [...] 3. This Regulation applies to all categories of batteries, namely portable batteries, starting, lighting and ignition batteries (SLI batteries), light means of transport batteries (LMT batteries), electric vehicle batteries and industrial batteries, regardless of their shape, volume, weight, design, material composition, chemistry, use or purpose. It shall also apply to batteries that are incorporated into or added to products or that are specifically designed to be incorporated into or added to products." https://data.consilium.europa.... [europa.eu] pdf page 90.
Re:How EVs will change (Score:2)
electric vehicle batteries and industrial batteries, regardless of their shape, volume, weight, design, material composition, chemistry, use or purpose. It shall also apply to batteries that are incorporated into or added to products or that are specifically designed to be incorporated into or added to products." https://data.consilium.europa.... [europa.eu] pdf page 90.
It sounds like theyre also requiring EV batteries to be easily replaceable as well.
Re: (Score:2)
How will this affect IP ratings? (Score:4)
Just on the surface it seems this requirement will make it harder to seal from water and dust.
Re:How will this affect IP ratings? (Score:5, Insightful)
Electronics were made waterproof (to 10m) for decades prior to the iPhone being a sparkle in Steve Jobs' eye.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet any phone I had before the iPhone would die an immediate death if you got it wet. Phones used to have moisture sensors in them that would void the warranty, and being in a room with a hot shower was enough to turn those suckers pink.
There are plenty of things I don't love about Apple, but I do love that my last iPhone was underwater for over 3 hours and, aside from a glitchy 24 hours after, worked well for another year. I'm all for replaceable batteries, but I wouldn't trade a phone that's relativ
Re: (Score:2)
iPhones have water damage indicators as well.
Great. Now bring back microSD slots (Score:3)
So we don't have to pay for storage all over again with each new phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Moto G never lost its microSD slot. https://www.motorola.com/us/sm... [motorola.com] And it's only $300 unlocked, and runs all the apps any other phone can run.
Re: (Score:2)
Need to vote with your wallet. Certainly phones out there now that still have microSD slots. All three of my Sony phones have it, which are mid-range and flagship specs for their model years (newest is 2021, and Sonys still do now). My mother just got a Samsung A14 5G -- a budget phone with a microSD card slot.
Oh, did I mention all these same phones I'm talking about have 3.5mm headphone jacks?
CPU and subsystems been "fast enough" for a while (Score:3)
I'm relatively new to the game but my Snapdragon 835 and Snapdragon 845 tablet and phone are both still plenty fast for everything I use them for. And so of course are the Snapdragon 865+ and Snapdragon 888 in my newer tablet and phone.
I frequently switch between them, so I think I have a decent sense of how much the performance upgrades actually make a difference to me, a consumer of content. I appreciate new hardware and software updates, but I feel like I'm not actually missing much on my Android 10 device versus my Android 13 device as far as it comes to the UI.
I can appreciate the bump from the Snapdragon 835 to the Snapdragon 888, but I'm not left thinking the older device is tediously slow when switching back to it. The differences between them and the in between devices leaves little to talk about. Two Samsung Tablets, one Samsung phone, one Google Pixel 3XL (Nacho Notch ftw).
I just bought another Samsung tablet on Prime Day, the Galaxy Tab S6 Lite refreshed/2022 version, brand new but a steep discount, and it's basically just a hair faster than my older Tablet, the Galaxy Tab S4, while having a LCD screen instead of the S4's still amazing OLED display.
Don't laugh, lol, at my getting another tablet, I can justify this one because it ships with Android 12 and should get four OS upgrades, and five years from release total years of security updates. I figure that makes it better for lugging into public places. Even comes with Samsung's Knox security feature.
Anywho, my point such as it is being that I guess I put my money where my mouth is when I say current hardware is "good enough" for we content consumers, and down the road I'll appreciate it if I can buy a new device knowing its battery won't be what compels me to retire it.
Way to ignore forced obsolescence. (Score:2)
Putting aside all those your-drunk-ass-dropped-a-$1000-phone-in-the-toilet-again reasons society piled up every weekend to justify waterproof smartphone designs for a moment, I'm guessing the marketing department behind this new hot-swap battery push conveniently forgot about the larger problem of forced obsolescence.
The fuck is the point in swapping out for a new battery in 2 years when the manufacturer is going to screw you right in your soft(ware) hole long before that new battery has a chance to even p
Releasing glue doesn't require a specific tool. (Score:2)
A heat pad, a pair of suction cups and some guitar picks is all it needs. Yes, it's easier with a heating plate and device to lift the back in one step, but it isn't required.
All you need is information about where the connectors are, and care in design so antennas and connectors won't get torn.
There are no great design changes needed to comply with this. Glass sandwiches present no problems.
This is gonna get buried or downvoted (Score:5, Interesting)
The glue in a modern smart phone is an INTEGAL PART of the structure. It’s not because the evil companies want to charge huge fees for battery replacements, or cause the CEOs want to build in obscelescence. It’s cause people like cell phones that are both stiff and strong. Phones that don’t break when you sit down with them in your pocket. Let me try and explain in an easy way.
Take a deck of playing cards. It’s pretty flexible, right? If you try hard, you can probably use your hands to bend the deck enough to separate the cards and even fold or crease them.
Now, glue each card together and let the glue dry.
What you have now is a brick of paper/glue composite. Way stronger. Way stiffer. Bend that thing? Don’t make me laugh. Use your hands to tear it or fold the cards? Not even if you’re the strongest guy on the planet.
From a mechanical perspective, gluing the cards together takes 52 very thin beams and creates one beam that is 52 times thicker. More if you count for the glue thickness. At that point, trying to bend that monster requires putting one side in tension, with the other side in compression, with the glue layers transferring forces around because they support shear stresses. You might say “big deal how much difference can it really make?” Well, the stiffness of a beam scales with the CUBE OF THE THICKNESS. The glued deck is at least 2500 times stiffer than the unglued deck. Strength is a different calculation but it also goes through the roof.
The battery is a huge fraction of the volume in a phone. Mandating no glue means that we go back to the old days of battery compartments. You think that’s great? You could practically crush one of those phones in your fist if you tried hard. If you actually sat on one of them, forget it you were buying a new phone. Gorilla glass wont improve things all that much if it isn't tied in with the rest of the phones structure, including the battery.
Yes, phones with replaceabe batteries should be available for people who want them. But to mandating it across a continent? I think people will break their phones so frequently that phone companies will be taking even more of people's money.
Will this allow some batteries to be easily replaced? Yes. It will also result in heaps of badly-crushed phones.
It's a bad idea.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: This is gonna get buried or downvoted (Score:3)
It doesnâ(TM)t take a lot of imagination to understand why people might want thinner phones.
I have a thin phone in a case to protect it. A thicker phone would just get even more bulky. I donâ(TM)t want an overly bulky phone.
updates? (Score:2)
seems this would need to be paired with mandatory security and function updates for a decade or more, else manufacturers can still cause obsolescence
Give the EU what they asked for (Score:2)
Give the EU what they are demanding - but only in the EU. The EU gets phones that no longer have good water resistance ratings, and are about 30mm larger (depth and width) than the phones the rest of the world gets...
Or heck, give them nothing and let citizens import newer phones on the black market.
The rest of the world gets fully sealed phones, smaller and lighter, where battery replacement is almost always actually recycling the battery.
As an example Apple already exceeds all those recycling targets you
Re: (Score:3)
Seems like this would have been good 10 years ago (Score:2)
I'm all for it, BUT... (Score:4, Informative)
I got an LG some years ago (with a replaceable battery). It still ran just fine for my needs (I don't install every "free" app, especially if it is data-harvesting). But the battery was bad (charging twice a day and having an external battery ready) and I could just not find a replacement. TBH I once ordered one online when the phone was 3 years old, but it lost charge already after 3 days' use, so I returned it. Probably gone bad in storage?
So yeah, exchangeable batteries are cool, but will they also be required to provide the replacement batteries???
Better would be to require (one of a few) standard battery sizes so that batteries become an interchangeable consumable.
I felt forced to get a replacement and went to get a comparable Samsung. Better storage, no noticeable speed improvement (although the figures claim it should be), it is heavier, and the software does not seem to have improved in user usability in the intervening years - in fact some standard apps are more convoluted (or maybe that was just LG's custom programming?) Yeah, I'm just a user, with a life outside of the small screen, so it is a grudge purchase/necessary burden.
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:5, Interesting)
People said the same thing about the USB-C decision, but when it came out, it was a well-written document from a technical committee that defined not only the USB-C requirement but how industry can submit future connectors for consideration.
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
USB-B should've been good enough for anyone!
Re: (Score:2)
Ugh -- I drive a vehicle that came with a stereo system with a USB-B female connection, which works with absolutely zero devices without an adaptor. It's the most asinine use of USB I've ever seen.
Yaz
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:2)
However the USB-C connector is easy to break when it comes to heavier devices like laptops. Something I have seen at work several times.
Re: (Score:2)
People said the same thing about the USB-C decision, but when it came out, it was a well-written document from a technical committee that defined not only the USB-C requirement but how industry can submit future connectors for consideration.
Yes and no. The technical committee making the recommendations in the EU are typically those subject matter experts with knowledge of what the law is trying to achieve. For the USB-C requirement that was filled with people who understood charging requirements and reps from industry.
This however is not a technical law. This is a battery law. It is filled by people who are experts on the lithium lifecycle and have zero understanding of small electronic design. The USB-C requirement had no impact on manufactur
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
It would have been great if micro-USB was forced to Apple so that their proprietary connectors never existed.
I'll take an imperfect standard any day over a proprietary solution.
Apple's connectors are actually a good idea... (Score:5, Insightful)
While no fan of Apple, they gone one very important thing right with their lightning plug. The gender.
Micro-USB and USB-C both have the tongue part of the plug in the device. Being recessed, when a bending force is applied, it levers the base of the tongue. The electrical connection for that tongue has to come in from the back, then are soldered usually to the surface of the PCB. This is very physically weak, and a terrible design decision. Putting the weakest part on the device means if it breaks you have to repair or replace an expensive device.
With lightning the weakest part, the tongue, is on the cable. Also the electrical connection on the device side can simple BE the surface mount board itself, rather than thin wires soldered on top of it. The device is stronger and more stable. The weakest part is on the cable. If it breaks, you replace a $10 cable.
USB-C is better than Micro-USB was, but still vulnerable, and still the wrong way. I can't fathom why they thought a thin sliver of a tongue that inserts into the cable end was a good idea.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
On the contrary, it's Apple that has the wrong gender jack.
USB C has a metal housing on the socket and on the plug. When they mate they guide the connector in, and prevent stress being applied to the contacts (what you call the tongue). It's impossible to stress that part without applying so much force to the metal mating parts that you damage the cable and/or socket.
The cables are designed to break first, rather than the socket. The break is between the metal housing and the plastic connector part that you
Re:Apple's connectors are actually a good idea... (Score:5, Informative)
It's impossible to stress that part without applying so much force to the metal mating parts that you damage the cable and/or socket.
On a new device, this might be the case. Unfortunately, after a few months those tolerances fade.
[USB] cables are designed to break first, rather than the socket. The break is between the metal housing and the plastic connector part that you hold.
USB-C, as I said, is better, but still vulnerable. With an even modestly used device, the metal housing on the cable end can still exert a shearing force inside the device. I've experienced it. It's particularly vulnerable to a force exerted inwards at an up or down angle. The way the USB-C end breaks off is, as you describe, by the metal end breaking out of its housing. An even partially inward force prevents this, and there is enough play in most phone USB jacks that the shearing force can quite easily snap off that fragile little tongue.
Unfortunately, what I describe above, is the exact force exerted if you drop your phone while it's plugged in and it lands on the plug at a slight angle. Which is a pretty common occurrence, especially if a phone is sitting on a table and someone bumps the cable to pull it off.
With Apple's system the weak part, the plastic tongue with the contacts on it, takes all the stress. Being plastic, it's never going to be as strong as the metal parts of the USB C connector.
Exactly! I'd say you're getting my point, but you wrote the above like it's a positive thing. In Apple's system the part that takes all the stress is on the cable, rather than in the phone. It will never be as strong as the metal end of a USB-C and thus it will break instead of the phone. I'd much rather have to replace a dozen cables than one phone.
I'll also add, it's much easier to clean, and waterproof a Lightning socket than USB-C. Lightning sockets can get water inside the socket itself, but the whole socket can be sealed internally quite easily so no water gets into the phone proper through the socket. USB-C, because of the way the internal tongue has to solder to the board has a hard time with this and is a water ingress point to the rest of the phone.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Apple's connectors are actually a good idea... (Score:5, Informative)
Speaking as a K-12 tech director that sees these cables and ports get destroyed year-in, year-out, I'll say this:
Every year, with a fleet of about 1,200 Chromebooks that use USB-C charging, I have about 5-7 USB-C receptacle ports that get broken off each year due to the flexing problems Excelcia mentioned. But in all the six years that we've had Lightning connectors on our iPads, we've had 0 broken receptacle ports.
I throw 30-40 cables every year due to damages, both types. They're equally weak. But the USB-C receptacles are definitely weak and more easily broken than they should be. And when they break, it's near-impossible to repair them.
Re: (Score:2)
When apple made its proprietary connector: every phone had a proprietary.
And 90% of those other phones had the connecting cable hard wired into the power plug/charger.
So, broken cable: buy a new charger.
I probably have a dozen of those chargers at home (intact ones), pretty useless, but somehow I do not throw them away.
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:3)
Reason: Apple cables suck (Score:3)
if you buy an apple device an apple cable is included. so who the fuck cares what kind of connector it is?
Apple cables are flimsy, charge slowly, cost too much, and have no extra features. For everything I now own, but my Apple small devices, I have a much stronger USB-C cable with a built-in power meter that charges up to 100w. It charges my iPad pro much faster than Apple's cable. When I go on vacation, I can just pack a few USB-C cables and charge every device, but our iPhones and Apple watches. It's nice having the same cable charge your laptop, tablet, headphones, kid's white noise machine, XBox contro
Re: (Score:2)
I care. When with every device comes a different cable it's PITA searching for the right cable. It's a lot easier just using the same cable with every device. So far I need 3 different cables just for my Apple devices.
Now with the newer devices I just need 1 for Apple and Android.
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:2)
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not overjoyed by the prospect of governments making tech design decisions
And this is why you are still using rods, hogsheads, and seven different types of ounce.
Re: (Score:3)
Seven? I only come up with three, regular, Troy, and fluid.
Your point is still made.
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Informative)
The regular is the avoirdupois ounce. Then there's the Troy ounce and fluid ounce as you mention. There's also the apothecaries ounce, although that's apparently just another name for the Troy one. Then the Spanish ounce, French ounce, Maria Theresa ounce (named after the weight of a type of Austro-Hungarian/Bohemian coin commonly called the Maria Theresa), the Tower ounce and an abomination called the metric ounce. There may be others.
oz (Score:2)
Don't forget the one that isn't in Kansas
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:5, Funny)
Drug dealers ounce (just dilute the actual drug), shrinkflation ounce (manufactuter claims that the content has dried during transport), shady marketplace ounce (hacked scales, hollowed out weights)
Re: Good news and bad news (Score:2)
You forgot the hog ounce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
The biggest issue I truly see is with folding phone. I'm not going to get into it with people that don't like them. But, they're still not thin when folded in half. They've been working to make them thinner, and this will do the exact opposite.
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Interesting)
Same. Phones have already grown too damned large for my own tastes. In fact, that's been my main gripe about Apple in general over the years. They seem to think that people only buy the physically smaller options because they're too poor to buy a iPhone Pro Max so we "settle" for an SE or Mini or too poor to buy a Macbook Pro 15" so we "settle" for the Macbook Air 11" (Still the best Macbook ever, IMO.). So they strip out features and capability and give those of us who prefer portability crippled gear with worse and fewer cameras or integrated Intel GPUs instead of discrete GPUs. The idea that small, thin, and light are themselves value-added features and we might want (and be willing to pay for) small, thin, and light with no compromises is just lost on them...
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
But I guess consumer choice is not something the EU believes anyone should have. *sigh*
It believes we should have the choice of being able to replace our batteries cheaply. It believes that poorer people should be able to buy perfectly decent second hand phones with new batteries for around $20.
Nobody will stop companies making non-replaceable battery phones and selling them outside the EU. Heck, nobody will stop anyone in the EU buying them from the US.
Re: (Score:3)
> I can't imagine it will be even as low as $20
They're not. Well... you can find them that low for the oldest iPhones that still... technically... work, like the 7 and 8. But those are some pretty dodgy batteries from the darkest interior of China, and definitely not OEM.
I got curious a couple years back and compared Apple's pricing for battery replacements to what I could find for aftermarket batteries. And their premium was between $20-40 over the cost of a decent (UL and/or CE certification is pret
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't need to make design decisions: we just need them to set the design requirement.
They SHOULD have made it apply to the system storage media as well.
It ought to be that All consumables within any consumer electronic device that costs above a set amount shall be replaceable by the end user, And it's up to the manufacturer how to meet that requirement.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not overjoyed by the prospect of tech companies making tech design decisions.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not overjoyed by the prospect of governments making tech design decisions
Thats the job of a government. Otherwise you need no government.
Re:Good news and bad news (Score:5, Insightful)
....I'm not overjoyed by the prospect of governments making tech design decisions
Then stop wearing seat belts. Governments make technical decisions all the time, that's one of the reasons we have governments in the first place. What we need to be concerned about is government making GOOD technical decisions, not decisions that enrich a clientele at the expense of everyone else.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not overjoyed by the prospect of governments making tech design decisions
How many different types of outlets does your home have? Does is have an Apple outlet? A Samsung outlet? Google outlet?
Let's stop pretending this is a technical issue. It's not. Making a device thin enough that it would handle a lighting port vs a USB-C would make is as fragile. The other option is to place the port on the back of the device. It would be stupid but it didn't stop Apple putting the charging port on the underside of their mouse.
Apple is still free to innovate as long as they standardize the c
Re:EU hates innovation (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, it's a move to prevent people from having to throw away perfectly good phones simply because the phone's battery has gone dead and it's not economical to replace it.
That's the sort of "innovation" that helps the manufacturer sell more phones, but doesn't help anyone else.
Re: EU hates innovation (Score:2)
Who does that? Who throws perfectly good phones away at all? I would say very few people do.
I think batteries need to be replaceable / accessible. I donâ(TM)t think it needs to be user replaceable. It just shouldnâ(TM)t require going back to the original manufacturer.
Re:EU hates innovation (Score:5, Insightful)
LOL. For real?
Apple had just 34% of the European smartphone market share as of 23Q1. That's 66% of the smartphone market that isn't Apple. Samsung (Korean), Xiaomi and Huawei (Chinese), and every other smartphone manufacturer that rounds out that 66% will have to comply with those laws too.
Many red-blooded Conservative Americans might like to believe that all Europeans are Red Commies out to get them, but that just isn't the case. There's nothing to see here except the obvious - Europe wants smartphone manufacturers to make phones with replaceable batteries in order to reduce electronic waste.
Re:Why would it take an EU ruling (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe, instead of just parroting the talking points of the manufactures, you should check the facts.
Why is it that especially rugged phones, that are made to be durable and water-resistant, often do allow to easily replace the battery?
And there are non-rugged phones as well that combine replaceable batteries with being water-resistant.
The real reason why manufactures don't want replaceable batteries is that they can more easily sell you a new phone if replacing a dead battery is complicated and expensive.
Re: (Score:3)
Because rugged phones are bigger?
Re:Why would it take an EU ruling (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I have a $1500 phone.
It costs me something like $130 to have Apple replace the battery.
The battery needs to be replaced something like 1 every 3 or 4 years.
This is NOT a fucking problem. I mean, fucking Christ!
I will GLADLY pay that money to have a more compact, more liquid resistant device.
Re: (Score:2)
You have a phone which cost $1500 when new.
In 3 / 4 years time it will be worth a few hundred bucks second hand. Then 130$ becomes significant
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I have a $1500 phone.
Then you're a fucking idiot. Talk about conspicuous consumption.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
...smallest phones of their time...
The Motorola DynaTAC 8000X was also the smallest phone for its time, and also had a user-replaceable battery.
It weighed 2kg/4.4lbs.
Yaz
Re: (Score:3)
The Motorola v3688 and the Unihertz Jelly (1) were the smallest phones of their time, both had user-replaceable batteries.
Both of those phones have batteries that would barely get past the boot screen of a modern device. They were only viable due to their tiny screens and utter lack of capability. Only one is a smart phone (the fact you needed to lump the Motorola in shows how desperate your argument truly is), and neither of them are even remotely comparable to any other smart phone. You may also note that the Unihertz Jelly 2 doesn't have a replacable battery. Why? Because the company addressed the biggest complaint about th
Re: Why would it take an EU ruling (Score:3)
This is not just true for rugged phones, as i already wrote.
Before this craze of glued-in batteries started, we had durable and water-resistant phones.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
MAYBE, instead of being an asshole, you think before shitposting... Or just read the part where I said it requires a more expensive manufacturing process vs just using glue.
Good, ruggedized phones are put together with screws, and rubber seals -not cheap glue.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not so sure about more expensive, as it's hard to reconcile against the fact the lots of manufacturers make phones with replaceable batteries now. Here is one list [androidcentral.com]. The problem for your "it's expensive" argument is they are all cheap phones. (Not being able to buy a high end phone with a user replaceable battery has been a long standing frustration of mine.)
Those expensive phones have one thing in
Re: Why would it take an EU ruling (Score:3)
Because rugged phones are thick and heavy and they don't care what your space constraints are. I'm already annoyed that so few small phones exist and Apple abandoned the mini, I don't want any extra size added to my phone for a replaceable battery that I donâ(TM)t need. I have an iPhone 11 which is 4 years old. It just dipped under 80% battery capacity. It would cost me $120 to get the batter replaced by apple and probably a lot less by a third party, and I still wonâ(TM)t be thinking about that f
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why would it take an EU ruling (Score:4, Informative)
Why is it that especially rugged phones, that are made to be durable and water-resistant, often do allow to easily replace the battery? And there are non-rugged phones as well that combine replaceable batteries with being water-resistant.
Because they are bigger and have lower battery capacities. There's not much too it. This is a design trade-off, nothing more. This is the fact, not some parroting of manufacturers or some other evil conspiracy.
The real reason why manufactures don't want replaceable batteries is that they can more easily sell you a new phone if replacing a dead battery is complicated and expensive.
100% of phones on the market today have replacable batteries. Just not *easily* replacable ones If you have been throwing away phones because your battery is dead then slap yourself you silly man, that phone could have had a brand new battery in it for $20 worth of labour (actual amount I was charged last time I got a battery replaced in my phone on top of the battery cost itself). And the only reason I paid the $20 is because I was too busy to do it myself.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There are a bunch of IP68 rated devices with removable batteries on the market. The problem is that they won't be as thin and light as devices with non-removable batteries. I would guess that for the average consumer, they'd prefer a thin and light device over a device with a removable battery. Most people replace their phone anyway around the time when you would need a battery replacement.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Why would it take an EU ruling (Score:2)
I had a V20, too. IMHO, it was the last true flagship phone that was a step up in every way from the phones that came before it (including the display. After 3 oled phones with burned in displays, I never want a fucking oled display again).
Re: (Score:2)
I think that the average consumer does not care enough to go looking for the phone with removable battery.
For example, I recently had some business with a cell phone operator. While waiting in line, I looked at the phones they have on display. I don''t remember seeing a single model with replaceable battery.
This means that someone has to really know what he's looking for and specifically look for a phone with removable battery.
Most people replace their phone anyway around the time when you would need a battery replacement.
And now they will be able to sell the old phone to someone else and that someone
Re: (Score:3)
The manufacturers do. They have every incentive to cater to what the average person wants to see. They want as many people to buy them as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Since I don't like that manufacturers don't cater to MY tastes, I'll shit on everyone else".
Re: (Score:2)
I can't reasonably expect a manufacturer to invest money in a product that would probably be a commercial flop. They're going to respond to meet demand. If anything, the type of demand is the problem. For example, if people demanded privacy, you'd see them catering to that. But people don't.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me something I don't already know..
Gaskets and screws are more expensive than just glueing the fucker together into a solid block...
Manufacturers have to be forced to spend the few extra cents per phone to do it right.
The OP asked why it took an act of legislature to make it happen. Cost.
Re: (Score:2)
a. Cost
b. Forced upgrade
c. The phone can't be fully switched off and therefore can be located anywhere there is a mobile signal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And there is prior tech for this, just use the designs from only a handful of years ago.... when batteries were user replaceable.
The last thing I bought with a NiCd battery was a solar path light
Re: (Score:3)
If you put a new battery in a three year old phone and reset it it should be good as new. Yes phones are getting a little more powerful every year, but a three year old phone should still be perfectly usable.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, you can baby your phone, use a screen protector, use a case, make sure the USB-C jack is free of lint, be gentle on the physical switches, charge it to 80%,
and the day you replace the battery you drop it and the screen cracks.
Re: (Score:2)
Peculiar as it seems, fixing a thing that cost a thousand bucks when it needed a $100 part used to be considered normal rather than unthinkable.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would it? It's up to the company to comply. Apple could choose to make it a pain in the ass, but there's no upside for Apple in doing that. It would be like deliberately letting the car you make run poorly after everybody had to give up leaded gasoline.
Re: (Score:2)
People love using the strong arm of government to force companies to make their products how they think they should be made. Here’s an idea, make your own phone exactly the way you want it.
They do. And they're actively consumer hostile and promote needless waste. This is exactly how the "strong arm of the government" should be used - to prevent tragedies of the commons.
Re: (Score:2)
i think this falls more into the "dangerous master" side of your sig... even if i DO want replaceable batteries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Manufacturers generally want the widest availability for their products. If it were debilitatingly expensive to make a removable battery cover, maybe there would be some incentive for them to arrange things so that customers jump through a bunch of extra hoops to make a purchase.
But since it is stupid-easy to make such a phone, and stupid-easy to sell through existing distribution channels, your fantasy will remain just that.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I have heard that about the MicroUSB mandate and about the USB C mandate back in the day. Turns out, the EU is such a large market that it was easier to sell phones built for the EU worldwide.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh BS. Stop your whining. Phone manufacturers will comply with the ruling AND make their phones just as water/dust proof as before. I hope this ruling is made in the U.S. so I can purchase my future battery replaceable phones locally.
Re: (Score:2)
i agree. While i WANT replaceable batteries, in my phone (and large headphones and laptops), i don't want the government to mandate this.
If you _really_ want maybe put a $20 tax on things that don't comply or something to give companies who want to compete a bit more of a differentiator, and it would pay for any imagined environmental impact many times over.