It’s been long enough that people of forgotten what’s it’s like. Cameras still have replaceable batteries, there are several benefits:
I can have two (or more) batteries, if it runs out I just change it. I don’t need walk around with a USB battery pack and cable hanging off the device preventing me from using it properly.
I can put the battery on charge somewhere and leave it, even if not completely secure, because just the battery not the device. This way my expensive device and my data is not at risk.
I can use 40+ year old cameras, because I can just put a new battery in. This is not something you can do with newer device, e.g. and iPod and you can’t even find anyone who will fit them for the older models.
Battery tech moves on. There are now some batteries with charging ports on them. Other batteries offer more capacity than the original ones. Apple even did this once for me, when MacBook Air batteries were fairly easy to replace, I had mine replaced (it wore out) at the shop and they put a slightly bigger one in, which was the standard on the newer models.
The final law just makes replacing batteries more accessible (i.e. no glue or special screws), but it doesn't mandate battery packs. Also some devices like hearing aids are exempt.
I question whether battery packs would be a good thing to bring back now. USB power banks have 100% interchangeability among many device classes, which is something that not even dry cell batteries achieved. I can choose to leave the house with or without a power bank and just rent one in my city (YMMV). Modern charging wattages are high enough that I don't miss shutting down my Nexus, changing the pack, then rebooting.
It's tempting to say that this could be solved if battery sizes were standardized, but that would inevitably limit device dimensions. For example, I especially loathe how the 18650 has made almost all modern flashlights clunky. I would hate it if Apple pushes for a 4.5mm thick battery standard to kill all foldables because they don't want to enter the market and cannibalize their iPad demand.
Agree - I read this as it will be easy to replace the battery when it reaches its end of life and no longer can hold my charge. It will still take time to replace it, but that's okay since it'll only be done once every few years. It's not meant to re-introduce swappable battery packs, so you won't be able to carry spares on long trips etc.
Isn't Apple supposedly entering the market this year though? By the time any regulations has passed, they'd probably already be established. Though I agree I don't really see too much point in making batteries quick-swappable rather than just easily swappable as you say considering it's unlikely to be a true hot-swap without requiring a power cycle.
I don't think this is where peak battery tech ends up. At current capacities, batteries are becoming genuinely dangerous, and faster charging only amplifies the risk. Charging high-capacity cells outside a temperature-controlled charger is risky, and even reputable chargers shouldn't be left unattended — many workplaces ban it outright (it only takes one fire to make that policy).
Phone batteries are the worst of it: highest power density, fastest charging, odd geometry, and tight space constraints. Manufacturers shrink the phone by offloading temperature monitoring and heat dissipation onto the phone's own electronics and housing — so replaceable, externally rechargeable batteries are tricky to design.
IMO, swappable batteries were a feature because batteries used to suck. In less volume-constrained devices like cameras, swappable batteries still work — but you're trading single-charge runtime for that convenience.
This last point is actually a real killer, an easily swappable battery in a phone probably sacrifices >10% "maximum" capacity in lost space. e.g a phone with a glued battery can have 5000mAh but the same phone with a more durable battery connector can only be 4500mAh.
We COULD have an EV with a 200kWh battery that can go 1000km++ on a charge in -30C weather. But nobody really needs that beyond a few outliers.
What we NEED is ubiquitous and easy charging.
Going for a burger, it'll take 20 minutes for you to order, eat and walk out. On a 300kW charger in the parking lot you can in theory get up to 100kWh charged. Or less with a slower one. Even plugging in to a 50kW charger for 20 minutes is enough.
Same with shopping etc, giving "everyone" a 2kW charger in a parking lot is table stakes in 2026.
And with phones: just have the possilibity of charging everywhere. I have 13€ Ikea Qi2 ("Magsafe") compatible chargers[0] everywhere in the house. Anyone can just slap their phone on one and it'll charge a bit.
There's no reason why we can't have more of those in public - we did try when wireless charging first appeared, but it was a whole chicken and egg thing. Nobody had phones that supported it and finding the exact 1x1cm spot where the phone charges was a pain. Qi2 with the alignment magnets takes that problem away completely.
Ultimately the main benefit obtained from not allowing battery replacement, is an increase in sales of newer models.
While your reasoning has _some_ merit, it reads as an apologia for the status quo .. rather than an example of why we should prevent easy battery replacement.
The main thing that makes all this hard to do is the form factor.
Give these phone batteries a standard geometry and interface and pretty much all these problems immediately go away. 3 prongs on the battery (ground, positive, data). A standard protocol so the battery can communicate things like SOC or acceptable charge rate with the charger. And viola, you are off to the races.
Yes, this will mean manufacturers will have a hard limit on how thin they can make their phones and a constraint on what designs they can employ.
That brings back memories! Yes, many devices before iPhone had normalized internal batteries indeed had aftermarket extended batteries. They would come with matching bulged back covers to fit the significantly oversized battery.
My early iPhones had external battery cases, which even when attached (when travelling a long distance) were smaller than modern iPhones in the important dimensions.
We don't need fast charging. Phones will be left on wireless charging surfaces, which will eventually be ubiquitous. Everyone hates usb-c plug in. Just leave it on a surface, pick it whenever you want.
We don't need to fast charge anything, phones or EVs. Slow charging preserves battery life and smart charging will charge whenever it is cheapest.
I hate USB-C. Hi. I do a lot of woodworking and the port easily clogs with sawdust and lint. It was very easy to clean it each day when I had a lightning connector, a common toothpick would suffice.
Now I have to purchase specialized non-marring micro tool scrapers to clean the port without damaging it. The scrapers break after a few cleanings, so this is an ongoing monthly recurring cost. Yeah I can charge wirelessly, but I still don’t want sawdust in my phone hole after a day of ripping wood.
Finally someone with an argument. I do hear why you dislike it, most people seems to do it without any reason... As it was said by someone else you might be able to cover it up somehow, either a rubber plug, or 3d print a small strip of plastic and put it in your case.
Charging a 5Ah phone empty to full every day of the year adds up to all of about 7kWh. Nobody cares if you shave off a couple cents per year if the experience is worse.
The fact that pretty much no phones have a replaceable battery says something. And it doesn't mean that all manufacturers are somehow colluding with each. The market is very competitive and pretty much every manufacturer decided the trade offs are not worth the benefit. If Samsung or Xiaomi or Google could sell you a better phone with a replaceable battery, they would. But everyone came to the conclusion that the trade off is just not worth it. And now the EU, in its infinite wisdom has decided it knows whats best.
If it's such a superior product that people want despite the tradeoffs, why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
Because people will buy that phone and keep it much longer. When phones had replaceable batteries, they needed replaced after a couple of years because they were terrible. I'm now on a several year old pixel phone that I'm happy with, but eventually the battery will wear out and I'll have to replace it. Google likes it that way.
I think OP meant the phone was going to be replaced in three years tops, so no one cared much about battery longevity. Nowadays, the battery can be the constraint for practical phone life, since few consumers can replace one themselves and by the time they pay someone else to do it, may as well trade it in and let Verizon subsidize a new one.
Having an easily swappable battery returns some power to the user.
As an example of public policy it had significant impact on death, injury, medical costs, etc.
Road Traffic Accidents before and after Seatbelt Legislation-Study in a District General Hospital (1990)
Injuries among samples of car accident cases attending the Accident & Emergency (A & E) department of a District General Hospital (DGH) in the year before and after the introduction of seat belt legislation were classified applying the Abbreviated Injury Scale using information recorded in the patient case notes.
Those who died or did not attend an A & E department were not included in the sampling frame.
The number of those who escaped injury increased by 40% and those with mild and moderate injuries decreased by 35% after seatbelt legislation. There was a significant reduction in soft tissue injuries to the head. Only whiplash injuries to the neck showed a significant increase.
You don't have to replace the phone. You can go to some repair shop and get the battery replaced. It will be several times cheaper than a new phone.
Very few people do that. I don't.
Because a) general software enshittification makes me need a more powerful decice anyway, and, more importantly, b) people are just happy to have an excuse to get the the new shiny.
> You don't have to replace the phone. You can go to some repair shop and get the battery replaced. It will be several times cheaper than a new phone.
Still way more expensive than swapping a battery pack, and this mean leaving your phone to a stranger for a few hours or maybe a day if the shop is really busy.
Anything that add friction to changing battery will help sell new phone.
Nah, sorry, enshittification is not "just an excuse". My current 2020 phone(xperia 5-ii - I wanted that sd slot&jack) is noticeably slower than when I got it, even though the battery is holding up decently(it basically needs to last a day, and it usually does). Software shops seem to get focused on testing their stuff on "modern" devices. It looks like, once your device starts to slip out of that "testing pool", things get increasingly buggy until it eventually makes general use enough of a pain to require replacement.
I think last couple years' improvements to battery tech made software take over batteries as the bigger contributor to device obsolescence.
I have 4+ years old S22 Ultra and there is absolutely nothing slowed down. I didn't install any crap semi-random apps just for the lolz, its basically static set of features with maybe 2 new apps per year added as it keeps doing more and more like ebanking or work auth. It doesn't even have Snapdragon processor, just their own Exynos and its simply fine.
It keeps getting all updates and will keep for few more years.
Camera results massively improved cca 2 years ago with some update so that they are cca on same level as current ones. Plus I still has 10x physical zoom which trumps all current models, iphone pro max including since we still can't bypass physical limits of optics.
Really, 0 reasons to update and battery capacity is the only upcoming issue - still fine now but I feel the decrease a bit. If I could swap it easily myself without paying some phone shop to do it, that's a massive advantage.
Fairphone exists. The batteries are easily replaceable, they have a video on their website. It's no thicker than many other phones, runs on non Google OS, maybe just check it out. I have one and am totally satisfied with it.
I don't think the objective is to make it a "superior product" in the somewhat circular way you're defining it (i.e., the market equilibrium that we settled on). It's one of several measures to try to have people keep their phones for longer and cut e-waste.
Do you think fuel efficiency or emission standards "slowed down innovation"? They brought a huge amount of innovation: lighter materials, better aerodynamics, higher compression ratios, direct injection, better mixture control, etc.
There will still be innovation; the solutions will just have satisfy the new parameters.
Yes, they definitely slowed down innovation and decreased consumer surplus compared to the counterfactual of just taxing the behaviour you don't like (like taxing fuel or emissions).
Sure, but they could have taxed it more and not have any official fuel efficiency standards.
(And compared to most of Europe or Singapore, US fuel is taxed very lightly, and their CAFE standards are especially stupid. Especially since their loopholes led to the replacement of practical station wagons with silly and dangerous SUVs. With a more car-agnostic fuel tax, this wouldn't have happened.)
You stumbled onto the pain point. The problem isn’t the intention but the execution. The EU historically has done a better job at nailing the execution of this type of regulation.
If it slows down innovation is debatable but even so there’s still a solid principle behind it, a small speed reduction can grant a huge efficiency gain. It’s usually a worthwhile compromise. You don’t run tour engine only in the red zone because that’s where it makes the most power.
You can’t have infinitely improving standards for an infinite time, otherwise you end up with bullshit like Dieselgate, and ecotechnocrats forcing everyone to drive around in mobile inextinguishable incendiary devices.
All ICE cars, or only those as old as the BEV fleet?
At least ICE car fires can be extinguished, and without special equipment.
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact and lock the occupants inside and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames taking down whole RORO car transport vessels at sea?
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames in your garage at night and ignite your whole house, while you and your family are sleeping?
Well, kind of. You have some seconds to try to cut it short, after that they will burn to a crisp, exactly like an electric car. The difference is that a battery will burn until the end no matter what. OTOH, an ICE fire is potentially explosive.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
They can and they do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu7tQ2-x61k or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKOQUE9U1Ek or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFvzTOZsnsg. That Youtube channel alone (Jersey Shore Fire Response) has more than a dozen ICE car fires, nobody comments nothing about ICE cars being dangerous, just "firefighters great job". ONE single case of electric trucks burning, and all comments are "lithium bad". ICE cars contain oil, gasoline, paper, rubber, plastics... They have some parts that get really hot on normal functioning, and any failure (e.g. an oil duct leaking, debris on the exhaust) could lead to a "spontaneous" fire. The difference is that a lithium battery can burn from a cold state without being our fault, while for an ICE car you can blame the driver for bad maintenance, parking over dry grass, reeving too much... we like to find causality, so we can convince ourself we can avoid that happening to us.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact and lock the occupants inside and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Any car can catch fire after any impact if the luck is bad. A gas or oil leakage can lead to a "spontaneous" fire very quickly. Any car can catch fire even without any impact, just driving around, as shown in the videos above. If your car catches fire, the fumes will be toxic, it doesn't matter if the toxicity comes from plastics, oil, rubber or lithium. Get far from the car quickly.
You are ignoring the fact that ICE cars are more prone to catch fire, proportionally. And the try to steer the debate to what is the cause of such fires, or if the ICE car can be extinguished with water. That would be a different debate.
> At least ICE car fires can be extinguished, and without special equipment.
That's not quite right. It's not like a non-special equipment like bucket of water or a garden hose (and I, for one, always travel with one of each!) work well for extinguishing any working car fire.
The remains of ICE car fires I've seen while out and about, while very few, are usually just hulks of vaguely car-shaped metal that have turned rusty from the heat by the time I come across them.
Car fires are never good. They're seldom easy to put out. EV fires can be worse in a lot of ways, but that doesn't make the other kinds of car fires saintly or anything.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
Nope. Except: One doesn't have to go very far on teh Interweb to find videos of car fires at gas stations, either.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact
Sometimes.
> and lock the occupants inside
Sometimes people can't get out.
> and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Nope.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames taking down whole RORO car transport vessels at sea?
Not usually.
People don't usually die from getting hit on the side of the road while pouring gas from a jerry can into their EV, either.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames in your garage at night
Not often, but sometimes.
> and ignite your whole house, while you and your family are sleeping?
I'm not answering that. I take too much pleasure in ignoring uselessly-specific addendums to questions like this. You'll have to forgive me.
> All ICE cars, or only those as old as the BEV fleet?
You tell us.
From the way you wrote this comment, you seem to have a pre-existing belief that ICE is safer despite the evidence to the contrary, it looks like this because you're asking questions that are nonsensically specific, to paraphrase "does a ICE car catch fire while charging?", given that depending solely on how you count the tiny little lead battery in an ICE they *either* don't charge at all but rather refuel *or* they continuously charge while running.
> At least ICE car fires can be extinguished, and without special equipment.
False.
There are many different classifications of fire, each with their own special equipment; liquid fuel is amongst them, just as electrical fires are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_extinguisher
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact and lock the occupants inside and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Re "lock the occupants inside", that sounds like you're talking about Tesla's design flaws, which is a "Tesla" problem not a "battery" problem. Other EV companies aren't as dumb as Musk has been with Tesla over the last decade.
Also, firefighters have for my entire life carried tools specifically for breaking open vehicles that had been smashed in ways that stopped the doors working: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_rescue_tool
And window-breaker hammers have likewise been standard emergency kit for a long time, though I don't know when they started getting recommended for drivers themselves.
Re "from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery", petrol and diesel fumes are also pretty nasty.
Irrelevant framing aside, post-crash fires are actually more common in ICE vehicles due to fuel system breaches.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames taking down whole RORO car transport vessels at sea?
Yes.
Stats I've found with a cursory glance say that there's more risk from the ship's own engine than all the vehicles, ICE and BEV combined, that it carries.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames in your garage at night and ignite your whole house, while you and your family are sleeping?
I noticed this first hand: past year I was driving near home and a ICE car was burning in the shoulder of the road, with the firefighters working on it. It didn't reach even local news, in the following days I couldn't find anybody who have heard about it. A few months later an electric car catched fire around 100km away from my house, and the day after everyone was talking about it at workplace and how dangerous they are.
I don't know why it happens. Maybe a case of "if a dog bites a man, it's not important. If a man bites a dog, it gets newspaper cover". Maybe it is that an ICE car burning is extinguished in minutes, and then towed away, while an electric car burning is basically a two hours firework show.
Yes. Here in Hamburg you have to pay some useless consultant to come to your house and check that there's no other way to decrease the temperature before you are allowed to install one.
You are also not allowed to but your bicycle in the garage.
I think it’s far more likely to introduce additional dead batteries into existing waste. Probably drop in an ocean given how much batteries are already dumped.
> If it's such a superior product that people want despite the tradeoffs, why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
Because legislation is direct and gives better results to consumers. Thank god the EU standardized on USB-C.
There's no reason to jump through extra hoops and rely on the whims of investors to do something good for the people.
Short term thinking, if anyone invents a significantly better connector the eu will lag a decade while they clear the red tape, it hampers innovation inside the bloc people who might otherwise be concocting their own improved connector.
(1) The EU fundamentally didn't care which standard so long as there was one; they only forced this because Apple dragged their feet with their own proprietary thing that wasn't a significant advantage. The other end of Apple's Lightning port being a USB port does not suggest it added anything except deliberate incompatibility.
(2) what would "significantly better" even look like? USB-C can do 120 watts, enough to fill a 20 Wh battery in 10 minutes, except the batteries themselves aren't ready to charge that fast.
(3) if someone somehow manages to make a significant advance, nothing prevents them from having two ports. Or indeed lobbying for a law change on the basis of a tangible thing they can demonstrate rather than a hypothetical that still hasn't happened in all the time since these discussions began.
The same Europeans that were miles ahead with their GSM standard?
We can compare that to the US. Here, we stayed stuck with power-thirsty analog phones for many years before bouncing through a litany of mutually-incompatible digital non-standards...and finally landed on the ~same actual-standards that Europe adopted.
I think they'll be OK. (I think the rest of us will be OK, too.)
I assume OP thinks more like me: the EU will move to the next standard in a reasonable amount of time after it's available.
I'll be the first to complain if the new standard isn't adopted in due time, but as a strong example I'm still very content with how the GSM legislation standard has played out.
This is fully on Apple themselves. USB consortium asked apple to use lightning for what became USB-C, but Apple didn't want to give up the ecosystem control.
You're aware the maker of the lightning connector helped produce the USB-C standard in the same year they created lightning?
> The design for the USB‑C connector was initially developed in 2012 by Apple Inc., with the help of Intel, HP Inc., Microsoft, and the USB Implementers Forum.
USB-C is rated for 10,000 connections, while Lightning is rated for 40,000. Except if you disconnect and reconnect your phone 4 times a day every day of every year you own it, 10,000 is enough for just under 7 years. And Lighting was introduced in 2012, while USB-C was 2014. In those days, the average lifespan of a smartphone was 2.5 years. Even today, the software is only supported for 7 years at most. You don't need a connector that's going to last nearly 30 years.
And the additional durability of Lightning is itself not free. It's not cheaper than USB-C. Quite the opposite. That additional cost means that it either uses more resources to manufacture, or more resources to make the tools to manufacture. So, it's just wasteful. Lightning is "physically superior" but USB-C is better engineering.
Apple knows that. So Apple chose to go with Lightning because it was theirs, not because it was better. Because it's not really better. Not better for the customer. Or really better for business. Apple chose vendor lock-in.
Worse than that, Apple's connectors are higher durability, but their cabling itself is awful. I work at a K-12 and we were in an iPad and Chromebook pilot back in the mid 2010s that ran about 4-5 years. We had a fleet of 3500 of each. The iPads saw less than half the usage hours as the Chromebooks, but had something like triple the incidence of cable replacement. The cable insulation splits. The plasticizers degrade, the cables get really sticky or oily, and then they split and expose the braided grounding sheath. That braided cable will shock you. That was true for both student and staff devices. So they had these wonderful connectors, but the cables still failed at effectively five or six times the rate of the alternative. And since they were proprietary, you couldn't just buy a better cable made by someone else! You had to buy the same cable that you knew was going to fail!
> And since they were proprietary, you couldn't just buy a better cable made by someone else! You had to buy the same cable that you knew was going to fail!
Godswallop! Aftermarket Lightning cables were readily available shortly after Apple first use the the port.
Agreed though, their own Apple branded cables that came with the device are terrible, and I always just threw them straight in the bin.
And connection cycles is the wrong metric for USB-C vs Lightning. The correct metric is how many and how much side-force removals can the port withstand.
My experience shows that for USB-C the answer is wildly insufficient whereas for Lightning it’s sufficiently high enough that it won’t be a concern.
What does any deity have to do with it? Btw, has anyone done a post mortem analysis of that mandate? I wonder if it delivered what it promised. I doubt it:
All they saved consumers from is buying a 5 dollar replacement cable.
The EU certainly hasn't done such an assessment yet.
The predicted savings of a quarter billion Euro come mostly from unbundling chargers, which they could have forced down customers throats without also making technical mandates about how customers are allowed to charge.
Unbundling charger without standardizing the connectors would result in every manufacturer using their own proprietary bespoke charging connectors. Which is exactly what the situation was before usb was made mandatory.
How much cool aid do you have to drink to genuinely believe the corporate argument that using proprietary connectors is "innovative"?
> Unbundling charger without standardizing the connectors would result in every manufacturer using their own proprietary bespoke charging connectors. Which is exactly what the situation was before usb was made mandatory.
Eh, no? USB-C was already pretty much the standard before, and you could plug in lightning cable with a cheap adapter cable.
Consumers still need to buy replacement cables, because they break.
And the USB-C cable end connector is a fragile piece of shit designed by committee and forced upon everyone buy another committee, neither of which must’ve had a single mechanic engineer even once walk passed their bike shed.
Future historians will do a postmortem on the EU and discover the USB-C enforcement act as an inflection point that marked the downer trend to the EU’s eventual collapse, and the reclamation of its land and people to the great nation of Russia, where it always belonged.
Or some other equally as dreadful outcome befitting the UBS-C Bike Shed & Enforcement Committee formerly know as the European Union.
> Not even that.
>
> Consumers still need to buy replacement cables, because they break.
>
> And the USB-C cable end connector is a fragile piece of shit designed by committee and forced upon everyone buy another committee, neither of which must’ve had a single mechanic engineer even once walk passed their bike shed.
Well, the USB committee did ask Apple for the superior connector, but for whatever reason they said no. So we're stuck with this.
OTOH, USB-C is not nearly as bad as your bizarre post would seem to imply. It could be better, but as we know from experience with things like micro-USB, it could be much, much worse.
> Future historians will do a postmortem on the EU and discover the USB-C enforcement act as an inflection point that marked the downer trend to the EU’s eventual collapse, and the reclamation of its land and people to the great nation of Russia, where it always belonged.
>
> Or some other equally as dreadful outcome befitting the UBS-C Bike Shed & Enforcement Committee formerly know as the European Union.
Russia can't even handle Ukraine, a country significantly smaller in population, economy, and land area than Russia. And you think that they could take on the EU‽ A block, mind you, which has more population and a significantly larger economy. Oh, also nukes.
And you think that the EU would fall in this case because of... USB-C? Please explain the mechanism which would lead to this situation.
Well good thing is that they didn't. The only thing you need is to provide a USB-C port for charging. Nothing stops a manufacturer adding additional ports for charging, data sharing etc.
So Apple could give people the ability to use their oh-so-superior Lightning cable while also being able to use USB-C for charging. If nothing else, it means that there are no longer any "does anyone have an iPhone charger" discussions at parties because people can just charge all their phones with USB-C.
> Well good thing is that they didn't. The only thing you need is to provide a USB-C port for charging. Nothing stops a manufacturer adding additional ports for charging, data sharing etc.
That's a bit silly. There's only so much space in eg a phone.
I don't understand your issue with USB C. Mini and micro USB connectors routinely got loose and fell out of multiple devices I owned, USB C is everywhere now and I have not encountered such issues.
I don't mind USB-C. Most of my devices have USB-C charging, and it works well.
I mind bureaucrats locking that in.
> Future historians will do a postmortem on the EU and discover the USB-C enforcement act as an inflection point that marked the downer trend to the EU’s eventual collapse, and the reclamation of its land and people to the great nation of Russia, where it always belonged.
Haha, what? I like to complain about this piece of legislation, but it's not that important. And it's not like Russia has better policy. Oh, just the opposite. (Like waging wars they can't win, or running crazy high corruption.)
Thanks for decontextualising that paragraph by not including the following paragraph.
I really appreciate it, keep up with the good work.
Bloody Clippers.
You always got to watch out for the Clippers, they’ll take whatever you say or write and clip it out of context and make it mean something completely different to what you really said.
The European Union will fall to Russia while they're looking for a USB-C charge cable that works, or looking for a charged swappable battery for their MANPADs.
> Thanks for decontextualising that paragraph by not including the following paragraph.
Eh, you know that people can just scroll up?
> The European Union will fall to Russia while they're looking for a USB-C charge cable that works, or looking for a charged swappable battery for their MANPADs.
1. It's easier to design and build Ingress Protection without user-accessible compartments.
2. There's a lot of tech on the back: NFC, wireless charging, structurally important [magnetic] attachment points. Ensuring electric contact and physical strength on a door is again hard and expensive or all that tech has to live on the battery.
3. Design. A glass-like openable door is going to be extremely failure prone.
4. Compatibility. You can't guarantee quality of 3rd party batteries, even more so if the tech is in the battery pack.
5. Planned obsolescence. Let's not kid ourselves, encouraging replacing the whole phone is good for business.
The trade-off is basically having a thicker phone. Nobody except apple thus all manufacturers 6 month later want paper-thin phones. Never the actual consumers.
> If Samsung or Xiaomi or Google could sell you a better phone with a replaceable battery, they would.
It's an interesting theory. I'm going to call it capitalist-optimism. It's roughly oppositional to Doctorow's theory of enshittification.
> but everyone came to the conclusion that the trade off is just not worth it
The trade-off here being profit margin versus customer convenience. They've calculated that they'd make more cash with non-changeable batteries (e.g. by encouraging more buying of new devices rather than changing batteries) would make them more cash than selling a phone with a replaceable battery. And they might well be right, but that doesn't make it a good thing for civilisation.
> And now the EU, in its infinite wisdom has decided it knows whats best.
Before the EU mandated USB-c chargers pretty much every phone had their own charger. It was awful. You couldn't easily borrow a charger because everyone had a different configuration.
Now things are far better. It turned out that the EU did know best. It maybe wasn't best for phone manufacturers in the short term, but it was better for customers.
> why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
Is this a serious question? In order to create a competitor to the major smartphone operators you'd need a huge amount of capital. I don't think I could convince a venture capitalist or bank to give me that kind of investment just to start a company selling a phone with a replaceable battery.
> If it's such a superior product that people want despite the tradeoffs, why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
That wont solve the problem of carbon footprint this is trying to solve? There is still going to be iPhones and samsung phones of the world in EU. And people will buy it. Unless you want EU to go full autocratic and enforce people to use just 1 phone manufacturer!
Last 4 phones I had, 3 was replaced cos of old battery and 1 was due to broken display.
Imagine you not being able to replace the SMPS (Power) in your custom PC even though your ~$2000 worth of hardware which includes GPU, CPU and motherboard is working perfectly fine.
Does it really say something? If so what? I think the assumption that suppliers are always just catering to whatever the market demands is dubious at best. In uncompetitive markets with strong moats and price inelasticity, there's no need to cater the demands of market, the market must cater to the supplier's demands. And since markets tend to collapse into a few main stakeholders, markets eventually end up this way, rather than the assumed way.
Because I don't have a few billion dollars in my back pocket and even if I did, planned obsolescence and dark patterns are infinitely more profitable thus regulation is needed to achieve consumer positive outcomes?
A camera doesn't care if you take the battery out, except for that sub-second bit when it's saving the photo. Otherwise it doesn't notice you swapping the battery at all.
Modern phones are different because they are basically computers, and computers really don't like it when you just cut the power with no warning.
Phones don't have removable batteries mostly because of the desire to make the device as thin as possible. The battery is just a delicate, flexible pouch that can easily be damaged and catch fire if removed from the phone and carried around. To make it safe, you'd need to add a hard shell, which would probably make the device 2 mm thicker or so.
As to why we want to make phones as thin as possible... I don't know, but I guess it makes them look futuristic, which helps with sales. The same goes for highly-reflective, glossy screens. I guess I'm not gonna cry if that gets regulated away.
> Phones don't have removable batteries mostly because of the desire to make the device as thin as possible. The battery is just a delicate, flexible pouch that can easily be damaged and catch fire if removed from the phone and carried around. To make it safe, you'd need to add a hard shell, which would probably make the device 2 mm thicker or so.
Fairphone 6, recent with replaceable battery: 9.6 mm
Galaxy S5, has a replaceable battery, released _12 years ago_ - battery tech has improved a lot since then: 8.1 mm
iPhone 17 Pro Max: 8.8 mm
iPhone 12 Pro Max: 7.4 mm
We want to make phones as thin as possible so the latest flagship iPhone is 1.4 mm thicker than the one from 5 years ago? A whole 0.8 mm thinner than a recent one with a replaceable battery with maybe 0.1% of the iPhone's R&D budget, and 0.8 mm thicker than one with a replaceable battery made 12 years ago?
Galaxy S5 had a tool-free replaceable 2800mAh battery, with hard sides for protection. NFC. Wireless charging (as a user-installed option -- again, no tools, but did add some thickness and weight). USB 3 with OTG. HDMI over MHL. An excellent camera for the time. An OLED screen. A headphone jack. An SD card. A sim card. An IR blaster for changing TV channels at the pub. (I'm probably missing some functions here.)
The bootloader was unlocked in many regions (and became unlockable in all regions). Custom roms were abundant.
And it was waterproof.
(In the subsequent decade+, I have heard it said over and over again that this is an impossible combination of traits. And yet, there was a time when we had all that.)
Bullshit. This was the reason the industry gave for why they were removing battery replaceability support. Everybody hated it when it was first introduced, and to this day I only buy phones which have easily accessible ways to put a new battery on when the day comes. Fuck this BS of "people wanted thinner phones".
It’s also very hard to make them resistant to water and dust, I really like that I can wash my iPhone in the sink and don’t have to worry about it getting wet in general.
This is a lot harder to achieve with battery doors, especially if they need to be as big as a phone back.
Rugged phones are so far removed from any consumer phone in terms of size and weight the comparison is about as apt as comparing military use laptops with a MacBook.
Easiest way to get rid of dust and other buildup, free flowing water for a few seconds and done. Compared to the Middle Ages of using tooth picks or similar to clean the ports and speakers it’s much nicer.
And no, I don’t have my phone in any weird places, just my pocket.
and you can’t even find anyone who will fit them for the older models.
I'm quite certain you can find many companies in the far East who will produce cells of exactly the size and shape you want, as long as you're willing to order a minimum quantity. There are also a few semi-standard sizes of prismatic cells available.
That said, having a few truly standard sizes like we had with 1.2/1.5V and 9V batteries would be a good idea. BL-5C and its variants were a de-facto standard for many years too, and apparently are still available new.
I tried to find a phone battery once and found very similar looking ones with prices ranging from expensive to terrifying with everything in between. I don't trust the ones that are to cheap as I don't know how they cut the corners. I don't trust the more expensive ones because they look the same. I cant see the profit margins. I was unable to pick one. I ask a guy with a repair store. He said he always buys from the same shop and the badges look different every time.
This is what happens when the market for phone batteries only exists for OEMs who buy millions at a time, custom.
It will stop only when there is a reason for consumer-detectable battery quality indicators — ie non-tech people have a reason to buy them. Which will now be the case with this law.
Having a battery pack has its uses though. As crazy as USBC is, you can now get a relatively large amount of power from a battery pack.
There’s a bunch of things that don’t need their own battery if they just drew enough power off USBC. I have an office coffee setup. My grinder and espresso maker have their own batteries. But there’s no reason I couldn’t have a single battery pack and just plug both into USBC saving me a ton of weight. (In fact the Lagom Mini 2 grinder is powered straight off USBC with no internal power.)
For phones and cameras, that need their own power source, a replaceable battery is mostly just an end of life thing for me. Because I’d still have to carry a cable or spare battery around.
These things aren't mutually exclusive. Once upon a time, batteries were generic and fit some standard form-factor. You could swap batteries between devices and often did! You could even connect your device to a pack of batteries, and swap out the batteries within the pack.
240W max is very little when it comes to hearing up water, and most powerbanks don't even do more than 100W output. That's more in the range of those swappable tool batteries.
Several years ago when I bought a slr, I went with nikon, mainly because their F-mount lenses are mostly compatible back to 1959.
It is a lot of fun to pick up and use nice old glass from garage sales and such. They tend to require manual control, but that is the fun part of taking pictures anyway.
Software security updates seem to be the limit to phone life, not batteries (the latter of which I've had replaced at Apple stores). Apple still seems to have the longest support for security updates.
Some action cameras have replaceable batteries, some don't. I had a perfectly good Contour Roam 2 where the battery died and I still have a Contour Roam 3 with some low capacity battery.
Action cameras seem to have less than a 2h run-time though. One could argue that a replaceable battery is a desired feature on such a device as many users of these cameras participate in activities lasting much longer. They also tend to have replaceable memory for the same reason. And it all is achieved without EU directives as far as I know, just from the pure market demand.
PS. Consumer surveillance cameras, on the other hand, don't have replaceable batteries in general, as they can operate indefinitely off a small solar panel or for months on a charge.
With cameras you don't care about every mm of width, nor about how resistant it is to falls. With phones you do.
I, for one, don't welcome that change. I'd be ok with paying someone a bit extra to replace the battery. I mean, I'd be ok if I had a battery die in my phone in the last 10 years, which I don't remember it did.
Just to be clear replaceable doesn't mean removable/hot-swappable in this context. There doesn't have to be a battery compartment, the battery can still be glued in place. The phone can still be sealed.
Manufacturers only have to make it possible for users to open and close the phone to replace the battery without damage, using common tools.
Personally I’m confused why people say they want a thinner phone while carrying a phone that’s keeps getting larger every model.
When was the last time you kept a phone longer than 2-3 years? That’d explain why you haven’t had one die.
Assuming you do get a new phone regularly, easy battery replacement will probably help the resale value of your own a fair bit - the labour cost of a battery replacement is priced into most older phones on the second hand market.
My average time on a smartphone is now at 4 years, feels like it's going to 5 pretty soon. [Last upgrade was for USB-C. Next upgrade will be for on-device LLM. It's wild how approximately 0% of what Apple has done outside of the USB-C connector has mattered to me in the last 10+ years - low-light photography is probably the only other thing that comes to mind. ]
I've had two battery replacements since 2015. One of them was required, the other was mostly optional (battery had dropped to 90% on my iPhone - which was probably sufficient).
USB-C - that was an awesome requirement that it was unclear whether Apple was ever going to do.
User Replaceable Battery? Zero desire, particularly if it reduces water resistance on the device. Dozens of things I've wanted from a phone - being able to replace the battery has never even entered my mind as something I wanted.
Your cycle is 4 years, and you’ve had two phone batteries replaced in 11 years? That’s 2/2.75 phones.
Ok, one was optional, and let’s round up to 3. So 1/3 of your phones. Kinda sounds like you would benefit from replaceable batteries.
Regardless, those 4-5 year old phones likely went to ewaste immediately or soon after you were done with them because the cost of replacing the battery was less than their resale value after 4-5 years.
That’s a pattern our planet literally can’t handle. Wars over digging up minerals using slave labour then putting them in phones for 3-5 years just to send them to have children get chemical burns stripping the metals out of them.
My last computer lasted me 11 years, with two battery replacements along the way. My phone should do the same, just as easily.
What really annoys me is Apple EOLed the iPhone 8 and then came out with a virtually identical SE version. Of course they soon discontinued the SE too…
Maybe they updated the CPU slightly but screen and camera were identical.
I would have kept my iPhone 8 if they kept updating the software. Yet somehow they can manage update the SE software despite looking the same as the iPhone 8…
I know there is a cost and overhead toward supporting old platforms. But for the premium on these devices and the level of waste generated, manufacturers can still do better…
I’d prefer no new features and only security updates… perhaps I’m weird.
Not weird. The last few os updates have made my phone laggy and slow. I want security updates, i don’t want new features that kill my battery life and usability.
Apple had been switching their various iOS devices to USB-C for several years before the EU decided to mandate it, so I don't know how you can assert that them switching the iPhone to USB-C was because they were forced to. It looks more like the EU just had lucky timing and told them to do something they were already doing.
Apple fought it the whole way, commissioned studies to show it was a bad idea, etc etc. This after they had a decade prior been subject to the same thing with micro USB and skirted that agreement by shipping more unnecessary cables.
Laptops, the ipads. Phones and airpods came after the eu law. Debatable, but it seems to me like they consider the ipad in the same class as a laptop, so it got grouped with those. Otherwise why did it take 5 years between the first ipad with usb-c and the first iphone?
The iPhone had by far the biggest ecosystem of Lightning accessories, the biggest base of users with Lightning cords. It was a foregone conclusion that a bunch of people were going to be angry about losing their Lightning accessories and having to buy new cords, and another bunch of people were going to be happy to switch their last non-USB-C device over. Apple needed to find the crossover point where the latter would outnumber the former.
I very much miss the ability to never use my phone on a charging cable. Just swap the battery on an external charger and go. 5 seconds to charge to full. It was freeing and simple
I always wanted an internal battery of like 1 minute, so I could hot swap batteries. Then the battery capacity would be largely irrelevant. What would be cool is to have a large case that could charge the battery multiple times like with ear buds. The magnetic wireless charging blocks that just stick on the back of the phone are pretty fair compromise though.
I've had the same phone for over 6 years now (iPhone 11). It's a bit slower now, but I suspect that's more to do with software changes than anything else. In particular the battery is still in pretty good shape.
Sort of a funny example since "batterygate" centered on degraded iPhone batteries in which Apple argued the best possible move is to throttle phones so they don't shutdown unexpectedly.
Most people would argue the best outcome is spending <100$ and 1 min of your time to have your phone restored to like-new speed.
Not sure what replacable has to do with thickness.
When I bought my first smartpone, a Moto G (1st gen) it was as flat as any phone most people carried around at the time (2014, I think). And the battery was replaceable.
I think also Samsung phones had replaceable batteries then. And this was the case for a few years after. Until it wasn't.
Devices didn't suddenly get thin when batteries were glued in. Why would they?
My grandma is still daily driving my ancient Galaxy S5 Neo. When someone says thinness is opposed to removable battery, or water resistance, or headphone jack, or durability, or SD card... I always think of it.
I'm not sure about too thin (although I switched to the qi-charging back after a year), the replacements /where/ thinner.. but lost the IR blaster, replaceable battery, eventually μSD housing, eventually headphone jack.
I don't know, it just felt flimsy. But in almost a "flimsy meaning it can handle a beating" way. It sure did.
I did ruin the water protection on mine pretty quickly though, because the back panel was made of plastic and was... flimsy. It basically became a fidget toy.
When thinking of how flagship phone producers are going to keep making sexy phones that also keep their watertightness, my biggest worry is repeated stress from any removable component becoming a fidget toy
Most digital cameras above mid ranges are made of painted Magnesium alloy material for both weight and durability. Only cosmetic parts are made of Aluminum and plastics. They don't talk much about those because all the remaining companies in the market are from one same country that don't speak English that isn't China, and there is no differentiation to be made in that area.
We've had thin smartphones with replaceable batteries 15 years ago. That was the standard. Galaxy S5 was the last one in that series, and it's not looking too different from today. It was even IP rated for water!
Batteries also don't really die, but you get shorter and shorter life. When a device that barely could make it through 2 days of use now survives for less than one, an "upgrade" seems nicer than it really would've been if you could just swap the battery.
The S5 was IP67 rated but only if the USB port flap was sealed. Modern phones like the S24 and iPhones are IP68 rated without covers.
As someone who spends a lot of time outdoors in the rain, giving up superior IP68 water resistance for a replaceable battery that I'll never replace will be a downgrade for me.
That's true. More-modern phones can be IP-rated without a cover for the USB port like the S5 required.
That doesn't mean that a modern phone of vaguely S5 shape, with an S5-esque battery door, can't be fitted with a more modern USB port, though. Does it?
They seem like very unrelated things.
(Those modern ports, by the way? They're pretty slick when they work right. They detect moisture and turn off the bit of normally-externally-available power to help prevent galvanic corrosion.)
IP_7 means it's ok with water immersion for up to 30 minutes, down to 1m. You can go swimming with an IP_7 rated device.
IP_8 is "more than 1m, more than 30min water immersion" rating.
"outdoors in the rain" needs IP_5 rating if you want to be safe. You do not need a dive watch to go out in rain.
Even non-waterproof devices are not exactly made of sugar. My first iphone was a 3gs. I want running with the device in an armband. My rain precautions were plugging in 3.5mm earphones, and pointing the charge port downwards. Regularly got caught in rain with it, and the device was completely fine two years later when I sold it.
Do you toss it in the trash when you’re done? Pop it in a drawer to rot? Ewaste will bury us all, conflict minerals and all. Replaceable batteries are a net good for humanity, and i personally believe that the smart people at phone companies can solve the problem of waterproofing even with replaceable batteries
No. Apple refurbishes and reuses the majority of trade-in phones. They recycle a small fraction. None of it ends up in landfills. In my case, they aren't paying me hundreds of dollars for my old phone to throw it in a landfill.
The comment above mine you linked to said they never had battery problems. I was saying they probably don’t keep their phones long enough to encounter battery problems. I wasn’t suggesting that’s a good thing - just that it’s very common. And if you need me to defend my position with action: I’m 5 years in on this phone and planning to do a diy battery swap soon to keep it running a little longer.
Ports develop rust if exposed to elements. This applies to USB-C ports too. That's why all seriously rugged phones has flaps for every ports with all-plastic enclosures over metal frames(not all waterproof equipment are seawater rated; they have to be specifically designed and tested to be resistant to galvanic corrosion if the water to be submerged in is not deionized or at least potable).
Urban rainproof phones like S24 and iPhone aren't actually intended to be left drenched in mud or seawater, so they don't have to be equipped to be resistant against pieces of soil or soaked driftwood jammed in the charge port.
"...that I'll never replace", I mean you will replace the whole phone, including the battery? (Unless this is your last phone, in which case you won't be affected anyway :P)
Both of those things are also important in cameras, there is even sites that compare the size such as https://camerasize.com/. Cameras have got smaller in recent years and it makes the size makes a big difference to whether you take it with you on not or fits in your pocket or not for compact cameras. Ricoh’s gr4 camera is 0.5mm thinner than the previous model (gr3). Cameras are essentially smaller than they would be otherwise because they have replaceable batteries. People who need at more power usually use several batteries rather than use a bigger camera with more capacity.
Cameras also need to withstand drops for similar reasons to phones, it’s in you hand and you could drop it, also tripods can fall over, car mounts fall off etc.
I don't care about every mm of width, and don't understand those that do. A phone up to 3/4" fits into any pocket that a 1/4" one does.
I had multiple android phones with replaceable batteries and many were no thicker than modern phones, especially once you've added the protective case.
I used to work for Nokia back when they still made phones. Replaceable batteries were very normal then. Phones were a bit thicker than today but not massively so. These days phones are actually thinner but much larger. I had a "are you happy to see me or is that a Nokia" type Nokia 9300. That was a brick. But it had a full hw keyboard. and flipped open it wasn't that much bigger than a modern smart phone.
You could argue that the trend towards more energy dense batteries and wireless charging could enable new interesting form factors. Recent phones have magnetic connectors for external wireless chargers/batteries that snap to the back. Most of bulk and weight of a phone is for accommodating batteries. You could make an argument that making a phone with replaceable batteries is easier than ever. Many cameras have a bulge for the camera. The negative space of the rest of the phone could easily hold a swappable battery. How critical are those 3mm really?
If you filled the negative space on an iPhone 17 Pro/Max it would be a horrendously unwieldy phone. People who say this stuff seriously underestimate the disastrous effect on ergonomics increasing the whole phone from 8.75mm to 13.2mm would have.
That's technically HMD a separate company but with some Nokia people involved. Nokia just licensed the Nokia brand to them and I think that deal ran out some time ago. I had a Nokia Android phone before I got my Pixel 6 a few years ago. Decent value device but the camera was a bit meh.
Nokia actually did an Android phone just before MS acquired them which they then promptly killed. And then of course they pulled the plug on the whole business unit. HMD apparently still makes feature phones based on Series 30. That's the pre-smart phone platform that a lot of Nokia fans remember fondly. The famously indestructible phones.
I have my 9300 still in a drawer ( checked ) . Interesting if it is possible to find a replacement battery for it and what functionality would still be usable? A physical SIM, 3G still works…
If you remember Nokia's batteries they were covered in a relatively thick ABS shell. They were also, compared to today, had laughably little storage. A Series 40 Nokia just did not draw that much power. The single GSM/PCS radio also sipped power.
Even if you stripped a 5G phone down to a Series 40-esque interface the 5G radios alone would use more power than a whole 3310.
In order to get the power density modern phones need they require high power Li-poly batteries. An extra 3mm worth of ABS shell is a lot of lost capacity. You can't sell user serviceable Li-poly batteries without a protective shell. You'd never get a UL rating because Li-polys are dangerous if mishandled.
The N95 had something like 995 mAh. A modern iphone would have about 4x that.
Also interesting to know is that BYD was supplying a lot of phone batteries back then. I think they also supplied to Nokia. Phone batteries is what made them big.
This is not correct. There is no exemption for Apple devices
You seem to referencing from a older exemption for self serviceability if your smartphone can do 1,000 cycles and retain 80% battery. Specifically - B 1.1 (1) (c) (ii) (b) . Here is the link - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...
Your link says otherwise. From the Article 11 link, ANNEX II, A.1.1.(5):
(a) From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for replacement of the display assembly and of parts referred to in point 1(a), with the exception of the battery or batteries, meets the following criteria: [...]
[...]
(c) From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for battery replacement:
(i) meets the following criteria:
— fasteners shall be resupplied or reusable;
- the process for replacement shall be feasible with no tool, a tool or set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part, or basic tools;
— the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out in a use environment;
— the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out by a layman.
(ii) or, as an alternative to point (i), ensure that:
— the process for battery replacement meets the criteria set out in (a);
— after 500 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 83 % of the rated capacity;
— the battery endurance in cycles achieves a minimum of 1 000 full charge cycles, and after 1 000 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 80 % of the rated capacity;
— the device is at least dust tight and protected against immersion in water up to one meter depth for a minimum of 30 minutes.
---
So manufacturers must make the battery replaceable, or meet all the conditions from (a) for replacing non-battery components, and meet the 1000 cycle / 80% capacity requirement.
It was not said explicitly but it was a straightforward implication. The replier then pointed out the exemption rule is outdated therefore the implied consequence is wrong and the original line of reasoning was misinformation, and thus would be the greater error. Humans
> covers exemptions but nothing to do with 1,000 cycles or Apple as far as i can see.
It appears what you're looking for is in B(5)(c)(ii).
> (c) From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for battery replacement:
> (i) meets the following criteria:
> — fasteners shall be resupplied or reusable;
> — the process for replacement shall be feasible with no tool, a tool or set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part, or basic tools;
> — the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out in a use environment;
> — the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out by a layman.
> (ii) or, as an alternative to point (i), ensure that
> — the process for battery replacement meets the criteria set out in (a);
> — after 500 full charge cycles the battery must have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 83 % of the rated capacity;
> — the battery endurance in cycles achieves a minimum of 1 000 full charge cycles, and after 1 000 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 80 % of the rated capacity;
> — the device is at least dust tight and protected against immersion in water up to one meter depth for a minimum of 30 minutes.
I was wondering about that. I lost my iPhone 13 mini the other day, did the find my phone beep thing and got a distant beep from my washing machine which was on wash cycle.
Surprisingly the phone was fine and works fine after a brief rinse under the tap. It must be hard to combine that sort of water resistance with easy user changing.
Don't fall for the 'glue cuz of protection' myth - there are and had been water-resistant phones way before Apple started glueing to avoid customers doing their own repairs and them losing out on new sales.
How much of the total volume of the device was the case/housing?
I suppose the glue-everything approach is partly due to the desire of making a device very thin. There's no room for strong, load-bearing outer case, the internals are load-bearing.
I suspect manufacturing has something to do with gluing too. Afaik screws are expensive compared with glue, and their assembly involves slow humans or expensive robots.
It's been a long time, but the gasket itself was probably a millimetre or two thick, squeezed extremely tightly by the screws in the battery cover. It ran on AA or AAA batteries, and they took about about half or a third of the depth.
Honestly I'd expect that to be SIGNIFICANTLY easier to waterproof than a laundry machine. Partly because laundry is sometimes done warm, and warm softens materials (like gaskets), but mostly because laundry has surfactants that considerably reduce surface tension, making it far easier to slip past gaps.
There is a good reason waterproofing claims are specific about the kind of liquid (usually just fresh or salt water, usually without significant movement (i.e. jets, like you get in a shower)).
Samsung still make the rugged Xcover range which has both replaceable batteries and waterproofing. And 3.5mm jacks too.
These devices are mostly sold in enterprise environments (eg field use, factories) and as such get a lot of wear and tear. But they hold up well. They're not ultra rugged but a good compromise. We use tons of them in our factories, we replaced DECT handheld phones with the Xcovers loaded with ms teams. Not an ideal setup (teams for mobile kinda sucks) but at least this way they can easily communicate with people in the offices.
Yes, but IP67 is not nearly as water resistant as IP68, which all modern phones are for the most part.
I'm not knowledgeable enough to know if IP68 could be achieved in a phone without glue. There's no clamping mechanism for the backs, they're just press-fit with small clips.
From a mechanical perspective ip68 is perfectly achievable mechanically and watches have been achieving it for a long time, however… with what sort of margins for the manufacturer and what sort of cost for the consumer ? Additionally a lot of them require pretty carefully adherence to instructions torques and tolerances to achieve the same waterproof rating.
Personally I’d be very happy to have a phone that says, if you swap the battery you might lose the ip68 rating unless you follow the resealing process within tolerances.
My phone (A Furiphone FLX1, which is kindof a variant of a Gigaset GX6) has a removable back with a gasket and is IP68. One of their promotional videos had them change the battery on video then boot the phone and and unlock it underwater
Who cares though? Sealing the battery in makes the device less drop resistant. I somehow managed to avoid water damage to my phones for decades, while none of my phones managed to avoid being dropped in a way that would most likely be fatal to them if their batteries were sealed in - and yet most of them survived to this day.
A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with.
> A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with.
I submerge my phone as a matter of normal use because I can. I take it into pools and hot tubs, and I clean it in the sink -- I personally wouldn't trade that for a battery door.
a lot of normal people who daily-use their phones near water and even jump into pools with them. I would bet you $100 that if you asked people "replaceable battery of water proofing to the same level you have it now", ~ nobody will puck the former.
Not once in my life I had thought "I would like to jump into this pool with my phone", while I did sometimes replace the battery on-the-go which actually made my life easier. It's an absurd take. If anything, I'd be more concerned with beverage spills, but these are still easier to avoid than drops.
Well you are the exception. Especially if you live in a hot area where a lot of people have backyard pools. Being in and out of the water constantly is a very normal in Florida for example.
Most the suburban kids in Houston had wristband attachments to their phones in the pool or would be in a floaty taking stupid pics of each other as kids do. Trying to keep a modern phone dry takes away a lot of utility.
Not a lot of people live in hot areas with plenty of backyard pools, but I can understand that waterproof phones could become more popular there than in the rest of the world based on this property alone (right now they're popular because there's not much choice).
Those people are doing a very stupid thing. I don't think that the world should be ordered around "let's make it so people can do stupid things without consequence".
Those people are the public buying the phones. Companies make phones that more people will buy. Turns out your desire for a bulky phone with a replaceable battery is less common than their desire for a phone that does not get destroyed when dropped into a pool.
I’ve done it and seen it many times. People throw their phones to each other in pools and the beach for photos all the time. One of the best things about modern phones is the waterproofing. IP68 level is amazing.
> A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with
It’s actually the opposite - a user replacement battery is a gimmick not worth the downsides.
Apple know this, and they know their customers a lot better than you do.
Your position is niche at best, anachronistic really.
Apple has vested interest in getting their customers to switch to a new phone often, and the average time to upgrade is absurdly low these days (less than 4 years), which is greatly influenced by battery wear and fall damage, so I don't think this argument is very persuasive.
It's not really the old kind of replace-ability, though. The only requirement is that you should be able to change it with commercially available tools.
Maybe as a society it's better for people to have replacement insurance than to have sealed batteries that make phones so disposable. I wonder if we've defined IP68 as a "must have" without considering the alternatives. I'm thinking the percentage of people who actually "use" IP68 over the course of their phone is pretty small...yet that "requirement" drives a huge design choice.
I suspect it's a moot point. Makers have every incentive to drive replacement cycles.
I replaced my phone because of the battery life, and I would have replaced the battery if it would have been easy, to offer a counter anecdote.
I had to make the choice of getting another phone (used in great condition, as I do) or pay half the cost I paid to get the battery replaced but also knowing it would still be heaviy used and more likely to fail in other ways because of use.
If labor cost and decreased relaibility weren't factors, swapping the battery would have been the choice.
Now the question is: are there more people like me or more people who need a sealed, hard to repair phone? I don't know but if I did I'd accept keeping the current situation.
Spills and drops were traditionally most common causes of mobile device insurance claims. We've only seen that change for phones because of their IP ratings in recent years.
While manufacturers do have an incentive to get people to buy new phones, many of them with first party insurance do have an incentive not to pay out as many claims.
Japan only, but KDDI/Kyocera never stopped IP rated phones with removable battery. TORQUE G07(2026) is IP65/68/69 rated with a coin key locked removable back cover.
It also officially support submersion in seawater as well as cleaning with soapy water. Most glued phones support neither.
I was wading through water with a 3310 in my pocket in 2006. Battery was fine and it worked after it was dried. There was a problem with the keyboard though but that was a cheap swap. And this was a phone without any water resistance.
Not really comparable perhaps - but I had a Ericsson t18s or similar that went through a full 60C cotton wash cycle (being on at the start of the wash) and was fine after drying off.
The thing is - if the battery had been destroyed, that could have been replaced...
I've seen rumors that Apple started waterproofing phones after Chinese criminal groups started farming parts on AppleCare by dumping the mainboard into buckets of Shenzhen seawater to deny electronic serial number readout. Your logic board can't be so dead from normal use that not even its PMIC respond to commands if it's waterproof.
I've also had iPhone dying from gasket leaks, the circumferential double sided tape seal dries out after a while.
My brand new Pixel phone several years back, I was so excited it was IP68. Took some photos splashing around in water, not more than a foot or two. It died in minutes.
This could be "fixed" right now by a software update that limits the maximum charge level to 80% of capacity. However, this comes at the cost of how many minutes of runtime your phone can operate.
So manufactures might just responds to this by making your phone heavier with a bigger battery that is being under utilized.
Honestly we should define 80% as the new "100%" on such batteries and label "charging to full" as "overcharging".
Psychologically, people understand charging a battery to "125%" (or whatever) a lot better: Do it when you really need to but if you do it all the time it wears down the battery a lot faster.
The Samsung phone I use these days has a "Protect Battery" mode that can be toggled (both manually and with automatic user-defined routines). It limits maximum charge to 85%. For those who want it: That's the ~same thing, without the psychological trick.
It also has some other settings that relate to smart charging that I don't fully understand (mostly because it's kind of inscrutable).
But the idea, AFAICT, is that it works with a person who charges their phone on a fairly regular schedule (they sleep at about the same time every night with plugged in all night).
The battery meanders up to 85% or something and holds there. Shortly before the person normally wakes up, it starts coming the rest of the way up to 100%. And then they wake up, unplug the phone, and it begins to discharge.
This helps to minimize the duration of being at a high state-of-charge, which is also a big factor in long-term battery longevity.
Nice idea. I think the reason it's not communicated as such is that then companies would be expected to advertise time on battery when charged to 100%, not 125%.
I recently investigated large portable power banks (Jackery, etc.) and like that there are options to charge faster with a battery life tradeoff. Let people make their own informed choices.
This sounds great. I would've loved to have set my phone to charge up to only 60% or 80% of its design capacity to reduce wear. I do this on my laptop.
It has been on iPhones for quite some while, but on androids even longer. Before that it was in the form of some smart charging scheme that it would only finish charging until the moment it thought you would unplug it.
Same for my s24, 80% battery limit and slow charging at night (most of my charging). It's been over 2 years and the battery seems to last just as long as day one
Battery capacity of smartphones seems to double every ~8 years. The design space is adding more battery capacity, reducing battery life, or using less power.
And what about if 4 years they says that they have dettected a problem in your battery? A new battery should fix that but now you cannot do it properly because it could do 1000 cycles.
This same thing happened to Pixels 6a after 500 cycles.
Then don’t buy a phone from a company with a piss poor record of customer service.
Just looking in maps, there are three Apple Stores within a 45 minute drive from where I live in central Florida.
The situation is worse in my hometown in South GA admittedly, you have to drive 70 miles for same day service for an authorized repair place - mostly Best Buy.
The goal should be reducing e-waste, and honestly this seems reasonable.
I’d rather get the additional structural rigidity, compactness, and weatherproofing that comes from the tight construction and then pay $99 to have Apple professionally install a new battery for me in 3-4 years. Forcing everyone’s iPhone to take all of the tradeoffs of replaceable batteries so some people can save $50 to replace their own battery isn’t a good deal.
I wouldn’t be surprised if forcing all phones to have easily replaceable batteries would result in a net increase in e-waste due to the additional failure modes introduced. Even if batteries were easily replaceable I think most iPhone users would have Apple do it for them anyway.
I’ve also replaced some iPhone batteries myself and it’s really not that bad if you are familiar with taking modern electronics apart. Apple will send you the entire toolkit if you want complete with a return label.
> Forcing everyone’s iPhone to take all of the tradeoffs of replaceable batteries so some people can save $50 to replace their own battery isn’t a good deal.
This sounds like the exact opposite of real life. Every battery ages to the point of uselessness, not every phone gets to take a dive. It's not a stretch to say most phones never see more than some rain or a spilled drink. But the worst part of every discussion on this topic is this false (uninformed) dichotomy that water resistance and easily replaceable battery are mutually exclusive.
> and then pay $99 to have Apple professionally install a new battery for me in 3-4 years
In 3-4 years yes, but how about in 10-15 years? Apple will refuse to take your money then.
> Apple will send you the entire toolkit if you want complete with a return label.
Which is malicious compliance. They should allow the friendly neighborhood repair shop to purchase a toolkit so you can choose who does the repairs for you.
Since when? Last time i read about the Apple "DIY" kit it was only a loan and only for ... doing it yourself.
But then I haven't broken a phone in a while so I haven't really talked to my friendly neighborhood repair shop. That only because my daughter finally grew up, they remembered me at the shop back when she was young :)
There is the DIY program, and the Independent Repair Program [0].
> That only because my daughter finally grew up, they remembered me at the shop back when she was young
Ha! This is so relatable right now. My daughter is 15 and recently has been learning to drive, and last week she taught herself what happens if you set your iPhone on top of the car and then drive off. That is the only reason I've got familiarity with my local friendly neighborhood repair shop, I've never broken one of my own phones in all these years. Fortunately this life lesson only cost her the $39 deductible. Glad I decided that a 15 year old getting her first phone needed an insurance plan.
> what happens if you set your iPhone on top of the car and then drive off
Mine once dropped hers without noticing in a parking lot. We called her number and some dude answered and said come back here, i'll wait for you, but unfortunately i found your phone by stepping on it (it was night). At least it was just a person and not a car.
But don't despair, they grow out of it eventually. You may have to wait until she's off to college and forced to be more responsable by living on her own though.
Apple offers replacement batteries for an 11 year old phone, now -- past performance is no guarantee but they're already way, way ahead of the pack and there's no sign they're going to stop repairing old phones.
Probably. I mean, I don't even remember what standard my home wifi is on. It works, it's fast enough. Sometimes I think about upgrading the AP but why bother?
I wonder if this is part of why Apple is behind most competitors in terms of fast charging. Would almost make marketing sense to come out and say it at this point.
Isn't this pretty much what Nothing are doing? At least one of their phones has a different battery rating in India than elsewhere, despite containing the same hardware.
1 Cycle is discharging from 100-0 and charging from 0-100, regardless of how many times the phone is charged, so for a user that averages 50% battery drain each day, 1000 cycles would actually be ~6 years. I have no idea what the actual average is, but I'm betting that 1000 cycles is at least 4 years for the average user and possibly significantly longer.
Aren't today's phone batteries already replaceable with commercially available tools? I can walk into a non-apple store with my iPhone and walk out with a replaced battery 20 minutes later.
This isn't even what drives obsolesce of phones, it's software updates.
If you really want to be able to self-swap your own battery, you can just buy an Android that has a replaceable battery.
Do we need to regulate something that isn't a problem? All regulation has downsides, is it worth paying this price here?
With all due respect, I can buy a kit on iFixit for $55 for an iPhone 16 pro max, including the battery. I’ve replaced my iPhone battery before, aside from the glue being a bit sticky so needing a heat gun it isn’t that difficult.
Starting a fire with a hair dryer, without disassemblibg it, seems almost like a challenge. What are you going to ignite with 80-90°C warm, rapidly cooling air?
Which is fine - but the law is the law and will look at what Apple (et al) provide and document.
(Thought Apple's $99 to do the repair themselves isn't terribly bad all things considered; and likely part of their attempt to forestall complaints and litigations).
I've replaced a battery in my 2019 Xiaomi phone for $5 (the costs of the battery), using basic tools - albeit the back was already ungluing itself, making that part easier. At 10x the price, it's hard not to call it a massive markup.
And you can do it for much less if you want. I've replaced phone batteries with 6 dollars worth of tools and a hairdryer. You can buy glue or sticky gaskets for next to nothing as well if you care about waterproofing.
Most people are going to give up in 1 minute trying to open a smartphone. I can't imagine most people I know succeeding to replace the battery by themselves.
The actual cost breakdown for a battery replacement is:
45 EUR for a new battery
10 EUR for new display adhesive
20 EUR for screwdrivers and a spudger (unless you have them already)
a suction cup and tweezers you probably have at home already
Ignore the 25 EUR clamp and 20 EUR heat pack, I did and they weren't needed at all. So all in all, around 910 USD less than you claimed.
The heat gun discussion in the sibling comments is also completely ridiculous. There must be 100 ways to do it without a heat gun. Put it on the radiator, use a heat pack for muscle soreness, or just borrow a hairdryer.
If somebody's unable to replace their iphone battery because they can't come up with a source of heat, I doubt they'd even be able to replace the batteries in their TV remote.
You talk about "an Android that has a replaceable battery" as if that was something you could just buy at any store at no inconvenience. Sadly the majority of Android phones no longer have user-replaceable batteries, and only a select few models have official replacement parts available.
I'd be happier if this was something the market took care of, but after 10 years of glued-in batteries that you most likely can't even buy, I think it's time for a regulatory nudge.
> This isn't even what drives obsolesce of phones, it's software updates.
Agreed, and software-locking parts, like batteries, to only first-party or authorized third-party repair shops is one of those drivers.
I can see the argument for software locking some components (to cut down on theft) even if I don't appreciate or agree with them - it is at least a valid reason from some perspectives.
Batteries are a wear item though, and will have to be replaced periodically until the device is discarded. Software-locking them to only "Apple and people Apple likes" is unconscionable
In a perfect world, sure. But people also want phones these days that are physically durable, have some degree of waterproofing/water resistance, maximum battery life, etc. Many of the demands and expectations of a modern phone aren't easily compatible with a replaceable battery design that can withstand the incompetence of the average end user.
A GoPro fits all of those requirements and has easily replaceable batteries. Now, I understand that the shape and sizes are different. But I wouldn't mind some extra mm of thickness (I already get a pretty big camera bump anyway) if that means I can replace a battery faster.
We don't have a choice in the first place, minding or not. People who would mind missing a 3.5mm jack or replaceable battery have no say anyway, as none of the flagship devices on the market have either.
Can we have this discussion once? In this thread alone, there's like 50 instances of people making this claim and each time it takes about 20 minutes before at least one person replies that it's not the case, after which no refutals are posted. I'm happy to learn it is false if it is (I never had a phone that I trusted to be waterproof to any degree so I don't have first-hand knowledge), but it gets really tiring to read the same information level over and over as a reason for why we can't have nice things
Taking this comment as an example of someone who actually used a battery-swappable phone in rain on a motorcycle: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835184 (I'm not only taking the person's word for it: the device is also IP certified as waterproof 30 mins at 1m depth)
There is a lot you can do with advanced materials science but as you get close to the high end of capability the cost goes up very rapidly and the ability to scale production is reduced.
>people also want phones these days that are physically durable,
Anecdotally on this front, I have had to replace the screens of my iphones at least three times in the past (different models). Incidentally, I have never needed to replace the screen of a phone that had a replaceable battery. YMMV, but this seems needlessly defeatist.
>maximum battery life
One could also claim that bespoke charging cables allow for faster charging or longer battery life, but I don't know any iPhone users that are a crying a river for their deprecated non-standard chargers. But again, YMMV I guess.
You severely underestimate the capabilities of modern electronics manufacturers. Sure, it’s harder to produce something that fits all those capabilities. But it’s totally possible. This is exactly the scenario where government regulation is critical to a well-functioning market.
Engage with the content of his comment instead of resorting to ad hominem.
He's right - the market wants embedded batteries, although perhaps not directly. Embedded batteries have improved price, battery capacity, water proofing, size, and strength. If the consumer really wanted a removable battery and all that that entails then there would be more phones that offered that. The reality is people misjudge what all that entails. By all means, I would love to just make the iPhone battery directly replaceable without any compromises but that's not reality.
Incorrect. Replaceable battery is a feature that decreases sales. Why would you implement it when battery being weak will cause substantial amount of users to replace phone instead of paying for service to replace the battery ?
If the feature isn't expected and it decrease sales, why would manufacturer put it in ?
And decreasing sales is exactly what the EU wants to accomplish. To stop people buying a whole new phone every couple of years.
Unfortunately I do expect other tricks towards planned obsolescence. Long-term support is now a thing but what they can still do is make phones slower over time. Even Apple did this with the iPhone 6.
Why would they break more often? I don't really see that.
We have thousands of Xcovers (also replaceable) in the factories at work and they break no more often than the regular phones in the office environment. In fact people treat them pretty roughly because they're handling heavy requirement and you know how well people look after equipment they didn't pay for :) They're not perfect but they walk the walk.
Another point: I know several people that have Fairphones where almost every component can be user-replaced and I've held them but I don't see them being any more fragile than any other phone, really. And these are not rugged models.
And a Fairphone battery is 40€. An Xcover battery (including NFC antenna which is weirdly enough in the battery) costs similar. The screen 90€. All a lot cheaper than Apple, probably because there is no labor cost. You can just do it yourself or ask a friend who's handy.
They were given the choice years ago, when some Android phones had removable batteries and touted that as a feature. Nobody seemed to care.
In contrast, users were also given the choice between headphone jack and Bluetooth for years when every phone had both, and clearly chose the jack. BT headphones were rare. But Apple and many other phonemakers figured out they make more money by removing it.
You can buy phones with non-embedded batteries but they suck. That's not a coincidence.
What is your hypothesis for why more phones arent designed with non-embedded, directly replacable batteries? If it's such a highly valued trait in a phone, why doesnt some company just gobble up that market share? Why havent existing solutions sold well? Mine is that consumers dont actually value non-embedded batteries when accounting for all the tradeoffs. What's your hypothesis?
I originally did engage with the comment. Water-resistance absolutely still is physically possible if the replacement battery is waterproof. Water can over time be corrosive at the contacts, but that's a risk for the user. It does not in any way imply that water will enter the internals of the device from the point of contact with the battery. This will require a bit of engineering at the contact to ensure that water doesn't enter the device. As for the size argument, adding 2 mm of thickness is less important than providing five years of extra life.
Wait, are you proposing sealing the phone and sealing the battery separately, but not sealing the contacts between them? That’s… super sketchy for salt water immersion. Unless you add fuses and a BMS and safety mechanisms into the “battery”. In which case wouldn’t customers want to be able to replace the actual battery within the now-a-battery-plus-computer phone accessory once it wears down?
Those are not mutually exclusive at all, and there were waterproof phones with replaceable batteries (without even needing a screwdriver). This is mostly an excuse.
I just don't see why we can't have nice things until proven otherwise (especially considering there is already evidence that this works), rather than have glued-shut devices until proven otherwise (by whom then? Apparently IP and practical experiences aren't enough for you)
I clicked the "parent comment" link all the way to the submission, and opened the submission as well. Nothing mentions IP68. Which "we" is this goalpost coming from?
It's likely impossible to legislate but it would be nice to say "each generation has to have one user-replaceable battery". Everyone who doesn't care (the 99%) can buy the iPhone 19x, and the people who want replaceable batteries can get the iPhone B.
you can have both. the waterproof was just an excuse to make you either change the phone or go to a specialised center to change the battery, something that is so incovinient/expensive that people just obsolete their phone instead.
I trust that most batteries from iPhones are currently recycled through proper means either by Apple or third party firms.
I don't know how most people will dispose of user replacement batteries, but I suspect the recycle rates will be lower. If you want to ensure higher rates you also need to do something they do in the USA for car lead acid batteries. Charge a deposit fee on the new battery that is returned only when the battery is turned into a valid recycling entity.
Plenty of phones that were waterproof and had replacable batteries already. This isn't new or even particularily hard to do.
For a simplest example - somehow my watch is waterproof to 200M down and replacing the battery just takes a tiny screwdriver. Gaskets are not particualarly hard to work with.
How is it that I owned a fully-submersible phone—with user replaceable battery—over 15 years ago?
You've bought into and are now parroting Apple & Samsung marketing BS.
P.S. it had a headphone jack too. Gaskets over the ports. The headphone jack was the first victim of "but muh waterproof" despite all the other holes and cutouts.
Why do you imply that the phone could no longer be waterproof? Granted, it would take a bit of extra engineering to make it comparably waterproof. There is no reasonable implication that water needs to leak into the internals of the device where it makes contact with the battery.
How do you feel about the batteries in electric vehicles?
What about wearable devices like a smartwatch, headphones, smart glasses?
Should all these be consumer-replaceable without tools, regardless of the effect on the other things people value in these devices (waterproofing, size and weight, battery life, etc.)?
FYI I do not work for anything close to the consumer tech industry.
In software architecture, we talk about essential complexity and incidental complexity.
Essential complexity is inherent to the problem being solved; it can't be eliminated through better tools, process, or design. Incidental complexity is anything added by poor choices or flawed tools. Every line in a "hello world" program that isn't something pretty close to `print("hello world")` is incidental complexity.
To change the battery in electric vehicles that follow typical present-day design patterns, it's essential to have a way to get some clearance under the vehicles like a lift, ramps, or a pit, and it's essential to have a lift or jack to support the weight of the battery. Everything else is basic hand tools.
It is not essential to use any proprietary tools or software that isn't onboard the car or battery. Requiring anything like that is incidental, and a regulation could forbid it in the name of right to repair, reducing waste, or maintaining a healthy used car market.
For EVs you need at least a hoist/lifter/crane/other power tool to replace a battery. But sure, there's no actual engineering reason they can't be replaced by the user. Same for the smartwatch - you can replace a battery in most ordinary wristwatches that use them, why not the smart ones? IEMs are usually too small and that's where the engineering limitations might matter. Headphones, no problem.
Says who? Not all devices can have the same level of repairability by laypeople. What if I complained that todays' CPUs are too miniaturized and that in my time I could swap the individual vacuum tubes in case something went wrong?
If CPU failure was a leading cause of device obsolescence, your argument would make sense. Next, the EU or other regulators should explicitly regulate software mechanisms that prevent owners of a device from installing an alternate OS, enabling open source or aftermarket OS developers to support devices that mainstream vendors no longer want to support.
Of course the upsides of regulations are worth it. The downsides might cause slight inconvenience to the manufacturer, so that doesn't really matter.
Your next phone will be heavier, bulkier, more expensive, and less reliable as a result of these regulations. It will also probably not run as long between charges.
If bureaucrats in Brussels were better at designing phones than Apple, wouldn't they be doing just that?
I agree with the overall thrust of your comment, but you’re overstating it a bit. Removable batteries bring benefits, and the tradeoffs aren’t as dire as you make them seem.
It’s ridiculous that regulators are forcing Apple’s hand with design and engineering (I was one of the few against the USB-C switch), but it is also true that Apple is often incapable of making certain kinds of design decisions that have become impossible due to organizational inertia or shareholder-pleasing. Look no further than macOS 26, or the history of bad design decisions on the hardware side.
> Your next phone will be heavier, bulkier, more expensive, and less reliable as a result of these regulations.
Huh, phones are getting heavier, bulkier and more expensive already with every new generation? There's no regulation needed for that. Also more fragile because everything is made of glass.
I'm an exception for sure but I have not seen much innovation in the phone space that you'd genuinely make me buy a new phone.
Yes, cameras are better now.
But some phones had good cameras years ago.
I bought new phones mainly because of battery decline and/or not getting security updates.
If one of these will be solved, that might change my phone buying behaviour.
I don't care whether a display is called "retina" , whether the next edition comes in the colour "space banana grey while lion tiger snail".
And I don't need to impress someone by proving that I'm able to buy a new phone either.
Such behaviour gives me a good hint what to think about them though.
A phone that will have the battery situation solved is a killer argument.
Then I'd like to have a software distribution on top that it's "mum compatible" and doesn't need nerd knowledge to maintain.
Something that allows to use banking apps.
Let's see how it goes.
Also I hope that there can be third party batteries without DRM-like behaviour.
To me the best "tradeoff" right now is buying used Fairphones from ebay.
It is LineageOS HEAD compatible and has replaceable batteries.
But it has some quirks. Medium performance if even that, non working fingerprint sensor. Camera quality from 2005.
I don't have gapps installed so I'm using my phone without any type of payment/2fa/banking apps. That decision from opsec makes it easily reflashable, so my anti malware strategy is essentially just reflashing the phone every couple weeks :D
My battery usually lasts a week because of using only f-droids chat, navigation, and translation apps for the most part, aside from the browser. I use Firefox with uBlock Origin, saves an insane amount of battery lifetime.
To me, repairability is the feature I value the most in a phone, so I'm kinda willing to compromise on the other features.
Fun fact: Did you know that WhatsApp, Telegram, and Signal all restart themselves when you connect to your headphones? If you froze them before, they'll just drain your battery again when you have any bluetooth changes. You can easily verify that by staying in airplane mode and freezing them, then connecting your headphones in airplane mode.
Batteries have been used as part of planned obsolescence for too long and a whole small business industry of replacing phone batteries has appeared because of it. Next the EU are going to have to address security patches because its another aspect being used to sell new phones.
I have found out that the main phone providers (Apple, Google, Samsung) have extremely long support period. I really don't get the "planned obsolescence" thing.
As an example, in Jan 2026, Apple published iOS 12.5.8 which provides updates for iPhone 5s which released in Sept 2013. That's 12.5 years ago. The equivalent would be to connect to the internet using ADSL in Jan 2000 with your IBM PS/2 rocking in intel 8086, 512 kb of RAM and expecting an update for your DOS operating system.
>As an example, in Jan 2026, Apple published iOS 12.5.8 which provides updates for iPhone 5s which released in Sept 2013. That's 12.5 years ago. The equivalent would be to connect to the internet using ADSL in Jan 2000 with your IBM PS/2 rocking in intel 8086, 512 kb of RAM and expecting an update for your DOS operating system.
The updates for ios 12 are all security updates, not feature updates, so your comparison to "connect to the internet using ADSL in Jan 2000 with your IBM PS/2 rocking in intel 8086" doesn't really make sense. The phones stuck on ios 15 are basically unusable because many apps don't support it anymore. At best you can download an older version from a few years ago, but that depends on whether the backend servers were updated. Apps that insist you use the latest version (eg. banking/finance apps) basically unusable.
Believe it or not, "apps" are an important "feature" of a smartphone, even if it's not theoretically bundled with it. Moreover it's not just banking apps, those are just the first ones to go, but any that don't keep backend compatibility will eventually break.
The entire point of the cellphone is that third party apps are required to live a modern life. If I cannot run the apps required to pay for a parking spot or perform a 2FA ritual then there’s really no point in even having a phone. The first party software isn’t compelling enough to justify the pocket space.
The EU already requires 5 years of patches since last year. Motorola thinks they have found a loophole, so there are still some, ahem, patches needed to the law.
Do you have more info about this? I recommended Motorola phones to people based on a combination of price, their needs, and expected longevity (at least 5y now with the new update and replacement part requirements). If that's not the case then I want to update my recommendations
I dunno, my wife has has the same iPhone 11 Pro Max since 2020. She had to get the battery replaced once at an Apple store, which I believe cost $99, and it took like thirty minutes and it wasn't that hard.
I'll admit it's a little annoying that I have to pay a hundred bucks to get the battery replaced, but the phone is otherwise fine and still gets updates, so I don't know that I buy that it's "planned obsolescence".
It's planned obsolescence through price. Your wife paid >50% of the phone's value just to replace the battery. Many people won't think that's worth it. It could have been a $30 user replaceable battery.
But that's not what the regulation is saying, is it?
It says
* replaceable with 'commercially available tools' (which means: Apple could just sell you a 'iphone battery replacment tool kit for 1000 Euros)
* has excemptions for high-cycle / long-lived batteries
* ... nothing about the price of the battery (which can be 1000 Euros)
* ... or that the battery/the battery's form factor can't be trademarked, essentially locking you into 'Apple batteries' and preventing aftermarket ones.
Also, I'd rather have a less bulky phone with fewer mechanical parts that can break as compared to a more user-maintainable. Because of 'high-security' software (think: banking apps, or - I assume - the soon-to-be-released EUId wallet), the thing is basically worthless after four years anyways and needs replacement.
I'd wager that ... nothing at all will change in 2027.
> Batteries have been used as part of planned obsol[esc]ence for too long and a whole small business industry of replacing phone batteries has appeared because of it.
Note that early phones had replaceable batteries and it was later phones that dropped that feature. The idea wasn't that making the phone impossible to open would compel people to replace their phone faster; it was that given that people didn't keep their phones long enough to wear out the battery, there was no need to make the battery accessible.
How is buying a midrange phone new a scam? Just because a second hand premium one is better value (assuming you don't place any value on being brand new). You buy it knowing full well that it isn't a premium device but most people don't need a premium device.
Eh, I don't find my Pixel 8 to be notably better in any way that I notice or care about than the Moto G that it replaced, except for the fact that it runs GrapheneOS.
also camera just not being satisfying enough anymore is a big deal
sure on highest end phones you have very good cameras since a long time by now, but even there they find improvements here and there (e.g. zoom, low light pictures, even better image stabilization)
but middle to lower end phones are still have major improvements in every generation of a certain brand/line/price category. And you might be satisfied with a "acceptable" quality camera, until everyone around you has way nicer photos, or you now have a reason to make photes you didn't had in the past, or you get older and your hands a bit unsteady etc.
Batteries are generally a cheap fix from third party stores. If you wanted to keep the phone why not spend the small dollars and just replace the battery?
Because you need to bring it to a shop, sometimes they may keep it for more times, sometimes if they are not that honest they will find something else and factory reset it and a long etc. If it's something one can do at home by one self as an expected and supported by the vendor operation, why not? You can still bring it to a store if you don't feel like crafty enough to do it.
Upgrade cycles have slowed down in recent years, the improvements are relatively incremental nowadays. Screens, durability, processors, storage sizes, cameras, even battery life are okay-ish and aren't improving quickly enough to justify the same upgrade rate. Foldables are basically the only big innovation in recent years, but are still a little too fragile and expensive.
This is also reflected in the increasing support durations from major manufacturers.
This might be partially true, but making them inacessible is still a great way approach to planned obsolescence and there's no way this was not part of the motivation. The fact that an entire industry exists to provide replacement batteries is proof of this, as is the fact that Apple offers a £100 battery replacement. They also replace the batteries of all refurbished models they sell, which again wouldn't be necessary if battery life wasn't a concern over the useful life of a phone.
Secondly, what you said may have been true in the past, when smartphones were rapidly evolving and upgrade cycles were short, but people are holding on to their devices for longer now, so its possible its becoming a problem again.
Not sure how comparable that is when considering that the devices are also commonly required as ticket on public transport with no offline fallback (going so far as to include animations on the screen so you can't send a screenshot to a friend or print it out -- no, I have no idea why they think you can't send a video to a friend). Having 10 minutes of use time is simply not on the table, and GP was probably not talking about that class of phones (pre-"smart" phone) in the first place
ok? If it dies after 10 minutes and then lets you use a select number of compatible smartcards for another 5, that's not quite the level I think people are talking about here
If running out of power is super critical carrying a power pack is just as simple as replacement battery. It also more generally useful as it can charge lots devices other then phones.
Nice! As a heads up, don't be tempted to replace the battery via a third party if the Samsung battery ever stops meeting expectations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47834810
This was true back when Moore's law was the driver of obsolescence. You bought a new phone every year simply because next year's phone was twice as fast.
Now that this doesn't happen, the driver of obsolescence is the battery, which is much less defensible because you can swap it much more easily than "the whole internals of the phone".
What if we regulate batteries even more? i.e. what if, in some magical perfect world, the world get's together and agrees on batteries for phones like how we agree on AA,AAA,D,C batteries? Even more though.. a standard connector, a standard comms bus, a variety of sizes, and they were designed for reuse as efficiently as possible.
Now we can scale up volume, swap them out, be free to purchase from a different manufacturer, and have scaled up recycling services.
I'd settle for requiring the battery specs to be fully available, and that they can't be made difficult to manufacture without good reason.
Ideally, there should be some set of standard protocols/connectors/voltages/sizes, but the manufacturer should only be held to "downward-compliance" with at least one of them, so they can have flexibility in design but still leave a suboptimal standard option available to users as a fallback.
That's an excellent idea! It will work out absolutely great - much like Communism.
Meaning, when you forcefully standardize and regulate how phones are built, you might expect that companies will not compete on making better phones (since they are not very much differentiated) but on who produces the cheapest phone.
You're thinking of socialism, which is what the EU is doing here (socialism-lite, anyway, as championed by the Social Democrats) and yes, it does work. Free healthcare, free education, and we're working towards decent privacy laws and regulations on big companies. It's far from perfect of course, but comparing it to how pure capitalism is going in the US it's clearly the better system.
This is great news. Every once in a while something good comes out of EU. Now of course, our US friends are telling myriads of reasons why this is obviously stupid and unnecessary. But it's not. Letting users actually maintain their devices is only smart.
It's a good move, but that is not enough. My old Chinese phone had a replaceable battery but it lasted so long that after it died, it was not possible to find the replacement. It seems that all phones have batteries with different sizes, and potentially different third pin designation, so even if you find smaller battery, it still can be incompatible because of third pin.
So if you want phones to be usable for longer period, you need to standardize batteries.
> Replacement batteries for any model will have to remain available to users for at least five years after the last unit of the product is placed on the market, the regulation also states.
While standardization would be nice, I can still order batteries for the Samsung phones I've used 15 years ago. Availability might not be that much of an issue with larger brands.
There's an aftermarket for phone batteries. They're new batteries produced by what I imagine are unaffiliated manufacturers. As long as the phone is popular enough, there should be enough market for manufacturers to make new batteries.
phones are indeed becoming more repairable, and the legislation is working upto an extent.
on the other hand, mandating easier to repair components is ineffective if the manufacturer does not support the parts sale or use parts otherwise widely available in the market.
this goes beyond for other consumer electronics. in the world of laptops, which are generally more repairable, i've had my own experience with a mid-range one from lenovo, the largest vendor worldwide. [1]
the laptop was from the covid-era and one of the refresh of their popular lineup which has seen minimal changes under the hood. despite that, when i had to replace its fans and battery, i had to look for third-party sellers for the components. they are quite easy to replace but as a regular consumer it is tricky to find the correct parts and not overspend on them.
maybe with the new silicon carbide batteries, we could have a "nokia bl-5c" moment, without the counterfeit explody part.
I use 15 Pro. I don't like the new aluminium iPhones much. So I just went it to Apple service center and had the battery replaced. It costs just 90 euros and I now have a brand new phone, basically.
I very much prefer my phone to be thinner, water resistant, and have a larger battery compared to being able to do it myself.
The law is not about you, but about everyone:
1) Apple doesn't have service centers everywhere: some countries/cities/small towns don't have them
2) Apple doesn't provide service for older devices
3) making it easier doesn't mean you'll be able to swap them live as we did in the 90s, but it means you could do it at home with a reasonable set of tools instead of sending the device to some shop that would need to unglue, unsolder, ...
> Why isn't there any significant demand for replaceable batteries?
Most consumers are like pigs who simply eat whatever the market throws into their trough, because ultimately they have better things to do than to get deeply involved in every purchasing decision.
> If replaceable batteries were better, they would already be available.
Developments like those in the smartphone market involve complex path dependencies. That’s why you can’t simply assume that competition will lead to the product offerings converging on the best product. Furthermore, “better” needs to be defined in some way. If we leave that up to the market, it becomes a circular argument: (1) The better product prevails in the market. (2) The product that prevails in the market is the better one. This circular reasoning is the biggest flaw in market ideology. I don't understand why people can't see that. The market moves in a certain direction, and they say, “There it is—progress!”
> Regulation hinders progress.
Perhaps, at times, the opposite is true. Even if we set aside the fact that “better” is defined in a circular manner here, the path-dependence of market development sometimes causes the market to get stuck in a local optimum. Regulatory interventions in the market can then serve as an effective lever to help the market break free from that situation.
> If you want a removable battery, you're simply in the minority as a consumer.
That’s another point where I just don’t get market ideologues: why should I reject regulatory intervention on the one hand, but on the other hand, if the market doesn’t give me what I want, I’m supposed to just shut up and accept that there isn’t enough demand for my quirky, special requests? I’ve been missing removable batteries ever since they disappeared from the market. That must have coincided with the rise of smartphones. Come to think of it, maybe Steve Jobs is to blame. With iPods, there was still a public debate about the issue [1]. With the iPhone, it was just the way it was.
> That’s why you can’t simply assume that competition will lead to the product offerings converging on the best product.
You also can't simply assume that an existing solution on the market is not the best already.
I mean, who told us that smartphones with user-replaceable batteries are better than smartphones that are 0.5 mm thinner because their batteries are non-replaceable? The same people who want to ban encryption?
> Regulatory interventions in the market can then serve as an effective lever to help the market break free from that situation.
No, they can't. Regulatory processes are shaped by the same incentives as market ones. It's just that the tools for achieving goals are different. And because of this, it is always moving in the opposite direction from "help the market".
> I’m supposed to just shut up and accept that there isn’t enough demand for my quirky, special requests?
Generally speaking, yes, it is a market ideology. But what's not clear about it? People adhere to it not because they like when unqualified masses, with their consumer behavior, encourage all sorts of nasty things in mass-market products. It's simply better than when a regulatory body implements its "quirky, special requests" at the expense of everyone else.
> You also can't simply assume that an existing solution on the market is not the best already.
What kind of rash response is that? No one here is making a blanket claim that the market solution is categorically suboptimal.
> I mean, who told us that smartphones with user-replaceable batteries are better...
Let me repeat: you have to FIRST define what you mean by “better” and then ask that question. I want a phone with a removable battery, and it’s immediately clear to me that making this a requirement is a measure that removes a lower limit on the devices’ lifespan.
> Regulatory processes are shaped by the same incentives as market ones.
That’s just another one of those market-driven circular arguments. There’s no alternative to market logic, because in the end, everything follows the same incentives. You should be able to see that this is nonsense just by driving down a public street or standing under a streetlight at night.
> opposite direction from "help the market"
I would rephrase that as: “help the market move in a desired direction for the benefit of people” and I do believe that regulation can achieve exactly that.
> It's simply better than when a regulatory body implements its "quirky, special requests" at the expense of everyone else.
At whose expense, then? People who are upset that batteries are replaceable again? People who now find their smartphones a few millimeters too thick or a few grams too heavy? Are these people also upset about safety and environmental standards for cars because they make cars a little heavier, more expensive, or more complex?
> I mean, who told us that smartphones with user-replaceable batteries are better than smartphones that are 0.5 mm thinner because their batteries are non-replaceable? The same people who want to ban encryption?
Even apart from the ad-hominem FUD argumentation, currently, it's the people who refuse to ban encryption even after it was pushed to them multiple times.
This argument is neither an ad hominem attack nor FUD. If you don’t like the pig trough analogy, I’ll be happy to rephrase it for you: when I buy something, I just go to the store and buy it. There are a few areas of personal interest where I’m more selective about what I buy, but generally speaking, I just grab whatever’s right at the front of the shelf, within arm’s reach, and looks roughly like what I want. If you look at consumers as a whole, that’s the best approximation of their behavior.
The ban on encryption is a good counterpoint! I’m not saying that everything the regulators want to do is good or in line with my views. But ultimately, I want to live in a world where policymakers set the framework and the market finds good solutions within that framework, not in a world where market players are given completely free rein and every political intervention is viewed as if someone had licked the sacred shrine of a deity with their tongue.
I find it so weird that European regulation targets very specific niches while avoiding generalization.
In order to reduce plastic pollution, they forced manufacturers to make attached bottle caps (terrible idea) but go to the supermarket and there are various fruits and vegetables each unit wrapped in plastic separately.
Now they are targeting phones but I also want my handheld and robot vacuum cleaners, electric toothbrushes, grass cutters, etc to also have batteries that can be removed and replaced without tearing down entire device and even learning soldering in some cases.
> In order to reduce plastic pollution, they forced manufacturers to make attached bottle caps (terrible idea)
According to research bottle caps are one of the biggest source of beach litter because they float and end up washed up. They are also exceptionally harmful to animals that confuse them for fish and end up consuming them.
I don’t think anyone who is against the bottle caps directive is serious about protecting our environment. It’s a minor change with an outsized impact.
I am definitely not against plastic pollution, but against narrowly targeted regulation. When the regulation is very specific, the workarounds are trivial. One funny example: Lithuania banned alcohol advertisement, so the advertisers started advertising non-alcoholic beer and other drinks under the same brand names; essentially the ads stayed the same with "non-alcoholic" appended to them. It's cynical but legal.
Depends on the countries water quality. Some countries don't have water good for drinking, and others have poor taste which many are put off by.
That being said, many EU airports do have water refill machines. Germanys airports for example..
While I understand where you're coming from and that this thinking is probably (and somewhat understandably) why there are no water filling stations, I find this incredibly nasty. I don't want to fill my water bottle in a public restroom riddled with bacteria.
And yes, I'm fully aware that a water filling station will probably be just as nasty, but it's the thought that bugs me.
I will never get the bottle cap haters. It’s a genuine improvement for me, and at most a minor inconvenience for anyone. Calling that a „terrible” idea makes you wonder what kind of scale you’re using, putting so much weight on something so minor.
Next, do user installable OS. Phones are the costliest gadgets with a dizzying range of sensors/capabilities and more than enough RAM. Its a shame we can't use them for a decade+, giving it a second life.
A lot of discussion about 'whether its needed' or 'moving a needle'. Batteries were swappable back in the day, and later on someone figured that making battery suck, can drive you to buy a new phone - because it is harder to degrade the rest of the device faster. Then we accepted that you cannot play around the battery, bcs that's the reality of things. So many people won't even think about it - but it does not mean it is not needed. I would love to make my device much better with swapping battery as many time as needed.
But then I think someone will figure out to make these batteries so expensive, that it won't change a thing.
I look into my perfect workable Samsung Tab S7+ and remember that it has been an year since the last security update.
Now I rely on a few random individuals who, for all I know could be state agents or a ransomware organization to provide unofficial versions of Lineage so I can keep using it.
Battery isn't the only problem to avoid e-waste, but it's a start.
Aren't security updates the deciding factor for the life of a phone these days? Manufacturers provide updates for 7 years max which is probably less than the battery life.
Seems to me like the top goal should be: you can easily replace the most-likely-to-break parts (screen, back, battery, etc) in any local independent repair shop, with genuine parts that have low markups.
I'm confused why that still isn't the case today given all the EU headlines we've seen over the years.
Now they only need to make sure that a supply chain for replacement batteries exists, there is regulation and competition and options remain available for a reasonable price.
There are plenty of old Dell and HP laptops with replaceable batteries which can only be found on eBay or some random seller that does who knows what under the refurbishing process.
Exactly. I had phones and laptops with replaceable batteries in the past. I liked the idea of it, but in practice there was no OEM-quality replacement available by the time I wanted one. The device would have been usable to me still, but not with a random black market battery that may well be a fire hazard.
Having thought about this long term, I think the only solution to this would be mandating standardized battery cells. Rather than every phone model having a bespoke cell that is manufactured once and then obsoleted, they need to have standardized shape and electrical characteristics so that batteries being produced for new phones would also be useful to rehabilitate old phones.
I expect we'll see a spike in cell phone battery fires starting about a year after this goes into effect. Same deal as cheap external battery-powered travel power banks, which are already a problem.
> Now they only need to make sure that a supply chain for replacement batteries exists, there is regulation and competition and options remain available for a reasonable price.
No, they won't do the hard part. Just the minimum plus a ton of PR and back patting then move on.
I was looking forward to finally be able to easily switch out (i)Phone batteries again - after 20 years - but turns out the lobbyists managed to get a loophole in the law - exempting Apple & Co from making their phones more repairable / longer live-able.
> If a battery can do 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity it is exempt
Seems entirely reasonable. Embedded batteries have a lot of advantages. Cheaper, higher battery capacity, water proof, smaller, stronger. I think this will largely just make the mid to low tier android market in the EU shittier.
Citation needed. It seems pretty clear that a mechanism to allow a user to access a battery will increase complexity, making all the other properties harder to achieve.
1) iPhones for example are ip68 rated while those are just ipx8/9
2) Do you want to be limited to the universe of those search results? Do you want to buy a Sony Xperia?
You can't make batteries directly replaceable at the same quality and price. There are tradeoffs. Obviously waterproof non-embedded batteries exist. Just like you could make a removable battery the same slimness as embedded. With massive tradeoffs. It's capacity will be terrible. No one is surprised a removable battery can be waterproof but the point is there are tradeoffs.
I don't see those options in the search results either way
In any case we heard the same sort of rationalization for getting rid of the headphone jack, so color me extremely skeptical-- yes of course there's going to be trade-offs, but what a coincidence that headphone jacks, replaceable batteries, SD card slots have all gone by the wayside, which just so happens to allow for upselling Bluetooth and cloud storage
Kinda weird to argue for longer life via battery replacement and against longer life via contaminant protections. My phone is regularly covered in chalk dust, sawdust, water, …
No, the list was "Cheaper, higher battery capacity, water proof, smaller, stronger". I don't think it's all that controversial to say that there are engineering tradeoffs to be made here. You can make a waterproof phone with a removable battery, but you can't make a waterproof phone with a removable battery that is as good or better than an iPhone in every other respect too. If you could, iPhones would already have removable batteries.
My point is that if it's all of those things (crucially, including cheaper), then it's a Pro-Apple move to manufacture iPhones that way. There would be no downside. To the extent they make anti-consumer moves at all (which I'll cede for the sake of keeping this brief), they do so because those moves are pro-Apple.
Planned obsolesce are anti consumer and increases sales. So yes anti consumer design can increase sales volume, that is often the point.
Replaceable batteries lets you use your phone longer, that means people will take longer to buy a new phone and reduce iphone sales. Such anti consumer moves requires regulations to be fixed, since there is no incentive for the company to be pro consumer here.
Oh yes, the famous Galaxy XCover 7 Pro. People are camping out in the rain waiting for their release because replaceable batteries are under such high demand.
So we're moving the goalposts from "these features can coexist" to "such a phone has to be popular"? Why don't you skip to the end and tell me where they're going to end up?
If phones are not for sale with features, how does that allow drawing any conclusion about popularity? I've yet to meet a single person who says, "I sure am glad I can't use fingerprint unlock on my iPhone anymore", but obviously it's not worth leaving the entire ecosystem
Recall also that building Android phones barely makes any money, so it's not exactly a business teeming with disruption
My experience with an Apple battery saying ~81% longevity remaining is that it'll die when it still reports half full and you open a demanding webpage
It's a genuinely hard problem to measure battery capacity with existing smartphone hardware, also because it's a matter of opinion how much to factor in the peak load capacity (how do you count the bottom 40%, where it can't handle peak draw anymore? Should one include half of it because the phone is still usable but in a degraded state?), so I'm not faulting Apple here at all. They choose to display this estimate and it's better than nothing / better than most manufacturers. Just that you can't take it at face value, even if you charged your phone from 0% to 100% for >=1000 days
The exemption is about ensuring customers get what they paid for. It shouldn’t care how the manufacturer achieves that; driving the batteries less hard is an obvious tactic, and actually also makes them safer to use.
I recently did a battery replacement on an iphone mini 13 with some success and some failure. I absolutely killed the screen without cracking it. A little too much pulling with the ifixit reverse clamp.
Had i gone a little slower, it would have been a very easy repair.
Yes, this is the most non-story I have ever seen on this topic. I do not know of any manufacturer who does not claim this, verifiable or otherwise; and even if they can't claim it, all they have to do is one minor purely-software capacity adjustment, which they will gladly do before they will even consider offering removable batteries.
Apple has no chance to claim their batteries can have 80% capacity after 1000 cycles seeing how they never achieved this so far. Lying about it puts them in a world of mass recalls and fraud investigations.
Depends on how "cycle" is defined - I'm sure they can finagle it so "any charge added to the battery" counts as a cycle.
As a datapoint my iPhone reports 522 cycles and 89% max - from march 2024. I do use the "limit charging to 80%" feature which I suspect may become mandatory before 2027 ...
> You complete one charge cycle when you’ve used (discharged) an amount that represents 100% of your battery’s capacity* — but not necessarily all from one charge. For instance, you might use 75% of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25% the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100%, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle.
I don’t think “a cycle” is up for redefining. I hope these terms are defined in the law.
But that supports my assumption that realistically the batteries don’t last 1000 cycles even when charged conservatively. The last 9% will go faster than the first 11%, the battery already has lower capacity and needs to be charged even more often.
On the other hand if I only get to 1000 cycles by charging up to 80% then I’m not getting 100% of the battery, am I?
Dieselgate was caught by some dudes with an emissions measuring device. It’s not that extreme to get a number of iPhone batteries, test them to 1000 cycles and see if statistically they still retain 80% capacity. If they don’t Apple could be looking at replacing everyone’s batteries.
The obvious solution is underrating - just like a 1 TB SSD actually has more than 1TB of "raw storage" available internally. What is a 100% battery today will be sold as an 80% capacity tomorrow, with 20% "overage" available for wear.
That’s fine as long as the battery ends up having 80% real capacity after 1000 cycles and maybe Apple is also transparent about how.
A bigger issue which I don’t know if the law covers is with the other battery specs. An 80% battery that can’t handle any spikes (low power mode) is useless.
Well, Apple was already fined for decreasing the CPU frequency (to avoid spikes on aged batteries), so that's not really an option. (Even though at the time they wasn't doing it out of malice at all, they actually tried to keep old phones usable - their marketing team messed up there big time)
The easiest is to just require it be replaced under warranty - if the battery has to be usable to 1000 cycles, and it is at 80% and 999 cycles but doesn't "work" it's a warranty replacement.
But that then brings in a "how many years" question.
VW engine specs said some things about emissions. It’s fine to have unrealistic specs if there are no consequences. The f there’s a law about it they’re far more exposed to people catching a lie or at least an unrealistic estimate.
> the lobbyists managed to get a loophole in the law - exempting Apple & Co
But Apple batteries are already user replaceable? I've replaced my own and batteries come with kits that have all the tools and disposable glue strips and seals.
I suppose what is "reasonable" might be different for different people. I already had pentalob bits although a fresh spudger is always welcome. But these are not exotic tools. The "glue" under the battery was a bit like "command strips" commonly used to hang things from walls.
It is interesting to think about the range of physical tool usage that is within a reasonable expectation. Is owning and being able to operate an implement to open and replace a battery in a simple watch like the Casio F91W reasonable?
“ If a battery can do 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity it is exempt”
I mean isn’t that an okay exemption? If the intent is to drive devices to be less disposable and more sustainable… if it incentivizes all mobile phone manufacturers to improve battery longevity, I’d say that’s a win.
I wouldn’t even call it a loophole. The entire purpose of the legislation could be that clause
No shot at all apple batteries can last 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity. Probably can’t even do 300 in my experience. Sounds like an easy lawsuit.
No doubt they will redefine maximum battery capacity to a figure that does achieve 80% over 1000 cycles. If you under-declare maximum capacity then there is a lot of headroom for actual degradation before you start to show degradation to the user.
This is what they should have been doing all along. My Pixel tells me that charging above 80% is bad for battery longevity and I should set a charge limit. Well then maybe 80% should be the new 100% and the advertised capacity should be the 80%.
This balancing act is already happening. If you modify the battery controller, you can totally continue charging beyond the voltage that the phone considers to be 100%. It also increases the risk of damaging the battery (https://www.acebattery.com/blogs/what-will-happen-when-a-lit...). What they define as 100% is already some point on a damage probability curve, and charging to anything below that point will further decrease the amount of battery stress (for li-ion batteries and similar technologies)
Fwiw, based on tests I've seen recently such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj4LMlGr4og, I think limiting to 80% is overblown, but somewhere in the 90%s could be a sweet spot that gives you several hours' longer battery life than with 80% but still has a much reduced chance of significant degradation. I don't understand why they didn't make this configurable
A battery that can support 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity would be a literal brick. For an example the Vision Pro's battery has extreme over-provisioning and limit how long it would last. (note I know it is removable but that isn't the point).
That has not been my experience, at least with Apple laptops. Even when rated for 1000 cycles, I'll get the warning that service is needed (AFAIK that means 80% capacity or lower) well before then. I've seen this on several, but the one I just checked is at just under 670 cycles and has had that warning up for some months already.
Maybe iPhones are better about this, though, I don't know. But I definitely don't have a lot of faith in the laptops maintaining 80% for 1000 cycles.
AppleCare covers the 80% capacity/1000 cycles rating, so I always keep an eye on my battery around 1000 cycles praying it will drop under 80% so I can get a new battery for free under AppleCare, and have yet to manage it
>The regulation states that batteries must be removable using ‘commercially available’ tools
This is doing a lot of work here. There's enough wiggle room for this to be absolutely meaningless. Anything short of I can slide off the back cover and maybe unscrew two or three screws to replace the battery means that a lot of people are going to end up not being able to replace the batteries.
The rest of that same sentence, " – and that if specialised tools are required, they must be provided free of charge when the phone or tablet is purchased," seems to mitigate that concern, no? I suppose it hinges on what the test for a "specialized tool" is.
EU regulatory bodies haven’t been as blindly sycophantic towards megacorporations in terms of allowing them to skirt by rules set forth by their legislatures, so I would be more optimistic than if this were a development in US law.
The free market only works when you have sufficient competition. The phone market is absolutely not trivial to enter, so your first sentence is plain and simply false.
Also, given that iphones almost already pass the requirements, where is the harm to innovation?
Specialised as in created specifically for swapping battery of that specific phone? As in you cannot do it with a generic commercially available tool (e.g. a screwdriver)
Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 states that a battery shall be considered readily removable by the end-user where it can be removed from a product with the use of commercially available tools, without requiring the use of specialised tools, unless provided free of charge with the product, proprietary tools, thermal energy, or solvents to disassemble the product.
Guidance on tool types can be drawn from standard EN 45554:2020e (2). In the context of the assessment of a product’s ability to be repaired, reused and upgraded, this standard uses the following classification groups: (i) basic tools (including
those provided with the product as a spare part) or no tools; (ii) product-group specific tools; (iii) commercially available
tools; and (iv) proprietary tools.
The concept of commercially available tools mentioned in Article 11 comprises the categories of basic tools or no tools and of commercially available tools as per EN 45554:2020e.
The concept of specialised tools laid down in the Regulation refers to product-group specific tools that are not available for purchase by the general public but are not protected by patents either. Article 11 requires that any such specialised tool that
might be necessary to have a portable battery removed and replaced is provided free of charge with the product into which the battery is incorporated.
As per EN 45554:2020e, proprietary tools refer to tools not available for purchase by the general public, or for which any applicable patent are not available for license under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. Such tools should not be
needed to remove portable batteries
--- start quote ---
(I fully expect literally no one on HN to spend even a second looking for and reading the relevant texts, and complain about the law being vague or impossible to implement or something)
Maybe. Maybe not. If my local phone and phone accessories shop can do it for little money in 15 minutes then the current calculus changes for a heck of a lot of people.
No. I can't find a legit battery for my Samsung phone, only forgeries and "compatible with"s. Local repair shop said they could put a new OEM battery into this 4yo second-hand phone
So I pay them and they do it. The result:
- back cover becomes rather loose while it's warm e.g. from fast charging or a hot day out. No longer waterproof
- the battery is no better than the original and is (2y later now) degrading faster than the original. If you ask a lot of it, the last 35% are gone within minutes. I think it's a knock-off battery but that the repair person doesn't know that
If there had been commercially available repair parts and tool access, neither would have been a problem and I could just have done it myself
My mom has the same model and sent hers in to the manufacturer for a battery swap. Took a while and cost half the price of the phone (since it was a 2yo second-hand at that time). That could have been much faster, even if the manufacturer is free to set the same steep prices
A colleague got their phone back from Google for some repair last week, I don't remember if screen or battery swap. He asked and they said it wouldn't be reset. He put a sticker on it not to wipe the device. They wiped the device. He's now trying to piece together what's in various backup files that Android allows making. Fun fun fun. Also not necessary if you, or your techy nephew, can just do it at home
---
The requirement for commercially availability of repair is so much better than the current state of what repair places can/are offering
I think the supply chain is pretty broken. I had just about the same experience as you with an iPhone 7 a few years back. I booked my replacement through Apple's website, so I was pretty confident I wouldn't get scammed. The new battery started bulging in less than two years, to the point that there was a serious gap between the screen and the body.
It was clearly worse than the battery that came with my refurbished (!) phone, which never did that; it just couldn't hold a decent charge anymore. I won't even go into the absolutely ridiculous experience I had with the repair shop, like not honoring booked times and whatnot and having me wait in line for ages, both to drop off and pick up my phone.
My current phone has lost some of its battery health as reported by the OS, but still gives me over a day of use, but when the time comes to fix it, I'll go directly to Apple.
Same with laptops btw. I once caught a seller where the webpage and sticker said 5200 mAh but acpi -i reported 4400 mAh. They provided a replacement free of charge, presumably their supplier scammed them in turn (it was a small local webshop), but that replacement also wasn't great even if now the chip reported the expected capacity. Never once have I had good experiences with replacement batteries, I really wonder what they do with the originals to make them so vastly superior
Also quite noticeable that the laptop battery market became much smaller once the batteries became an internal component (around 2015) that you can't see without opening it up completely. These also used to be behind a slider or two
People don't dare unscrew electronics, even if it's about as trivial as replacing a light bulb in a fixture that requires removing a screw. With phones having the battery inside as well now, not above the sim tray for example, I wonder how much such legislation is going to help the average person
Last time I checked I’d have to leave my phone for a couple of days and the glue factor meant they wouldn’t guarantee it would come back perfectly. My assumption is this might make it a more trivial change.
There were models that were both waterproof and not glued (the only tools needed for a battery swap were the replacement battery and opposable thumbs). I never had/tested one myself though, this is just going off of the manufacturer's claims and IP (ingress protection) certification
I used to have a Galaxy S5, the model that usually comes up in these discussions. Now, I never went and threw it in a swimming pool, or pressure washed it, or whatever other ridiculous test you may come up with. But I did attach it to my motorbike's handlebars and rode around under heavy rain on more occasions than I care to remember.
It was often drenched to the point that the map on the screen was basically illegible without stopping and wiping off the water. But it never skipped a beat. Basically, I was the limiting factor and would eventually give up and find some hotel with a hot shower to pass the night.
Why waste space for gaskets and o-rings when you can already get the battery changed out while you wait with glue? Glue is clearly the superior method, which is why almost the entire market has adopted it.
Heat pads exist even in the most basic repair shops. It's not advanced technology, no need to over-engineer it.
My last phone was all glued and the entry point was the screen. The repair guy said there was a 50% chance the screen would break in trying to unglue it so it was not worth the try. It was a shame, it was a decent phone killed prematurely by a faulty battery.
There are a number of phone designs that require special heating apparatus and very careful prying tools to get the back case off. And then extremely careful application of new glue to reassemble. Basically the whole thing is glued together at the factory. Google "phone heating pad for repair" for some examples...
Everyone is thinking Apple is the target, but they are actually one of the better companies with this. You can buy first-party replacement parts, tools are available. If you take a look at Chinese or sometimes even Samsung phones it's basically impossible to get replacement parts and if you do it may need other parts like the glass back to be replaced as it's impossible to remove it without breaking it.
That reads true. While replaceability is definitely a good thing, but whether it will end up being a good thing for the average user (and not lead to some further price hikes in the EU market) remains to be seen.
That is a very American view of law that has burned American companies again and again.
In EU law, the intent matters, not the letter of the law. No silly loophole lawyering.
To quote:
>When interpreting EU law, the CJEU pays particular attention to the aim and purpose of EU law (teleological interpretation), rather than focusing exclusively on the wording of the provisions (linguistic interpretation). This is explained by numerous factors, in particular the open-ended and policy-oriented rules of the EU Treaties, as well as by EU legal multilingualism. Under the latter principle, all EU law is equally authentic in all language versions. Hence, the Court cannot rely on the wording of a single version, as a national court can, in order to give an interpretation of the legal provision under consideration. Therefore, in order to decode the meaning of a legal rule, the Court analyses it especially in the light of its purpose (teleological interpretation) as well as its context (systemic interpretation).
One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are. If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
It's okay to have idiosyncratic preferences (I certainly do), but people should recognize that this law will make phones _worse_ for most people, because this law will force phone manufacturers to compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.
I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences. But that's nonsense, because the law doesn't actually require people to replace batteries rather than replacing their phone, and by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone. At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
Your experience is not at all what I see out there. Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day. They hate having to set up a new phone when their old one is totally fine other than the battery.
For the people I know that do upgrade their phones regularly, they typically want to give their old phone to someone who would love a usable phone, but can't afford a new one. Giving a phone with a shot and non-replaceable battery effectively destroys the value of the gift.
I know many people who can't afford to by new, and they avoid buying older or used phones because they fear the battery may be shot.
We obviously have different opinions regarding what most people want... totally fine.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day
I don't disagree with this, but I also think it's because the battery often dies around the time most people would consider upgrading anyway. The battery isn't the only reason people upgrade, it's just a forcing factor.
If batteries normally last 3-5 years, I don't think we're going to start seeing most people keep their phones for 7-10 years. I still think we're going to see people upgrading around the 3-5 year mark. I would point to the current market as evidence of this. An iPhone battery replacement is somewhere between $50-$100 right now which is drastically cheaper than a new iPhone and yet we still see the 3-5 year upgrade cycle. Maybe making it something you can do at home in a few minutes will result in a few more people just choosing to replace the battery vs the entire phone, but I don't see it drastically changing things since a cheap alternative to replacing the phone already exists and yet we still see the 3-5 year replacement cycle.
> If batteries normally last 3-5 years, I don't think we're going to start seeing most people keep their phones for 7-10 years.
I think they will eventually. People hang on to their computers for longer and longer because old ones are just good enough. Phones are getting to that same stage in their evolution where they stopped evolving by leaps and bounds between generations. A seven year old phone like an iPhone 11 for example is perfectly adequate for a lot of people.
There are two real blockers from keeping a phone for so long, official software support and battery life. If some big manufacturers solved the first with extended support cycles, which is an expensive one, why not solve the second too?
The second problem is already solved though. My wife just had to get her phone iPhone battery replaced so we went to the Apple store and it was $99 and the replacement took less than an hour.
The average person probably can't (or won't) replace an iPhone battery themselves right now, but getting an iPhone battery replaced is relatively easy and cheap compared to replacing the phone and yet most people still don't do it.
I feel people on here are forgetting that for a lot of people a phone is not just about utility. It's a lifestyle purchase that people tie into their self identity. That's why we see things like the whole blue bubble vs green bubble messaging drama that came up a few years ago.
> I don't think we're going to start seeing most people keep their phones for 7-10 years.
I do. I lasted more than 15 years on 2 phones, and the only reason I'm at my fourth right now, is because the third was stolen after 3 months of use. I'm hoping its replacement, a used phone already, will last at least 5 years. Regardless, my next upgrade will not be a choice. I will milk my current phone until I am forced to change, as I always do.
We're going to start seeing people keep the phones longer and longer. It used to be people were amazed at the upgrade between iPhone versions, and now they struggle to identify a difference.
Other than a few people who absolutely must have the latest phone, I only see two reason why people replace their phone: 1) Battery is no good. 2) Operating system has stopped getting updates and they can no longer run that one or two apps they really need.
Replaceable battery and 10 years of OS updates and a large percentage of people would stop upgrading their phones. There hasn't been much innovation in phones in the past 10 years. If the battery hadn't died and the OS was still updated there would be zero reason for me to not be using my iPhone 7.
most people would buy one phone and keep it forever if they could, because most people can't actually afford to be replacing their phone frequently.
The only reason they do is because they get slower, or battery gets worn out or whatever else. If their one phone actually lasted forever they would likely happily keep it forever
Especially now that there are near zero new hardware features to differentiate the latest models. “Oh 3MP better camera on what was already a fake big number. Cool, I guess”
The only reason I upgraded to my current model was to get USBC (thanks Europe!!!).
Agreed. Not much differences between new phones and couple years older phones if you are not doing crazy gaming on phones. At least for me but maybe some of you might have good reasons to upgrade and can tell us ?
Sure, batteries dying are just one way in which phones become disposable. But I want to fight all those ways too (stupid new protocols and lack of security updates notably).
I can't speak to the experience with Android but Apple offers both in-store battery replacement or Mail-in battery replacement for $70-120 which to me seems very reasonable. Could it be cheaper? Sure, maybe I guess? But $70-120 is a lot less than a new phone. And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail.
The battery costs $7-$12 to produce and ship to your location, so kind of strange to say $70-$120 is cheap.
It's a philosophical thing, sure. But the EU is taking the approach that businesses should make honest money by selling quality products, not through consumer-hostile practices like inflating the cost of spare parts + labour for fixing stuff.
In the past our family has had several Android phones where the battery was easily replaceable. We even had a couple of Motorolas where the screen was a simple and cheap thing to replace. That seems to be increasingly a thing of the past.
With those phones, I have never once experienced a failure mode related to seams / screws holding the phone together. If it's one thing that's extremely well known technology, it's fasteners and gaskets for consumer products.
For someone complaining about anecdata and a lack of citations, you're surprisingly eager to offer your own argument that basically boils down to "trust me, bro".
The grandparent provided an anecdote relating to absence of evidence; the parent provided some anecdotal counter-examples. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so the respondent's anecdote is more compelling if we give them equal credence. Disproof by counter-example is usually a very effective method, especially when arguing about whether something 'ever happened'.
Hah fair- I wouldn't give up paragliding either. To keep the analogies- I wouldn't want a bike without inflatable tires, nor a paraglider without a reserve.
They also designed with cheap shells that felt loose before a year was out, and offered exactly zero water and dust protection so if your device got wet, it was considered out of warranty.
how long are you willing to be without your phone? banking apps, public transit tickets, calls, messages, digital signatures. this is luxury not many can afford these days to be offline for days.
With Apple, at least in Germany, you schedule an appointment online, you walk in at that time, and you can come pick it up an hour later. Many independent shops offer basically the same for Android and Apple phones.
When I did it two months ago it took them an hour. Be generous and say they’re backed up and sometimes it takes two hours. Is that too long to be without your phone?
i was referring more to this part "Mail-in battery replacement". good to know that they can do this so fast. but it would be even faster when battery would be user serviceable. and not everyone is living driving distance away from certified workshops.
In many part of the world a lot of people buy second hand phones exclusively and they are the first customers for battery replacement. $70-120 is quite steep for them.
> And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail.
My older Samsung Galaxy had an easy clip-off back cover and easily replaceable battery. Nothing related to that ever failed.
Whereas two newer Pixel phones have had issues with the back cover glue coming loose, leading to interior damage.
Given that, the idea that a case that can be opened easily “compromises the shell of the phone” sounds like a weak excuse for some other deficiency or agenda.
You can have water protection and easily replaceable battery.
Still, I'm really curious about how many people take advantage of those standards and need IP67 (30min at 1m depth) as opposed to a quick splash or rain on it, or how many buy the artificial tradeoff of water resistance over easily replaceable battery because this is all that's offered.
If your battery is replaceable, you can still decide to throw the phone away and add to the pile of e-waste.
The legislation allows both choices, at the cost of higher prices.
Having a higher price is an incentive to using the phone you have a bit longer by replacing the battery. It’s certainly better than having them be guaranteed e-waste.
It's now possible to carry a spare battery or two, instead of lugging a portable power bank and slowly charging your phone. This is great news for outdoorsy types, travel, long bicycle rides, hiking, and so on.
but they require you to have a special charger, or typically you have to charge them one by one from your phone. Swapping batteries also requires downtime (not easy mid-flight, cycle, or whatever you're doing). A portable battery charger is much better imo. Plugging in a cord is always going to be easier and require less hands and focus than replacing a battery and keeping any kind of dust-and waterproofness.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day.
Most people I know get a new phone when they can't take the cracked screen anymore, or when they completely lose the phone. Or because a pretty new one came out and they upgraded two years ago so it's "time". That's most people.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day
Getting the battery replaced is already trivial and cheap. Revealed preference is that most people say they want it, but don't. This won't even decrease the cost or difficulty (you'll still need a screwdriver).
But replacing a replaceable battery is trivialer and cheaperer.
I've replaced more batteries (and screens) than I can count, and it's increasingly difficult and complicated. 5 years ago or so I'd agree with you, but now there's no phone I can easily open without heat gun, controlling the air so no spec of dust land on the lenses (and a blower to remove in case it happens), and almost always I need adhesive (B7000) to patch or replace the original one to keep similar level of weather proofing. It's easy if you pay 100 bucks someone else to do it, sure.
Back in the days of my HTC Desire I could carry an extra battery, or two, in the pocket, without issue. Nowadays I'm married to a power bank that needs to be plugged for the duration.
Last couple of years it’s gotten easier, for iPhones at least. Pardon the YT short but it’s 48seconds or look up “iPhone 9v battery” if you’ve blocked YT shorts.
That's at most 1/10th the cost of the average Samsung phone.
That's cheap. If you think that a safe first-party replacement battery will sell for less than the 79€ that the whole replacement effort takes, then you're fooling yourself.
I strongly suspect that there's also not good language for blocking against third-party batteries (and the phone manufacturers would have good reason to do so because it might result in overheating or worse with really bad third-party batteries).
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day.
I am not sure if your statistic is correct or people giving you excuses to get the latest model. If we speak iphones, flipping the battery is cheap and fast process, incomparable with the hassle of doing re-setup.
I am not sure if the process is equally or more simple with android phones though, but in my circle noone buys new phone because of the battery (often the battery is used as excuse to get a newer model).
> I am not sure if the process is equally or more simple with android phones though, but in my circle noone buys new phone because of the battery (often the battery is used as excuse to get a newer model).
Your circle sounds pretty strange honestly. Everyone in it lies to you about why they do things, but you secretly know their real motivations?
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
I have experience saying the exact opposite, although this was a few years ago.
OnePlus set up a marketing booth on my campus in 2018 or 2019 or so, and they did exactly this, with a large sign asking people what they want out of a phone. They asked passerbys what they want out of a phone, and they let people put their requests on a board.
When I put my request up, I wasn't the first one to request replaceable batteries and a headphone jack. (At the time, OnePlus had removed the jack from their most recent phone, after advertising their previous phone in comparison to Apple's jackless phone).
I think phone manufacturers will figure it out once it is a requirement. Was switching everyone to USB-C annoying for Apple? Sure. Are we in a better place because the EU forced it. You betcha. That's the point.
I don't love everything the EU does (cookie banners!?) but this is one where I have confidence that the consumer will ultimately benefit.
As others have noted, most people do not replace their phones every two years anymore, there just isn't any big reason to.
Cookie banners is malicious compliance. The ultimate goal being for you yo think it was bad legislation instead of how every company is fucking you for your privacy.
I'm not sure they're complying even with the letter of the law. Many cookie banners I see, require several clicks to deny anything but those they don't have to ask me about. And in most other cases, the accept button is significantly more visible than the deny one.
If that's actually allowed, yeah, bad law. If it's not… well I guess we can hope prosecutors will prosecute. Though I'm afraid we won't get much more than hope…
I'd say it was bad legislation because this was a foreseeable outcome. I actually worked on cookie banners, and we did user testing, a full 80% of people closed it before reading single word and thought it was an ad.
This type of ambush agree to XYZ or you can't come in that we see with EULA's and privacy polices is unfair, just like if some scammer demanded people sign a fifty page contract before they enter the supermarket. This is something people understand intuitively.
It was foreseeable, and the end result is very little has changed as far as consumer privacy. Most people just agree to get the box to go away, if you actually want privacy your best bet is still a private browsing session and a VPN.
Here is an idea, don't abuse your users and you don't even have to show a cookie banner. Of course people treat it like spam - because that is exactly what it is. A giant fuck you to every single user.
What do you think most users click? The quickest and easiest option ("agree"/ "that's fine”) to get on with their day. That then makes consent explicit which is worse than the previous gray area
The same way that the legislation that abolished slavery was bad because it didn’t account for the prison systems leasing out unpaid workers leading to even worse conditions for black folk in the US?
People talk as if the EU should have done nothing, or that the rule should be repealed, the GDPR forced people to have a functioning deny all.
The real lesson here is that people would rather annoy their users for money than create good products. Its a case for regulation.
I've come to realize (I think) that this actually does have a lot to do with waterproofness ratings -- a legibility trap.
I notice that Fairphone excludes headphones from their latest devices, and attributes it to the necessary of doing so in order to get an "IP55" rating.
I'm not sure if that ultimately makes sense (and suspect that it... doesn't), but the legibility trap of that ratings system might actually be part of the cause of the current market absence of a feature so many people still talk about after years of its unavailability.
> Was switching everyone to USB-C annoying for Apple? Sure.
Doubt. They have already switched over every other line they had.
I believe it was more of a marketing stunt, they calculated that n% of customers will be upset with the change, so they waited for the EU ruling so now they can just point these n% to blame the EU who will take the blame instead of them.
The iPhone 15 released in September 2023 already had USB-C. Apple wasn't required to use USB-C up until the iPhone 17 release in September 2025. That is two years.
I like usb C more than lightning but I think legislation is terribly suited. If people only wanted usb c then just don’t buy an iPhone? But this is from my US idealistic view and distrust of over regulation.
Anyways, Apple was working on an iPhone with usb C in 2022 and said they were going to do it anyways* so I don’t see it as some massive win that shows the prowess of the EU legislative body.
Granted this may have shaved a couple of years off of the timeline but at what cost of legislation (monetary, attention, and time cost)!?
When a product becomes as complex as a cell phone it's not as easy as saying "just get one that doesn't have ${thing}" as no product has the right combination of everything for everyone but people may agree every product should have something (whether it be for safety, environmental, buyer protection, or convenience reasons). Once most folks agree that's the case, it's about "where do you draw the line" rather than "does it make sense to require ${thing} in isolation when there are already options with ${thing}".
Your link is from 2020 and does not say Apple was moving to USB C, just that the industry was. By 2022 the law requiring it had already passed, so it would make sense they were planning on doing it at that point. Regardless, a few years would be a lot of impact for a market where over 100 million phones are sold annually.
Everyone moving to USB-C was the same standard, though; now you can use the same charger with your phone, laptop, tablet, other random gadgets, etc. If you forget your charger you can buy one virtually anywhere, or borrow someone else's, since they're all the same.
Everyone moving to "battery must be replaceable without tools" doesn't do anything useful for most users. Yeah, now you can carry an extra battery on a camping trip, I guess, though you could also carry a portable USB-C charger and use it for more than just your phone. It isn't particularly useful that it doesn't take tools to replace the battery when it starts failing, five years after your phone was discontinued, if you can't find a replacement battery for that exact model.
> Everyone moving to USB-C was the same standard, though; now you can use the same charger with your phone, laptop, tablet, other random gadgets, etc.
You could already use the same charger with nearly everything. It was the cables that were not necessarily USB on the device end.
Apple for example as far as I can tell has used USB chargers for everything (phones, tablets, music players, headphones, Apple TV remote) except laptops since sometime in 2012. For laptops everything introduced after the last MagSafe 2 laptop in mid 2017 has used a USB charger.
USB-C ports are more fragile than Lightning - one of the three ports on my laptop will no longer hold cables in place anymore. It also requires more precise alignment to get the cable plugged in.
I agree, and it preceeded USB-C. It came out in a market that was almost overwhelmingly USB Micro B; which was an extremely terrible connector.
Apple really fucked up by keeping the connector proprietary. Sure it helped them slim some phones but it didn't exactly help long term, and now we have a technologically inferior connector that took even longer to come to market.
I can't forgive Apple for that.
Good engineering, early to market, mired by greedy and short sighted businessmen.
I thought this way too, but have since heard that the Lightning connector itself has the spring-loaded contacts that wear out, in contrast to USB-C where they're on the cable. So I don't think it's so straightforward
Don't let them off that quickly. We've been making electrical connectors for well over a hundred years. There are books on high reliability connectors many hundreds of pages long. Connectors for aerospace, the military and industry have made connector technology highly advanced and connections very reliable.
Fact is USB connectors are shitty because they've been made as cheaply as possible—cheap manufacturing takes precedence over reliability and user ergonomics.
The trend of mass producing rock-bottom cheap connectors started in the early 1950s with that abominable super cheap RCA audio connector and it's continued ever since with consumer products. There's no end of crappy designs, the F coaxial connector for antennas, the DIN audio connector, the Belling Lee coax and so on.
Trouble is too many consumers are prepared to tolerate the crap without complaining so it
continues.
Sure, on paper the USB-C should be superior for that reason. But we have a lot of years of experience that suggests in practice the Lightning connector is more durable.
Honestly, I’m not sure either. I can’t find anybody who actually went through the trouble of testing port/cable durability over many cycles.
I can personally speak to the seeming reliability of the springs on lightening, but thats anecdotal and would only apply to devices I’ve interacted with. Truthfully USB-C has been almost as reliable (only seen 2-3 ports with issues over literally hundreds, vs the 0 for lightning over a smaller sample).
I guess at some point the argument is moot, but I do like digging lint out of USB-C connectors a lot less- it is a lot more worrying to do.
Right, I'm no fan of USB-C either. One knows why the USB alliance keeps designing such shitty connectors. After so many attempts they've got it right—it's the cheapest crappy design they could get away with.
Apple USB-C ports and plugs are superb so maybe the design is not so bad. Maybe most manufacturers just use crappy ports to save a few cents. But yeah, mechanically Lightning was awesome. Great plug/port.
Apple was a key member of the USB-C consortium, it was always planned to be their universal connector. They waited on switching to avoid public backlash about "why are you switching wires when I already bought all of these wires?". They generally give connectors 10 years before changing them (see 32-pin 2003 - 2012 etc). Doesn't invalidate your larger point, but it incorrectly describes the history of USB-C adoption by Apple.
I moderate /r/flashlight. Something I've seen a substantial increase in over the past few years is people who are surprised to learn that it's possible to have a built-in charger in combination with a field-replaceable battery. It doesn't take much explaining; it just hadn't occurred to them because the devices they're used to don't work that way.
People don't change batteries in their phones now because they'd need a heat gun and a soldering iron and they'd have even chances of starting a fire, breaking the phone, or succeeding in changing the battery without prior experience using those tools. A shop could do it reliably, but the shop will charge 100€ because it's time-consuming and error-prone. A 3-5 year old phone is often not worth 100€.
When a battery change costs 25€ and takes 5 minutes, people will do it all the time even if they don't know that today.
Still no real upgrade for hexbright, which is a shame.
I wish they were still being made. Fortunately, mine are still fine, and I expect to be able to repair them should they break. (xtal is a common failure point apparently)
Standard battery type is nice, but also has microusb charging port, the part that didn't age well.
Perhaps new circuit boards (with usb-pd charging, usb-c connector and mems oscillator) will be the way forward. It's definitely easier to order a pcb than the housing.
I suppose it depends on what you want out of a flashlight. It's kind of cool that you can flash the firmware over USB, but the rest of it is middling, and there are quite a few flashlights today running open source firmwares with exposed flashing pads.
Regulated, open source, flashable, USB-charging, and a standardized battery describes most lights from https://www.firefly-outdoor.com/
It used to be true that it made sense to replace your phone every few years because new ones were so much better. But like... I have a Pixel 8 and there's not really anything in a newer phone that's compelling enough to spend any money on...
Funnily enough I'm looking at getting a new phone because my pixel 6 battery no longer lasts 9am until 6pm without a mid-day charge -- I looked at the latest pixels (10) and they looked neat, but expensive; so took a look at the 9's, and saw they're basically exactly the same at 60% the price; then looked at the 8's and they're basically the same except 40% the price...
I expect the smartphone market to switch to a sales model where devices are somewhat more expensive, but more durable and to some extent more serviceable than in the past, so many will buy refurbished phones instead of new ones. I can see some similarities with the used car market, or hi-fi audio receivers, for example.
I agree, but also battery life has significantly improved over the last decade. Every phone I or my friends have replaced recently has been because the screen has broken. I would put good money on this being true for most people.
I think if the EU really wanted to reduce phone waste they'd make it easier or cheaper to fix screens. Still, this doesn't seem like a terrible move. I bet you can make it relatively easy to replace batteries without compromising much. Look at the Macbook Neo for example.
I had to replace my previous phone because my banking app dropped support for that Android version, and was going to stop working. The hardware was fine.
(I always buy phones in the cheapest tier, so that happens sooner)
Would it be cheaper in the long run to buy a newer phone less often? Get a "this year flagship" and use it for 5 years rather than a couple year old model and use it for 2-3?
Those cheap phones are made out of garbage and are chock-full of bloatware and spyware. This also applies to Samsung flagships so I guess more expensive doesn't always mean better.
That's just plain bullshit? I just checked my local second hand marketplace, and 2 year old flagship models seem to go for about 35-50% of the current equivalent newest model price.
I'm really unsure how broken screens happen. Don't you have a protective case on your phone? I've had smartphones for over 20 years, and have never broken a screen. Am I just lucky? More careful? I drop my phones too, but have never broken the screen. The only thing that ever failed on any phone I've owned has been the battery.
Yeah protective case helps A LOT. I've broken two phones basically two weeks from buying them by dropping them on the floor before I put them in protective case. Costly mistakes, I don't do them anymore. Nowadays I buy the case together with the phone.
I don't know if it's just my luck, I never drop my phone, but when I buy new, I'm guaranteed to drop it several times a day for the first two weeks of owning it. The protective case is a phone saver
For me i had a case and a screen protection film bit the phone dropped on stone pavement exactly so that a higher part of the stone hit the screen edge between the case and the panzer glass.
Attempted to take picture. Dropped phone from chest height. Center of screen hit corner of I-beam sitting on ground that I was standing at the end of. Bought a screen protector after that.
Dropped it off the top of some pallet racking, ping ponged down, broke the button and cracked the screen at the bottom near the button. Bought a case (and kept the screen protector on under it, lol)
Left it sitting on top of trailer tongue tool box to run timer to check/flip lunch that was being grilled in the vicinity. Trailer was involved in a minor industrial accident. Phone got tossed and crunched. Lunch was fine.
Exposed the 3rd one to, IDK, something, that etched it without hurting the case. IDK what that would be though since I can't think of anything that I have around or use that would do that.
Current phone has survived since 2022. Last month the case finally wore out to the point where corners were coming apart and it would sometimes get caught on its way in/out of pockets and got replaced.
I think it's just some people. I break my phone every couple years; I've never willingly upgraded or replaced a phone. The same thing happens with watches. It's a wonder I still have limbs.
On the other hand, my wife has never broken a phone, and has basically only upgraded when it becomes too old to be usable any more (due to battery issues or OS version causing problems). She's careful and sensible.
I’m not crazy like some people, but I’ve broken screens many times and every time it has been in a case, one time it was in a case I specifically bought for extra protection.
Half of my screen breaks have been from getting out of my car with my phone in my lap and gravel on the ground.
Another way I’ve broken screens is from my phone falling out of my pocket and onto rocks/concrete. That has happened twice.
And the final way has been from getting smashed in my pocket. I slipped while scrambling some rocks and my phone(in a case I bought for this long backpacking trip) got smashed on my hip, another time I was running around at my friend’s house at night and ran into a wheel barrow, smashing it on my thigh.
Never had a battery fail.
A note: My current iPhone 16 pro is built like a tank, and the glass is truly extraordinary.
I knew there exist people for whom paying for phone insurance is a good idea! Thanks!
In Norway you can get an insurance just for the screen, which is like half of the full one IIRC.
I still have my iPhone mini 12, in the desperate hope that it can last until Apple have another outbreak of common sense and decide that a mini iPhone has a place in the market.
Battery is starting to fade during the day, despite minimal use.
I think replaceable batteries should be mandatory and 10 years of security updates. In these times, phones are really expensive (however you pay for them) and we shouldn’t stand for planned obsolescence in any form.
I recently broke my 12 Mini beyond reasonable repair during a battery replacement recently (mostly just bad luck, I've been doing my own mobile repair for a long time). I bought a 17 to replace it, and promptly returned it in favor of a used 13 Mini. It's wild to me how large the smallest mainstream phone you can buy these days has become.
I honestly know I could “optimize” my phone replacement schedule based on resale values of phones etc, but for the last ~15ish years I just replace my iPhone when the battery starts shitting itself (3-5 years each in my experience)
This is going to be harder, or, at least, harder to replace your current phone with something objectively better. RAM and Flash shortages / high prices are likely going to last for years, wars are additionally jeopardizing production of electronic components, and the current crop of mobile devices is already insanely powerful. It's going to be pretty hard to sell most people an upgrade that feels meaningful when it's going to be like 30% more expensive.
Running AI locally could be a big selling point for an upgrade, but see the problems with RAM and general production capacity overload. I's not going to be a mass-market thing.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
But what if you asked the right question, "what is the biggest problem with your phone?"
Most would answer, "the battery dies too soon. It doesn't last all day like it used to."
> I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Possibly true, and equally true of the screen, the charging port, or any other component.
"Repairability" isn't a feature people list unprompted, it's a property they notice the moment a £5 part bricks their phone.
The street-corner survey tells you what people currently notice, not what they'd value if the option existed.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new phone
In a market where batteries are glued in and replacement costs a meaningful fraction of a new device, of course people upgrade on that timeline. Change the cost structure and the behaviour changes with it.
Fair point that we'd want data, but the original claim rests on the same intuition, just pointed the opposite way.
The broader framing (that repairability is an idiosyncratic preference being imposed on a majority who don't want it) gets this backwards. Most people don't want to care about repairability, in the same way most people don't want to care about food safety standards. They want the option to exist without having to think about it. That's what the law provides.
> you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery"
Before that, you wrote "One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are" and it's exactly what I could say here. Not everyone has lots of money and for some people extending the life of their phones is important. They really do wish they could replace the battery without hassle and without paying a shop to do it.
With the storage cost crisis which will make future phone more expensive I'm sure a lot of people will wish they could prolong the lifetime of theri current device with a battery swap.
> On that note, mandating an SD card slot as a requirement would be a very much welcome next step.
Fuck that. Who are you to subjugate us with your preferences. Limiting what a phone can possibly be by mandating features such as SD cards is so unimaginative. There's always a segment of HN that truly wants to be tyrants and impose their preferences on the entire marketplace and consumers.
Nothing is stopping something like Framework laptops from existing in the marketplace right now besides demand. Y'all can all celebrate it on HN in your bubble but to mandate that the entire market goes in this direction reveals your frustrations more than anything.
You hate that people don't share your preferences and would go so far as to use the legal system to distort the marketplace just to satisfy your own preferences. It doesn't matter if it puts constraints on what a product can be, so long as it fulfills your needs.
So basically, it's a simpler path to impose your preferences on others than it is to actually do any work to build something or find something that matches your preferences.
Completely selfish. Just admit you have disdain for everybody else and you think you know better than the marketplace about what people want, and therefore should have the authority to dictate how everything should be designed and built while doing none of the work.
A healthy reaction to this frustration is to go build the thing you want, show people that it's better, and compete against the status quo - giving everybody more options and choices. You're not there though, and neither are the societies in the EU.
It's sad to see this kind of mindset take over Europe and it's clear it holds back Europe of reaching the heights of innovation and creativity that the world is hoping to see come from a continent that once pushed humanity to higher levels of existence and consciousness.
Now go ahead an explain how having a microSD¹ slot may hurt someone who has a device that reads/writes data².
Not hurt shareholder value. I'm talking about people³ here.
I'll wait. Very curious to hear your perspective here.
_____
¹ Technology that has existed for 2+ decades at this point, is the defacto standard for removable storage in phones, laptops, cameras, audio recorders, etc, supported by devices that sell for $5 new and relied on by the highest end pro gear, current spec making it forwards and backwards compatible for the foreseeable future.
Something that takes virtually no physical space and costs virtually nothing to add to a device that already needs to operate on gigabytes of data (we're not talking about forcing that, say, on a thermostat).
² Particularly, one which can run into a "Storage full" error.
³ Physical human beings (including, but not limited to, the end users), and specifically not your (or some CEO's) feelings about it.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Are you sure about this? I've heard this complaint from a lot of non-tech people who are old enough to remember flip phones with replaceable batteries. It might be age related.
I don't think any single person I know would say they would exchange replaceable batteries for a 1mm thinner phone, waterproof up to 100m instead of 10m, or a $5 difference in price.
In fact, the only place I would ever expect somebody to claim otherwise is here.
I'd love thick phone with big battery, the current ones are already thin enough to be uncomfortable without a case, but the available models seem to be "ok if you want battery you want some rugged brick 3 android versions behind with everything else worse"
> I don't think any single person I know would say they would exchange replaceable batteries for a 1mm thinner phone, waterproof up to 100m instead of 10m, or a $5 difference in price.
Well, yes it's quite easy to argue against strawmen. I don't know anyone who would favor a built-in shoehorn over a replaceable battery either.
Although on your waterproof point, that's just a single dimension metric used for comms. It's not really about specifically descending to 100m. A 100m rated device responds better to water. In a general sense, it's more robust. Even if I don't go diving.
I know plenty. But not among the 18-20 year olds that do not know it any different, sure. But certainly my grandpa. Just thinking that you do not need a power-bank and just bring an extra battery on a longer trip will get millions of people interested.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone.
Not true. In recent years smartphones do not advance much, and would be perfectly fine to keep working if not for the dying battery.
> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
The degree of "possible" varies greatly depending on the available expertise and spare parts. Right now in EU it's cost prohibitive for both coz the special labor required is expensive and almost no official spare parts for consumers. So of coz this will be no data to support your claim.
I think the data for your last sentence does exist. When Apple was forced to replace broken batteries on the 12, lots of people opted to replace the phone and there was a corresponding drop in iPhone sales.
It’s a pretty commonly used canonical example of revealed preferences.
Counter-point - people might not know what they want until they experience it.
Yeah, for someone that changes phone every 3 years or earlier, that's not a desired feature.
But many people did that change precisely because battery got weak, and there have been less and less reasons to keep on the most modern model for a while now.
E.g. most peoples don't really think or ask that their tap water be free of cholera and other harmful substances, and yet we might want to make sure that continues to be the case. So it's not strong argument worth arguing about.
The real argument is - how much a compromise a replaceable vs non-replacable battery is. And I suspect the biggest part of non-replaceable batteries is actually superficial vanity considerations (gee, is it 7mm or 6.5mm), and planed obsolescence making more money. But the technical aspects are still a valid debate.
>compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.
What sort of compromise do you envision? I mean, toasters still have a crumb tray on the bottom that open so you can clean them even though no one does. Am I "missing out" on sleek, streamlined toaster designs because manufacturers feel they have to put a door in the bottom?
Half of cellphone users hold onto phone for 3+ years and experience battery degradation, and cell phone battery life is the #1 complain/concern about cellphone users. They might not immediately demand swappable batteries (particularly if they're too young to have ever owned a cellphone with swappable batteries) but I suspect if you prompted them, that the response rate would be very high, and that this isn't just an echo chamber concern.
I think that’s the wrong way of framing it. If, before the launch of the iPhone, you asked what people wanted from their phones you’d be there a very long time before anyone described something like an iPhone (no buttons, capacitive touch interface, etc). And yet, once they were offered it, people flocked to it.
This regulation is targeted to devices with poor battery lives. Just because it hasn’t occurred to people to ask for the feature doesn’t mean they won’t appreciate it.
That's an odd reply since by that argument they also flocked to a phone with no replaceable battery, which was pretty standard in the 2000s.
But you could be right. I guess this will be an experiment to watch: If EU consumers show a strong preference for replaceable batteries once they become more widely available, we can expect manufacturers to start offering it in other markets as well.
I think everything is a tradeoff and at that point people took the trade. But the place smartphones take in our lives today compared to 2006 is radically different, I wouldn’t assume much carries over.
Are laws typically enacted to compel companies to follow consumer demand? I think that’s what the market itself is best at.
Instead this law is designed to provide the public with a good everyone can benefit from - less waste of valuable electronic components polluting our environment.
And even if those same consumers would choose a thinner phone over a replaceable battery, they will probably also enjoy being able to fully charge it more often for less money.
The biggest problem with my phone is that it took too long to find one that isn't comically large (I have an iPhone 13 Mini). The second biggest problem is that the battery is not what it used to be. It lasts 2 days on a full charge instead of 3. The battery will need to be replaced in a few years.
I feel like I will be using this phone until it crumbles to dust. Apple shows no interest in making decently sized phones. I would support the EU enacting legislation to enforce at least one phone in each lineup to be no bigger than 60 mm x 125 mm. (iPhone Mini is ok, but it's still bigger than what I prefer.)
Smaller and lighter phones are an accessibility concern. Miniaturization has been the goal for computers since they were invented. It is incomprehensible that designers and manufacturers are reversing course. My options right now are basically do nothing or replace my phone with a watch.
I appreciate such a law very much. I find it very irritating how people always want new phones. And I think there are three major reasons to upgrade to a new phone:
1. lifestyle
2. software updates
3. battery capacity
While it is hard to change the first, the other two can be influenced by laws. And while the second is rather complex, the third is quite simple. Since the manufacturers have few incentives to produce phones with replaceable batteries, there are very few options on the market to choose from. Most have other major limitations, like slow CPU/GPU, crappy cameras, or else.
So eliminating one factor of unnecessary waste is absolutely a good idea. I just hope it doesn't backfire in some weird way. And I don't say that replaceable batteries don't come at a cost, they do. But that cost is much lower than many assume and not that easy to measure, because currently, you can compare only apples with oranges.
This doesn't require the battery to be replaceable. It requires either the battery to still be good after 1000 charges or for it to be replaceable, either one.
Although some of this depends on how you define replaceable.
A quick google will show you’re relying too much on your own views of what people desire for phone improvements.
This law will lead to much needed changes and improvements in a mature and arguably stale market.
> One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are. If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Yes, and if you asked every passerby what feature they would like to add to the streets, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish there were more accessibility ramps".
Luckily for us, we're not governed by "passerby" people.
Me and partner are both on iPhone 14 Pro. And this is more than powerful and sufficient for our daily use, except the battery is around 82%. I'd happily replace the battery right now for a more powerful one.
You can pay Apple to replace it for you, and the cost is not that high. £90 or so.
If the battery swap fails, you’ll get a as-new replacement phone and you also won’t be charged.
In exchange for this monetary cost and the inconvenience of leaving your phone at an Apple Store for 1 hour; you get peace of mind and a highly rated water/dust proof phone.
(Seriously, I’ve seen people diving with iPhones - no case - recording videos.)
I've done exactly that with my iPhone 14 Pro. Battery was degraded down to 72%, iOS suggested in the Settings app to get the battery replaced either at an Apple Store or at an authorized service center. I made an appointment at the Apple Genius Bar and took care of it in a little over an hour for $99. A lot cheaper than buying a brand new phone!
I used to be in this camp, and before we had the charge limit and power saving mode it was true, but now? I'm no longer sure.
Like, I've had my phone for 6 years now and the battery is still going strong with the 80% charge limit always on throughout its lifetime. Meanwhile the USB-c port is shot to fuck and disconnects constantly, it can't connect to 5G, leaving me without a connection in lots of locations cause there are no fallback towers, and the OS support has basically been over for a year now. Cameras are no longer up to snuff either and I could use a storage upgrade.
My previous phone had a replacable battery, which I replaced once before the GPS and wifi chip died and turned it into an air gapped brick. Everything else seems to fail at a similar rate.
Still it's not really about if it lasts as long or not. It's about having the right to repair devices and to reduce waste at large. First batteries, then displays, main boards, etc. Each law builds on the previous one as precedent.
The battery in my iPhone 11 pro (6.5 years old) is still basically fine as long as I charge it every day. None of my previous smart phones were able to keep enough charge to be useful after 3-4 years.
My Pixel 4a would also still be fine. If Google had not killed the battery. I think by now Google has asked (=paid) people to swap batteries on at least 3 different Pixel phones.
"…by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone."
Why? There have been few new features in recent years and new phones have restrictions not wanted by many. Google is closing the Android ecosystem and making it more proprietary so I'll keep my phone as long as I'm able.
The non-replaceable battery has to be one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on consumers. It's great that it's about to be broken.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone
Why? My phone works almost perfectly still three and a half years after I bought it. Except the battery lasts shorter.
If I go to battery health in settings it says:
> Important Battery Message
> Your battery's health is significantly degraded.
An Apple Authorised Service Provider can replace the battery to restore full performance and capacity.
> Find Your Service Options
Aside from my current phone, I also have a very old iPod Touch. That old iPod Touch would have been usable still as well, if it wasn’t for the fact that it takes somewhere around 10 minutes of active use until it goes from full charge to zero charge. In other words, unusable for bringing with me anywhere plainly because of the battery.
Replaceable battery would have been great. Both for my iPhone and my iPod Touch. Even if it meant they would have been a bit thicker than they currently are.
> asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, [...] before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
'If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses'....Henry Ford
Nobody cares about repairability....until they are hit hard by it.
Anecdote: Around 5y ago, the lightning connector of my wife's iPhone died after 3y usage.
We brought it to an Apple Store and the official answer was "Sorry, we don't fix that on this model. Here is a 200€ discount on a new one"... The phone was still worth >900€ at the time.
Let's be clear: This kind of commercial practice are unacceptable both ecologically and ethically speaking. It is terrible customer service.
A lot of high end phones (outside Apple) at the time would have their USB-C port fixed in matter of few hours for <100€ in any random "I Fix it" store.
> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people
Not really. The battery just needs to have a connector rather than soldered, and no other things blocking the battery once the back-case is opened. Realistically, a service shop will do the replacement like how watch-batteries are typically replaced.
I don't know, I see people every day using old smartphonereachinfg for a power outlet everywhere they can because their phone do not last a day. Most think going to a shop to ask them to replace the battery will cost an arm.
I think that law doesn't even go far enough, they should standardize a battery format. When like me you are used to open smartphones and replace batteries you realize how very similar they are all in footprint and could be compatible with each other with very minimal effort. If there were only a couple of standardized formats you could find new batteries in every small shop/airports whatever and easily have spares. Chance is that other electronic devices or toys would also adopt them.
I had a perfectly fine iPhone 11 I bought new. The first thing I replaced in it was battery. I had to pay for “genuine” Apple battery + certified laboratory. The price was higher than the price of my iPhone as second hand, but I liked this phone.
Then I sold it, because I ran out of 64GB space. If I could add an sd card, I would probably use this phone longer, instead of contributing to consumerism and creating more e-waste.
I wish that people would think about sustainability and using their devices for longer rather than chasing “new and shiny” every year Apple releases the “best iPhone we ever made”
Modern iPhone batteries are basically user replaceable are they not? They are metal encased and the adhesive can be electronically disabled. They don't seem "worse" to me?
> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people
Sometimes we have to acknowledge the externalities of our lifestyle and take things down a notch.
Even if most throw out their old phones, now at least it'll be trivial to shuck these devices to get the battery for recycling, while sending the device for refurb or further recycling.
A key component to effective recycling is separation, and this is one step in that direction
More replaceable batteries can have secondary effects that most people would probably like though - like the ability to by a used phone on ebay/FB marketplace that doesn't have an abysmal battery.
With the battery no longer a concern, more people will opt to buy used phones rather than cheap new phones.
Som even if most people change phone before the battery gets really bad (I doubt that this is really the case), the end result will still be that fewer new phones will be purchased.
Now we just need a law that requires hardware makers unlock their devices when they stop providing updates.
I'm curious about the environmental argument here. At face value it makes sense, but is there some hard data that shows that there is a meaningful number of consumers that buy new phones only (or "mostly") because of battery degradation?
The article (granted, probably not the best source of information) has some numbers like "number of phones sold", but doesn't actually tackle the crux of the issue: how many of those phone sales would be prevented by having user swappable batteries?
I feel we don't have these data yet. What we do have is repair statistics for cell phones, where battery replacement accounts for 22% (in the US) of a $18.5B market. https://worldmetrics.org/cell-phone-repair-statistics/
My previous phone was refurbished and was great in all ways except for battery life. I have now bought a new phone that I wouldn't have bought if batteries were replaceable.
Having said that, I do like having waterproof phones, and I expect this rule would make that harder.
So I guess newer iPhones and iPad allow you charge up to 80%, which extends battery life, for idiosyncratic reasons? I’m sure there must have been a reason and demand for that.
I guess I run my iPhone on low battery mode a lot, due to idiosyncratic reasons too. Maybe I do.
Apple battery replacement costs anywhere from $70 (for a ~$400 phone) to $120 (for a ~$1000+ phone). In many global markets you can get a brand new phone for that much.
With the replaceable batteries the people at least have a choice. Without the option for a battery swap you had to buy a new device and throw away a otherwise totally fine one.
In last 5 years or so me and my wife have purchased 5 new phones. Except for one, where the phone slipped from a flat countertop due to having a glass back, in all other cases the reason was battery life getting worse, with no other issues with the phone at all. So I have to disagree with you here.
I currently have a 12 mini, but I'd love to go back to the iphone 4 size, or even a blackberry curve. Would be fine for comms, and I suspect I'd spend less time doom-scrolling on it.
> this law will force phone manufacturers to compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.
Okay, you're claiming two things: (i) replaceable batteries will compromise some other features, and (ii) most people want those features more than they want a replaceable battery.
Can you name 3 of those features? I personally can't.
If we run this experiment and most people say they wish they could replace their battery would you concede you are actually the one with idiosyncratic preferences?
most of the time I replace my phone because the battery degraded so badly and a replacement is expensive.
Its not enough by itself that the phone has amassed scratches and is 20% slower or has a 30% worse camera optic than the current generation, or that updates will only continue for a year or two more.
But the slowdown (associated with battery degradation btw) and fact that it doesn’t get me through a whole day definitely move the needle into me buying a new phone.
Right to repair has never been about requirement to repair. Obviously we can't force people to repair their phones instead of buying a new one, because that would involve replacing the market economy with a planned economy. This would be extremely difficult to pull off and would be wildly unpopular.
At the same time, 5.78 billion people have a smartphone worldwide. It is obviously wildly unsustainable to live in a world where 5.78 billion people have to throw away their old phone and buy a new one every 2-3 years. However, phone manufacturers have figured out that if they force people to, they can amass ridiculous levels of wealth because the demand for new phones would be constantly high. So obviously the incentives here are completely wrong. This has happened before with lightbulbs in the 20th century and is a legitimate form of market failure that needs to be resolved, as it wastes a lot of consumer spending to replace what consumers already had (like the parable of the broken window).
For many years since phone manufacturers started gluing phones together with a consumable part inside, consumers have been denied the ability to replace their battery. Where the option does exist, it's often very inconvenient, difficult, or with a price inflated to be nearly as expensive as buying a new one.
Phones stopped advancing significantly many years ago. Phone manufacturers now re-release practically the same phone with slight CPU and camera improvements, something completely unheard of until relatively recently. Lately the main marketing trend for new phones has been AI, but this is a nonsense trend because most of modern AI runs in the cloud, and very few are actually utilizing any local AI features, so the only "AI" thing about the phone is just a preinstalled ChatGPT-like app you can get on any other phone. So clearly they have run out of things to improve, and things to market around. In a normally functioning market, this would mean phones have become a solved technology and we can stop replacing our phones as often, maybe once every 10 years if you're careful with your phone. But this is not what we see precisely because phone manufacturers have been manufacturing problems that are most easily solved by buying a new phone, which they will push people to do whatever way they can for profit. The phone industry has failed to regulate itself, and so this is why we are seeing a push for this type of regulation.
No one cares, and having replaceable batteries is not gonna make any difference software and hardware support as usual will drive most people to upgrade their phones or their computers or anything else electronic for that matter.
Owner of an 11Pro iPhone soon to be obsolete after seven years. I probably will upgrade sometime in the next two years nine years with the same electronic device is long enough.
I got my moneys worth. very satisfied with the longevity and resale value of most of the Apple products in comparison to the competition.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone.
Extreme consumer brain coupled with privilege. Billions of people can’t afford a new phone every couple years, they buy things and use them until they are past the point of repair, only buying a replacement when they have no other choice.
Can you honestly even say this year’s new flagships, or any from the last decade, represent meaningful improvement for most people outside the tech bubble and influencer sphere? Smartphones have been “good enough” for a long time.
Apple is about to deprecate the iphone 11/SE 2020 version. Am gonna repurpose them as webcams given the 12MP camera put in there is arguably better than the brand new ones they put on new macs.
The phone now has a limited lifespan though because of this prior stupidity where eventually am gonna get into spicy pillow territory. At that point the phone prematurely dies.
We are going into a period where we are throwing away devices with 12mp+ cameras, and processors arguably faster than most desktops. It was arguable when the phones were old and legacy, but at this point the cameras on there are stupidly good.
We need these phones to be repurposed for a second life and actually capture their manufacture energy costs.
Frankly, if Apple allowed old iphones to be used for server usage, it is kind of crazy how efficient per dollar that would be.
> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people
I challenge you to give me an example of how this law might result in a phone that is worse for most people.
This law does not require a slide-off phone cover. It does not require a screwed-on backplate. It does not forbid the use of chemical adhesives. It does not stipulate how a phone should or shouldn't be designed.
It basically just requires the manufacturer to offer replacement batteries and to enable the replacement to be done with commercially available tools. I'd wager the overwhelming majority of phones are already compliant, pending availability of a replacement battery from the manufacturer.
I'm quite confident I could replace the battery on my Sony Xperia 1 iii with a heat gun and my basic iFixit toolkit.
"Normal people" (tiresome and unnecessarily reductive meme) do not necessarily care about how it's implemented, but they certainly care about planned obsolescence, which is the target of this law. It just another way to enforce reasonable service life and reduce e-waste. That's the goal of this regulation.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby if they want their phone to have a replaceable battery, I don't think you would be there very long before receiving a "yes". I think that's a more honest framing of the question.
> I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences. But that's nonsense, because the law doesn't actually require people to replace batteries rather than replacing their phone
How could they replace their batteries if they wanted to, unless the manufacturer makes it possible? The goal is not to force individuals to not replace their phones, but rather to provide that as an option at all, for those who want it.
> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
At the very least, we'd need only data showing that that number is non-zero. From where did you get the idea that we need to prove "most" people would choose to take advantage of this option?
> The goal is not to force individuals to not replace their phones, but rather to provide that as an option at all, for those who want it.
But my point is that you need to recognize that in so doing, you are taking away the option of having other things, such as waterproofing, larger batteries, smaller/lighter phones, etc. There is no free lunch.
> But my point is that you need to recognize that in so doing, you are taking away the option of having other things, such as waterproofing, larger batteries, smaller/lighter phones, etc. There is no free lunch.
1. Waterproofing is possible with replaceable batteries.
2. Larger batteries are possible with replaceable batteries. In fact, replaceable batteries makes this easier. I'm old enough to remember when you could buy a bigger battery for your cell phone that came with a bulged cover to accommodate it. If you don't want that though, you will have the choice to avoid it.
3. Smaller/lighter phones are possible with user-replaceable batteries. You could even use a smaller/lighter battery, too, if you wanted
These options aren't being taken away. We're just adding another option.
Consumers may not know that a feature is something they want until they don't have it anymore.
Invert the situation. If every iPhone in history had a replaceable battery, until 2027 when the newest iPhone did not have a replaceable battery, I think we can all agree that the uproar would be significant.
I provide food and services for the homeless in my area working with friends outside of any non-profit. That the phone people get from non-profits become unusable in some number of months is a big complaint. Batteries dying is significant part of this (lack of security updates is another part). Replaceable batteries are something that a lot of people would want (especially the option to have several batteries).
Just as much, there's a certain HN complaint form that basically goes "any complaint about the crap that sold now is just programmer/civil-rights-fan/etc idiosyncrasy, real people want exactly this crap 'cause markets never lie".
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
I doubt most people wouldn't even think that this is a thing they can wish for or that this is even within realm of possibility.
It has to be explicitly named as an option - as, I'm afraid, people have forgotten that you can have "nice things".
Also I feel rather uncomfortable every time somebody purports to be representitive of or know that "most people" want.
Following the bottle-cap madness, I don't think any current data shows the actual issue was resolved. Even worse, the effect on marine life is still not measured, and afaik reduction of harm was the primary goal. Instead of brutally high fines on fishing net waste, we got bottle-cap madness.
We have so much experience with scientific method, yet these massive decisions are adhoc, that's how the whole world works. We never tested what would happen by allowing mass production of plastic, or phones, or whatever, so these antipatches are going by the "feels" as well, with no individual taking responsibility for failures.
A bit off topic, but I recently had a drink that didn't have the attached bottle cap while travelling abroad, and my god, was it a minor annoyance to have to hold the bottle cap in my hand while drinking. I also almost dropped it because I expected it to stay attached. Funny how fast we adapt.
There is monitoring of beach pollution but data publication is typically delayed, like, we know it went down by 30% from 2015-2016 to 2020-2021, we will have data on a regulation that went into force in late 2024 only in a few years.
I think you're plain wrong. I have never talked to anyone in my life about phones who didn't want replaceable batteries and wasn't annoyed by the throwaway culture. It's a top priority for the people I know, though by far not important enough for most of them to go for something like a Fairphone.
However, these preferences don't really matter anyway because nobody is forced to replace the battery and not buy a new phone when their phone has replaceable batteries.
I envision somone keeping a phone long time, not updating it and evtualluy the spying hooks get obsolete and so phone gets more secure, as tech companies move on with new apis and drop support for the old ones. This might be the biggest win. Ms still has customers using win95
It would take a great deal of lawmaking to make phones more worse, for most people, than phone manufacturers and mobile app developers already do. You want to talk about idiosyncratic preferences, really? Here?
Buddy. You are on the Hacker News. It's like you wanted to get skewered on purpose. Of course we want replaceable batteries! Anyone over the age of 30 will remember the convenience of throwing another charged battery in your car/backpack/briefcase and heading out for the day. Carefree. Also, what a treat to be able to properly restart or power off my phone (no, I mean REALLY power it off) by ripping out the battery!
What's next, having TV remote controls with non-removable rechargeable batteries, for the "convenience"?! Gimme a break. I love tech progress, but leave your hands off my removable batteries! And my 3.5mm audio jack, now that I think about it! :-)
> One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are.
Least self-aware HN user out there.
Do you really think the European commission got lobbied hard by HN folks?
This law will make phones better for most people, who would rather keep their phone for a decade rather than having to every three years buy a new phone optimized for some vanity metric that looks good on Engadget reviews.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Not my experience at all. The (few) non-tech people I've talked to about phones soon getting batteries again like it. People believe the idea that non-removable batteries are a conspiracy by the phone companies to sell you more phones the same way cartels manipulated the lightbulb market (Phoebus cartel).
My own hesitation with HM echo chamberification is federation. Nobody cares. And until you can point to a concrete benefit to end users, you should stop and think about why you’re pushing it this hard.
But I don’t think this is the case with phone batteries. I’ve had many conversations with friends and family that came down to replace the battery or upgrade the phone.
I feel the same way about soldered on CPUs, RAM and SSDs in laptops and other computers. The benefits of doing this are marginal at best. We all know the real reason is forced obsolescence.
We all know this is why battery replacement is hard too.
what are you on about? most people i know have 4 year old phones which are just fine and want only the battery changed. my phone was 6 years old this year and it hurt me that I had to change it because of the battery. otherwise it was a perfectly fine phone.
Recently replaced the battery and charging port of my Fairphone. 5 screws, two plucked components, done. Hopefully this means that soon you won't have to buy a specific company's phone for this marvelous experience.
The Fairphone 5 is only IP55 rated (dust protected, and water droplet resistant). Most flagship phones are IP68 rated (fully dust sealed, and water submersible). IP68 phones are sealed with a single-use adhesive gasket, and replacing battery requires breaking (and replacing) this seal. If the seal is improperly applied, the phone is no longer protected from dust or water.
There is also a middle ground of IP67 from the Samsung Galaxy S5. I'm personally fine with the Fairphone level (they clearly prioritise easy and frequent disassembly; that's their entire brand) but for someone who wants to be able to submerge it just below the surface and walk through pouring rain for hours, that would be enough
I just spent a few hours [this past weekend] trying to replace a battery on an old iPod Touch and botching it (I'll blame my crappy soldering iron). Everything about that was a massive pain, prying the case open, dealing with all the glue inside, de-soldering the old battery.
I thought I did everything right but then the thing wouldn't turn on. Could be a bad battery (ordered on Amazon so zero guarantees). Then when I tried to de-solder and re-solder my new battery the pads came off it. Very annoying.
I certainly understand the value of replaceable batteries. OTOH, I'm concerned about what this will mean for how many common upper end phones are IP67 submersion rated. I don't want that to go back to being a feature only of clunky super expensive phones, and I would rather have IP67 over a replaceable battery.
Now, if I'm lucky, they will mandate both a replaceable battery and that the phones be ip55 or better, after battery replacement.
Just like how it already work with watches. You can replace batteries yourself, but waterproofing is not guaranteed. If you want to be certain that the waterproof rating is maintained, you have to sent it to an authorised service provider.
I worry that this ends up, like other EU consumer-protection regulation, as an own goal.
- The cheapest phones available in the EU (and purchasable online) all have glued-in batteries, not swappable ones. Forcing consumers to use phones with swappable batteries may just mean that the bottom of the market disappears, and consumers will be left paying more for their phones. And would they rather pay less or have swappable batteries?
- This will cause some cascade of engineering changes, which will make phones thicker or less waterproof. Again, it's not clear to me that the tradeoff is being fairly reflected here.
- efficient vaccuums
- efficient bulbs
- no roaming costs if somebody leaves a message on your voicemail
- insurance companies and banks can't charge you as they see fit
- toxic free food
- toxic free meat
- farming without killing the rest of the living things
- Best of all: China and USA can't dictate the rules everytime
Like the experience of opening any website for the last decade and being greeted with a cookie popup is more the direction the parent comment was intending I'm assuming.
Some regulations are good, some are bad, all have second and third order effects that need to be weighed against benefits.
and you comfortably ignore all the adds that get in your face when opening any news or commerce site. you would not need these popups with agree and list of third party data aggregators if you were not selling all that visitor information to anyone. alas eu requires you to notify visitors about it. its not like eu says "you must show annoying popups" its page authors choose to do so to be able to sell the data. even knowing that this will annoy the visitors. and then blame EU
Unified charging cable: what if the standard had been set much earlier? For example, in 2008? We'd all be on Micro-USB, far inferior to USB-C. Right now USB-C feels great, but do you really think this is the end-all, be-all? I think the cost of this mandatory standardization will become apparent a few years from now.
They then end up paying more by buying five awful low-range phones that each last a year instead of one mid-range that will last more. No, I would rather everyone paid more for a phone. I find it hard to believe that the difference in price will make it impossible for them to buy it, if so, that's a separate problem. This + mandated software support may finally make it viable to just buy a used phone, too.
What good is a replaceable battery if the device becomes obsoleted by changing communication standards first? How long before 4G and 5G are phased out? What if we could have forward compatibility in our mobile network protocols?
I have never used a phone without easily replaceable battery (where "easily" means no screwdriver necessary, just pop the backcover and pull the battery out). It just happened this way, but I think I'd refuse to buy one anyway, as aside of obvious repairability and maintainability issues having the battery sealed in is also a big factor that makes dropping the phone so dangerous. When I drop my phone, the battery is easily set free to disperse its kinetic energy away from more fragile parts of the device, so it's much harder to break the phone this way. I have made some small dents and scratches from drops over the years, but no serious damage.
While this is a good step forward, it feels like complaining about the 0.025% of plastic from straws in the ocean while ignoring the 75% of plastic from fishing nets.
I own a 2020 Kona EV. The battery cannot be upgraded. Eventually, I'll have to replace the entire car to get a longer range. BEVs should be mandated to have upgradable batteries and modular interfaces so that the shell can continue to be reused, the batteries (and BMS) upgraded, and old batteries easily recycled.
Useful life of most of the cars is on par with their battery longevity, as long as you have proper thermal management and your usage patterns are not outliers.
Focusing on being able to upgrade battery (and to be clear - upgrade, not replaced/repair) is solving 1% problem.
Cars have basically unlimited useful life because every component (arguably with the exception of the frame) can be repaired. It's surprisingly affordable to rebuild an engine and make it as good as new. I can buy a car made in the 50s today, that's a 70 year old car. And I can keep servicing it and keep it going for another 70 years.
The main enemy of cars is rust, but for that there are cost effective mitigations now. The real reason people ditch cars is always they get tired of the old car and want something more modern, not because the car is at the end of its "useful life".
Batteries are not like that. They actually have a useful life that degrades over time, which makes them non-servicable.
What I would like to see is serviceable batteries, where you can replace individual damaged cells and keep the battery going. Everyone would benefit from that, especially the used EV market, which would help stem the massive depreciation hits EV buyers are facing now.
Given the huge environmental cost involved in manufacturing a car, 20 years seems fair.
I’m still driving a 26-year old Nissan Micra – though it’s now on its last legs: the Irish climate isn’t kind to steel and we’ve had to have the under-carriage re-welded three times in the past five years. :(
EV batteries are expected to offer about 60-70% of capacity at 20 years. I think that's really good compared to general wear and tear of the car.
But let's go back to the original point, about being able to UPGRADE (not repair/replace) battery in the car. 20 years old car is worth like $1k-2k, which is fraction of the cost of the new battery.
While it's cool thing to do for hobbyists, it makes 0 economical sense.
What an old car is worth depends on many factors, but age is not the most important one. The average age of passenger cars on the road in the U.S. is 14 years old -- I think 14.5 years now. I don't think we have data on average appraised value of passenger cars on the road, but I would guess it would be in the range of 10-15K.
Why not ask me my motivations instead of assuming them?
I'm not fine with the range; I bought an EV to stop burning fossil fuels, my 24-year-old RAV4 was on its last leg, and there was a $6K bonus for trade-ins (my RAV4 would have been about $5k in parts).
Because I want to explore the interior of BC, drive across Canada on fewer charges, visit family, go on road trips, etc. Just yesterday I spent 30 minutes trying to charge my Kona. It's a long and boring story, but suffice to say our charging infrastructure here sucks, and is not as simple, quick, or convenient as "tap-to-pay" (with a credit card) at petrol stations.
> Should I be able to eventually replace gas tank with the larger one in my ICE vehicle?
FWIW, that is actually a thing you can do. It is mostly done for SUVs and pickups since the primary use case for the extra range is off-pavement driving and the upgrade is simpler.
Yes, which is why they are replacable, and Hyundai is bound by law to keep making batteries for OP's Kona for a good while even after the production stops.
Unfortunately Hyundai is not required by law to keep making batteries. They are only legally required to provide for warranty support for up to 10 years after a car is made. Usually that means you keep making parts, but I'm not sure how this works with EVs.
But the window is 10 years. After that, you rely on market forces -- if there is a profit to be made from making the part, then it is made. Heavily cars rely on aftermarket parts, but the question of a battery is a bit different.
Again, we need open source cars, with open source designs, so that batteries can be repaired, upgraded, and replaced by an aftermarket. I keep pushing this and hope I'm not being tedious, but people are underestimating the risk to the consumer.
That will probably come when EV marketshare is higher and innovation plateaus. I definitely appreciate the phone thing as someone typing from an iPhone SE. I also think phone batteries degrade faster than cars, right? I think my phone is from 2022 and I’m definitely starting to feel it.
I don't see how that's even remotely comparable. It's not like you can replace the battery in your phone with a larger one. You will be able to buy a new battery for your car, that's already guaranteed in the EU - but it will be the same capacity as what you got.
I don't know why is this even an argument really, like.....in a petrol car, do you expect to be able to fit it with a bigger fuel tank after 10 years? or a more powerful engine? Until very recently even software updates to the infotainment weren't really a thing, if you wanted a newer interface you had to change the entire car(I'm not saying this was a good thing, just that generally the expectation is that the product will work the way it was when you bought it).
> It's not like you can replace the battery in your phone with a larger one.
That was totally a thing for phones in the past. Depending on the model you could get a larger pack that had a bulge on the back of the device to have extra battery time. There was a similar thing with a number of laptops.
I do agree its kind of a questionable thing on something like a car. I imagine packaging concerns would really get in the way of adding a bit extra.
Disagree. I want a replaceable battery in my phone. They can get to extensible memory next. And it's not because you don't care about something that you should remove this freedom from me. And don't tell me that the market will self regulate in the best interests of the consumer or other nonsense like that.
I want replaceable CPU and memory in my phone as well. I demand the government force device manufacturers to use socketed CPUs using standardized sockets and SO-DIMM memory. And it's not because you don't care about something that you should remove this freedom from me.
It's not for me at least. Nobody can prove their inner intent to you but most people will know from themselves that their actions are sometimes misunderstood (especially when something worked/came out badly) but that they genuinely mean well
People shouldn't have to pay $$$ for a 128GB upgrade when a 1TB microSDXC card is under $200. It feels like a trick to sell cloud storage and new phones.
Yeah this is what I don’t get. People are actually blowing hundreds of dollars on new phones rather than having Apple (not the cheapest option certainly) replace the battery for $89
They (Samsung, Apple, etc.) should never have been allowed to glue it behind the screen. Threaded fasteners and a silicone gasket cover is good enough for 99.999% of the public use-case.
Via firsthand observation of people in the world. Go ahead and check the number of people on the street that need the edge case of using the phone under IEC standard 60529. Now go ahead and check out how many people on the street want to be able to replace their battery.
How about computers to have replaceable SSDs? There's no point you can exchange the battery when the hard-soldered SSD dies first. (I had more dead SSDs than batteries)
As long as it does not make the phone bigger or compromise the water resistance, I support the requirement.
But it is not super high on my list. Every 2 or 3 years I pay less than $100 to have a new OE battery installed, takes about an hour. There are other features I would put a higher priority on - like a good small phone option now and again.
They should have standardized 3 to 5 battery sizes (and their connectors, voltages, etc.), so that the same battery could be used across many different devices, which would bring down the cost even more.
Same but from the other side. The new phone (without SD, removable battery, or headphone jack) is already acquired and laying in my drawer, but I have yet to bite into the lemon and start making the switch. Too damn convenient compared to the abstract threat of software updates... I'm dreading the new situation so much
Replacing the battery on my iphone takes 30 minutes and the only tools needed are a couple of screwdrivers and a new display adhesive. In exchange, the phone is a lot more waterproof. For me, it's a good tradeoff.
What's next? Mandating that the screens be "replaceable" as well? Having used a fairphone before, I can tell from experience that easily replaceable parts are more prone to breaking from dust and moisture etc.
Will this affect the water-resistance of current iPhones? I thought that was why the batteries are not easily replaceable by users, because of the seals/gaskets.
Most wristwatches provide much stronger water resistance while still being very user serviceable with a $20 watch tool kit. Whatever the phone makers are peddling are mostly excuses.
There are multiple watches, cameras, etc., with a lot of physical buttons even, all with replaceable batteries and weather-resistant (or even better, water proof). This is a bad excuse.
water resistance + easily battery exchange for repairs is very viable (AFIK always had been, too.)
like this law isn't about users causally replacing batteries like on very old phones
but about an repair shop easily and without risk of breaking your phone being able to replace it without only holding on your phone for idk. 10 minutes
So that you can just drop by (once they have the replacement parts) wait a moment and have a new battery.
This means in the worst case something like needing to a add a bit of additional seal/wax/glue or similar to improve sealing is very much fully viable (Id the sealing agent is generally buy able.)
It just is something you have to design in from the get to go. And it's easier to not do so at all. And maybe if you obsess if your phone is 1/10mm smaller or not that gets in your way too. And not doing so is more profitable as people will buy successor products more likely, even if just very slightly more likely.
But in general? That really isn't the problem.
Also even if it where the problem. What is better? Having a less waterproof phone, but not needing to buy a new one for another one or two years or having to buy one now?
While I'd be perfectly content with an IP67 iPhone with interchangeable battery, the current iPhones are IP68 which is a significant step up in dust/water ingress protection. IP68 devices generally require a sealant, IP67 normally doesn't, making it easier to do a battery hatch etc.
IP68 doesn't require a sealant if you just use enough pressure. Phones are just too thin to screw on the back plate and use a proper gasket. Which is stupid in the first place because most people then go and put a bulky cover on them.
and applying a sealant isn't per-see the problem either
iff
- it's generally commercially available
- and re-applicable after replacement with just generic tools
- and removing the battery doesn't risk breaking your phone due to physical strong binding glue being used as sealant etc.
As a dump example you can design the phone as a sealed unit with the battery department being "outside" the seal. Then have the battery also sealed and apply a bit of "sealant" (wax?, glue?) on the electrical contacts braking the seal on both sides. As the battery and battery compartment back have to only be waterproof and not "rigid" this probably fits "just fine" into most phones (except the most over the top slim ones).
Which is probably more the actual problem. Thinks like phone makers over-obsessing with making phones slimmer on a sub 1mm standard ... and then people anyway putting "thick" cases on the phone to protect it...
This must be paired with strong lithium battery import regulation. Even the highest quality OEM batteries can fail in dangerous ways (See many models of Samsung, Surface or Macbook). Cheap, dangerous Chinese imports must be eliminated as an option, because the secondhand owners doing this replacement will likely buy the cheapest replacement battery available on the market.
I hate to say it, but the lack of removable batteries serves a purpose. It wasn't done just because 'screw consumers'.
It was done because:
* It makes phones massively easier to waterproof
* It allows for larger batteries
* It allows for more compact and lighter phones
Consumers, based on what they buy, have shown again and again that they want these features.
It also simplifies manufacture and lowers costs, which everyone likes.
I like removable batteries. If I had the option, I'd get a phone with that feature. But I know that I am certainly in the minority, as is almost everyone in this thread.
It's also worth pointing out that these days, battery and software have advanced to the point where degradation is quite slow in many cases. The phone will often outlive its useful life due to specs rather than battery.
This is good. I recently had to replace a generally working phone because the battery was dying and there was no cost effective & reliable means of replacing.
A proper gasket and screws needs to be the standard solution here.
In order to have my iPhone 11's battery replaced by my local apple authorised repair shop, inexplicably I have to leave my phone with them for days. Since the phone is old they have to order the battery from Apple and that could take up to a week, according to them. Of course it's impossible to stay without my phone for a week+ so my only option is to buy a new phone if I want to fix my battery capacity issues.
There aren’t any 3rd party repair shops close to me that are in Apple’s Independent Repair Provider network, so if I were to choose a random repair shop my only real option with them would be a battery from a 3rd party manufacturer, which I’ve had bad experiences with before. I wouldn’t mind as much if I could easily replace it again myself if it started swelling like last time.
Yeah it's tough when all you have locally are the aftermarket options. I'm lucky to have two Apple certified shops within a few minutes of my home, and in a pinch two Apple stores within 20-30 minutes.
I bought a 12 Mini a couple years ago to be the shared phone the kids would take if they were out somewhere that we wanted to have communications ability, and it came with a third party battery. It hasn't been awful, exactly, but the life on the battery seems very low even for a mini.
(every time I pick up the 12 mini, I feel tempted to find the nicest 13 mini I can find and set it up for myself. what a fantastic size, makes my 17 pro seem huge)
Removing it is one of the most annoying things ever in a phone. Yes, Bluetooth is getting better, but the jack always works perfectly. Why can't we have both?
The IP rating will degrade the moment they bring it back. The jacks will either corrode or let water inside the phone and kill it entirely. Nobody wants to deal with that giant hole.
It seems like the whole world could massively benefit from this much like the other great innovation out of the EU -- the Common Charger Directive (aka USB-C).
- rules on disassembly and repair, including obligations for producers to make critical spare parts available within 5-10 working days, and for 7 years after the end of sales of the product model on the EU market
- availability of operating system upgrades for longer periods (at least 5 years from the date of the end of placement on the market of the last unit of a product model)
Phones cannot have non-updated software due to another EU Regulation: Cyber Resilience Act. You need to support devices at least for 5 years starting from December 2027.
This is about user replaceable batteries, which is subtly different for me. Batteries that can be replaced by a shop, with some specialized tools and knowledge are important to me from a sustainability perspective since that extends the life of the phone.
Batteries that can be popped out and replaced by your average consumer are something beyond that, and have certain consumer benefits like being able to bring along a backup or something, but aren't that important to me.
You mean the kind of "first" that comes right after shattered screens, worn batteries, and loose charging ports? :P
I agree in spirit though: storage chips wearing out seems to be common from my limited experience and it would be good if you could solder on, or slide in, a new chip with some standard procedure
Thank you, EU, for having the courage to pass the pro-consumer regulations that my own government lacks. Often, as happened when the iPhone got rid of the proprietary Lightning connector, the benefits extend well beyond your borders.
The right to repair legislation the EU passed is heartening. Now, let's see if they actually enforce it.
There is a shocking amount of apathy on the part of people who think this doesn't affect them because they personally have no desire to use their car out of warranty or to take a car to an independent mechanic. It affects them because it affects resale price, which affects depreciation which hits their pocketbooks directly. Even if they lease the car.
There is a reason that EVs are getting hammered and even ICE vehicles are seeing steeper depreciation curves, and that's because they are becoming more disposable and harder to repair. People are talking about "useful life" of a car as if this was a disposable consumer device, and not a durable good that can be repaired and maintained for decades as long as the ability to replace components is out there. Toyota famously said "Our mission is to build cars that last for 30 years in the third world" and what do you know Toyotas don't depreciate nearly as much as other cars and people still pay 5 figures for 20 year old landrovers.
We also used to build toasters and refrigerators that easily last 50, 60 years or even 100 years if properly maintained. There is no reason cars can't do the same, and for some cars this is possible, but not for modern cars and certainly not for modern EVs. This can change.
[offtopic] Ive always wondered why a conversion has not been offered ( by someone ) for apple phones to make, it so the battery can be replaced by end user? It would be a case modification somehow. Some kind of new "back"
This is a bad development. This is likely the end of waterproof phones in the EU market. Customers preferred phones that had non-removable batteries. Previously all phones had replaceable batteries. This is due to market forces.
So this means no iPhone Air 2 in Europe? I can hardly see Apple wiggle around the special tools requirement when these batteries are glued and sealed shut in the devices.
[edit] didn’t see the fine print with the cycles requirement etc. so it seems Apple etc is still safe.
Aside from an easily swap-able battery I would love for an iPhone with a double thickness screen that was less susceptible to cracking and built-in rubber bumpers so I wouldn't need a case.
Both options have pros and cons but IMHO the cons for replaceable are more.
Since 2020 phone hardware and especially battery has become much better, reliable and long lasting, at least at not dirt cheap ones. It will fail long after the screen brakes or the software updates stop. And a replaceable battery degrades the design.
On the other side a new battery makes an old phone like new. But again it only costs 15-20E to change it in a non-repl phone.
The only real reason to promote battery repl is to reduce e-waste.
And next we could have mandatory security patching for 5 years to make it worth replacing the battery on an old phone. I would say right to repair should apply to the firmware/OS as well.
It probably makes things easier, but its unlikely that the industry that found a way to make foldables waterproof couldn't figure out a way to put rubber gaskets on battery covers. And in fact, they did, there were several devices introduced in the transition period that had both features.
Rubber gaskets wear out. Best practice is to replace them every time you open the cover. We can put them in, but the replacement battery better come with the gasket because you can't safely replace the battery without a new gasket.
Galaxy S5 was IP67-rated (1 metre depth, 30 minutes) and had a user-replaceable back cover / battery
Also a notification LED, OLED screen, bezels to pick the device up by, headphone jack, unlockable, a continuous light sensor... peak smartphone, save perhaps for the meager 200 Hz accelerometer refresh rate (modern phones have 500 Hz usually, I have no idea what for but I personally love toying with FFT plots)
Waterproof phones all still have charging ports and no flaps. Not sure how but that seems to be solved. Maybe that one part's connectors are encased in glue?
Yes and don't forget consumer preferences. This is Hacker News where they are still clamoring for a "small smartphone" because everything else is too big. Shocker, small phones don't sell. Neither do bulky ones when compared to sleek iPhones.
Not sure if I should be repeating the same answer below each instance of the question but here goes: See the Samsung Galaxy S5 for example as having a good waterproofing rating and user-replaceable battery
Every post about the EU here gets absolutely flooded by negative comments of people who tell me that whatever the EU proposed won't work, governments shouldn't do these things, the proposed legislation is ineffective, it doesn't go far enough, they're just trying to extract money from our successful American companies, and so on and so forth. It's just a neverending diarrhoea of anti-government anti-European underbelly sentiment.
That sounds like seeing a pattern where there is none (apophenia). Do you have examples of posts that wouldn't be downvoted outside of times where Europe/Africa is awake, or that weren't only because it was posted outside of said hours?
Earlier this year I downgraded my S24 ultra to an iphone 13 mini and then to the first gen iphone SE. I replaced the battery myself on the SE and couldn't be happier. Less screen time and more IRL time. People should just use less of their phones and for battery longevity they should not let their phones go daily below 20%.
No one on this planet should use their phone more than 2 hours per day. Period. More is just plain stupid.
This might be shifting us closer to worse overall design/performance to accommodate swapability. The pouch cells are very fragile, with the phone itself being the physical protection for the cell. If end users begin to handle these, you likely have to add additional packaging to the cell which increases the overall dimensions or reduces total capacity to maintain the same size.
Maybe it's for our own good, maybe we have to suck it up and lose a little capacity to meet sustainability goals. Or maybe this won't do much for the environment.
I am not sure people actually care that much about dimensions.
Most phones today only look thin on promotional material. With the massive camera bump that is sometimes thicker than the phone itself, and the way most people use cases, in the end, you have quite a brick. Also a glass back panel, which to me is one of the worst materials for that purpose, but it looks good on the store stand.
So to me, a removable battery will not affect the phone dimensions as much as it will affect the look, which may piss off the marketing guys, and I take it as a positive!
Seriously, bring back the removable plastic back covers, plastic may look cheap, but to me, it is the best material, and if you put on a case, as most people do, you won't even see it!
Obviously it helps with the design to embed. But it's also obvious so hard to replace batteries are by design to make those phones throw away after the 1000cycle or whatever batties last.
A good middle ground would have been to enforce an easy to replace specification..but then we are up to interpretation.
I know a common refrain with my friends is "IDGAF about an extra few centimeters, give me an audio jack". I think consumers are down for thicker phones if they get something for it. In this case, a phone that lasts longer
Where in the market can I buy a thicker phone with a 3.5mm jack that has comparable features to those of best sellers? How can I reveal a preference that isn't offered.
They optimize for enriching shareholders and experiments like exploring the market for brick phones is a needlessly costly one when existing trends can be exploited.
I think most (all?) would already comply. What laptop do you see as not having a user replacable battery? Even MacBook can be swapped out pretty easily [1].
I won't name brands, but there are lots of low cost "tablet with keyboard" laptops with glued battery. Just a couple of months ago I had to ditch one.
Anyway, if most comply, why not make it mandatory? Or are these kind of directives only aimed at picking fights with manufacturers?
Note that I am not suggesting that all laptops should have USB-C chargers, that's a separate directive. I mean user replaceable batteries available for at least 5 years, without requiring major surgery to replace.
MacBooks are not easy at all. I did it twice and it's an annoying, dangerous mess (danger of tearing the battery open). Apple won't even bother with it. If you want an "official job", they will just replace the whole top shell including the keyboard, because they can't be bothered to remove the glue. And of course it's expensive because of that.
8 minutes to complete, using only a screw driver and credit card, once every three or four years, is definitely "annoying". But, I'd still say it's also "pretty easy" (I never said "easy"). My reference frame may be different than yours.
Have you actually done it? Mine were 15" MacBooks, not 13" like in the video – maybe that makes a difference. It took me about 20 minutes. In the video the outer two battery packs just pop up without much resistance – that is not how it was in my case. It needed lots of acetone and patience and it was a messy process. I also had to apply quite a lot of force and was worried I might tear a battery pack open in the process (they were already swollen and looked like they might explode any moment).
The noname replacement batteries also have nowhere near the same capacity that the Apple batteries had originally.
It's interesting to see almost all the exact sentiment. I think barring some niches, most people are happy with USB-C transition.
I understand the scepticism but the expectation of "perfection" from regulators (incremental improvement disliked) while fanfare for incremental startup / tech improvement is a weird, cognitive dissonance of HN
Considering that this, and other, regulation is officially aimed at reducing e-waste, the EU should commit to publish independent data on the amount of e-waste and phones replacement rates now and every year afterwards in order to measure the real world impact.
Too often, including in HN comments, those regulations are presented as "obviously" good policies. Well, data are better than assumptions.
I don't know if this is standard, but at least for some previously enacted electronics regulations I know they look into the real-world effects. I think I was looking for information on how they calculate the battery life for the new smartphone energy labels (e.g. is the browsing test over WiFi or the LTE/NR modem) when I found some document about how much energy they're expecting to save with this regulation. It showed a base path of expected energy consumption development, and then how the regulation is expected to modify that
The shaded area is the effect that they think is attributable to regulations, e.g. -2.2TWh electricity per year in the category of phones and tablets when comparing 2010 and 2030
As another example, for "Servers and data storage products" they expect almost no change due to regulation: the consumption is expected to go from 48 to 67 TWh (2010 till 2030) and that it would have been 70 TWh without regulations. If I'm reading it right, this small improvement would be due to the 2019 "information requirement ... including the maximum allowed operating temperature for the equipment ... to stimulate data centres to choose equipment that supports higher operating temperatures, to enable further reduction of the cooling load."
Page 42 shows that they also take into account 'additional acquisition costs' (how much more expensive devices are because of this, I think that means?), but that this added expense is well below the energy costs that would have been incurred otherwise. Of course, that's what I'd say too about my regulations :) but I don't know of another information source for this so this is the best info I have atm
> The move comes amid EU-wide efforts to cut the continent’s carbon footprint and tackle mounting waste [...]
...
> [...] if specialised tools are required, they must be provided free of charge when the phone or tablet is purchased.
So if a family buys several phones and tablets that all use the same specialized tool to change their batteries they end up with several identical specialized tools?
From a reducing waste perspective wouldn't it be better to just require that the tool be available for free for some reasonable amount of time such as however long the manufacturer is required to support the device?
I don't think hackers (in the Hacker News sense of the word) are generally iphone users, considering apple's hostility and condescension towards customers, fighting consumer rights forced by regulators, and device lock-down. People who already compromised on that for a status symbol would probably take the shiny new toy over functionality, sure
good. now do the software enshittification part, which is the real driver of device obsolescence. being able to replace the battery is nice, but if the new battery lasts half as long because the software needs twice as much resources to perform the same tasks - you're not really fixing anything.
I honestly would not have upgraded my iPhone 13 Pro if I could have just swapped the battery. That phone seemed to get better battery life than current models.
I recently bought a Supernote Manta. It's an e-ink writing tablet. Guess what: it has a back which can be opened, and its innards are easily accessible. I could pop in an SD card, and the battery can be replaced, too. It's thin and light.
We are being gaslighted by Apple. They keep telling us that it's impossible to have a thin and light device with a user-replaceable battery, or even, heaven forbid, an SD card slot. I beg to differ: there are some compromises (it won't be as seamless perhaps and Jony Ive or whoever won't be able to wax poetic about the materials), but it can be done.
I would imagine something similar is true for waterproofing. There are certainly ways to have a separate battery and phone, with a waterproofed connector.
So Apple will skip the iPhone 18 replaceable battery? I will wait another year to upgrade my 7-year-old phone, but I wouldn't buy 18 if they don't include this.
If this happens, all phones worldwide will have replaceable batteries. It makes no financial sense to have EU and non EU models of phones with seperate manufacturing lines...
I mean, I paid like $100 to have apple do it on my iphone 13 mini. It took a few hours and my phone works approximately like new. If a $800 phone's battery lasts 4 years, it's very much worth $100 to get even a couple more years out of it...
Next time I will also by previous generation rather than the newest model.
Now all we need is that they honor the requirement for at least one physical nano-SIM so that we are not beholden to carriers to do something as simple as switching phones when travelling--or in an emergency.
They’re just going to change the software for thebattery so that it only charges to 80% capacity so that it meets the requirement of 1000 cycles no one is actually getting replaceable batteries.
Edit: commercially available tools. All right so you just sell that tool on your shop.
Nfc tags don't have battery and they draw power from the em waves of the scanner. Maybe in a few centuries we will power our phones using the cell towers.
This is idiotic. What's next, disallowing unified memory or SoC with packaged memory? These people think they know better than world experts on these matters.
and now these voices from right wing, that EU is a communistic union resonate more and more.
Now they tell you what to do and how to do.not by market forces.
if anyone can replace the phone, it's much harder to track how it was recycle with phone with battery. same with cars btw.
they trying to change the world by just issuing the order. That usually never works fine.
Damn, recently I had a phone with a battery that wasn’t properly glued and it would turn off when shaken. I hope this doesn’t become the norm from now on.
Never had this issue with several cellphones I had in ye olden times when all cellphones had removable batteries. All it takes is a properly designed connector.
Yeah, none of my Nokias with a removable back cover and battery had that issue. What you realistically might've had was instead that you dropped your phone on the floor and the battery came flying out.
I am simply not a fan of this type of legislation. It reminds me of CA bullet button. I also don’t quite understand the purpose. Official retail cost from Apple in the US ~$120. Third-party you can usually get it around $60. Sure the battery does not have quick accessibility but I can replace it pretty cheaply.
Agreed. This rule will likely be irrelevant in 5-10 years when battery technology improves, and it has such a huge carve out (batteries that maintain 80% capacity after 1000 cycles are exempt) every phone manufacture can get around it. Phone makers can meet this regulation by artificially limiting battery capacity through software to protect battery health. Or they could put in a 10,000 mAh battery and only allow the user to use 8,000 of it, and use the rest as buffer.
A better example is the EU cookie consent law. The intent was to make websites stop using cookies, but what resulted was websites didn't change anything except put up annoying consent banners, and made the internet experience worse.
Sure but how does this legislation help that? Not to mention that would mean labor is going to be a lot cheaper so the largest cost may be the battery itself. That $60 would come down.
Phone manufacturers should be able to seal their phones to prevent unwanted substance egress and to compete on aesthetics. They should also make the seal breachable with consumer-grade hand tools like a hairdryer, suction cup, and plastic wedges.
The inside of the phone should use standard screws and securing mechanisms, and batteries should not be glued to the phone.
I actually really like what Apple's been doing with its new batteries by sealing them in metal. That way if a user is being careless and accidentally slips a screwdriver under the back of their phone, the risk that they puncture their battery and start a fire is greatly reduced.
It secures the most dangerous component of your device in a way that makes it easy for anyone to remove and replace safely. I'm sure Apple has a robot to rip the battery out of its case at its recycling plant, and if the phone gets dropped in a lake or something, if that battery eventually catastrophically fails, at least it's wrapped in a suit of armor.
Yikes, I don't live in the EU, but I absolutely don't want this. Maybe I'm mistaken and they could have achieved the same with removable batteries, but my phone is completely waterproof, dustproof, and has survived more than a few hard drops with no case. I would definitely take that over a replaceable battery. Again, I acknowledge they might not be mutually exclusive.
As the law is written, the latest iPhones, for example, would be compliant (battery is replaceable with commercially available tools under the self-repair program), and they are completely waterproof and dustproof. Some manufacturers now use glued seals for their phones and would probably need to change their approach in design, but I think the majority would be okay with minimal changes.
Like others have pointed out, if phones can certify using batteries with 1000 cycles of charge above 80%, they'll also be exempt, so this will likely only affect very cheap models.
With respect, maybe read the article? You're against it, because you didn't read what is being mandated and instead just invented worst-case scenarios instead. You're against your own Strawman.
The proposal is: batteries must be removable using commercially available tools, if the manufacturer requires specialist tools then they must provide them for free.
Essentially they're banning specialized tools, and mandating that repair shops and consumers must be able to purchase replacement batteries for "at least five years."
For context the iPhone was already altered to be compliant with this law and none of the issues you raised were notably worse in the iPhone Air, or 17.
This likely will eliminate specialist software to "sync" batteries, and non-standard screws/attachment mechanisms.
> The proposal is: batteries must be removable using commercially available tools
That's exactly what he's against, plus the premise "Making batteries removable prevents them from being waterproof, dustproof, and collision resistant". Which may be true or false, but not a straw man.
Thanks, and yes, exactly this. As I acknowledged in my comment, maybe phones can be made waterproof, dustproof, and dropproof while also being user serviceable. If there is a tradeoff, I'll take waterproof over user-battery-replaceable. Apparently conditionals make me a strawman...
It absolutely is a Strawman. There's no basis in fact for why using commercial tools instead of specialist tools would result in worse "waterproof, dustproof, or collision resistance." It is completely fictional claim invented whole cloth.
Again, multiple phones have already become compliant with this law and didn't lose or compromise any of those things.
So you OR they, will need to explain the basis for the claim, otherwise it is just a Strawman you're poking baselessly.
I guess the headline is what sets up the straw man -- I didn't think we were arguing about the narrower claim "all phones with replaceable batteries should be removable using commercial tools", just whether they should be replaceable at all. I still think it's reasonable to expect that mandating phones be openable would have tradeoffs in waterproofing, so your disagreement should be factual/historical, not about good faith.
It’s been long enough that people of forgotten what’s it’s like. Cameras still have replaceable batteries, there are several benefits:
I can have two (or more) batteries, if it runs out I just change it. I don’t need walk around with a USB battery pack and cable hanging off the device preventing me from using it properly.
I can put the battery on charge somewhere and leave it, even if not completely secure, because just the battery not the device. This way my expensive device and my data is not at risk.
I can use 40+ year old cameras, because I can just put a new battery in. This is not something you can do with newer device, e.g. and iPod and you can’t even find anyone who will fit them for the older models.
Battery tech moves on. There are now some batteries with charging ports on them. Other batteries offer more capacity than the original ones. Apple even did this once for me, when MacBook Air batteries were fairly easy to replace, I had mine replaced (it wore out) at the shop and they put a slightly bigger one in, which was the standard on the newer models.
The final law just makes replacing batteries more accessible (i.e. no glue or special screws), but it doesn't mandate battery packs. Also some devices like hearing aids are exempt.
I question whether battery packs would be a good thing to bring back now. USB power banks have 100% interchangeability among many device classes, which is something that not even dry cell batteries achieved. I can choose to leave the house with or without a power bank and just rent one in my city (YMMV). Modern charging wattages are high enough that I don't miss shutting down my Nexus, changing the pack, then rebooting.
It's tempting to say that this could be solved if battery sizes were standardized, but that would inevitably limit device dimensions. For example, I especially loathe how the 18650 has made almost all modern flashlights clunky. I would hate it if Apple pushes for a 4.5mm thick battery standard to kill all foldables because they don't want to enter the market and cannibalize their iPad demand.
Agree - I read this as it will be easy to replace the battery when it reaches its end of life and no longer can hold my charge. It will still take time to replace it, but that's okay since it'll only be done once every few years. It's not meant to re-introduce swappable battery packs, so you won't be able to carry spares on long trips etc.
Isn't Apple supposedly entering the market this year though? By the time any regulations has passed, they'd probably already be established. Though I agree I don't really see too much point in making batteries quick-swappable rather than just easily swappable as you say considering it's unlikely to be a true hot-swap without requiring a power cycle.
I don't think this is where peak battery tech ends up. At current capacities, batteries are becoming genuinely dangerous, and faster charging only amplifies the risk. Charging high-capacity cells outside a temperature-controlled charger is risky, and even reputable chargers shouldn't be left unattended — many workplaces ban it outright (it only takes one fire to make that policy). Phone batteries are the worst of it: highest power density, fastest charging, odd geometry, and tight space constraints. Manufacturers shrink the phone by offloading temperature monitoring and heat dissipation onto the phone's own electronics and housing — so replaceable, externally rechargeable batteries are tricky to design. IMO, swappable batteries were a feature because batteries used to suck. In less volume-constrained devices like cameras, swappable batteries still work — but you're trading single-charge runtime for that convenience.
This last point is actually a real killer, an easily swappable battery in a phone probably sacrifices >10% "maximum" capacity in lost space. e.g a phone with a glued battery can have 5000mAh but the same phone with a more durable battery connector can only be 4500mAh.
It's the exact same as with EVs.
We COULD have an EV with a 200kWh battery that can go 1000km++ on a charge in -30C weather. But nobody really needs that beyond a few outliers.
What we NEED is ubiquitous and easy charging.
Going for a burger, it'll take 20 minutes for you to order, eat and walk out. On a 300kW charger in the parking lot you can in theory get up to 100kWh charged. Or less with a slower one. Even plugging in to a 50kW charger for 20 minutes is enough.
Same with shopping etc, giving "everyone" a 2kW charger in a parking lot is table stakes in 2026.
And with phones: just have the possilibity of charging everywhere. I have 13€ Ikea Qi2 ("Magsafe") compatible chargers[0] everywhere in the house. Anyone can just slap their phone on one and it'll charge a bit.
There's no reason why we can't have more of those in public - we did try when wireless charging first appeared, but it was a whole chicken and egg thing. Nobody had phones that supported it and finding the exact 1x1cm spot where the phone charges was a pain. Qi2 with the alignment magnets takes that problem away completely.
[0] https://www.ikea.com/us/en/p/vaestmaerke-wireless-charging-s...
Ultimately the main benefit obtained from not allowing battery replacement, is an increase in sales of newer models.
While your reasoning has _some_ merit, it reads as an apologia for the status quo .. rather than an example of why we should prevent easy battery replacement.
The main thing that makes all this hard to do is the form factor.
Give these phone batteries a standard geometry and interface and pretty much all these problems immediately go away. 3 prongs on the battery (ground, positive, data). A standard protocol so the battery can communicate things like SOC or acceptable charge rate with the charger. And viola, you are off to the races.
Yes, this will mean manufacturers will have a hard limit on how thin they can make their phones and a constraint on what designs they can employ.
> e.g a phone with a glued battery can have 5000mAh but the same phone with a more durable battery connector can only be 4500mAh.
alternatively, i can trade more bulk for more battery. if its got a connector, why cant i put a bigger batter in the slot that sticks out?
That brings back memories! Yes, many devices before iPhone had normalized internal batteries indeed had aftermarket extended batteries. They would come with matching bulged back covers to fit the significantly oversized battery.
That's true even today for HAM radio handhelds. There is a cottage industry of ever larger snap on batteries for Baofengs and others. Very handy.
Random thought: Maybe Apple should use radioisotope batteries to never have to change them, ever. I jest.
My early iPhones had external battery cases, which even when attached (when travelling a long distance) were smaller than modern iPhones in the important dimensions.
Thinkpad T480, with dual battery was a really great idea
Slop
We don't need fast charging. Phones will be left on wireless charging surfaces, which will eventually be ubiquitous. Everyone hates usb-c plug in. Just leave it on a surface, pick it whenever you want.
We don't need to fast charge anything, phones or EVs. Slow charging preserves battery life and smart charging will charge whenever it is cheapest.
I've never seen anyone hate usb-c, what world do you live in? And on phones fast-charging's cost on the battery life expectancy is negligible[0]
Also, wireless charging is finicky and comes at a cost: way less efficient energy transfer.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLS5Cg_yNdM
Well hatered for USB-C for charging connectors seems to be strong in this thread alongside the dislike for being able to have changeable batteries.
Hell, this thread even has a person whose argument against USB-C is that mandating it will mean that the EU will get conquered by Russia.
I hate USB-C. Hi. I do a lot of woodworking and the port easily clogs with sawdust and lint. It was very easy to clean it each day when I had a lightning connector, a common toothpick would suffice.
Now I have to purchase specialized non-marring micro tool scrapers to clean the port without damaging it. The scrapers break after a few cleanings, so this is an ongoing monthly recurring cost. Yeah I can charge wirelessly, but I still don’t want sawdust in my phone hole after a day of ripping wood.
Finally someone with an argument. I do hear why you dislike it, most people seems to do it without any reason... As it was said by someone else you might be able to cover it up somehow, either a rubber plug, or 3d print a small strip of plastic and put it in your case.
Toothpicks work great for this if you narrow them a bit with a knife.
As a woodworker I'm surprised you didn't have that idea :D
(Like, c'mon, toothpicks aren't immutable objects that fall out of question just because they're a bit too large)
why not to buy a rubber usb-c plug?
Charging a 5Ah phone empty to full every day of the year adds up to all of about 7kWh. Nobody cares if you shave off a couple cents per year if the experience is worse.
The fact that pretty much no phones have a replaceable battery says something. And it doesn't mean that all manufacturers are somehow colluding with each. The market is very competitive and pretty much every manufacturer decided the trade offs are not worth the benefit. If Samsung or Xiaomi or Google could sell you a better phone with a replaceable battery, they would. But everyone came to the conclusion that the trade off is just not worth it. And now the EU, in its infinite wisdom has decided it knows whats best.
If it's such a superior product that people want despite the tradeoffs, why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
Because people will buy that phone and keep it much longer. When phones had replaceable batteries, they needed replaced after a couple of years because they were terrible. I'm now on a several year old pixel phone that I'm happy with, but eventually the battery will wear out and I'll have to replace it. Google likes it that way.
Battery tech has gotten a lot better every year over the last hundred years.
I think OP meant the phone was going to be replaced in three years tops, so no one cared much about battery longevity. Nowadays, the battery can be the constraint for practical phone life, since few consumers can replace one themselves and by the time they pay someone else to do it, may as well trade it in and let Verizon subsidize a new one.
Having an easily swappable battery returns some power to the user.
Phones with swappable batteries are already legal to buy.
It was legal to buy a car that had a seatbelt before the seatbelt became mandatory.
Or phones with USB-C.
I suspect this will be a good thing to force, but I don't know for sure.
> It was legal to buy a car that had a seatbelt before the seatbelt became mandatory.
Yes, making seatbelts mandatory was also a weird decision.
Weird in what way?
As an example of public policy it had significant impact on death, injury, medical costs, etc.
Road Traffic Accidents before and after Seatbelt Legislation-Study in a District General Hospital (1990)
~ https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/014107689008300207( ^ One of many before/after studies that highlight difference made by seatbelt legislation )
Oh, seatbelts are great, and I wouldn't want to ride a car without one.
However people who don't want to wear seatbelts generally only endanger themselves. So why force them against their will?
Saving hundreds of thousands of lives was a weird decision?
Seatbelts are great, and I wouldn't want to ride a car without one.
However people who don't want to wear seatbelts generally only endanger themselves. So why force them against their will?
You don't have to replace the phone. You can go to some repair shop and get the battery replaced. It will be several times cheaper than a new phone.
Very few people do that. I don't. Because a) general software enshittification makes me need a more powerful decice anyway, and, more importantly, b) people are just happy to have an excuse to get the the new shiny.
> You don't have to replace the phone. You can go to some repair shop and get the battery replaced. It will be several times cheaper than a new phone.
Still way more expensive than swapping a battery pack, and this mean leaving your phone to a stranger for a few hours or maybe a day if the shop is really busy. Anything that add friction to changing battery will help sell new phone.
I do it.
> a) general software enshittification makes me need a more powerful decice anyway
You don't, this is nothing but an excuse for
> b) people are just happy to have an excuse to get the the new shiny.
Nah, sorry, enshittification is not "just an excuse". My current 2020 phone(xperia 5-ii - I wanted that sd slot&jack) is noticeably slower than when I got it, even though the battery is holding up decently(it basically needs to last a day, and it usually does). Software shops seem to get focused on testing their stuff on "modern" devices. It looks like, once your device starts to slip out of that "testing pool", things get increasingly buggy until it eventually makes general use enough of a pain to require replacement.
I think last couple years' improvements to battery tech made software take over batteries as the bigger contributor to device obsolescence.
So this change, while welcome, is a bit late.
I have 4+ years old S22 Ultra and there is absolutely nothing slowed down. I didn't install any crap semi-random apps just for the lolz, its basically static set of features with maybe 2 new apps per year added as it keeps doing more and more like ebanking or work auth. It doesn't even have Snapdragon processor, just their own Exynos and its simply fine.
It keeps getting all updates and will keep for few more years.
Camera results massively improved cca 2 years ago with some update so that they are cca on same level as current ones. Plus I still has 10x physical zoom which trumps all current models, iphone pro max including since we still can't bypass physical limits of optics.
Really, 0 reasons to update and battery capacity is the only upcoming issue - still fine now but I feel the decrease a bit. If I could swap it easily myself without paying some phone shop to do it, that's a massive advantage.
[dead]
Fairphone exists. The batteries are easily replaceable, they have a video on their website. It's no thicker than many other phones, runs on non Google OS, maybe just check it out. I have one and am totally satisfied with it.
https://www.fairphone.com/the-fairphone-gen-6-e-operating-sy...
[dead]
I don't think the objective is to make it a "superior product" in the somewhat circular way you're defining it (i.e., the market equilibrium that we settled on). It's one of several measures to try to have people keep their phones for longer and cut e-waste.
Also Products aren't being designed for individuals anymore. There being designed to maximize for ad revenue, we're the product.
If there is any incentive to make a product better is to make it more accessible to their first party customers.
Slow down innovation is certainly one way to have people keep their phones longer and cut e-waste. Imagine if they allowed air conditioners...
Do you think fuel efficiency or emission standards "slowed down innovation"? They brought a huge amount of innovation: lighter materials, better aerodynamics, higher compression ratios, direct injection, better mixture control, etc.
There will still be innovation; the solutions will just have satisfy the new parameters.
Yes, they definitely slowed down innovation and decreased consumer surplus compared to the counterfactual of just taxing the behaviour you don't like (like taxing fuel or emissions).
They tax the fuel as well, don’t you worry.
Sure, but they could have taxed it more and not have any official fuel efficiency standards.
(And compared to most of Europe or Singapore, US fuel is taxed very lightly, and their CAFE standards are especially stupid. Especially since their loopholes led to the replacement of practical station wagons with silly and dangerous SUVs. With a more car-agnostic fuel tax, this wouldn't have happened.)
You stumbled onto the pain point. The problem isn’t the intention but the execution. The EU historically has done a better job at nailing the execution of this type of regulation.
If it slows down innovation is debatable but even so there’s still a solid principle behind it, a small speed reduction can grant a huge efficiency gain. It’s usually a worthwhile compromise. You don’t run tour engine only in the red zone because that’s where it makes the most power.
> [...] a small speed reduction can grant a huge efficiency gain.
And customers directly benefit from the efficiency gain by burning through less fuel. So no need to decide for them.
And then when EVs become viable they went - naaaah look at those efficient diesels!!
To a degree.
You can’t have infinitely improving standards for an infinite time, otherwise you end up with bullshit like Dieselgate, and ecotechnocrats forcing everyone to drive around in mobile inextinguishable incendiary devices.
ICE cars catch fire at a far higher rate than BEVs.
All ICE cars, or only those as old as the BEV fleet?
At least ICE car fires can be extinguished, and without special equipment.
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact and lock the occupants inside and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames taking down whole RORO car transport vessels at sea?
Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames in your garage at night and ignite your whole house, while you and your family are sleeping?
> At least ICE car fires can be extinguished
Well, kind of. You have some seconds to try to cut it short, after that they will burn to a crisp, exactly like an electric car. The difference is that a battery will burn until the end no matter what. OTOH, an ICE fire is potentially explosive.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
They can and they do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu7tQ2-x61k or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKOQUE9U1Ek or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFvzTOZsnsg. That Youtube channel alone (Jersey Shore Fire Response) has more than a dozen ICE car fires, nobody comments nothing about ICE cars being dangerous, just "firefighters great job". ONE single case of electric trucks burning, and all comments are "lithium bad". ICE cars contain oil, gasoline, paper, rubber, plastics... They have some parts that get really hot on normal functioning, and any failure (e.g. an oil duct leaking, debris on the exhaust) could lead to a "spontaneous" fire. The difference is that a lithium battery can burn from a cold state without being our fault, while for an ICE car you can blame the driver for bad maintenance, parking over dry grass, reeving too much... we like to find causality, so we can convince ourself we can avoid that happening to us.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact and lock the occupants inside and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Any car can catch fire after any impact if the luck is bad. A gas or oil leakage can lead to a "spontaneous" fire very quickly. Any car can catch fire even without any impact, just driving around, as shown in the videos above. If your car catches fire, the fumes will be toxic, it doesn't matter if the toxicity comes from plastics, oil, rubber or lithium. Get far from the car quickly.
You are ignoring the fact that ICE cars are more prone to catch fire, proportionally. And the try to steer the debate to what is the cause of such fires, or if the ICE car can be extinguished with water. That would be a different debate.
> At least ICE car fires can be extinguished, and without special equipment.
That's not quite right. It's not like a non-special equipment like bucket of water or a garden hose (and I, for one, always travel with one of each!) work well for extinguishing any working car fire.
The remains of ICE car fires I've seen while out and about, while very few, are usually just hulks of vaguely car-shaped metal that have turned rusty from the heat by the time I come across them.
Car fires are never good. They're seldom easy to put out. EV fires can be worse in a lot of ways, but that doesn't make the other kinds of car fires saintly or anything.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
Nope. Except: One doesn't have to go very far on teh Interweb to find videos of car fires at gas stations, either.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact
Sometimes.
> and lock the occupants inside
Sometimes people can't get out.
> and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Nope.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames taking down whole RORO car transport vessels at sea?
Not usually.
People don't usually die from getting hit on the side of the road while pouring gas from a jerry can into their EV, either.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames in your garage at night
Not often, but sometimes.
> and ignite your whole house, while you and your family are sleeping?
I'm not answering that. I take too much pleasure in ignoring uselessly-specific addendums to questions like this. You'll have to forgive me.
> All ICE cars, or only those as old as the BEV fleet?
You tell us.
From the way you wrote this comment, you seem to have a pre-existing belief that ICE is safer despite the evidence to the contrary, it looks like this because you're asking questions that are nonsensically specific, to paraphrase "does a ICE car catch fire while charging?", given that depending solely on how you count the tiny little lead battery in an ICE they *either* don't charge at all but rather refuel *or* they continuously charge while running.
> At least ICE car fires can be extinguished, and without special equipment.
False.
There are many different classifications of fire, each with their own special equipment; liquid fuel is amongst them, just as electrical fires are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_extinguisher
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames while you’re sitting in it waiting for it charge?
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=petrol+station+fire&t=osx&ia=image...
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames after a relatively low speed impact and lock the occupants inside and immediately fill the cabin with fumes from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery?
Re "lock the occupants inside", that sounds like you're talking about Tesla's design flaws, which is a "Tesla" problem not a "battery" problem. Other EV companies aren't as dumb as Musk has been with Tesla over the last decade.
Also, firefighters have for my entire life carried tools specifically for breaking open vehicles that had been smashed in ways that stopped the doors working: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_rescue_tool
And window-breaker hammers have likewise been standard emergency kit for a long time, though I don't know when they started getting recommended for drivers themselves.
Re "from a rapidly degradging lithium ion battery", petrol and diesel fumes are also pretty nasty.
Irrelevant framing aside, post-crash fires are actually more common in ICE vehicles due to fuel system breaches.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames taking down whole RORO car transport vessels at sea?
Yes.
Stats I've found with a cursory glance say that there's more risk from the ship's own engine than all the vehicles, ICE and BEV combined, that it carries.
> Do ICE cars spontaneously erupt in flames in your garage at night and ignite your whole house, while you and your family are sleeping?
Yes, and are more likely to than BEVs.
I noticed this first hand: past year I was driving near home and a ICE car was burning in the shoulder of the road, with the firefighters working on it. It didn't reach even local news, in the following days I couldn't find anybody who have heard about it. A few months later an electric car catched fire around 100km away from my house, and the day after everyone was talking about it at workplace and how dangerous they are.
I don't know why it happens. Maybe a case of "if a dog bites a man, it's not important. If a man bites a dog, it gets newspaper cover". Maybe it is that an ICE car burning is extinguished in minutes, and then towed away, while an electric car burning is basically a two hours firework show.
...You think air conditioners are forbidden in Europe...?
Yes. Here in Hamburg you have to pay some useless consultant to come to your house and check that there's no other way to decrease the temperature before you are allowed to install one.
You are also not allowed to but your bicycle in the garage.
I think it’s far more likely to introduce additional dead batteries into existing waste. Probably drop in an ocean given how much batteries are already dumped.
> If it's such a superior product that people want despite the tradeoffs, why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
Because legislation is direct and gives better results to consumers. Thank god the EU standardized on USB-C.
There's no reason to jump through extra hoops and rely on the whims of investors to do something good for the people.
>Thank god the EU standardized on USB-C
Short term thinking, if anyone invents a significantly better connector the eu will lag a decade while they clear the red tape, it hampers innovation inside the bloc people who might otherwise be concocting their own improved connector.
(1) The EU fundamentally didn't care which standard so long as there was one; they only forced this because Apple dragged their feet with their own proprietary thing that wasn't a significant advantage. The other end of Apple's Lightning port being a USB port does not suggest it added anything except deliberate incompatibility.
(2) what would "significantly better" even look like? USB-C can do 120 watts, enough to fill a 20 Wh battery in 10 minutes, except the batteries themselves aren't ready to charge that fast.
(3) if someone somehow manages to make a significant advance, nothing prevents them from having two ports. Or indeed lobbying for a law change on the basis of a tangible thing they can demonstrate rather than a hypothetical that still hasn't happened in all the time since these discussions began.
The same Europeans that were miles ahead with their GSM standard?
We can compare that to the US. Here, we stayed stuck with power-thirsty analog phones for many years before bouncing through a litany of mutually-incompatible digital non-standards...and finally landed on the ~same actual-standards that Europe adopted.
I think they'll be OK. (I think the rest of us will be OK, too.)
With that attitude, we’d still be using D-sub connectors.
I assume OP thinks more like me: the EU will move to the next standard in a reasonable amount of time after it's available.
I'll be the first to complain if the new standard isn't adopted in due time, but as a strong example I'm still very content with how the GSM legislation standard has played out.
[flagged]
This is fully on Apple themselves. USB consortium asked apple to use lightning for what became USB-C, but Apple didn't want to give up the ecosystem control.
What does that have to do with the EU requiring everyone to use the USB-C connector?
The EU could have made a different decision. Or not got itself involved.
You're aware the maker of the lightning connector helped produce the USB-C standard in the same year they created lightning?
> The design for the USB‑C connector was initially developed in 2012 by Apple Inc., with the help of Intel, HP Inc., Microsoft, and the USB Implementers Forum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C
So?
USB-C is rated for 10,000 connections, while Lightning is rated for 40,000. Except if you disconnect and reconnect your phone 4 times a day every day of every year you own it, 10,000 is enough for just under 7 years. And Lighting was introduced in 2012, while USB-C was 2014. In those days, the average lifespan of a smartphone was 2.5 years. Even today, the software is only supported for 7 years at most. You don't need a connector that's going to last nearly 30 years.
And the additional durability of Lightning is itself not free. It's not cheaper than USB-C. Quite the opposite. That additional cost means that it either uses more resources to manufacture, or more resources to make the tools to manufacture. So, it's just wasteful. Lightning is "physically superior" but USB-C is better engineering.
Apple knows that. So Apple chose to go with Lightning because it was theirs, not because it was better. Because it's not really better. Not better for the customer. Or really better for business. Apple chose vendor lock-in.
Worse than that, Apple's connectors are higher durability, but their cabling itself is awful. I work at a K-12 and we were in an iPad and Chromebook pilot back in the mid 2010s that ran about 4-5 years. We had a fleet of 3500 of each. The iPads saw less than half the usage hours as the Chromebooks, but had something like triple the incidence of cable replacement. The cable insulation splits. The plasticizers degrade, the cables get really sticky or oily, and then they split and expose the braided grounding sheath. That braided cable will shock you. That was true for both student and staff devices. So they had these wonderful connectors, but the cables still failed at effectively five or six times the rate of the alternative. And since they were proprietary, you couldn't just buy a better cable made by someone else! You had to buy the same cable that you knew was going to fail!
> And since they were proprietary, you couldn't just buy a better cable made by someone else! You had to buy the same cable that you knew was going to fail!
Godswallop! Aftermarket Lightning cables were readily available shortly after Apple first use the the port.
Agreed though, their own Apple branded cables that came with the device are terrible, and I always just threw them straight in the bin.
And connection cycles is the wrong metric for USB-C vs Lightning. The correct metric is how many and how much side-force removals can the port withstand.
My experience shows that for USB-C the answer is wildly insufficient whereas for Lightning it’s sufficiently high enough that it won’t be a concern.
It’s a weird comment.
Like yeah, Apple helped design the USB-C connector and preferred something else.
Thereby only reinforcing my point.
[flagged]
[flagged]
What does any deity have to do with it? Btw, has anyone done a post mortem analysis of that mandate? I wonder if it delivered what it promised. I doubt it:
All they saved consumers from is buying a 5 dollar replacement cable.
The EU certainly hasn't done such an assessment yet.
The predicted savings of a quarter billion Euro come mostly from unbundling chargers, which they could have forced down customers throats without also making technical mandates about how customers are allowed to charge.
Unbundling charger without standardizing the connectors would result in every manufacturer using their own proprietary bespoke charging connectors. Which is exactly what the situation was before usb was made mandatory.
How much cool aid do you have to drink to genuinely believe the corporate argument that using proprietary connectors is "innovative"?
> Unbundling charger without standardizing the connectors would result in every manufacturer using their own proprietary bespoke charging connectors. Which is exactly what the situation was before usb was made mandatory.
Eh, no? USB-C was already pretty much the standard before, and you could plug in lightning cable with a cheap adapter cable.
Not even that.
Consumers still need to buy replacement cables, because they break.
And the USB-C cable end connector is a fragile piece of shit designed by committee and forced upon everyone buy another committee, neither of which must’ve had a single mechanic engineer even once walk passed their bike shed.
Future historians will do a postmortem on the EU and discover the USB-C enforcement act as an inflection point that marked the downer trend to the EU’s eventual collapse, and the reclamation of its land and people to the great nation of Russia, where it always belonged.
Or some other equally as dreadful outcome befitting the UBS-C Bike Shed & Enforcement Committee formerly know as the European Union.
> Not even that. > > Consumers still need to buy replacement cables, because they break. > > And the USB-C cable end connector is a fragile piece of shit designed by committee and forced upon everyone buy another committee, neither of which must’ve had a single mechanic engineer even once walk passed their bike shed.
Well, the USB committee did ask Apple for the superior connector, but for whatever reason they said no. So we're stuck with this.
OTOH, USB-C is not nearly as bad as your bizarre post would seem to imply. It could be better, but as we know from experience with things like micro-USB, it could be much, much worse.
> Future historians will do a postmortem on the EU and discover the USB-C enforcement act as an inflection point that marked the downer trend to the EU’s eventual collapse, and the reclamation of its land and people to the great nation of Russia, where it always belonged. > > Or some other equally as dreadful outcome befitting the UBS-C Bike Shed & Enforcement Committee formerly know as the European Union.
Russia can't even handle Ukraine, a country significantly smaller in population, economy, and land area than Russia. And you think that they could take on the EU‽ A block, mind you, which has more population and a significantly larger economy. Oh, also nukes.
And you think that the EU would fall in this case because of... USB-C? Please explain the mechanism which would lead to this situation.
> Well, the USB committee did ask Apple for the superior connector, but for whatever reason they said no. So we're stuck with this.
They didn't need to ban all other connectors..
Well good thing is that they didn't. The only thing you need is to provide a USB-C port for charging. Nothing stops a manufacturer adding additional ports for charging, data sharing etc.
So Apple could give people the ability to use their oh-so-superior Lightning cable while also being able to use USB-C for charging. If nothing else, it means that there are no longer any "does anyone have an iPhone charger" discussions at parties because people can just charge all their phones with USB-C.
> Well good thing is that they didn't. The only thing you need is to provide a USB-C port for charging. Nothing stops a manufacturer adding additional ports for charging, data sharing etc.
That's a bit silly. There's only so much space in eg a phone.
Apple switched to USB C years before legal standardization took place.
(actually, which single-vendor connector are we mourning, here? I forget.)
Yes, Apple switched to USB-C for some of their stuff.
So I'm not quite so sure why the EU needed to outlaw alternative chargers.
I don't understand your issue with USB C. Mini and micro USB connectors routinely got loose and fell out of multiple devices I owned, USB C is everywhere now and I have not encountered such issues.
The Lighnting connector and its port are superior in every way.
Physically, maybe. (I don't know.) Legally and economically, I don't think Samsung can just use lightning without having to pay Apple.
Without the EU mandate, perhaps I would still have a Lightning port in my instead of the currently broken USB-C port.
I never had a Lightning port fail.
Good on you!
I just wish that all of them would be legal, and consumer like you be allowed to pick what they like best.
I don't mind USB-C. Most of my devices have USB-C charging, and it works well.
I mind bureaucrats locking that in.
> Future historians will do a postmortem on the EU and discover the USB-C enforcement act as an inflection point that marked the downer trend to the EU’s eventual collapse, and the reclamation of its land and people to the great nation of Russia, where it always belonged.
Haha, what? I like to complain about this piece of legislation, but it's not that important. And it's not like Russia has better policy. Oh, just the opposite. (Like waging wars they can't win, or running crazy high corruption.)
Thanks for decontextualising that paragraph by not including the following paragraph.
I really appreciate it, keep up with the good work.
Bloody Clippers.
You always got to watch out for the Clippers, they’ll take whatever you say or write and clip it out of context and make it mean something completely different to what you really said.
The European Union will fall to Russia while they're looking for a USB-C charge cable that works, or looking for a charged swappable battery for their MANPADs.
There’s nothing important in the last paragraph.
> Thanks for decontextualising that paragraph by not including the following paragraph.
Eh, you know that people can just scroll up?
> The European Union will fall to Russia while they're looking for a USB-C charge cable that works, or looking for a charged swappable battery for their MANPADs.
Are you willing to bet on this?
It means that everybody copies Apple.
Just like 3.5mm headphone jacks and MicroSD card expandable storage.
They're hard to find even on lower end devices any more, despite more ports being a premium/pro feature in other market segments.
That doesn't change anything the parent said. If not copying Apple created a better product that people want to buy, someone would be doing it.
1. It's easier to design and build Ingress Protection without user-accessible compartments.
2. There's a lot of tech on the back: NFC, wireless charging, structurally important [magnetic] attachment points. Ensuring electric contact and physical strength on a door is again hard and expensive or all that tech has to live on the battery.
3. Design. A glass-like openable door is going to be extremely failure prone.
4. Compatibility. You can't guarantee quality of 3rd party batteries, even more so if the tech is in the battery pack.
5. Planned obsolescence. Let's not kid ourselves, encouraging replacing the whole phone is good for business.
The trade-off is basically having a thicker phone. Nobody except apple thus all manufacturers 6 month later want paper-thin phones. Never the actual consumers.
> If Samsung or Xiaomi or Google could sell you a better phone with a replaceable battery, they would.
It's an interesting theory. I'm going to call it capitalist-optimism. It's roughly oppositional to Doctorow's theory of enshittification.
> but everyone came to the conclusion that the trade off is just not worth it
The trade-off here being profit margin versus customer convenience. They've calculated that they'd make more cash with non-changeable batteries (e.g. by encouraging more buying of new devices rather than changing batteries) would make them more cash than selling a phone with a replaceable battery. And they might well be right, but that doesn't make it a good thing for civilisation.
> And now the EU, in its infinite wisdom has decided it knows whats best.
Before the EU mandated USB-c chargers pretty much every phone had their own charger. It was awful. You couldn't easily borrow a charger because everyone had a different configuration.
Now things are far better. It turned out that the EU did know best. It maybe wasn't best for phone manufacturers in the short term, but it was better for customers.
> why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
Is this a serious question? In order to create a competitor to the major smartphone operators you'd need a huge amount of capital. I don't think I could convince a venture capitalist or bank to give me that kind of investment just to start a company selling a phone with a replaceable battery.
> If it's such a superior product that people want despite the tradeoffs, why don't they just fund a company to create such a phone? Why doesn't anyone?
That wont solve the problem of carbon footprint this is trying to solve? There is still going to be iPhones and samsung phones of the world in EU. And people will buy it. Unless you want EU to go full autocratic and enforce people to use just 1 phone manufacturer!
Last 4 phones I had, 3 was replaced cos of old battery and 1 was due to broken display.
Imagine you not being able to replace the SMPS (Power) in your custom PC even though your ~$2000 worth of hardware which includes GPU, CPU and motherboard is working perfectly fine.
Does it really say something? If so what? I think the assumption that suppliers are always just catering to whatever the market demands is dubious at best. In uncompetitive markets with strong moats and price inelasticity, there's no need to cater the demands of market, the market must cater to the supplier's demands. And since markets tend to collapse into a few main stakeholders, markets eventually end up this way, rather than the assumed way.
Because I don't have a few billion dollars in my back pocket and even if I did, planned obsolescence and dark patterns are infinitely more profitable thus regulation is needed to achieve consumer positive outcomes?
Ah yes, “market knows best”.
Perhaps consider that what companies are optimizing for isn’t what is best for consumers, or humanity, or the earth.
[dead]
Quickswap batteries work for stateless devices.
A camera doesn't care if you take the battery out, except for that sub-second bit when it's saving the photo. Otherwise it doesn't notice you swapping the battery at all.
Modern phones are different because they are basically computers, and computers really don't like it when you just cut the power with no warning.
Phones don't have removable batteries mostly because of the desire to make the device as thin as possible. The battery is just a delicate, flexible pouch that can easily be damaged and catch fire if removed from the phone and carried around. To make it safe, you'd need to add a hard shell, which would probably make the device 2 mm thicker or so.
As to why we want to make phones as thin as possible... I don't know, but I guess it makes them look futuristic, which helps with sales. The same goes for highly-reflective, glossy screens. I guess I'm not gonna cry if that gets regulated away.
> Phones don't have removable batteries mostly because of the desire to make the device as thin as possible. The battery is just a delicate, flexible pouch that can easily be damaged and catch fire if removed from the phone and carried around. To make it safe, you'd need to add a hard shell, which would probably make the device 2 mm thicker or so.
Fairphone 6, recent with replaceable battery: 9.6 mm
Galaxy S5, has a replaceable battery, released _12 years ago_ - battery tech has improved a lot since then: 8.1 mm
iPhone 17 Pro Max: 8.8 mm
iPhone 12 Pro Max: 7.4 mm
We want to make phones as thin as possible so the latest flagship iPhone is 1.4 mm thicker than the one from 5 years ago? A whole 0.8 mm thinner than a recent one with a replaceable battery with maybe 0.1% of the iPhone's R&D budget, and 0.8 mm thicker than one with a replaceable battery made 12 years ago?
Galaxy S5 had a tool-free replaceable 2800mAh battery, with hard sides for protection. NFC. Wireless charging (as a user-installed option -- again, no tools, but did add some thickness and weight). USB 3 with OTG. HDMI over MHL. An excellent camera for the time. An OLED screen. A headphone jack. An SD card. A sim card. An IR blaster for changing TV channels at the pub. (I'm probably missing some functions here.)
The bootloader was unlocked in many regions (and became unlockable in all regions). Custom roms were abundant.
And it was waterproof.
(In the subsequent decade+, I have heard it said over and over again that this is an impossible combination of traits. And yet, there was a time when we had all that.)
Bullshit. This was the reason the industry gave for why they were removing battery replaceability support. Everybody hated it when it was first introduced, and to this day I only buy phones which have easily accessible ways to put a new battery on when the day comes. Fuck this BS of "people wanted thinner phones".
It’s also very hard to make them resistant to water and dust, I really like that I can wash my iPhone in the sink and don’t have to worry about it getting wet in general. This is a lot harder to achieve with battery doors, especially if they need to be as big as a phone back.
Completely untrue and debunked ad nauseum.
Rugged phones with removable batteries has vastly superior IP ratings. Glues go bad faster than O-rings used in removable batteries do.
I've had water intrusion with an iPhone, and it drove a sales of a new display panel from myself. Not so much with an actual rugged phone.
Rugged phones are so far removed from any consumer phone in terms of size and weight the comparison is about as apt as comparing military use laptops with a MacBook.
You... wash your phone in the sink?
Easiest way to get rid of dust and other buildup, free flowing water for a few seconds and done. Compared to the Middle Ages of using tooth picks or similar to clean the ports and speakers it’s much nicer. And no, I don’t have my phone in any weird places, just my pocket.
and you can’t even find anyone who will fit them for the older models.
I'm quite certain you can find many companies in the far East who will produce cells of exactly the size and shape you want, as long as you're willing to order a minimum quantity. There are also a few semi-standard sizes of prismatic cells available.
That said, having a few truly standard sizes like we had with 1.2/1.5V and 9V batteries would be a good idea. BL-5C and its variants were a de-facto standard for many years too, and apparently are still available new.
I tried to find a phone battery once and found very similar looking ones with prices ranging from expensive to terrifying with everything in between. I don't trust the ones that are to cheap as I don't know how they cut the corners. I don't trust the more expensive ones because they look the same. I cant see the profit margins. I was unable to pick one. I ask a guy with a repair store. He said he always buys from the same shop and the badges look different every time.
This is what happens when the market for phone batteries only exists for OEMs who buy millions at a time, custom.
It will stop only when there is a reason for consumer-detectable battery quality indicators — ie non-tech people have a reason to buy them. Which will now be the case with this law.
Having a battery pack has its uses though. As crazy as USBC is, you can now get a relatively large amount of power from a battery pack.
There’s a bunch of things that don’t need their own battery if they just drew enough power off USBC. I have an office coffee setup. My grinder and espresso maker have their own batteries. But there’s no reason I couldn’t have a single battery pack and just plug both into USBC saving me a ton of weight. (In fact the Lagom Mini 2 grinder is powered straight off USBC with no internal power.)
For phones and cameras, that need their own power source, a replaceable battery is mostly just an end of life thing for me. Because I’d still have to carry a cable or spare battery around.
These things aren't mutually exclusive. Once upon a time, batteries were generic and fit some standard form-factor. You could swap batteries between devices and often did! You could even connect your device to a pack of batteries, and swap out the batteries within the pack.
240W max is very little when it comes to hearing up water, and most powerbanks don't even do more than 100W output. That's more in the range of those swappable tool batteries.
The Ikape Cera+ can heat water from room temp but it can’t do this many times.
But in many environments you don’t have to heat from cold. There’s often a Zip tap or kettle to get you most of the way.
But maybe the internal battery can deliver more power directly to the heating element.
I cannot wait until I can carry a spare battery in my wallet again
Too scary to sit on a battery and possibly breach it. Keep em on your belt like batman.
Living on the edge is part of the fun
Who carries there wallet in their back pocket?
Many people do, although I too don't get why
I carry USB-battery pack or my MagSafe battery. At night I use pass through charging.
Works just as well.
This is what I do now, but the convenience of always having at least one spare battery on my person at any time was peak smartphone
> or my MagSafe battery
So you agree that swappable batteries are superior.
There are benefits and downsides. Consumers and companies can make these decisions just fine.
> I can use 40+ year old cameras
Apple winces.
Several years ago when I bought a slr, I went with nikon, mainly because their F-mount lenses are mostly compatible back to 1959.
It is a lot of fun to pick up and use nice old glass from garage sales and such. They tend to require manual control, but that is the fun part of taking pictures anyway.
Nah, they'll just make the battery an external MagSafe accessory like the Air.
Software security updates seem to be the limit to phone life, not batteries (the latter of which I've had replaced at Apple stores). Apple still seems to have the longest support for security updates.
user replaceable batteries and blue bubbles are the 2 greatest threats to Apple
Some action cameras have replaceable batteries, some don't. I had a perfectly good Contour Roam 2 where the battery died and I still have a Contour Roam 3 with some low capacity battery.
Action cameras seem to have less than a 2h run-time though. One could argue that a replaceable battery is a desired feature on such a device as many users of these cameras participate in activities lasting much longer. They also tend to have replaceable memory for the same reason. And it all is achieved without EU directives as far as I know, just from the pure market demand.
PS. Consumer surveillance cameras, on the other hand, don't have replaceable batteries in general, as they can operate indefinitely off a small solar panel or for months on a charge.
My GoPro hero 4 black still going strong. Probably one of the greatest cameras ever made. They kind of hurt themselves with how good it was lol
With cameras you don't care about every mm of width, nor about how resistant it is to falls. With phones you do.
I, for one, don't welcome that change. I'd be ok with paying someone a bit extra to replace the battery. I mean, I'd be ok if I had a battery die in my phone in the last 10 years, which I don't remember it did.
Just to be clear replaceable doesn't mean removable/hot-swappable in this context. There doesn't have to be a battery compartment, the battery can still be glued in place. The phone can still be sealed.
Manufacturers only have to make it possible for users to open and close the phone to replace the battery without damage, using common tools.
Personally I’m confused why people say they want a thinner phone while carrying a phone that’s keeps getting larger every model.
When was the last time you kept a phone longer than 2-3 years? That’d explain why you haven’t had one die.
Assuming you do get a new phone regularly, easy battery replacement will probably help the resale value of your own a fair bit - the labour cost of a battery replacement is priced into most older phones on the second hand market.
My average time on a smartphone is now at 4 years, feels like it's going to 5 pretty soon. [Last upgrade was for USB-C. Next upgrade will be for on-device LLM. It's wild how approximately 0% of what Apple has done outside of the USB-C connector has mattered to me in the last 10+ years - low-light photography is probably the only other thing that comes to mind. ]
I've had two battery replacements since 2015. One of them was required, the other was mostly optional (battery had dropped to 90% on my iPhone - which was probably sufficient).
USB-C - that was an awesome requirement that it was unclear whether Apple was ever going to do.
User Replaceable Battery? Zero desire, particularly if it reduces water resistance on the device. Dozens of things I've wanted from a phone - being able to replace the battery has never even entered my mind as something I wanted.
Your cycle is 4 years, and you’ve had two phone batteries replaced in 11 years? That’s 2/2.75 phones.
Ok, one was optional, and let’s round up to 3. So 1/3 of your phones. Kinda sounds like you would benefit from replaceable batteries.
Regardless, those 4-5 year old phones likely went to ewaste immediately or soon after you were done with them because the cost of replacing the battery was less than their resale value after 4-5 years.
That’s a pattern our planet literally can’t handle. Wars over digging up minerals using slave labour then putting them in phones for 3-5 years just to send them to have children get chemical burns stripping the metals out of them.
My last computer lasted me 11 years, with two battery replacements along the way. My phone should do the same, just as easily.
What really annoys me is Apple EOLed the iPhone 8 and then came out with a virtually identical SE version. Of course they soon discontinued the SE too…
Maybe they updated the CPU slightly but screen and camera were identical.
I would have kept my iPhone 8 if they kept updating the software. Yet somehow they can manage update the SE software despite looking the same as the iPhone 8…
I know there is a cost and overhead toward supporting old platforms. But for the premium on these devices and the level of waste generated, manufacturers can still do better…
I’d prefer no new features and only security updates… perhaps I’m weird.
The iPhone SE (2020) cpu is like twice as fast as the iPhone 8 cpu, lol.
The SE got a 2 Generation newer CPU. The iPhone 8 lost software support the same day all other devices with an A11 lost it.
> Yet somehow they can manage update the SE software despite looking the same as the iPhone 8...
Are you seriuos? What does the look of a phone have to do with how long it is supported?
Not weird. The last few os updates have made my phone laggy and slow. I want security updates, i don’t want new features that kill my battery life and usability.
Note that your 2 best features were usb-c and replacement batteries. Both were government mandated against unethical behavior of Apple.
That's what governments are for.
Apple had been switching their various iOS devices to USB-C for several years before the EU decided to mandate it, so I don't know how you can assert that them switching the iPhone to USB-C was because they were forced to. It looks more like the EU just had lucky timing and told them to do something they were already doing.
I am curious where you got this impression?
Apple fought it the whole way, commissioned studies to show it was a bad idea, etc etc. This after they had a decade prior been subject to the same thing with micro USB and skirted that agreement by shipping more unnecessary cables.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/02/02/what-the-eu-manda...
Laptops, the ipads. Phones and airpods came after the eu law. Debatable, but it seems to me like they consider the ipad in the same class as a laptop, so it got grouped with those. Otherwise why did it take 5 years between the first ipad with usb-c and the first iphone?
The iPhone had by far the biggest ecosystem of Lightning accessories, the biggest base of users with Lightning cords. It was a foregone conclusion that a bunch of people were going to be angry about losing their Lightning accessories and having to buy new cords, and another bunch of people were going to be happy to switch their last non-USB-C device over. Apple needed to find the crossover point where the latter would outnumber the former.
I very much miss the ability to never use my phone on a charging cable. Just swap the battery on an external charger and go. 5 seconds to charge to full. It was freeing and simple
I always wanted an internal battery of like 1 minute, so I could hot swap batteries. Then the battery capacity would be largely irrelevant. What would be cool is to have a large case that could charge the battery multiple times like with ear buds. The magnetic wireless charging blocks that just stick on the back of the phone are pretty fair compromise though.
I've had the same phone for over 6 years now (iPhone 11). It's a bit slower now, but I suspect that's more to do with software changes than anything else. In particular the battery is still in pretty good shape.
Sort of a funny example since "batterygate" centered on degraded iPhone batteries in which Apple argued the best possible move is to throttle phones so they don't shutdown unexpectedly.
Most people would argue the best outcome is spending <100$ and 1 min of your time to have your phone restored to like-new speed.
Not sure what replacable has to do with thickness.
When I bought my first smartpone, a Moto G (1st gen) it was as flat as any phone most people carried around at the time (2014, I think). And the battery was replaceable.
I think also Samsung phones had replaceable batteries then. And this was the case for a few years after. Until it wasn't.
Devices didn't suddenly get thin when batteries were glued in. Why would they?
The Samsung S5 was very thin. Too thin imo. And it had a replaceable battery
My grandma is still daily driving my ancient Galaxy S5 Neo. When someone says thinness is opposed to removable battery, or water resistance, or headphone jack, or durability, or SD card... I always think of it.
I'm not sure about too thin (although I switched to the qi-charging back after a year), the replacements /where/ thinner.. but lost the IR blaster, replaceable battery, eventually μSD housing, eventually headphone jack.
I don't know, it just felt flimsy. But in almost a "flimsy meaning it can handle a beating" way. It sure did.
I did ruin the water protection on mine pretty quickly though, because the back panel was made of plastic and was... flimsy. It basically became a fidget toy.
When thinking of how flagship phone producers are going to keep making sexy phones that also keep their watertightness, my biggest worry is repeated stress from any removable component becoming a fidget toy
A replaceable battery needs protection. One in the device gets protection from the device.
The replaceable battery is still inside the case. How is it more protected because "glue"?
I also replaced glued batteries in phones following ifixit instructions a few times (using a hair dryer/heat gun).
They didn't have any less or more "protection" than the replaceable ones. They looked exactly the same apart from the connectors ofc.
Please substantiate your claim. Until then I call it BS.
Most digital cameras above mid ranges are made of painted Magnesium alloy material for both weight and durability. Only cosmetic parts are made of Aluminum and plastics. They don't talk much about those because all the remaining companies in the market are from one same country that don't speak English that isn't China, and there is no differentiation to be made in that area.
We've had thin smartphones with replaceable batteries 15 years ago. That was the standard. Galaxy S5 was the last one in that series, and it's not looking too different from today. It was even IP rated for water!
Batteries also don't really die, but you get shorter and shorter life. When a device that barely could make it through 2 days of use now survives for less than one, an "upgrade" seems nicer than it really would've been if you could just swap the battery.
The S5 was IP67 rated but only if the USB port flap was sealed. Modern phones like the S24 and iPhones are IP68 rated without covers.
As someone who spends a lot of time outdoors in the rain, giving up superior IP68 water resistance for a replaceable battery that I'll never replace will be a downgrade for me.
That's true. More-modern phones can be IP-rated without a cover for the USB port like the S5 required.
That doesn't mean that a modern phone of vaguely S5 shape, with an S5-esque battery door, can't be fitted with a more modern USB port, though. Does it?
They seem like very unrelated things.
(Those modern ports, by the way? They're pretty slick when they work right. They detect moisture and turn off the bit of normally-externally-available power to help prevent galvanic corrosion.)
IP_7 means it's ok with water immersion for up to 30 minutes, down to 1m. You can go swimming with an IP_7 rated device.
IP_8 is "more than 1m, more than 30min water immersion" rating.
"outdoors in the rain" needs IP_5 rating if you want to be safe. You do not need a dive watch to go out in rain.
Even non-waterproof devices are not exactly made of sugar. My first iphone was a 3gs. I want running with the device in an armband. My rain precautions were plugging in 3.5mm earphones, and pointing the charge port downwards. Regularly got caught in rain with it, and the device was completely fine two years later when I sold it.
GoPros are IP68 rated without a housing and have removable batteries. This is not an impossible task.
Phone makers do not want you to be able to replace batteries easily because it will extend the life of a phone. End of story.
Do you toss it in the trash when you’re done? Pop it in a drawer to rot? Ewaste will bury us all, conflict minerals and all. Replaceable batteries are a net good for humanity, and i personally believe that the smart people at phone companies can solve the problem of waterproofing even with replaceable batteries
I trade the phone in for the new model as God and Steve Jobs intended.
Right. So ewaste.
No. Apple refurbishes and reuses the majority of trade-in phones. They recycle a small fraction. None of it ends up in landfills. In my case, they aren't paying me hundreds of dollars for my old phone to throw it in a landfill.
in another comment you just said "When was the last time you kept a phone longer than 2-3 years?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47834195#47842655
how do you square that position with your stance here on e-waste as it applies to other people who are apparently ruining the planet?
What? I think you misunderstood…
The comment above mine you linked to said they never had battery problems. I was saying they probably don’t keep their phones long enough to encounter battery problems. I wasn’t suggesting that’s a good thing - just that it’s very common. And if you need me to defend my position with action: I’m 5 years in on this phone and planning to do a diy battery swap soon to keep it running a little longer.
Ports develop rust if exposed to elements. This applies to USB-C ports too. That's why all seriously rugged phones has flaps for every ports with all-plastic enclosures over metal frames(not all waterproof equipment are seawater rated; they have to be specifically designed and tested to be resistant to galvanic corrosion if the water to be submerged in is not deionized or at least potable).
Urban rainproof phones like S24 and iPhone aren't actually intended to be left drenched in mud or seawater, so they don't have to be equipped to be resistant against pieces of soil or soaked driftwood jammed in the charge port.
"...that I'll never replace", I mean you will replace the whole phone, including the battery? (Unless this is your last phone, in which case you won't be affected anyway :P)
Both of those things are also important in cameras, there is even sites that compare the size such as https://camerasize.com/. Cameras have got smaller in recent years and it makes the size makes a big difference to whether you take it with you on not or fits in your pocket or not for compact cameras. Ricoh’s gr4 camera is 0.5mm thinner than the previous model (gr3). Cameras are essentially smaller than they would be otherwise because they have replaceable batteries. People who need at more power usually use several batteries rather than use a bigger camera with more capacity.
Cameras also need to withstand drops for similar reasons to phones, it’s in you hand and you could drop it, also tripods can fall over, car mounts fall off etc.
> care about every mm of width
I think you mean thickness?
Extra width is sold as a feature.
I don’t understand the obsession with reducing thickness.
Why is a thinner phone more desirable than a thicken one?
I don't care about every mm of width, and don't understand those that do. A phone up to 3/4" fits into any pocket that a 1/4" one does.
I had multiple android phones with replaceable batteries and many were no thicker than modern phones, especially once you've added the protective case.
The main issue of paying someone to teplace the battery is procuring the battery in the first place.
For example, good luck finding good apple batteries in regions where there is no official apple service.
Most Chinese parts are inferior: for example rates for max 500 cycles instead of 1000
Just to clarify something: afaik official apple batteries are “chinese” in origin.
I used to work for Nokia back when they still made phones. Replaceable batteries were very normal then. Phones were a bit thicker than today but not massively so. These days phones are actually thinner but much larger. I had a "are you happy to see me or is that a Nokia" type Nokia 9300. That was a brick. But it had a full hw keyboard. and flipped open it wasn't that much bigger than a modern smart phone.
You could argue that the trend towards more energy dense batteries and wireless charging could enable new interesting form factors. Recent phones have magnetic connectors for external wireless chargers/batteries that snap to the back. Most of bulk and weight of a phone is for accommodating batteries. You could make an argument that making a phone with replaceable batteries is easier than ever. Many cameras have a bulge for the camera. The negative space of the rest of the phone could easily hold a swappable battery. How critical are those 3mm really?
If they filled that negative space my phone wouldn't rock annoyingly and sit awkwardly on flat surfaces, and that would be a great shame.
If you filled the negative space on an iPhone 17 Pro/Max it would be a horrendously unwieldy phone. People who say this stuff seriously underestimate the disastrous effect on ergonomics increasing the whole phone from 8.75mm to 13.2mm would have.
Would only need to be at the top, to balance out the camera.
The only reason I use a case is that the iPhone is close to unusable on a flat surface without it.
People already do this by buying cases
It wasn't even that long ago. My Galaxy S had a back plate that clipped on and was still thin
Fairphones already have replacable battery for more than a decade (2013?), so yes, it could, can, hold a swappable battery.
Nokia still make phones. They even had a line of smartphones until last year. I've got an XR20 "rugged" phone that's served me well for a few years.
That's technically HMD a separate company but with some Nokia people involved. Nokia just licensed the Nokia brand to them and I think that deal ran out some time ago. I had a Nokia Android phone before I got my Pixel 6 a few years ago. Decent value device but the camera was a bit meh.
Nokia actually did an Android phone just before MS acquired them which they then promptly killed. And then of course they pulled the plug on the whole business unit. HMD apparently still makes feature phones based on Series 30. That's the pre-smart phone platform that a lot of Nokia fans remember fondly. The famously indestructible phones.
I have my 9300 still in a drawer ( checked ) . Interesting if it is possible to find a replacement battery for it and what functionality would still be usable? A physical SIM, 3G still works…
If it's one of the BL/BH/etc batteries you can still get them.
They're somewhat of a standard in DIY circles because they're a familiar form and all of the support stuff for them has existed for decades.
If you remember Nokia's batteries they were covered in a relatively thick ABS shell. They were also, compared to today, had laughably little storage. A Series 40 Nokia just did not draw that much power. The single GSM/PCS radio also sipped power.
Even if you stripped a 5G phone down to a Series 40-esque interface the 5G radios alone would use more power than a whole 3310.
In order to get the power density modern phones need they require high power Li-poly batteries. An extra 3mm worth of ABS shell is a lot of lost capacity. You can't sell user serviceable Li-poly batteries without a protective shell. You'd never get a UL rating because Li-polys are dangerous if mishandled.
I found out somewhat recently that those Nokia batteries (like BL-5C) are still used in hardware. You can still pick them up on some stores.
I came across them in portable radios (portable FM radios, small global radios, plane listening radios and similar).
The N95 had something like 995 mAh. A modern iphone would have about 4x that.
Also interesting to know is that BYD was supplying a lot of phone batteries back then. I think they also supplied to Nokia. Phone batteries is what made them big.
If a battery can do 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity it is exempt from this, which is exactly what Apple implemented a few years ago.
Low cost phones will be most affected.
This is not correct. There is no exemption for Apple devices
You seem to referencing from a older exemption for self serviceability if your smartphone can do 1,000 cycles and retain 80% battery. Specifically - B 1.1 (1) (c) (ii) (b) . Here is the link - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...
Article 11 of the new regulation (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...) covers exemptions but nothing to do with 1,000 cycles or Apple as far as i can see.
Your link says otherwise. From the Article 11 link, ANNEX II, A.1.1.(5):
(a) From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for replacement of the display assembly and of parts referred to in point 1(a), with the exception of the battery or batteries, meets the following criteria: [...]
[...]
(c) From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for battery replacement:
(i) meets the following criteria:
— fasteners shall be resupplied or reusable;
- the process for replacement shall be feasible with no tool, a tool or set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part, or basic tools;
— the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out in a use environment;
— the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out by a layman.
(ii) or, as an alternative to point (i), ensure that:
— the process for battery replacement meets the criteria set out in (a);
— after 500 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 83 % of the rated capacity;
— the battery endurance in cycles achieves a minimum of 1 000 full charge cycles, and after 1 000 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 80 % of the rated capacity;
— the device is at least dust tight and protected against immersion in water up to one meter depth for a minimum of 30 minutes.
---
So manufacturers must make the battery replaceable, or meet all the conditions from (a) for replacing non-battery components, and meet the 1000 cycle / 80% capacity requirement.
There is no Article 11 in the second link i mistakenly linked the same link twice . Here is the correct link https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1542/oj/eng
So if it weren't for that exemption, would iPhone batteries qualify? You can do it with regular tools and a YouTube tutorial, but it's not easy.
The tools are not regular. They’re teeny tiny security bits.
> a tool or set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part, or basic tools
It's or, not and
> This is not correct. There is no exemption for Apple devices
It was not said that Apple was exempted. What was said is that Apple complied with the exemption rules.
It was not said explicitly but it was a straightforward implication. The replier then pointed out the exemption rule is outdated therefore the implied consequence is wrong and the original line of reasoning was misinformation, and thus would be the greater error. Humans
> It was not said explicitly but it was a straightforward implication
It really, really wasn't. All it said is that Apple became compliant with their current offerings.
Now you're contorting to dig your heels in, so I think this conversation is over. Have a good day.
The replier was wrong, though. They misread it and skipped over the part they thought wasn’t there.
> covers exemptions but nothing to do with 1,000 cycles or Apple as far as i can see.
It appears what you're looking for is in B(5)(c)(ii).
> (c) From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for battery replacement:
> (i) meets the following criteria:
> — fasteners shall be resupplied or reusable;
> — the process for replacement shall be feasible with no tool, a tool or set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part, or basic tools;
> — the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out in a use environment;
> — the process for replacement shall be able to be carried out by a layman.
> (ii) or, as an alternative to point (i), ensure that
> — the process for battery replacement meets the criteria set out in (a);
> — after 500 full charge cycles the battery must have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 83 % of the rated capacity;
> — the battery endurance in cycles achieves a minimum of 1 000 full charge cycles, and after 1 000 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 80 % of the rated capacity;
> — the device is at least dust tight and protected against immersion in water up to one meter depth for a minimum of 30 minutes.
the mistake was in using the same link twice. It is the same URL. There is no Article 11 in the that link.
You and other poster could have just web searched and corrected me, Here is the the actual link https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1542/oj/eng
Jinx! Owe me a coke.
I ctrl-f'd a minute faster than you!
Cannot edit this now Here is the actual link to new regulations https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1542/oj/eng
P.S. I had posted same link twice.
> B 1.1 (1) (c) (ii) (b)
Written by the sub-sub-sub subcommittee…
Europe will fall to the Russians, if the Russians can ever find it under all the piles of disused regulations.
I was wondering about that. I lost my iPhone 13 mini the other day, did the find my phone beep thing and got a distant beep from my washing machine which was on wash cycle.
Surprisingly the phone was fine and works fine after a brief rinse under the tap. It must be hard to combine that sort of water resistance with easy user changing.
Don't fall for the 'glue cuz of protection' myth - there are and had been water-resistant phones way before Apple started glueing to avoid customers doing their own repairs and them losing out on new sales.
Which phones? I ask as someone that's had to replace multiple phones after a trip through the washing machine.
Modern phone water resistance is incredible. I've even seen people literally swim with their phones and not even question if it was a bad idea.
Fifteen years ago, I had a Garmin GPS (admittedly not a phone, but similar form factor) that survived a week of knocking around the bottom of a raft.
The battery compartment had a rubber gasket and some very tight screws.
How much of the total volume of the device was the case/housing?
I suppose the glue-everything approach is partly due to the desire of making a device very thin. There's no room for strong, load-bearing outer case, the internals are load-bearing.
I suspect manufacturing has something to do with gluing too. Afaik screws are expensive compared with glue, and their assembly involves slow humans or expensive robots.
It's been a long time, but the gasket itself was probably a millimetre or two thick, squeezed extremely tightly by the screws in the battery cover. It ran on AA or AAA batteries, and they took about about half or a third of the depth.
You just need well designed rubber gasket. Thickness is impact resistance thing in those devices
Honestly I'd expect that to be SIGNIFICANTLY easier to waterproof than a laundry machine. Partly because laundry is sometimes done warm, and warm softens materials (like gaskets), but mostly because laundry has surfactants that considerably reduce surface tension, making it far easier to slip past gaps.
There is a good reason waterproofing claims are specific about the kind of liquid (usually just fresh or salt water, usually without significant movement (i.e. jets, like you get in a shower)).
Samsung still make the rugged Xcover range which has both replaceable batteries and waterproofing. And 3.5mm jacks too.
These devices are mostly sold in enterprise environments (eg field use, factories) and as such get a lot of wear and tear. But they hold up well. They're not ultra rugged but a good compromise. We use tons of them in our factories, we replaced DECT handheld phones with the Xcovers loaded with ms teams. Not an ideal setup (teams for mobile kinda sucks) but at least this way they can easily communicate with people in the offices.
Dimensions well worth it:
Samsung Galaxy XCover7
Apple iPhone 17 Pro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_Xcover_seriesYes but they just don't make a small model. Same as their consumer midrange line (A36/A57). They did before.
The Xcover 4S was 146.2 x 73.3 x 9.7 mm (5.76 x 2.89 x 0.38 in)
Also, these are business rugged models, unlike the iPhone.
Samsung Galaxy S5 was the last one that attempted it. IP67 with a removable back cover and swappable battery.
Yes, but IP67 is not nearly as water resistant as IP68, which all modern phones are for the most part.
I'm not knowledgeable enough to know if IP68 could be achieved in a phone without glue. There's no clamping mechanism for the backs, they're just press-fit with small clips.
From a mechanical perspective ip68 is perfectly achievable mechanically and watches have been achieving it for a long time, however… with what sort of margins for the manufacturer and what sort of cost for the consumer ? Additionally a lot of them require pretty carefully adherence to instructions torques and tolerances to achieve the same waterproof rating. Personally I’d be very happy to have a phone that says, if you swap the battery you might lose the ip68 rating unless you follow the resealing process within tolerances.
My phone (A Furiphone FLX1, which is kindof a variant of a Gigaset GX6) has a removable back with a gasket and is IP68. One of their promotional videos had them change the battery on video then boot the phone and and unlock it underwater
Who cares though? Sealing the battery in makes the device less drop resistant. I somehow managed to avoid water damage to my phones for decades, while none of my phones managed to avoid being dropped in a way that would most likely be fatal to them if their batteries were sealed in - and yet most of them survived to this day.
A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with.
> A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with.
I submerge my phone as a matter of normal use because I can. I take it into pools and hot tubs, and I clean it in the sink -- I personally wouldn't trade that for a battery door.
Have you had issues because of wear and tear? I trust the water proofing completely until my phone has fallen out of my hands onto the floor.
Then I won't chance any submersion and I can't think of an accurate way to test it.
I have never had an issue, but I certainly wouldn’t do it with a phone that had visible damage.
Being replaceable does not require a battery door.
The EU regulation we’re talking about essentially does, with an exception for high cycle batteries on waterproof phones
quite a few people put their phones in their back pockets...
A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with
Some like to read in the bathtub. Statistics say women prefer the bathtub more than the shower. Therefore your position is sexist.
(Yes, I'm being an asshat)
> Who cares though?
a lot of normal people who daily-use their phones near water and even jump into pools with them. I would bet you $100 that if you asked people "replaceable battery of water proofing to the same level you have it now", ~ nobody will puck the former.
Not once in my life I had thought "I would like to jump into this pool with my phone", while I did sometimes replace the battery on-the-go which actually made my life easier. It's an absurd take. If anything, I'd be more concerned with beverage spills, but these are still easier to avoid than drops.
Well you are the exception. Especially if you live in a hot area where a lot of people have backyard pools. Being in and out of the water constantly is a very normal in Florida for example.
Most the suburban kids in Houston had wristband attachments to their phones in the pool or would be in a floaty taking stupid pics of each other as kids do. Trying to keep a modern phone dry takes away a lot of utility.
Not a lot of people live in hot areas with plenty of backyard pools, but I can understand that waterproof phones could become more popular there than in the rest of the world based on this property alone (right now they're popular because there's not much choice).
Those people are doing a very stupid thing. I don't think that the world should be ordered around "let's make it so people can do stupid things without consequence".
Those people are the public buying the phones. Companies make phones that more people will buy. Turns out your desire for a bulky phone with a replaceable battery is less common than their desire for a phone that does not get destroyed when dropped into a pool.
I’ve done it and seen it many times. People throw their phones to each other in pools and the beach for photos all the time. One of the best things about modern phones is the waterproofing. IP68 level is amazing.
> A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with
It’s actually the opposite - a user replacement battery is a gimmick not worth the downsides.
Apple know this, and they know their customers a lot better than you do.
Your position is niche at best, anachronistic really.
Apple has vested interest in getting their customers to switch to a new phone often, and the average time to upgrade is absurdly low these days (less than 4 years), which is greatly influenced by battery wear and fall damage, so I don't think this argument is very persuasive.
> user replacement battery
It's not really the old kind of replace-ability, though. The only requirement is that you should be able to change it with commercially available tools.
Nothing stops them from adding a gasket and some screws though.
Maybe as a society it's better for people to have replacement insurance than to have sealed batteries that make phones so disposable. I wonder if we've defined IP68 as a "must have" without considering the alternatives. I'm thinking the percentage of people who actually "use" IP68 over the course of their phone is pretty small...yet that "requirement" drives a huge design choice.
I suspect it's a moot point. Makers have every incentive to drive replacement cycles.
Phones aren't disposable because of the lack of replacement batteries.
I keep my phones for 3-4 years, and the battery life while degraded isn't really an issue.
And that's with recharging it just about every night even if it's not dead.
I replaced my phone because of the battery life, and I would have replaced the battery if it would have been easy, to offer a counter anecdote.
I had to make the choice of getting another phone (used in great condition, as I do) or pay half the cost I paid to get the battery replaced but also knowing it would still be heaviy used and more likely to fail in other ways because of use.
If labor cost and decreased relaibility weren't factors, swapping the battery would have been the choice.
Now the question is: are there more people like me or more people who need a sealed, hard to repair phone? I don't know but if I did I'd accept keeping the current situation.
Spills and drops were traditionally most common causes of mobile device insurance claims. We've only seen that change for phones because of their IP ratings in recent years.
While manufacturers do have an incentive to get people to buy new phones, many of them with first party insurance do have an incentive not to pay out as many claims.
Downvoted for daring to speculate. I love this place.
Japan only, but KDDI/Kyocera never stopped IP rated phones with removable battery. TORQUE G07(2026) is IP65/68/69 rated with a coin key locked removable back cover.
It also officially support submersion in seawater as well as cleaning with soapy water. Most glued phones support neither.
1: https://k-tai.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/2088291.html
You forget the Xcover and active lines which do IP68. They stopped making Galaxy active phones but the tabs are still there. The Xcovers too.
Back when replaceable batteries were the norm, I had two Blackberries that survived going through the washer and dryer.
> I've even seen people literally swim with their phones and not even question if it was a bad idea.
Which is funny to me, because even with an IP68 phone, I get worried if I even splash a little water on it.
I was wading through water with a 3310 in my pocket in 2006. Battery was fine and it worked after it was dried. There was a problem with the keyboard though but that was a cheap swap. And this was a phone without any water resistance.
Samsung Galaxy S5 is the first one to cross my mind.
Not really comparable perhaps - but I had a Ericsson t18s or similar that went through a full 60C cotton wash cycle (being on at the start of the wash) and was fine after drying off.
The thing is - if the battery had been destroyed, that could have been replaced...
I've seen rumors that Apple started waterproofing phones after Chinese criminal groups started farming parts on AppleCare by dumping the mainboard into buckets of Shenzhen seawater to deny electronic serial number readout. Your logic board can't be so dead from normal use that not even its PMIC respond to commands if it's waterproof.
I've also had iPhone dying from gasket leaks, the circumferential double sided tape seal dries out after a while.
Re the repairs, I can get the battery swapped on the 13 mini for £49 which isn't that bad. (iSmash, not Apple).
Also important to note that post is 1 datapoint. My "waterproof" phone fell in the bath for about 2 seconds and broke...
My brand new Pixel phone several years back, I was so excited it was IP68. Took some photos splashing around in water, not more than a foot or two. It died in minutes.
And they weren't bulky tactical phones that looked like the smartphone equivalent of Humvees?
Samsung xCover series phones are smaller than flagship phones with a case that many people add to achieve the same durability.
Putting the battery outside the water insulation zone might work for that, it's a sealed pouch anyway.
Conformal coating is a little more expensive than gasketing, but it works much, much better under pressure. Motorola does this.
Third parties offer new iphone batteries so it's clearly replaceable commercially
This could be "fixed" right now by a software update that limits the maximum charge level to 80% of capacity. However, this comes at the cost of how many minutes of runtime your phone can operate.
So manufactures might just responds to this by making your phone heavier with a bigger battery that is being under utilized.
Honestly we should define 80% as the new "100%" on such batteries and label "charging to full" as "overcharging".
Psychologically, people understand charging a battery to "125%" (or whatever) a lot better: Do it when you really need to but if you do it all the time it wears down the battery a lot faster.
The Samsung phone I use these days has a "Protect Battery" mode that can be toggled (both manually and with automatic user-defined routines). It limits maximum charge to 85%. For those who want it: That's the ~same thing, without the psychological trick.
It also has some other settings that relate to smart charging that I don't fully understand (mostly because it's kind of inscrutable).
But the idea, AFAICT, is that it works with a person who charges their phone on a fairly regular schedule (they sleep at about the same time every night with plugged in all night).
The battery meanders up to 85% or something and holds there. Shortly before the person normally wakes up, it starts coming the rest of the way up to 100%. And then they wake up, unplug the phone, and it begins to discharge.
This helps to minimize the duration of being at a high state-of-charge, which is also a big factor in long-term battery longevity.
It's a tidy set of tradeoffs, I think.
Nice idea. I think the reason it's not communicated as such is that then companies would be expected to advertise time on battery when charged to 100%, not 125%.
Yes and yes.
I recently investigated large portable power banks (Jackery, etc.) and like that there are options to charge faster with a battery life tradeoff. Let people make their own informed choices.
This sounds great. I would've loved to have set my phone to charge up to only 60% or 80% of its design capacity to reduce wear. I do this on my laptop.
It has been on iPhones for quite some while, but on androids even longer. Before that it was in the form of some smart charging scheme that it would only finish charging until the moment it thought you would unplug it.
It makes a bit of a difference, but not dramatically: https://youtu.be/kLS5Cg_yNdM?t=3m26
In that experiment, it’s also unclear if the 30% lower limit or the 80% upper limit is more important. I suspect the former.
I charge my s25 to 80%. Previous phone (pixel) was also limited to 80%, but radio stopped working after 2 years so I had to buy a new phone.
Same for my s24, 80% battery limit and slow charging at night (most of my charging). It's been over 2 years and the battery seems to last just as long as day one
Battery capacity of smartphones seems to double every ~8 years. The design space is adding more battery capacity, reducing battery life, or using less power.
Samsung phones let you limit them to 80% charge. I've had this enabled since I got my current phone.
As do iPhones. I expect all flagship phones these days have the same ability.
On Pixels too.
And what about if 4 years they says that they have dettected a problem in your battery? A new battery should fix that but now you cannot do it properly because it could do 1000 cycles.
This same thing happened to Pixels 6a after 500 cycles.
Then don’t buy a phone from a company with a piss poor record of customer service.
Just looking in maps, there are three Apple Stores within a 45 minute drive from where I live in central Florida.
The situation is worse in my hometown in South GA admittedly, you have to drive 70 miles for same day service for an authorized repair place - mostly Best Buy.
> Then don’t buy a phone from a company with a piss poor record of customer service.
That is not an argument.
It’s a perfect argument- use your own agency and intelligence to choose products from reliable companies instead of depending on the government.
It’s like complaining about items from TEMU aren’t high quality and expecting the government to do more.
Apple has now a great record of customer service?
The goal should be reducing e-waste, and honestly this seems reasonable.
I’d rather get the additional structural rigidity, compactness, and weatherproofing that comes from the tight construction and then pay $99 to have Apple professionally install a new battery for me in 3-4 years. Forcing everyone’s iPhone to take all of the tradeoffs of replaceable batteries so some people can save $50 to replace their own battery isn’t a good deal.
I wouldn’t be surprised if forcing all phones to have easily replaceable batteries would result in a net increase in e-waste due to the additional failure modes introduced. Even if batteries were easily replaceable I think most iPhone users would have Apple do it for them anyway.
I’ve also replaced some iPhone batteries myself and it’s really not that bad if you are familiar with taking modern electronics apart. Apple will send you the entire toolkit if you want complete with a return label.
> Forcing everyone’s iPhone to take all of the tradeoffs of replaceable batteries so some people can save $50 to replace their own battery isn’t a good deal.
This sounds like the exact opposite of real life. Every battery ages to the point of uselessness, not every phone gets to take a dive. It's not a stretch to say most phones never see more than some rain or a spilled drink. But the worst part of every discussion on this topic is this false (uninformed) dichotomy that water resistance and easily replaceable battery are mutually exclusive.
> and then pay $99 to have Apple professionally install a new battery for me in 3-4 years
In 3-4 years yes, but how about in 10-15 years? Apple will refuse to take your money then.
> Apple will send you the entire toolkit if you want complete with a return label.
Which is malicious compliance. They should allow the friendly neighborhood repair shop to purchase a toolkit so you can choose who does the repairs for you.
> Apple will refuse to take your money then.
They still offer battery service for iPhone 6.
> They should allow the friendly neighborhood repair shop to purchase a toolkit
They do. My friendly neighborhood repair shop a couple miles away has the same tools and parts Apple uses themselves at their Store.
Since when? Last time i read about the Apple "DIY" kit it was only a loan and only for ... doing it yourself.
But then I haven't broken a phone in a while so I haven't really talked to my friendly neighborhood repair shop. That only because my daughter finally grew up, they remembered me at the shop back when she was young :)
There is the DIY program, and the Independent Repair Program [0].
> That only because my daughter finally grew up, they remembered me at the shop back when she was young
Ha! This is so relatable right now. My daughter is 15 and recently has been learning to drive, and last week she taught herself what happens if you set your iPhone on top of the car and then drive off. That is the only reason I've got familiarity with my local friendly neighborhood repair shop, I've never broken one of my own phones in all these years. Fortunately this life lesson only cost her the $39 deductible. Glad I decided that a 15 year old getting her first phone needed an insurance plan.
[0] https://support.apple.com/irp-program
> what happens if you set your iPhone on top of the car and then drive off
Mine once dropped hers without noticing in a parking lot. We called her number and some dude answered and said come back here, i'll wait for you, but unfortunately i found your phone by stepping on it (it was night). At least it was just a person and not a car.
But don't despair, they grow out of it eventually. You may have to wait until she's off to college and forced to be more responsable by living on her own though.
Apple offers replacement batteries for an 11 year old phone, now -- past performance is no guarantee but they're already way, way ahead of the pack and there's no sign they're going to stop repairing old phones.
Will we even have a compatible wireless standards in 15 years?
Probably. I mean, I don't even remember what standard my home wifi is on. It works, it's fast enough. Sometimes I think about upgrading the AP but why bother?
3G was up for about 20 years, between roll-out and shutdown.
LTE has been up for 15 year in the US as of now. Chances are it may not be up after another 15 years.
Where did you see this? Can't see that in the article or a quick search on the rules PDF.
What if they don't? What if there are manufacturer errors? What if they burn your battery with updates along the way?
> What if there are manufacturer errors?
Typically that's subject to some sort of recall or remediation through a service centre?
I wonder if this is part of why Apple is behind most competitors in terms of fast charging. Would almost make marketing sense to come out and say it at this point.
Are they behind? AFAIK the Pixel and the iPhone both typically charge in the ~25W range but can support up to ~45W.
> Low cost phones will be most affected.
Not really. Take a 4000 mAh rated cell, advertise it as "rated for 3500 mAh" and that's it.
Isn't this pretty much what Nothing are doing? At least one of their phones has a different battery rating in India than elsewhere, despite containing the same hardware.
Isn't like most of the new phones claim at least 1000 cycles?
Funnily enough I've had a "low cost phone" with replaceable batteries (the "old school way")
So it does not seem a big deal
1000 cycles is barely 3 years, that's far too low a number
1 Cycle is discharging from 100-0 and charging from 0-100, regardless of how many times the phone is charged, so for a user that averages 50% battery drain each day, 1000 cycles would actually be ~6 years. I have no idea what the actual average is, but I'm betting that 1000 cycles is at least 4 years for the average user and possibly significantly longer.
Cycles are not days. My 7 month-old phone is currently sitting at 55 cycles. At that rate it would take me ~10 years to reach 1000 cycles.
It isn't quite that linear in practice but realistically it will still be at least 5+ years.
My phone is from December 2023, so 28 months and is at 842 cycles (and 85% max capacity). So, about 33 months at this rate.
6-7 years for me on the current phone, double on the previous one. 7 years is a good limit.
Wish they'd have implemented it before the iPhone 14 Pro launched. I'm at 624 cycles right now and my phone's gone below 80% fucking ages ago.
My battery’s at 70%, I could replace it for $50, but I consider it a feature to get me off my goddamn phone more.
> The regulation states that batteries must be removable using ‘commercially available’ tools
I’m pretty sure that’s more or less already the case, so…
Apple’s replacement program is $99 for out of warranty battery replacement
Not really. The "estimated cost" on Apple.com is 139€ to 199€ depending on which company I take it.
[flagged]
Is 1000 cycles above 80% even possible without gimping the device like apple does with all its hardware?
Aren't today's phone batteries already replaceable with commercially available tools? I can walk into a non-apple store with my iPhone and walk out with a replaced battery 20 minutes later.
This isn't even what drives obsolesce of phones, it's software updates.
If you really want to be able to self-swap your own battery, you can just buy an Android that has a replaceable battery.
Do we need to regulate something that isn't a problem? All regulation has downsides, is it worth paying this price here?
They're taking "commercially available" to mean things like a screwdriver - not a $1000 phone disassembly machine.
With all due respect, I can buy a kit on iFixit for $55 for an iPhone 16 pro max, including the battery. I’ve replaced my iPhone battery before, aside from the glue being a bit sticky so needing a heat gun it isn’t that difficult.
Heat gun? This isn't the type of consumer-friendly battery replacement which the EU is looking for.
reminds me of finding an old scout manual that said "go to your neighborhood blacksmith" - different things are "easy" for different people.
You don't need a heat gun. A regular hair dryer is fine.
Not everyone has, or needs a hairdryer!
Or hair.
A fine way to start a house fire, sure.
Starting a fire with a hair dryer, without disassemblibg it, seems almost like a challenge. What are you going to ignite with 80-90°C warm, rapidly cooling air?
Even with a good battery, bugs/features on the latest iOS can make iPhone 15 Pro Max battery last terribly, terribly short.
Part of the new requirement should be they can't kill battery lifespan in 2-year old phones through software updates, either.
Because even "replaceable battery" doesn't fix that serious problem!
Which is fine - but the law is the law and will look at what Apple (et al) provide and document.
(Thought Apple's $99 to do the repair themselves isn't terribly bad all things considered; and likely part of their attempt to forestall complaints and litigations).
I've replaced a battery in my 2019 Xiaomi phone for $5 (the costs of the battery), using basic tools - albeit the back was already ungluing itself, making that part easier. At 10x the price, it's hard not to call it a massive markup.
> so needing a heat gun it isn’t that difficult.
https://xkcd.com/2501/
And you can do it for much less if you want. I've replaced phone batteries with 6 dollars worth of tools and a hairdryer. You can buy glue or sticky gaskets for next to nothing as well if you care about waterproofing.
Most people are going to give up in 1 minute trying to open a smartphone. I can't imagine most people I know succeeding to replace the battery by themselves.
Most people I know would come to me to replace the battery in an old Thinkpad, and those were made to be easily removable!
The actual cost breakdown for a battery replacement is:
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+11+Battery+Replacement/1...Ignore the 25 EUR clamp and 20 EUR heat pack, I did and they weren't needed at all. So all in all, around 910 USD less than you claimed.
The heat gun discussion in the sibling comments is also completely ridiculous. There must be 100 ways to do it without a heat gun. Put it on the radiator, use a heat pack for muscle soreness, or just borrow a hairdryer.
If somebody's unable to replace their iphone battery because they can't come up with a source of heat, I doubt they'd even be able to replace the batteries in their TV remote.
You talk about "an Android that has a replaceable battery" as if that was something you could just buy at any store at no inconvenience. Sadly the majority of Android phones no longer have user-replaceable batteries, and only a select few models have official replacement parts available.
I'd be happier if this was something the market took care of, but after 10 years of glued-in batteries that you most likely can't even buy, I think it's time for a regulatory nudge.
> This isn't even what drives obsolesce of phones, it's software updates.
Agreed, and software-locking parts, like batteries, to only first-party or authorized third-party repair shops is one of those drivers.
I can see the argument for software locking some components (to cut down on theft) even if I don't appreciate or agree with them - it is at least a valid reason from some perspectives.
Batteries are a wear item though, and will have to be replaced periodically until the device is discarded. Software-locking them to only "Apple and people Apple likes" is unconscionable
Not replaceable in the sense of popping it out and putting in a new one in 5 seconds.
This one is pretty cool, it has a swappable battery plus an internal battery so you can swap the battery without shutting down the device.
https://rugone.net/products/xever-7
People shouldn't have to go to a special store or buy special tools requiring special skills to change a battery.
In a perfect world, sure. But people also want phones these days that are physically durable, have some degree of waterproofing/water resistance, maximum battery life, etc. Many of the demands and expectations of a modern phone aren't easily compatible with a replaceable battery design that can withstand the incompetence of the average end user.
A GoPro fits all of those requirements and has easily replaceable batteries. Now, I understand that the shape and sizes are different. But I wouldn't mind some extra mm of thickness (I already get a pretty big camera bump anyway) if that means I can replace a battery faster.
YOU would not mind, many others would.
We don't have a choice in the first place, minding or not. People who would mind missing a 3.5mm jack or replaceable battery have no say anyway, as none of the flagship devices on the market have either.
That statement looks like an assumption. Do you care to back it up with some factual sources?
> some degree of waterproofing/water resistance
Can we have this discussion once? In this thread alone, there's like 50 instances of people making this claim and each time it takes about 20 minutes before at least one person replies that it's not the case, after which no refutals are posted. I'm happy to learn it is false if it is (I never had a phone that I trusted to be waterproof to any degree so I don't have first-hand knowledge), but it gets really tiring to read the same information level over and over as a reason for why we can't have nice things
Taking this comment as an example of someone who actually used a battery-swappable phone in rain on a motorcycle: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835184 (I'm not only taking the person's word for it: the device is also IP certified as waterproof 30 mins at 1m depth)
The missing part is "at a specific price point".
There is a lot you can do with advanced materials science but as you get close to the high end of capability the cost goes up very rapidly and the ability to scale production is reduced.
>people also want phones these days that are physically durable,
Anecdotally on this front, I have had to replace the screens of my iphones at least three times in the past (different models). Incidentally, I have never needed to replace the screen of a phone that had a replaceable battery. YMMV, but this seems needlessly defeatist.
>maximum battery life
One could also claim that bespoke charging cables allow for faster charging or longer battery life, but I don't know any iPhone users that are a crying a river for their deprecated non-standard chargers. But again, YMMV I guess.
We can make waterproof things that are attached with screws.
You severely underestimate the capabilities of modern electronics manufacturers. Sure, it’s harder to produce something that fits all those capabilities. But it’s totally possible. This is exactly the scenario where government regulation is critical to a well-functioning market.
Engage with the content of his comment instead of resorting to ad hominem.
He's right - the market wants embedded batteries, although perhaps not directly. Embedded batteries have improved price, battery capacity, water proofing, size, and strength. If the consumer really wanted a removable battery and all that that entails then there would be more phones that offered that. The reality is people misjudge what all that entails. By all means, I would love to just make the iPhone battery directly replaceable without any compromises but that's not reality.
Incorrect. Replaceable battery is a feature that decreases sales. Why would you implement it when battery being weak will cause substantial amount of users to replace phone instead of paying for service to replace the battery ?
If the feature isn't expected and it decrease sales, why would manufacturer put it in ?
And decreasing sales is exactly what the EU wants to accomplish. To stop people buying a whole new phone every couple of years.
Unfortunately I do expect other tricks towards planned obsolescence. Long-term support is now a thing but what they can still do is make phones slower over time. Even Apple did this with the iPhone 6.
If the phones with replaceable batteries break more often (and they most likely will), then people will buy them more often, not less.
Also, a new battery is how much - €100 for an iPhone battery? It's not that expensive.
Why would they break more often? I don't really see that.
We have thousands of Xcovers (also replaceable) in the factories at work and they break no more often than the regular phones in the office environment. In fact people treat them pretty roughly because they're handling heavy requirement and you know how well people look after equipment they didn't pay for :) They're not perfect but they walk the walk.
Another point: I know several people that have Fairphones where almost every component can be user-replaced and I've held them but I don't see them being any more fragile than any other phone, really. And these are not rugged models.
And a Fairphone battery is 40€. An Xcover battery (including NFC antenna which is weirdly enough in the battery) costs similar. The screen 90€. All a lot cheaper than Apple, probably because there is no labor cost. You can just do it yourself or ask a friend who's handy.
You say "the market wants" like consumers are given much choice.
Using that hypothesis, the market also loves cookie banners and prefers subscriptions over one-time payments.
They were given the choice years ago, when some Android phones had removable batteries and touted that as a feature. Nobody seemed to care.
In contrast, users were also given the choice between headphone jack and Bluetooth for years when every phone had both, and clearly chose the jack. BT headphones were rare. But Apple and many other phonemakers figured out they make more money by removing it.
You can buy phones with non-embedded batteries but they suck. That's not a coincidence.
What is your hypothesis for why more phones arent designed with non-embedded, directly replacable batteries? If it's such a highly valued trait in a phone, why doesnt some company just gobble up that market share? Why havent existing solutions sold well? Mine is that consumers dont actually value non-embedded batteries when accounting for all the tradeoffs. What's your hypothesis?
"instead of resorting to ad hominem" Was this edited out or which part do you mean?
calling him a shill for having a different opinion. just an attack on the person. based on nothing and distracts from the substance of his comment.
I originally did engage with the comment. Water-resistance absolutely still is physically possible if the replacement battery is waterproof. Water can over time be corrosive at the contacts, but that's a risk for the user. It does not in any way imply that water will enter the internals of the device from the point of contact with the battery. This will require a bit of engineering at the contact to ensure that water doesn't enter the device. As for the size argument, adding 2 mm of thickness is less important than providing five years of extra life.
Wait, are you proposing sealing the phone and sealing the battery separately, but not sealing the contacts between them? That’s… super sketchy for salt water immersion. Unless you add fuses and a BMS and safety mechanisms into the “battery”. In which case wouldn’t customers want to be able to replace the actual battery within the now-a-battery-plus-computer phone accessory once it wears down?
I'd rather my phone be waterproof than have a battery I can replace myself
Those are not mutually exclusive at all, and there were waterproof phones with replaceable batteries (without even needing a screwdriver). This is mostly an excuse.
I am not sure I believe this, but I'm sure there are phones that attempted it.
Then read upthread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835184
I just don't see why we can't have nice things until proven otherwise (especially considering there is already evidence that this works), rather than have glued-shut devices until proven otherwise (by whom then? Apparently IP and practical experiences aren't enough for you)
Samsung only rated the S5 Active as water resistant, and only IP67.
We're talking about IP68, where you can take a new phone with you on a long swim.
I clicked the "parent comment" link all the way to the submission, and opened the submission as well. Nothing mentions IP68. Which "we" is this goalpost coming from?
I had an s5. It was neither waterproof nor even water resistant—the enclosure got too banged up to ensure seals stay sealed.
It's likely impossible to legislate but it would be nice to say "each generation has to have one user-replaceable battery". Everyone who doesn't care (the 99%) can buy the iPhone 19x, and the people who want replaceable batteries can get the iPhone B.
Then the 99% have to pay extra to subsidise the compliance phone for the 1%...
you can have both. the waterproof was just an excuse to make you either change the phone or go to a specialised center to change the battery, something that is so incovinient/expensive that people just obsolete their phone instead.
I trust that most batteries from iPhones are currently recycled through proper means either by Apple or third party firms.
I don't know how most people will dispose of user replacement batteries, but I suspect the recycle rates will be lower. If you want to ensure higher rates you also need to do something they do in the USA for car lead acid batteries. Charge a deposit fee on the new battery that is returned only when the battery is turned into a valid recycling entity.
Plenty of phones that were waterproof and had replacable batteries already. This isn't new or even particularily hard to do.
For a simplest example - somehow my watch is waterproof to 200M down and replacing the battery just takes a tiny screwdriver. Gaskets are not particualarly hard to work with.
How is it that I owned a fully-submersible phone—with user replaceable battery—over 15 years ago?
You've bought into and are now parroting Apple & Samsung marketing BS.
P.S. it had a headphone jack too. Gaskets over the ports. The headphone jack was the first victim of "but muh waterproof" despite all the other holes and cutouts.
Why do you imply that the phone could no longer be waterproof? Granted, it would take a bit of extra engineering to make it comparably waterproof. There is no reasonable implication that water needs to leak into the internals of the device where it makes contact with the battery.
We have the technology to have both - it's called a gasket.
How do you feel about the batteries in electric vehicles?
What about wearable devices like a smartwatch, headphones, smart glasses?
Should all these be consumer-replaceable without tools, regardless of the effect on the other things people value in these devices (waterproofing, size and weight, battery life, etc.)?
FYI I do not work for anything close to the consumer tech industry.
In software architecture, we talk about essential complexity and incidental complexity.
Essential complexity is inherent to the problem being solved; it can't be eliminated through better tools, process, or design. Incidental complexity is anything added by poor choices or flawed tools. Every line in a "hello world" program that isn't something pretty close to `print("hello world")` is incidental complexity.
To change the battery in electric vehicles that follow typical present-day design patterns, it's essential to have a way to get some clearance under the vehicles like a lift, ramps, or a pit, and it's essential to have a lift or jack to support the weight of the battery. Everything else is basic hand tools.
It is not essential to use any proprietary tools or software that isn't onboard the car or battery. Requiring anything like that is incidental, and a regulation could forbid it in the name of right to repair, reducing waste, or maintaining a healthy used car market.
For EVs you need at least a hoist/lifter/crane/other power tool to replace a battery. But sure, there's no actual engineering reason they can't be replaced by the user. Same for the smartwatch - you can replace a battery in most ordinary wristwatches that use them, why not the smart ones? IEMs are usually too small and that's where the engineering limitations might matter. Headphones, no problem.
> without tools
With commercially available tools, yes. The argument is that, given the skill, you could pull it off.
Then again, maybe cars are a different category. I really don't have enough skilll to add to this discussion
> The argument is that, given the skill, you could pull it off.
Obviously true for any iPhone battery.
[dead]
In other words: IKEA-esque. Should be the goal of any so-called modular systems.
Says who? Not all devices can have the same level of repairability by laypeople. What if I complained that todays' CPUs are too miniaturized and that in my time I could swap the individual vacuum tubes in case something went wrong?
If CPU failure was a leading cause of device obsolescence, your argument would make sense. Next, the EU or other regulators should explicitly regulate software mechanisms that prevent owners of a device from installing an alternate OS, enabling open source or aftermarket OS developers to support devices that mainstream vendors no longer want to support.
>Says who?
The EU, just now.
So the EU is the objective truth of the universe, I guess
No, not everything can be repairable or replaceable, but batteries can and should be.
> If you really want to be able to self-swap your own battery, you can just buy an Android that has a replaceable battery.
Those don't really exist anymore.
> Do we need to regulate something that isn't a problem?
It is a problem and needs to be regulated.
> All regulation has downsides, is it worth paying this price here?
Of course the upsides of regulations are worth it. The downsides might cause slight inconvenience to the manufacturer, so that doesn't really matter.
Of course the upsides of regulations are worth it. The downsides might cause slight inconvenience to the manufacturer, so that doesn't really matter.
Your next phone will be heavier, bulkier, more expensive, and less reliable as a result of these regulations. It will also probably not run as long between charges.
If bureaucrats in Brussels were better at designing phones than Apple, wouldn't they be doing just that?
I agree with the overall thrust of your comment, but you’re overstating it a bit. Removable batteries bring benefits, and the tradeoffs aren’t as dire as you make them seem.
It’s ridiculous that regulators are forcing Apple’s hand with design and engineering (I was one of the few against the USB-C switch), but it is also true that Apple is often incapable of making certain kinds of design decisions that have become impossible due to organizational inertia or shareholder-pleasing. Look no further than macOS 26, or the history of bad design decisions on the hardware side.
> Your next phone will be heavier, bulkier, more expensive, and less reliable as a result of these regulations.
Huh, phones are getting heavier, bulkier and more expensive already with every new generation? There's no regulation needed for that. Also more fragile because everything is made of glass.
I'm an exception for sure but I have not seen much innovation in the phone space that you'd genuinely make me buy a new phone.
Yes, cameras are better now. But some phones had good cameras years ago. I bought new phones mainly because of battery decline and/or not getting security updates.
If one of these will be solved, that might change my phone buying behaviour.
I don't care whether a display is called "retina" , whether the next edition comes in the colour "space banana grey while lion tiger snail".
And I don't need to impress someone by proving that I'm able to buy a new phone either. Such behaviour gives me a good hint what to think about them though.
A phone that will have the battery situation solved is a killer argument. Then I'd like to have a software distribution on top that it's "mum compatible" and doesn't need nerd knowledge to maintain. Something that allows to use banking apps.
Let's see how it goes. Also I hope that there can be third party batteries without DRM-like behaviour.
To me the best "tradeoff" right now is buying used Fairphones from ebay.
It is LineageOS HEAD compatible and has replaceable batteries.
But it has some quirks. Medium performance if even that, non working fingerprint sensor. Camera quality from 2005.
I don't have gapps installed so I'm using my phone without any type of payment/2fa/banking apps. That decision from opsec makes it easily reflashable, so my anti malware strategy is essentially just reflashing the phone every couple weeks :D
My battery usually lasts a week because of using only f-droids chat, navigation, and translation apps for the most part, aside from the browser. I use Firefox with uBlock Origin, saves an insane amount of battery lifetime.
To me, repairability is the feature I value the most in a phone, so I'm kinda willing to compromise on the other features.
Fun fact: Did you know that WhatsApp, Telegram, and Signal all restart themselves when you connect to your headphones? If you froze them before, they'll just drain your battery again when you have any bluetooth changes. You can easily verify that by staying in airplane mode and freezing them, then connecting your headphones in airplane mode.
Batteries have been used as part of planned obsolescence for too long and a whole small business industry of replacing phone batteries has appeared because of it. Next the EU are going to have to address security patches because its another aspect being used to sell new phones.
I have found out that the main phone providers (Apple, Google, Samsung) have extremely long support period. I really don't get the "planned obsolescence" thing.
As an example, in Jan 2026, Apple published iOS 12.5.8 which provides updates for iPhone 5s which released in Sept 2013. That's 12.5 years ago. The equivalent would be to connect to the internet using ADSL in Jan 2000 with your IBM PS/2 rocking in intel 8086, 512 kb of RAM and expecting an update for your DOS operating system.
>As an example, in Jan 2026, Apple published iOS 12.5.8 which provides updates for iPhone 5s which released in Sept 2013. That's 12.5 years ago. The equivalent would be to connect to the internet using ADSL in Jan 2000 with your IBM PS/2 rocking in intel 8086, 512 kb of RAM and expecting an update for your DOS operating system.
The updates for ios 12 are all security updates, not feature updates, so your comparison to "connect to the internet using ADSL in Jan 2000 with your IBM PS/2 rocking in intel 8086" doesn't really make sense. The phones stuck on ios 15 are basically unusable because many apps don't support it anymore. At best you can download an older version from a few years ago, but that depends on whether the backend servers were updated. Apps that insist you use the latest version (eg. banking/finance apps) basically unusable.
A phone is not unusable because some banking apps don't work on it. It didn't even ship with said apps installed.
Believe it or not, "apps" are an important "feature" of a smartphone, even if it's not theoretically bundled with it. Moreover it's not just banking apps, those are just the first ones to go, but any that don't keep backend compatibility will eventually break.
Isn't it the banks/apps that are choosing not to support the phone, not Apple?
The entire point of the cellphone is that third party apps are required to live a modern life. If I cannot run the apps required to pay for a parking spot or perform a 2FA ritual then there’s really no point in even having a phone. The first party software isn’t compelling enough to justify the pocket space.
Indeed you can still get a battery replaced by Apple for an old iPhone 6.
The updates often require more power. Which drains the battery more than it was designed for. Which helps shorten the life of the device.
BTW: DOS was supported until 2001, and Win95 could boot DOS standalone.
Machines were roughly doubling in performance every year back in 2000.
Nowadays they are doubling in performance every... 5 years?
Only in some edge cases, in others it takes even longer than 5 years and that time is getting longer and longer.
The EU already requires 5 years of patches since last year. Motorola thinks they have found a loophole, so there are still some, ahem, patches needed to the law.
Do you have more info about this? I recommended Motorola phones to people based on a combination of price, their needs, and expected longevity (at least 5y now with the new update and replacement part requirements). If that's not the case then I want to update my recommendations
https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/news/new-eu-rules...
motorolanis not mentioned there
No company is mentioned there...
> Next the EU are going to have to address security patches because its another aspect being used to sell new phones.
They already are. 5 years of updates is now the legal minimum in the EU. https://www.osnews.com/story/142500/new-eu-rules-mandate-fiv...
I dunno, my wife has has the same iPhone 11 Pro Max since 2020. She had to get the battery replaced once at an Apple store, which I believe cost $99, and it took like thirty minutes and it wasn't that hard.
I'll admit it's a little annoying that I have to pay a hundred bucks to get the battery replaced, but the phone is otherwise fine and still gets updates, so I don't know that I buy that it's "planned obsolescence".
It's planned obsolescence through price. Your wife paid >50% of the phone's value just to replace the battery. Many people won't think that's worth it. It could have been a $30 user replaceable battery.
Or she spent 7% of the purchase price of a new device to defer requiring to upgrade for another 3 years.
$100 is worth it, but you can get a good discount by going to that one mall kiosk instead of the Apple Store.
> you can get a good discount by going to that one mall kiosk instead of the Apple Store.
Apple actively impeded third-party repair shops though. Oregon had to outlaw parts pairing for them to change that practice.
Wow that’s ridiculous compared to a user replaceable battery
Imagine you can order a battery from Apple for $20 and you swap it in 1 minute: less money, less time, user satisfaction++.
But that's not what the regulation is saying, is it?
It says
* replaceable with 'commercially available tools' (which means: Apple could just sell you a 'iphone battery replacment tool kit for 1000 Euros)
* has excemptions for high-cycle / long-lived batteries
* ... nothing about the price of the battery (which can be 1000 Euros)
* ... or that the battery/the battery's form factor can't be trademarked, essentially locking you into 'Apple batteries' and preventing aftermarket ones.
Also, I'd rather have a less bulky phone with fewer mechanical parts that can break as compared to a more user-maintainable. Because of 'high-security' software (think: banking apps, or - I assume - the soon-to-be-released EUId wallet), the thing is basically worthless after four years anyways and needs replacement.
I'd wager that ... nothing at all will change in 2027.
> Batteries have been used as part of planned obsol[esc]ence for too long and a whole small business industry of replacing phone batteries has appeared because of it.
Note that early phones had replaceable batteries and it was later phones that dropped that feature. The idea wasn't that making the phone impossible to open would compel people to replace their phone faster; it was that given that people didn't keep their phones long enough to wear out the battery, there was no need to make the battery accessible.
That was true 15-20 years ago. Nowadays changing the phone is basically because:
1) battery dying / not lasting enough
2) shattered glasses whose replacement costs 35-40% of the cost of the phone new (for budget/mid-range phones, not everybody has iPhones)
distant 3rd) not enough free internal storage
Unrelated note but, cheap/midrange phones are a scam, you almost always get better value purchasing a second hand premium one.
How is buying a midrange phone new a scam? Just because a second hand premium one is better value (assuming you don't place any value on being brand new). You buy it knowing full well that it isn't a premium device but most people don't need a premium device.
Are non-premium new cars a scam too?
How is it not a scam?
It is clear what you are buying
Eh, I don't find my Pixel 8 to be notably better in any way that I notice or care about than the Moto G that it replaced, except for the fact that it runs GrapheneOS.
also camera just not being satisfying enough anymore is a big deal
sure on highest end phones you have very good cameras since a long time by now, but even there they find improvements here and there (e.g. zoom, low light pictures, even better image stabilization)
but middle to lower end phones are still have major improvements in every generation of a certain brand/line/price category. And you might be satisfied with a "acceptable" quality camera, until everyone around you has way nicer photos, or you now have a reason to make photes you didn't had in the past, or you get older and your hands a bit unsteady etc.
TBH we are in the terrain of diminishing returns also for those phones and cameras, IMO.
Batteries are generally a cheap fix from third party stores. If you wanted to keep the phone why not spend the small dollars and just replace the battery?
Because you need to bring it to a shop, sometimes they may keep it for more times, sometimes if they are not that honest they will find something else and factory reset it and a long etc. If it's something one can do at home by one self as an expected and supported by the vendor operation, why not? You can still bring it to a store if you don't feel like crafty enough to do it.
Indeed, even directly from Apple a new battery is a whole lot less expensive than getting another phone.
Upgrade cycles have slowed down in recent years, the improvements are relatively incremental nowadays. Screens, durability, processors, storage sizes, cameras, even battery life are okay-ish and aren't improving quickly enough to justify the same upgrade rate. Foldables are basically the only big innovation in recent years, but are still a little too fragile and expensive.
This is also reflected in the increasing support durations from major manufacturers.
This might be partially true, but making them inacessible is still a great way approach to planned obsolescence and there's no way this was not part of the motivation. The fact that an entire industry exists to provide replacement batteries is proof of this, as is the fact that Apple offers a £100 battery replacement. They also replace the batteries of all refurbished models they sell, which again wouldn't be necessary if battery life wasn't a concern over the useful life of a phone.
Secondly, what you said may have been true in the past, when smartphones were rapidly evolving and upgrade cycles were short, but people are holding on to their devices for longer now, so its possible its becoming a problem again.
Batteries on early cell phones needed to be replaced multiple times a day. I remember talk time of like 10 minutes on my motorola StarTec.
1996, for anyone else wondering
Not sure how comparable that is when considering that the devices are also commonly required as ticket on public transport with no offline fallback (going so far as to include animations on the screen so you can't send a screenshot to a friend or print it out -- no, I have no idea why they think you can't send a video to a friend). Having 10 minutes of use time is simply not on the table, and GP was probably not talking about that class of phones (pre-"smart" phone) in the first place
https://support.apple.com/guide/security/express-cards-with-...
ok? If it dies after 10 minutes and then lets you use a select number of compatible smartcards for another 5, that's not quite the level I think people are talking about here
If running out of power is super critical carrying a power pack is just as simple as replacement battery. It also more generally useful as it can charge lots devices other then phones.
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/external-battery-packs/usb-c-po...
Nowadays batteries seem to be doing pretty good, though. I've got a galax s20 fe, and the battery is still fine after 5 years.
Nice! As a heads up, don't be tempted to replace the battery via a third party if the Samsung battery ever stops meeting expectations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47834810
This was true back when Moore's law was the driver of obsolescence. You bought a new phone every year simply because next year's phone was twice as fast.
Now that this doesn't happen, the driver of obsolescence is the battery, which is much less defensible because you can swap it much more easily than "the whole internals of the phone".
[dead]
What if we regulate batteries even more? i.e. what if, in some magical perfect world, the world get's together and agrees on batteries for phones like how we agree on AA,AAA,D,C batteries? Even more though.. a standard connector, a standard comms bus, a variety of sizes, and they were designed for reuse as efficiently as possible.
Now we can scale up volume, swap them out, be free to purchase from a different manufacturer, and have scaled up recycling services.
Phones would be hard because manufacturers want to fill every square mm of it, but we can start with power tools batteries...
Some manufacturers in the industry are already standardising on one or two designs since a few years ago.
Power tools have lots of empty space in the battery case already, and most just use 18650s. We could mandate making the cells directly reachable.
Phones are definitely a more difficult use case.
I'd settle for requiring the battery specs to be fully available, and that they can't be made difficult to manufacture without good reason.
Ideally, there should be some set of standard protocols/connectors/voltages/sizes, but the manufacturer should only be held to "downward-compliance" with at least one of them, so they can have flexibility in design but still leave a suboptimal standard option available to users as a fallback.
That's an excellent idea! It will work out absolutely great - much like Communism.
Meaning, when you forcefully standardize and regulate how phones are built, you might expect that companies will not compete on making better phones (since they are not very much differentiated) but on who produces the cheapest phone.
You're thinking of socialism, which is what the EU is doing here (socialism-lite, anyway, as championed by the Social Democrats) and yes, it does work. Free healthcare, free education, and we're working towards decent privacy laws and regulations on big companies. It's far from perfect of course, but comparing it to how pure capitalism is going in the US it's clearly the better system.
This is great news. Every once in a while something good comes out of EU. Now of course, our US friends are telling myriads of reasons why this is obviously stupid and unnecessary. But it's not. Letting users actually maintain their devices is only smart.
It's a good move, but that is not enough. My old Chinese phone had a replaceable battery but it lasted so long that after it died, it was not possible to find the replacement. It seems that all phones have batteries with different sizes, and potentially different third pin designation, so even if you find smaller battery, it still can be incompatible because of third pin.
So if you want phones to be usable for longer period, you need to standardize batteries.
From the article
> Replacement batteries for any model will have to remain available to users for at least five years after the last unit of the product is placed on the market, the regulation also states.
Using a 5 year old phone is common these days. I still see plenty of home button iPhones in the wild.
While standardization would be nice, I can still order batteries for the Samsung phones I've used 15 years ago. Availability might not be that much of an issue with larger brands.
As long as those unused batteries you can find are fresh a 15 year old unused battery would be doa
There's an aftermarket for phone batteries. They're new batteries produced by what I imagine are unaffiliated manufacturers. As long as the phone is popular enough, there should be enough market for manufacturers to make new batteries.
phones are indeed becoming more repairable, and the legislation is working upto an extent.
on the other hand, mandating easier to repair components is ineffective if the manufacturer does not support the parts sale or use parts otherwise widely available in the market.
this goes beyond for other consumer electronics. in the world of laptops, which are generally more repairable, i've had my own experience with a mid-range one from lenovo, the largest vendor worldwide. [1]
the laptop was from the covid-era and one of the refresh of their popular lineup which has seen minimal changes under the hood. despite that, when i had to replace its fans and battery, i had to look for third-party sellers for the components. they are quite easy to replace but as a regular consumer it is tricky to find the correct parts and not overspend on them.
maybe with the new silicon carbide batteries, we could have a "nokia bl-5c" moment, without the counterfeit explody part.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/267018/global-market-sha...
The EU with its mama energy again.
I use 15 Pro. I don't like the new aluminium iPhones much. So I just went it to Apple service center and had the battery replaced. It costs just 90 euros and I now have a brand new phone, basically.
I very much prefer my phone to be thinner, water resistant, and have a larger battery compared to being able to do it myself.
The law is not about you, but about everyone: 1) Apple doesn't have service centers everywhere: some countries/cities/small towns don't have them 2) Apple doesn't provide service for older devices 3) making it easier doesn't mean you'll be able to swap them live as we did in the 90s, but it means you could do it at home with a reasonable set of tools instead of sending the device to some shop that would need to unglue, unsolder, ...
Out of the 27 EU countries, there are only apple stores in 8 of them.
> Why isn't there any significant demand for replaceable batteries?
Most consumers are like pigs who simply eat whatever the market throws into their trough, because ultimately they have better things to do than to get deeply involved in every purchasing decision.
> If replaceable batteries were better, they would already be available.
Developments like those in the smartphone market involve complex path dependencies. That’s why you can’t simply assume that competition will lead to the product offerings converging on the best product. Furthermore, “better” needs to be defined in some way. If we leave that up to the market, it becomes a circular argument: (1) The better product prevails in the market. (2) The product that prevails in the market is the better one. This circular reasoning is the biggest flaw in market ideology. I don't understand why people can't see that. The market moves in a certain direction, and they say, “There it is—progress!”
> Regulation hinders progress.
Perhaps, at times, the opposite is true. Even if we set aside the fact that “better” is defined in a circular manner here, the path-dependence of market development sometimes causes the market to get stuck in a local optimum. Regulatory interventions in the market can then serve as an effective lever to help the market break free from that situation.
> If you want a removable battery, you're simply in the minority as a consumer.
That’s another point where I just don’t get market ideologues: why should I reject regulatory intervention on the one hand, but on the other hand, if the market doesn’t give me what I want, I’m supposed to just shut up and accept that there isn’t enough demand for my quirky, special requests? I’ve been missing removable batteries ever since they disappeared from the market. That must have coincided with the rise of smartphones. Come to think of it, maybe Steve Jobs is to blame. With iPods, there was still a public debate about the issue [1]. With the iPhone, it was just the way it was.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuTcavAzopg
> That’s why you can’t simply assume that competition will lead to the product offerings converging on the best product.
You also can't simply assume that an existing solution on the market is not the best already.
I mean, who told us that smartphones with user-replaceable batteries are better than smartphones that are 0.5 mm thinner because their batteries are non-replaceable? The same people who want to ban encryption?
> Regulatory interventions in the market can then serve as an effective lever to help the market break free from that situation.
No, they can't. Regulatory processes are shaped by the same incentives as market ones. It's just that the tools for achieving goals are different. And because of this, it is always moving in the opposite direction from "help the market".
> I’m supposed to just shut up and accept that there isn’t enough demand for my quirky, special requests?
Generally speaking, yes, it is a market ideology. But what's not clear about it? People adhere to it not because they like when unqualified masses, with their consumer behavior, encourage all sorts of nasty things in mass-market products. It's simply better than when a regulatory body implements its "quirky, special requests" at the expense of everyone else.
> You also can't simply assume that an existing solution on the market is not the best already.
What kind of rash response is that? No one here is making a blanket claim that the market solution is categorically suboptimal.
> I mean, who told us that smartphones with user-replaceable batteries are better...
Let me repeat: you have to FIRST define what you mean by “better” and then ask that question. I want a phone with a removable battery, and it’s immediately clear to me that making this a requirement is a measure that removes a lower limit on the devices’ lifespan.
> Regulatory processes are shaped by the same incentives as market ones.
That’s just another one of those market-driven circular arguments. There’s no alternative to market logic, because in the end, everything follows the same incentives. You should be able to see that this is nonsense just by driving down a public street or standing under a streetlight at night.
> opposite direction from "help the market"
I would rephrase that as: “help the market move in a desired direction for the benefit of people” and I do believe that regulation can achieve exactly that.
> It's simply better than when a regulatory body implements its "quirky, special requests" at the expense of everyone else.
At whose expense, then? People who are upset that batteries are replaceable again? People who now find their smartphones a few millimeters too thick or a few grams too heavy? Are these people also upset about safety and environmental standards for cars because they make cars a little heavier, more expensive, or more complex?
> I mean, who told us that smartphones with user-replaceable batteries are better than smartphones that are 0.5 mm thinner because their batteries are non-replaceable? The same people who want to ban encryption? Even apart from the ad-hominem FUD argumentation, currently, it's the people who refuse to ban encryption even after it was pushed to them multiple times.
This argument is neither an ad hominem attack nor FUD. If you don’t like the pig trough analogy, I’ll be happy to rephrase it for you: when I buy something, I just go to the store and buy it. There are a few areas of personal interest where I’m more selective about what I buy, but generally speaking, I just grab whatever’s right at the front of the shelf, within arm’s reach, and looks roughly like what I want. If you look at consumers as a whole, that’s the best approximation of their behavior.
The ban on encryption is a good counterpoint! I’m not saying that everything the regulators want to do is good or in line with my views. But ultimately, I want to live in a world where policymakers set the framework and the market finds good solutions within that framework, not in a world where market players are given completely free rein and every political intervention is viewed as if someone had licked the sacred shrine of a deity with their tongue.
I find it so weird that European regulation targets very specific niches while avoiding generalization.
In order to reduce plastic pollution, they forced manufacturers to make attached bottle caps (terrible idea) but go to the supermarket and there are various fruits and vegetables each unit wrapped in plastic separately.
Now they are targeting phones but I also want my handheld and robot vacuum cleaners, electric toothbrushes, grass cutters, etc to also have batteries that can be removed and replaced without tearing down entire device and even learning soldering in some cases.
> In order to reduce plastic pollution, they forced manufacturers to make attached bottle caps (terrible idea)
According to research bottle caps are one of the biggest source of beach litter because they float and end up washed up. They are also exceptionally harmful to animals that confuse them for fish and end up consuming them.
I don’t think anyone who is against the bottle caps directive is serious about protecting our environment. It’s a minor change with an outsized impact.
I am definitely not against plastic pollution, but against narrowly targeted regulation. When the regulation is very specific, the workarounds are trivial. One funny example: Lithuania banned alcohol advertisement, so the advertisers started advertising non-alcoholic beer and other drinks under the same brand names; essentially the ads stayed the same with "non-alcoholic" appended to them. It's cynical but legal.
Every airport in Europe has no water filling stations so you have to buy a plastic bottle with the stupid attached bottle cap. So green!
> has no water filling stations
Wouldn't you just fill it up from ... a tap in the washroom?
Depends on the countries water quality. Some countries don't have water good for drinking, and others have poor taste which many are put off by. That being said, many EU airports do have water refill machines. Germanys airports for example..
While I understand where you're coming from and that this thinking is probably (and somewhat understandably) why there are no water filling stations, I find this incredibly nasty. I don't want to fill my water bottle in a public restroom riddled with bacteria.
And yes, I'm fully aware that a water filling station will probably be just as nasty, but it's the thought that bugs me.
I will never get the bottle cap haters. It’s a genuine improvement for me, and at most a minor inconvenience for anyone. Calling that a „terrible” idea makes you wonder what kind of scale you’re using, putting so much weight on something so minor.
The regulation targets most portable electronics, not just phones.
Next, do user installable OS. Phones are the costliest gadgets with a dizzying range of sensors/capabilities and more than enough RAM. Its a shame we can't use them for a decade+, giving it a second life.
A lot of discussion about 'whether its needed' or 'moving a needle'. Batteries were swappable back in the day, and later on someone figured that making battery suck, can drive you to buy a new phone - because it is harder to degrade the rest of the device faster. Then we accepted that you cannot play around the battery, bcs that's the reality of things. So many people won't even think about it - but it does not mean it is not needed. I would love to make my device much better with swapping battery as many time as needed.
But then I think someone will figure out to make these batteries so expensive, that it won't change a thing.
In case of Fairphone, which already has swappable batteries, this did not manifest: the batteries cost, depending on the model, between €39 and €59.
I look into my perfect workable Samsung Tab S7+ and remember that it has been an year since the last security update.
Now I rely on a few random individuals who, for all I know could be state agents or a ransomware organization to provide unofficial versions of Lineage so I can keep using it.
Battery isn't the only problem to avoid e-waste, but it's a start.
Aren't security updates the deciding factor for the life of a phone these days? Manufacturers provide updates for 7 years max which is probably less than the battery life.
Seems to me like the top goal should be: you can easily replace the most-likely-to-break parts (screen, back, battery, etc) in any local independent repair shop, with genuine parts that have low markups.
I'm confused why that still isn't the case today given all the EU headlines we've seen over the years.
Low markups wouldn't be the main issue in the EU, though it would help. It's labor cost because it takes skill, specialized tools, and time.
If the shop could replace the battery with nothing more niche than a torx bit in 5 minutes we wouldn't be talking about this.
Now they only need to make sure that a supply chain for replacement batteries exists, there is regulation and competition and options remain available for a reasonable price.
There are plenty of old Dell and HP laptops with replaceable batteries which can only be found on eBay or some random seller that does who knows what under the refurbishing process.
Exactly. I had phones and laptops with replaceable batteries in the past. I liked the idea of it, but in practice there was no OEM-quality replacement available by the time I wanted one. The device would have been usable to me still, but not with a random black market battery that may well be a fire hazard.
Having thought about this long term, I think the only solution to this would be mandating standardized battery cells. Rather than every phone model having a bespoke cell that is manufactured once and then obsoleted, they need to have standardized shape and electrical characteristics so that batteries being produced for new phones would also be useful to rehabilitate old phones.
I expect we'll see a spike in cell phone battery fires starting about a year after this goes into effect. Same deal as cheap external battery-powered travel power banks, which are already a problem.
> Now they only need to make sure that a supply chain for replacement batteries exists, there is regulation and competition and options remain available for a reasonable price.
No, they won't do the hard part. Just the minimum plus a ton of PR and back patting then move on.
I was looking forward to finally be able to easily switch out (i)Phone batteries again - after 20 years - but turns out the lobbyists managed to get a loophole in the law - exempting Apple & Co from making their phones more repairable / longer live-able.
> If a battery can do 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity it is exempt
Seems entirely reasonable. Embedded batteries have a lot of advantages. Cheaper, higher battery capacity, water proof, smaller, stronger. I think this will largely just make the mid to low tier android market in the EU shittier.
Citation needed.
All of those can be achieved with replaceable batteries.
Are you claiming it's not cheaper to embed batteries?
Citation needed. It seems pretty clear that a mechanism to allow a user to access a battery will increase complexity, making all the other properties harder to achieve.
You're asking for proof that effective waterproof phones with removable batteries exist?
https://m.gsmarena.com/results.php3?chkRemovableBattery=sele...
You're proving the point.
1) iPhones for example are ip68 rated while those are just ipx8/9
2) Do you want to be limited to the universe of those search results? Do you want to buy a Sony Xperia?
You can't make batteries directly replaceable at the same quality and price. There are tradeoffs. Obviously waterproof non-embedded batteries exist. Just like you could make a removable battery the same slimness as embedded. With massive tradeoffs. It's capacity will be terrible. No one is surprised a removable battery can be waterproof but the point is there are tradeoffs.
I don't see those options in the search results either way
In any case we heard the same sort of rationalization for getting rid of the headphone jack, so color me extremely skeptical-- yes of course there's going to be trade-offs, but what a coincidence that headphone jacks, replaceable batteries, SD card slots have all gone by the wayside, which just so happens to allow for upselling Bluetooth and cloud storage
1 mm thickness is a fine trade-off
> just ipx8/9
Do you actually need it? For what?
Kinda weird to argue for longer life via battery replacement and against longer life via contaminant protections. My phone is regularly covered in chalk dust, sawdust, water, …
No, the list was "Cheaper, higher battery capacity, water proof, smaller, stronger". I don't think it's all that controversial to say that there are engineering tradeoffs to be made here. You can make a waterproof phone with a removable battery, but you can't make a waterproof phone with a removable battery that is as good or better than an iPhone in every other respect too. If you could, iPhones would already have removable batteries.
> If you could, iPhones would already have removable batteries.
A crazy take since apple has very clearly made anti-consumer moves in the past.
If having a baked in battery caused there to be 1% more iphones sales which would they choose.
You were likely nodding along when Jobs was out there telling people they were holding the phone wrong.
My point is that if it's all of those things (crucially, including cheaper), then it's a Pro-Apple move to manufacture iPhones that way. There would be no downside. To the extent they make anti-consumer moves at all (which I'll cede for the sake of keeping this brief), they do so because those moves are pro-Apple.
The crazy take is thinking that a design choice that causes there to be 1% more iPhone sales is an anti-consumer move.
Planned obsolesce are anti consumer and increases sales. So yes anti consumer design can increase sales volume, that is often the point.
Replaceable batteries lets you use your phone longer, that means people will take longer to buy a new phone and reduce iphone sales. Such anti consumer moves requires regulations to be fixed, since there is no incentive for the company to be pro consumer here.
The point is that the incentives are not pointing towards "make better phone" they are pointing towards "sell more phones"
Sometimes "better phone" drives "sell more phones"
Sometimes it doesn't.
Can you explain your reasoning? Is there some minimum sales threshold required, and 2 million iPhones wouldn't meet it?
Oh yes, the famous Galaxy XCover 7 Pro. People are camping out in the rain waiting for their release because replaceable batteries are under such high demand.
So we're moving the goalposts from "these features can coexist" to "such a phone has to be popular"? Why don't you skip to the end and tell me where they're going to end up?
If phones are not for sale with features, how does that allow drawing any conclusion about popularity? I've yet to meet a single person who says, "I sure am glad I can't use fingerprint unlock on my iPhone anymore", but obviously it's not worth leaving the entire ecosystem
Recall also that building Android phones barely makes any money, so it's not exactly a business teeming with disruption
Fairphone managed to do it, I'm sure companies with more budget than them can figure it out.
Not water proof and definitely big for its capacity.
Yes, hence why I'm sure companies with 100x the budget can do better.
It'll increase the size of the case by a small amount but a battery cell is a battery cell... Rip open an old device and you'll see.
What proportion of devices would need to meet this 80% rule? 50%? 90%? 99%? Could make a huge difference
My iPhone 14 is 1081 days old, charged every night, battery capacity is reported as 81%. So in Apple's own measurements this is possible.
I guess there is some built in spare capacity, but that may still qualify for the exemption?
My experience with an Apple battery saying ~81% longevity remaining is that it'll die when it still reports half full and you open a demanding webpage
It's a genuinely hard problem to measure battery capacity with existing smartphone hardware, also because it's a matter of opinion how much to factor in the peak load capacity (how do you count the bottom 40%, where it can't handle peak draw anymore? Should one include half of it because the phone is still usable but in a degraded state?), so I'm not faulting Apple here at all. They choose to display this estimate and it's better than nothing / better than most manufacturers. Just that you can't take it at face value, even if you charged your phone from 0% to 100% for >=1000 days
If you charge every night from say 50%, that's not a full cycle.
The exemption is about ensuring customers get what they paid for. It shouldn’t care how the manufacturer achieves that; driving the batteries less hard is an obvious tactic, and actually also makes them safer to use.
> If a battery can do 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity it is exempt
Is there a definition for a cycle? 80->85%? 33->72? 22-83? 87->96? Would each of these be a "cycle"?
A battery cycle is a full discharge/charge cycle (100 -> 0 -> 100). Going from 70% to 20% and then charging back to 70% is half a cycle.
It's like saying you were looking forward to shooting and killing an invader but unfortunately no one invaded your house and that made you sad.
I recently did a battery replacement on an iphone mini 13 with some success and some failure. I absolutely killed the screen without cracking it. A little too much pulling with the ifixit reverse clamp.
Had i gone a little slower, it would have been a very easy repair.
Yes, this is the most non-story I have ever seen on this topic. I do not know of any manufacturer who does not claim this, verifiable or otherwise; and even if they can't claim it, all they have to do is one minor purely-software capacity adjustment, which they will gladly do before they will even consider offering removable batteries.
What a disappointment.
Apple has no chance to claim their batteries can have 80% capacity after 1000 cycles seeing how they never achieved this so far. Lying about it puts them in a world of mass recalls and fraud investigations.
Depends on how "cycle" is defined - I'm sure they can finagle it so "any charge added to the battery" counts as a cycle.
As a datapoint my iPhone reports 522 cycles and 89% max - from march 2024. I do use the "limit charging to 80%" feature which I suspect may become mandatory before 2027 ...
> Depends on how "cycle" is defined - I'm sure they can finagle it so "any charge added to the battery" counts as a cycle.
The definition is pretty well established, and Apple themselves have for years used it consistently.
https://www.apple.com/batteries/why-lithium-ion/
> You complete one charge cycle when you’ve used (discharged) an amount that represents 100% of your battery’s capacity* — but not necessarily all from one charge. For instance, you might use 75% of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25% the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100%, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle.
>Depends on how "cycle" is defined - I'm sure they can finagle it so "any charge added to the battery" counts as a cycle.
the definition of a battery cycle is very well established. there isnt really any room to finagle it.
Charging to 80% significantly decreases the wear. Your battery would be way lower if you charged to 100%
I don’t think “a cycle” is up for redefining. I hope these terms are defined in the law.
But that supports my assumption that realistically the batteries don’t last 1000 cycles even when charged conservatively. The last 9% will go faster than the first 11%, the battery already has lower capacity and needs to be charged even more often.
On the other hand if I only get to 1000 cycles by charging up to 80% then I’m not getting 100% of the battery, am I?
Dieselgate was caught by some dudes with an emissions measuring device. It’s not that extreme to get a number of iPhone batteries, test them to 1000 cycles and see if statistically they still retain 80% capacity. If they don’t Apple could be looking at replacing everyone’s batteries.
The obvious solution is underrating - just like a 1 TB SSD actually has more than 1TB of "raw storage" available internally. What is a 100% battery today will be sold as an 80% capacity tomorrow, with 20% "overage" available for wear.
That’s fine as long as the battery ends up having 80% real capacity after 1000 cycles and maybe Apple is also transparent about how.
A bigger issue which I don’t know if the law covers is with the other battery specs. An 80% battery that can’t handle any spikes (low power mode) is useless.
Isn't the most obvious end game just (if using the same packaging) some note on a spec sheet of "12 hours screen on time (10 hours in the EU)"?
If it's not configurable people will likely complain battery life is higher on the US's software version, they won't care about the reason.
Well, Apple was already fined for decreasing the CPU frequency (to avoid spikes on aged batteries), so that's not really an option. (Even though at the time they wasn't doing it out of malice at all, they actually tried to keep old phones usable - their marketing team messed up there big time)
The easiest is to just require it be replaced under warranty - if the battery has to be usable to 1000 cycles, and it is at 80% and 999 cycles but doesn't "work" it's a warranty replacement.
But that then brings in a "how many years" question.
I'm pretty the spec sheet claimed 1000 cycles when I bought my iPhone 17.
They do claim it at least for iPhone 15 "under ideal conditions": https://support.apple.com/en-us/101575
VW engine specs said some things about emissions. It’s fine to have unrealistic specs if there are no consequences. The f there’s a law about it they’re far more exposed to people catching a lie or at least an unrealistic estimate.
[dead]
> the lobbyists managed to get a loophole in the law - exempting Apple & Co
But Apple batteries are already user replaceable? I've replaced my own and batteries come with kits that have all the tools and disposable glue strips and seals.
That is not "user replaceable" by any reasonable definition.
I suppose what is "reasonable" might be different for different people. I already had pentalob bits although a fresh spudger is always welcome. But these are not exotic tools. The "glue" under the battery was a bit like "command strips" commonly used to hang things from walls.
It is interesting to think about the range of physical tool usage that is within a reasonable expectation. Is owning and being able to operate an implement to open and replace a battery in a simple watch like the Casio F91W reasonable?
“ If a battery can do 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity it is exempt”
I mean isn’t that an okay exemption? If the intent is to drive devices to be less disposable and more sustainable… if it incentivizes all mobile phone manufacturers to improve battery longevity, I’d say that’s a win.
I wouldn’t even call it a loophole. The entire purpose of the legislation could be that clause
No shot at all apple batteries can last 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity. Probably can’t even do 300 in my experience. Sounds like an easy lawsuit.
No doubt they will redefine maximum battery capacity to a figure that does achieve 80% over 1000 cycles. If you under-declare maximum capacity then there is a lot of headroom for actual degradation before you start to show degradation to the user.
iPhone 17 Pro launch specs:
> Video Playback: Up to 27* hours
> *: 25 hours in the EU
This is what they should have been doing all along. My Pixel tells me that charging above 80% is bad for battery longevity and I should set a charge limit. Well then maybe 80% should be the new 100% and the advertised capacity should be the 80%.
This balancing act is already happening. If you modify the battery controller, you can totally continue charging beyond the voltage that the phone considers to be 100%. It also increases the risk of damaging the battery (https://www.acebattery.com/blogs/what-will-happen-when-a-lit...). What they define as 100% is already some point on a damage probability curve, and charging to anything below that point will further decrease the amount of battery stress (for li-ion batteries and similar technologies)
Fwiw, based on tests I've seen recently such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lj4LMlGr4og, I think limiting to 80% is overblown, but somewhere in the 90%s could be a sweet spot that gives you several hours' longer battery life than with 80% but still has a much reduced chance of significant degradation. I don't understand why they didn't make this configurable
A battery that can support 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity would be a literal brick. For an example the Vision Pro's battery has extreme over-provisioning and limit how long it would last. (note I know it is removable but that isn't the point).
Well, this just incentivized a new battery tech then, what's the problem?
I would wager that batteries that powered down at 20% and that halt charging at 80% would be significantly prolonged.
If Apple resorts to those tactics, then there is no limit in moving the goalposts.
In the meantime, my daily driver here in reality land: https://i.imgur.com/8yEEJVb.png
That has not been my experience, at least with Apple laptops. Even when rated for 1000 cycles, I'll get the warning that service is needed (AFAIK that means 80% capacity or lower) well before then. I've seen this on several, but the one I just checked is at just under 670 cycles and has had that warning up for some months already.
Maybe iPhones are better about this, though, I don't know. But I definitely don't have a lot of faith in the laptops maintaining 80% for 1000 cycles.
AppleCare covers the 80% capacity/1000 cycles rating, so I always keep an eye on my battery around 1000 cycles praying it will drop under 80% so I can get a new battery for free under AppleCare, and have yet to manage it
212 cycles, still 100% capacity (maybe 99.5 rounded up) "relative to when it was new". Doesn't that seem a bit dodgy to you?
>The regulation states that batteries must be removable using ‘commercially available’ tools
This is doing a lot of work here. There's enough wiggle room for this to be absolutely meaningless. Anything short of I can slide off the back cover and maybe unscrew two or three screws to replace the battery means that a lot of people are going to end up not being able to replace the batteries.
The rest of that same sentence, " – and that if specialised tools are required, they must be provided free of charge when the phone or tablet is purchased," seems to mitigate that concern, no? I suppose it hinges on what the test for a "specialized tool" is.
EU regulatory bodies haven’t been as blindly sycophantic towards megacorporations in terms of allowing them to skirt by rules set forth by their legislatures, so I would be more optimistic than if this were a development in US law.
Well yes, that's where the innovation happened. Collecting fines based on regulation without innovation is easy street.
If people wanted replaceable batteries in the US, companies would sell them.
There's big conspiracy here. They just don't matter to most people.
And this regulation is really bad and will harm innovation for very little to no value.
The free market only works when you have sufficient competition. The phone market is absolutely not trivial to enter, so your first sentence is plain and simply false.
Also, given that iphones almost already pass the requirements, where is the harm to innovation?
You can buy a soldering kit for 100$ USD. That doesn't mean normal people are going to be able to use them.
I'd rather force larger companies to offer battery replacement at cost + shipping.
I have no real interest and opening up my own devices and messing with batteries, but I have no problem paying the manufacturer $100 for service.
In that context it seems like "specialized" means "not commercially available", no?
Toss: "technically you can purchase a new phone with non-specialist tool 'cash' so we feel no need to provide anything at all"
Specialised as in created specifically for swapping battery of that specific phone? As in you cannot do it with a generic commercially available tool (e.g. a screwdriver)
Quote from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:C...
--- start quote ---
Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 states that a battery shall be considered readily removable by the end-user where it can be removed from a product with the use of commercially available tools, without requiring the use of specialised tools, unless provided free of charge with the product, proprietary tools, thermal energy, or solvents to disassemble the product.
Guidance on tool types can be drawn from standard EN 45554:2020e (2). In the context of the assessment of a product’s ability to be repaired, reused and upgraded, this standard uses the following classification groups: (i) basic tools (including those provided with the product as a spare part) or no tools; (ii) product-group specific tools; (iii) commercially available tools; and (iv) proprietary tools.
The concept of commercially available tools mentioned in Article 11 comprises the categories of basic tools or no tools and of commercially available tools as per EN 45554:2020e.
The concept of specialised tools laid down in the Regulation refers to product-group specific tools that are not available for purchase by the general public but are not protected by patents either. Article 11 requires that any such specialised tool that might be necessary to have a portable battery removed and replaced is provided free of charge with the product into which the battery is incorporated.
As per EN 45554:2020e, proprietary tools refer to tools not available for purchase by the general public, or for which any applicable patent are not available for license under fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms. Such tools should not be needed to remove portable batteries
--- start quote ---
(I fully expect literally no one on HN to spend even a second looking for and reading the relevant texts, and complain about the law being vague or impossible to implement or something)
> without requiring […] thermal energy, or solvents to disassemble the product.
No heat or solvents required. Sounds good.
I did actually look for the text for several minutes but couldn't find it anywhere. Thanks for doing what the news apparently couldn't.
Maybe. Maybe not. If my local phone and phone accessories shop can do it for little money in 15 minutes then the current calculus changes for a heck of a lot of people.
Isn't that already the case though?
No. I can't find a legit battery for my Samsung phone, only forgeries and "compatible with"s. Local repair shop said they could put a new OEM battery into this 4yo second-hand phone
So I pay them and they do it. The result:
- back cover becomes rather loose while it's warm e.g. from fast charging or a hot day out. No longer waterproof
- the battery is no better than the original and is (2y later now) degrading faster than the original. If you ask a lot of it, the last 35% are gone within minutes. I think it's a knock-off battery but that the repair person doesn't know that
If there had been commercially available repair parts and tool access, neither would have been a problem and I could just have done it myself
My mom has the same model and sent hers in to the manufacturer for a battery swap. Took a while and cost half the price of the phone (since it was a 2yo second-hand at that time). That could have been much faster, even if the manufacturer is free to set the same steep prices
A colleague got their phone back from Google for some repair last week, I don't remember if screen or battery swap. He asked and they said it wouldn't be reset. He put a sticker on it not to wipe the device. They wiped the device. He's now trying to piece together what's in various backup files that Android allows making. Fun fun fun. Also not necessary if you, or your techy nephew, can just do it at home
---
The requirement for commercially availability of repair is so much better than the current state of what repair places can/are offering
I think the supply chain is pretty broken. I had just about the same experience as you with an iPhone 7 a few years back. I booked my replacement through Apple's website, so I was pretty confident I wouldn't get scammed. The new battery started bulging in less than two years, to the point that there was a serious gap between the screen and the body.
It was clearly worse than the battery that came with my refurbished (!) phone, which never did that; it just couldn't hold a decent charge anymore. I won't even go into the absolutely ridiculous experience I had with the repair shop, like not honoring booked times and whatnot and having me wait in line for ages, both to drop off and pick up my phone.
My current phone has lost some of its battery health as reported by the OS, but still gives me over a day of use, but when the time comes to fix it, I'll go directly to Apple.
Same with laptops btw. I once caught a seller where the webpage and sticker said 5200 mAh but acpi -i reported 4400 mAh. They provided a replacement free of charge, presumably their supplier scammed them in turn (it was a small local webshop), but that replacement also wasn't great even if now the chip reported the expected capacity. Never once have I had good experiences with replacement batteries, I really wonder what they do with the originals to make them so vastly superior
Also quite noticeable that the laptop battery market became much smaller once the batteries became an internal component (around 2015) that you can't see without opening it up completely. These also used to be behind a slider or two
People don't dare unscrew electronics, even if it's about as trivial as replacing a light bulb in a fixture that requires removing a screw. With phones having the battery inside as well now, not above the sim tray for example, I wonder how much such legislation is going to help the average person
Last time I checked I’d have to leave my phone for a couple of days and the glue factor meant they wouldn’t guarantee it would come back perfectly. My assumption is this might make it a more trivial change.
I don't see what change they can make, at least to an iPhone. The glue is necessary for water resistance.
There were models that were both waterproof and not glued (the only tools needed for a battery swap were the replacement battery and opposable thumbs). I never had/tested one myself though, this is just going off of the manufacturer's claims and IP (ingress protection) certification
I used to have a Galaxy S5, the model that usually comes up in these discussions. Now, I never went and threw it in a swimming pool, or pressure washed it, or whatever other ridiculous test you may come up with. But I did attach it to my motorbike's handlebars and rode around under heavy rain on more occasions than I care to remember.
It was often drenched to the point that the map on the screen was basically illegible without stopping and wiping off the water. But it never skipped a beat. Basically, I was the limiting factor and would eventually give up and find some hotel with a hot shower to pass the night.
This doesn't look very waterproof to me, sadly. A good attempt though.
So why can't I buy the glue?
If it is a special glue that needs to be heated (or something), I should be able to make/buy an oven the does the cure procedures.
Glue is not required. Gaskets and other methods exist.
Necessary? Gaskets and o-rings haven't been invented yet?
They have, and people preferred smaller phones.
People didn't prefer shit. This is a supply-driven market, vendors put out whatever they want, and we deal with it.
Did you forget how to not buy things?
And then they got larger again.
Due to the things inside them that people did want.
> They have, and people preferred smaller phones.
Are these smaller phones in room with use right now? Where can I buy an iPhone 8-sized iPhone? Or an iPhone 4-sized iPhone?
The only ones who "preferred" "smaller" aka thinner phones are Apple with their psychotic "it's thinner again" yearly presentations.
Why waste space for gaskets and o-rings when you can already get the battery changed out while you wait with glue? Glue is clearly the superior method, which is why almost the entire market has adopted it.
Heat pads exist even in the most basic repair shops. It's not advanced technology, no need to over-engineer it.
My last phone was all glued and the entry point was the screen. The repair guy said there was a 50% chance the screen would break in trying to unglue it so it was not worth the try. It was a shame, it was a decent phone killed prematurely by a faulty battery.
There are a number of phone designs that require special heating apparatus and very careful prying tools to get the back case off. And then extremely careful application of new glue to reassemble. Basically the whole thing is glued together at the factory. Google "phone heating pad for repair" for some examples...
Everyone is thinking Apple is the target, but they are actually one of the better companies with this. You can buy first-party replacement parts, tools are available. If you take a look at Chinese or sometimes even Samsung phones it's basically impossible to get replacement parts and if you do it may need other parts like the glass back to be replaced as it's impossible to remove it without breaking it.
I presume it means "don't even try doing the printer ink DRM thing".
That reads true. While replaceability is definitely a good thing, but whether it will end up being a good thing for the average user (and not lead to some further price hikes in the EU market) remains to be seen.
better than glued.
Heat guns and pryers are commercially available. I don't think this will change anything there.
You're wrong about that:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835530
Thanks. I couldn't find the text for the life of me. Glad to be wrong.
Also Stanley's Fubar and CAT 797 trucks are commercially available, doesn't mean I will need one of those to change my phone battery :)
And Pentalobe screwdrivers are also commercially available now, so Apple doesn't even have to include one...
That is a very American view of law that has burned American companies again and again.
In EU law, the intent matters, not the letter of the law. No silly loophole lawyering.
To quote:
>When interpreting EU law, the CJEU pays particular attention to the aim and purpose of EU law (teleological interpretation), rather than focusing exclusively on the wording of the provisions (linguistic interpretation). This is explained by numerous factors, in particular the open-ended and policy-oriented rules of the EU Treaties, as well as by EU legal multilingualism. Under the latter principle, all EU law is equally authentic in all language versions. Hence, the Court cannot rely on the wording of a single version, as a national court can, in order to give an interpretation of the legal provision under consideration. Therefore, in order to decode the meaning of a legal rule, the Court analyses it especially in the light of its purpose (teleological interpretation) as well as its context (systemic interpretation).
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/5993...
And lose water resistance…
One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are. If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
It's okay to have idiosyncratic preferences (I certainly do), but people should recognize that this law will make phones _worse_ for most people, because this law will force phone manufacturers to compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.
I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences. But that's nonsense, because the law doesn't actually require people to replace batteries rather than replacing their phone, and by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone. At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
Your experience is not at all what I see out there. Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day. They hate having to set up a new phone when their old one is totally fine other than the battery.
For the people I know that do upgrade their phones regularly, they typically want to give their old phone to someone who would love a usable phone, but can't afford a new one. Giving a phone with a shot and non-replaceable battery effectively destroys the value of the gift.
I know many people who can't afford to by new, and they avoid buying older or used phones because they fear the battery may be shot.
We obviously have different opinions regarding what most people want... totally fine.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day
I don't disagree with this, but I also think it's because the battery often dies around the time most people would consider upgrading anyway. The battery isn't the only reason people upgrade, it's just a forcing factor.
If batteries normally last 3-5 years, I don't think we're going to start seeing most people keep their phones for 7-10 years. I still think we're going to see people upgrading around the 3-5 year mark. I would point to the current market as evidence of this. An iPhone battery replacement is somewhere between $50-$100 right now which is drastically cheaper than a new iPhone and yet we still see the 3-5 year upgrade cycle. Maybe making it something you can do at home in a few minutes will result in a few more people just choosing to replace the battery vs the entire phone, but I don't see it drastically changing things since a cheap alternative to replacing the phone already exists and yet we still see the 3-5 year replacement cycle.
> If batteries normally last 3-5 years, I don't think we're going to start seeing most people keep their phones for 7-10 years.
I think they will eventually. People hang on to their computers for longer and longer because old ones are just good enough. Phones are getting to that same stage in their evolution where they stopped evolving by leaps and bounds between generations. A seven year old phone like an iPhone 11 for example is perfectly adequate for a lot of people.
There are two real blockers from keeping a phone for so long, official software support and battery life. If some big manufacturers solved the first with extended support cycles, which is an expensive one, why not solve the second too?
The second problem is already solved though. My wife just had to get her phone iPhone battery replaced so we went to the Apple store and it was $99 and the replacement took less than an hour.
The average person probably can't (or won't) replace an iPhone battery themselves right now, but getting an iPhone battery replaced is relatively easy and cheap compared to replacing the phone and yet most people still don't do it.
I feel people on here are forgetting that for a lot of people a phone is not just about utility. It's a lifestyle purchase that people tie into their self identity. That's why we see things like the whole blue bubble vs green bubble messaging drama that came up a few years ago.
> I don't think we're going to start seeing most people keep their phones for 7-10 years.
I do. I lasted more than 15 years on 2 phones, and the only reason I'm at my fourth right now, is because the third was stolen after 3 months of use. I'm hoping its replacement, a used phone already, will last at least 5 years. Regardless, my next upgrade will not be a choice. I will milk my current phone until I am forced to change, as I always do.
I don't think you're a good representation of the average consumer
We're going to start seeing people keep the phones longer and longer. It used to be people were amazed at the upgrade between iPhone versions, and now they struggle to identify a difference.
For Android this also runs into the problem of security/OS update support
Other than a few people who absolutely must have the latest phone, I only see two reason why people replace their phone: 1) Battery is no good. 2) Operating system has stopped getting updates and they can no longer run that one or two apps they really need.
Replaceable battery and 10 years of OS updates and a large percentage of people would stop upgrading their phones. There hasn't been much innovation in phones in the past 10 years. If the battery hadn't died and the OS was still updated there would be zero reason for me to not be using my iPhone 7.
> most people would consider upgrading anyway
most people would buy one phone and keep it forever if they could, because most people can't actually afford to be replacing their phone frequently.
The only reason they do is because they get slower, or battery gets worn out or whatever else. If their one phone actually lasted forever they would likely happily keep it forever
Especially now that there are near zero new hardware features to differentiate the latest models. “Oh 3MP better camera on what was already a fake big number. Cool, I guess”
The only reason I upgraded to my current model was to get USBC (thanks Europe!!!).
Agreed. Not much differences between new phones and couple years older phones if you are not doing crazy gaming on phones. At least for me but maybe some of you might have good reasons to upgrade and can tell us ?
Sure, batteries dying are just one way in which phones become disposable. But I want to fight all those ways too (stupid new protocols and lack of security updates notably).
I can't speak to the experience with Android but Apple offers both in-store battery replacement or Mail-in battery replacement for $70-120 which to me seems very reasonable. Could it be cheaper? Sure, maybe I guess? But $70-120 is a lot less than a new phone. And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail.
https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery-replacement
The battery costs $7-$12 to produce and ship to your location, so kind of strange to say $70-$120 is cheap.
It's a philosophical thing, sure. But the EU is taking the approach that businesses should make honest money by selling quality products, not through consumer-hostile practices like inflating the cost of spare parts + labour for fixing stuff.
In the past our family has had several Android phones where the battery was easily replaceable. We even had a couple of Motorolas where the screen was a simple and cheap thing to replace. That seems to be increasingly a thing of the past.
With those phones, I have never once experienced a failure mode related to seams / screws holding the phone together. If it's one thing that's extremely well known technology, it's fasteners and gaskets for consumer products.
[flagged]
For someone complaining about anecdata and a lack of citations, you're surprisingly eager to offer your own argument that basically boils down to "trust me, bro".
The grandparent provided an anecdote relating to absence of evidence; the parent provided some anecdotal counter-examples. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so the respondent's anecdote is more compelling if we give them equal credence. Disproof by counter-example is usually a very effective method, especially when arguing about whether something 'ever happened'.
[flagged]
> And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail
The ancients managed to design around replaceable batteries, I don't think these techniques have been entirely lost to time.
The ancients also designed ways to carry humans without gas or electricity, but I don't really want to regress to those techniques.
Not a biker, eh?
Hah fair- I wouldn't give up paragliding either. To keep the analogies- I wouldn't want a bike without inflatable tires, nor a paraglider without a reserve.
The "ancients" refers to phone makers 15 years ago when batteries were still replaceable.
They also designed with cheap shells that felt loose before a year was out, and offered exactly zero water and dust protection so if your device got wet, it was considered out of warranty.
https://m.gsmarena.com/results.php3?chkRemovableBattery=sele...
Incorrect. Here are 115 phones with removable batteries and rated for > 0 water protection.
how long are you willing to be without your phone? banking apps, public transit tickets, calls, messages, digital signatures. this is luxury not many can afford these days to be offline for days.
With Apple, at least in Germany, you schedule an appointment online, you walk in at that time, and you can come pick it up an hour later. Many independent shops offer basically the same for Android and Apple phones.
When I did it two months ago it took them an hour. Be generous and say they’re backed up and sometimes it takes two hours. Is that too long to be without your phone?
That's assuming you live near a store.
There are many small shops that swap batteries just fine in an hour, at least in Europe.
> offline for days
Just making shit up.
i was referring more to this part "Mail-in battery replacement". good to know that they can do this so fast. but it would be even faster when battery would be user serviceable. and not everyone is living driving distance away from certified workshops.
I just checked for my iPhone 14 Pro and the mail-in battery replacement is free. Maybe because I have Apple Care?
In many part of the world a lot of people buy second hand phones exclusively and they are the first customers for battery replacement. $70-120 is quite steep for them.
A genuine Pixel battery costs €38 from iFixit
> And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail.
My older Samsung Galaxy had an easy clip-off back cover and easily replaceable battery. Nothing related to that ever failed.
Whereas two newer Pixel phones have had issues with the back cover glue coming loose, leading to interior damage.
Given that, the idea that a case that can be opened easily “compromises the shell of the phone” sounds like a weak excuse for some other deficiency or agenda.
Can you keep the same water-resistant standards with a removable cover? In my head that's the main tradeoff
> the same water-resistant standards
You can have water protection and easily replaceable battery.
Still, I'm really curious about how many people take advantage of those standards and need IP67 (30min at 1m depth) as opposed to a quick splash or rain on it, or how many buy the artificial tradeoff of water resistance over easily replaceable battery because this is all that's offered.
Yes you can! It was done with many phones in the past...
It would seem that "different opinions are out there" is not really a good basis for "one opinion enforced by EU directive", though.
If your battery is replaceable, you can still decide to throw the phone away and add to the pile of e-waste. The legislation allows both choices, at the cost of higher prices.
Having a higher price is an incentive to using the phone you have a bit longer by replacing the battery. It’s certainly better than having them be guaranteed e-waste.
Obviously people aren't finding the literal act of wasteful disposal the appealing thing about e.g. non-self-repairable iPhones, so no, not really.
This but for USB-C
It's now possible to carry a spare battery or two, instead of lugging a portable power bank and slowly charging your phone. This is great news for outdoorsy types, travel, long bicycle rides, hiking, and so on.
but they require you to have a special charger, or typically you have to charge them one by one from your phone. Swapping batteries also requires downtime (not easy mid-flight, cycle, or whatever you're doing). A portable battery charger is much better imo. Plugging in a cord is always going to be easier and require less hands and focus than replacing a battery and keeping any kind of dust-and waterproofness.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day.
Most people I know get a new phone when they can't take the cracked screen anymore, or when they completely lose the phone. Or because a pretty new one came out and they upgraded two years ago so it's "time". That's most people.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day
Getting the battery replaced is already trivial and cheap. Revealed preference is that most people say they want it, but don't. This won't even decrease the cost or difficulty (you'll still need a screwdriver).
But replacing a replaceable battery is trivialer and cheaperer.
I've replaced more batteries (and screens) than I can count, and it's increasingly difficult and complicated. 5 years ago or so I'd agree with you, but now there's no phone I can easily open without heat gun, controlling the air so no spec of dust land on the lenses (and a blower to remove in case it happens), and almost always I need adhesive (B7000) to patch or replace the original one to keep similar level of weather proofing. It's easy if you pay 100 bucks someone else to do it, sure.
Back in the days of my HTC Desire I could carry an extra battery, or two, in the pocket, without issue. Nowadays I'm married to a power bank that needs to be plugged for the duration.
Last couple of years it’s gotten easier, for iPhones at least. Pardon the YT short but it’s 48seconds or look up “iPhone 9v battery” if you’ve blocked YT shorts.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/VNZewnrkDng
It isn't trivial (you can't do it yourself) nor cheap (79€ for Samsung phones).
That's at most 1/10th the cost of the average Samsung phone.
That's cheap. If you think that a safe first-party replacement battery will sell for less than the 79€ that the whole replacement effort takes, then you're fooling yourself.
I strongly suspect that there's also not good language for blocking against third-party batteries (and the phone manufacturers would have good reason to do so because it might result in overheating or worse with really bad third-party batteries).
The people for whom €79 is not cheap are not getting flagship Samsungs, but some low tier $100-300 Android.
Here's a replacement battery for last year's S25 Ultra: https://www.mobilesentrix.ca/replacement-battery-compatible-.... Retails for 14 CAD or approx 9 EUR (11 EUR with a 20% VAT). So yes, 79 EUR would be extremely expensive.
Even going directly to Apple for out-of-warranty battery replacement is almost always way cheaper than getting another phone.
> They hate having to set up a new phone when their old one is totally fine other than the battery.
That is why I have the battery replaced every few years.
Most people I know get a new phone because the marketing works on them and they lie that it's about the battery.
They all know about Apple's battery replacement programme that's been around for years now
And iCloud backups makes setting up a new phone trivial
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day.
I am not sure if your statistic is correct or people giving you excuses to get the latest model. If we speak iphones, flipping the battery is cheap and fast process, incomparable with the hassle of doing re-setup.
I am not sure if the process is equally or more simple with android phones though, but in my circle noone buys new phone because of the battery (often the battery is used as excuse to get a newer model).
> I am not sure if the process is equally or more simple with android phones though, but in my circle noone buys new phone because of the battery (often the battery is used as excuse to get a newer model).
Your circle sounds pretty strange honestly. Everyone in it lies to you about why they do things, but you secretly know their real motivations?
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
I have experience saying the exact opposite, although this was a few years ago.
OnePlus set up a marketing booth on my campus in 2018 or 2019 or so, and they did exactly this, with a large sign asking people what they want out of a phone. They asked passerbys what they want out of a phone, and they let people put their requests on a board.
When I put my request up, I wasn't the first one to request replaceable batteries and a headphone jack. (At the time, OnePlus had removed the jack from their most recent phone, after advertising their previous phone in comparison to Apple's jackless phone).
I think phone manufacturers will figure it out once it is a requirement. Was switching everyone to USB-C annoying for Apple? Sure. Are we in a better place because the EU forced it. You betcha. That's the point.
I don't love everything the EU does (cookie banners!?) but this is one where I have confidence that the consumer will ultimately benefit.
As others have noted, most people do not replace their phones every two years anymore, there just isn't any big reason to.
Cookie banners is malicious compliance. The ultimate goal being for you yo think it was bad legislation instead of how every company is fucking you for your privacy.
They’re winning.
I'm not sure they're complying even with the letter of the law. Many cookie banners I see, require several clicks to deny anything but those they don't have to ask me about. And in most other cases, the accept button is significantly more visible than the deny one.
If that's actually allowed, yeah, bad law. If it's not… well I guess we can hope prosecutors will prosecute. Though I'm afraid we won't get much more than hope…
I'd say it was bad legislation because this was a foreseeable outcome. I actually worked on cookie banners, and we did user testing, a full 80% of people closed it before reading single word and thought it was an ad.
This type of ambush agree to XYZ or you can't come in that we see with EULA's and privacy polices is unfair, just like if some scammer demanded people sign a fifty page contract before they enter the supermarket. This is something people understand intuitively.
It was foreseeable, and the end result is very little has changed as far as consumer privacy. Most people just agree to get the box to go away, if you actually want privacy your best bet is still a private browsing session and a VPN.
Here is an idea, don't abuse your users and you don't even have to show a cookie banner. Of course people treat it like spam - because that is exactly what it is. A giant fuck you to every single user.
Why does the EU Commission site have cookie banners then?
https://commission.europa.eu
Malicious compliance?
[dead]
It was bad legislation because it didn't achieve anything except make visiting websites more annoying.
I don't care what the politicians intended. The outcome is no improvement in privacy but more annoying banners.
The cookie banners typically have an opt out. How is that not a privacy improvement?
What do you think most users click? The quickest and easiest option ("agree"/ "that's fine”) to get on with their day. That then makes consent explicit which is worse than the previous gray area
I don't follow this reasoning
Because most people won't make use of their ability to opt out and will thus get the exact same thing as they were already getting, that's "worse"?
Somehow this nebulous "gray area" concept of not explicitly consenting (so, no actual difference) is better than the actual ability to opt out?
I don't think you're trying to understand at all
The same way that the legislation that abolished slavery was bad because it didn’t account for the prison systems leasing out unpaid workers leading to even worse conditions for black folk in the US?
People talk as if the EU should have done nothing, or that the rule should be repealed, the GDPR forced people to have a functioning deny all.
The real lesson here is that people would rather annoy their users for money than create good products. Its a case for regulation.
I also want headphone jacks back - which I'm sure will be less popular here than batteries. We used to have waterproof phones with both.
I'm not sure about the rules around required ability but I'd like that too
I've come to realize (I think) that this actually does have a lot to do with waterproofness ratings -- a legibility trap.
I notice that Fairphone excludes headphones from their latest devices, and attributes it to the necessary of doing so in order to get an "IP55" rating.
I'm not sure if that ultimately makes sense (and suspect that it... doesn't), but the legibility trap of that ratings system might actually be part of the cause of the current market absence of a feature so many people still talk about after years of its unavailability.
Phones back then were definitely not as durable as modern ones. Whether you like it or not, it's easier to waterproof a completely insulated system.
I do recognize that not having headphone jacks make it easier to waterproof phones.
Every phone should have a SCSI port with an included terminator in the box.
> Was switching everyone to USB-C annoying for Apple? Sure.
Doubt. They have already switched over every other line they had.
I believe it was more of a marketing stunt, they calculated that n% of customers will be upset with the change, so they waited for the EU ruling so now they can just point these n% to blame the EU who will take the blame instead of them.
Apple switched the iPhone to USB-C years before it became an EU requirement. I doubt the EU played a role in it. The 2015 MacBook was USB-C only.
> iPhone 15 released September 22, 2023
> EU’s Common Charger Directive went into effect on December 28, 2024
Years?
The iPhone 15 released in September 2023 already had USB-C. Apple wasn't required to use USB-C up until the iPhone 17 release in September 2025. That is two years.
I like usb C more than lightning but I think legislation is terribly suited. If people only wanted usb c then just don’t buy an iPhone? But this is from my US idealistic view and distrust of over regulation.
Anyways, Apple was working on an iPhone with usb C in 2022 and said they were going to do it anyways* so I don’t see it as some massive win that shows the prowess of the EU legislative body.
Granted this may have shaved a couple of years off of the timeline but at what cost of legislation (monetary, attention, and time cost)!?
# https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/apple-pushes-back...
When a product becomes as complex as a cell phone it's not as easy as saying "just get one that doesn't have ${thing}" as no product has the right combination of everything for everyone but people may agree every product should have something (whether it be for safety, environmental, buyer protection, or convenience reasons). Once most folks agree that's the case, it's about "where do you draw the line" rather than "does it make sense to require ${thing} in isolation when there are already options with ${thing}".
Your link is from 2020 and does not say Apple was moving to USB C, just that the industry was. By 2022 the law requiring it had already passed, so it would make sense they were planning on doing it at that point. Regardless, a few years would be a lot of impact for a market where over 100 million phones are sold annually.
The EU did not force USB-C on the iPhone. Apple switched to USB-C years before it became mandatory.
Everyone moving to USB-C was the same standard, though; now you can use the same charger with your phone, laptop, tablet, other random gadgets, etc. If you forget your charger you can buy one virtually anywhere, or borrow someone else's, since they're all the same.
Everyone moving to "battery must be replaceable without tools" doesn't do anything useful for most users. Yeah, now you can carry an extra battery on a camping trip, I guess, though you could also carry a portable USB-C charger and use it for more than just your phone. It isn't particularly useful that it doesn't take tools to replace the battery when it starts failing, five years after your phone was discontinued, if you can't find a replacement battery for that exact model.
> Everyone moving to USB-C was the same standard, though; now you can use the same charger with your phone, laptop, tablet, other random gadgets, etc.
You could already use the same charger with nearly everything. It was the cables that were not necessarily USB on the device end.
Apple for example as far as I can tell has used USB chargers for everything (phones, tablets, music players, headphones, Apple TV remote) except laptops since sometime in 2012. For laptops everything introduced after the last MagSafe 2 laptop in mid 2017 has used a USB charger.
> if you can't find a replacement battery for that exact model.
Usually there are compatible ones that still give you some juice for 1-2 years at a small fraction of the price (of the original one).
If you worry about that, you can always buy an "official" battery in advance to be used 4-5 years later.
I believe part of the legislation is that manufacturers must make spare parts available for five years.
> Are we in a better place because the EU forced it. You betcha. That's the point.
Speak for yourself, I've gained nothing but annoyance. (I'm willing to accept a theoretical greater good argument - but I'm not precisely sold)
What exactly is your specific annoyance?
USB-C ports are more fragile than Lightning - one of the three ports on my laptop will no longer hold cables in place anymore. It also requires more precise alignment to get the cable plugged in.
I agree, and it preceeded USB-C. It came out in a market that was almost overwhelmingly USB Micro B; which was an extremely terrible connector.
Apple really fucked up by keeping the connector proprietary. Sure it helped them slim some phones but it didn't exactly help long term, and now we have a technologically inferior connector that took even longer to come to market.
I can't forgive Apple for that.
Good engineering, early to market, mired by greedy and short sighted businessmen.
I thought this way too, but have since heard that the Lightning connector itself has the spring-loaded contacts that wear out, in contrast to USB-C where they're on the cable. So I don't think it's so straightforward
"So I don't think it's so straightforward"
Don't let them off that quickly. We've been making electrical connectors for well over a hundred years. There are books on high reliability connectors many hundreds of pages long. Connectors for aerospace, the military and industry have made connector technology highly advanced and connections very reliable.
Fact is USB connectors are shitty because they've been made as cheaply as possible—cheap manufacturing takes precedence over reliability and user ergonomics.
The trend of mass producing rock-bottom cheap connectors started in the early 1950s with that abominable super cheap RCA audio connector and it's continued ever since with consumer products. There's no end of crappy designs, the F coaxial connector for antennas, the DIN audio connector, the Belling Lee coax and so on.
Trouble is too many consumers are prepared to tolerate the crap without complaining so it continues.
Sure, on paper the USB-C should be superior for that reason. But we have a lot of years of experience that suggests in practice the Lightning connector is more durable.
Honestly, I’m not sure either. I can’t find anybody who actually went through the trouble of testing port/cable durability over many cycles.
I can personally speak to the seeming reliability of the springs on lightening, but thats anecdotal and would only apply to devices I’ve interacted with. Truthfully USB-C has been almost as reliable (only seen 2-3 ports with issues over literally hundreds, vs the 0 for lightning over a smaller sample).
I guess at some point the argument is moot, but I do like digging lint out of USB-C connectors a lot less- it is a lot more worrying to do.
Right, I'm no fan of USB-C either. One knows why the USB alliance keeps designing such shitty connectors. After so many attempts they've got it right—it's the cheapest crappy design they could get away with.
Apple USB-C ports and plugs are superb so maybe the design is not so bad. Maybe most manufacturers just use crappy ports to save a few cents. But yeah, mechanically Lightning was awesome. Great plug/port.
Lack of incentive for technological development beyond the current required standard.
My guess is apple user
Apple was a key member of the USB-C consortium, it was always planned to be their universal connector. They waited on switching to avoid public backlash about "why are you switching wires when I already bought all of these wires?". They generally give connectors 10 years before changing them (see 32-pin 2003 - 2012 etc). Doesn't invalidate your larger point, but it incorrectly describes the history of USB-C adoption by Apple.
I moderate /r/flashlight. Something I've seen a substantial increase in over the past few years is people who are surprised to learn that it's possible to have a built-in charger in combination with a field-replaceable battery. It doesn't take much explaining; it just hadn't occurred to them because the devices they're used to don't work that way.
People don't change batteries in their phones now because they'd need a heat gun and a soldering iron and they'd have even chances of starting a fire, breaking the phone, or succeeding in changing the battery without prior experience using those tools. A shop could do it reliably, but the shop will charge 100€ because it's time-consuming and error-prone. A 3-5 year old phone is often not worth 100€.
When a battery change costs 25€ and takes 5 minutes, people will do it all the time even if they don't know that today.
re: flashlights.
Still no real upgrade for hexbright, which is a shame.
I wish they were still being made. Fortunately, mine are still fine, and I expect to be able to repair them should they break. (xtal is a common failure point apparently)
Standard battery type is nice, but also has microusb charging port, the part that didn't age well.
Perhaps new circuit boards (with usb-pd charging, usb-c connector and mems oscillator) will be the way forward. It's definitely easier to order a pcb than the housing.
I suppose it depends on what you want out of a flashlight. It's kind of cool that you can flash the firmware over USB, but the rest of it is middling, and there are quite a few flashlights today running open source firmwares with exposed flashing pads.
Regulated, open source, flashable, USB-charging, and a standardized battery describes most lights from https://www.firefly-outdoor.com/
It used to be true that it made sense to replace your phone every few years because new ones were so much better. But like... I have a Pixel 8 and there's not really anything in a newer phone that's compelling enough to spend any money on...
Funnily enough I'm looking at getting a new phone because my pixel 6 battery no longer lasts 9am until 6pm without a mid-day charge -- I looked at the latest pixels (10) and they looked neat, but expensive; so took a look at the 9's, and saw they're basically exactly the same at 60% the price; then looked at the 8's and they're basically the same except 40% the price...
I expect the smartphone market to switch to a sales model where devices are somewhat more expensive, but more durable and to some extent more serviceable than in the past, so many will buy refurbished phones instead of new ones. I can see some similarities with the used car market, or hi-fi audio receivers, for example.
I agree, but also battery life has significantly improved over the last decade. Every phone I or my friends have replaced recently has been because the screen has broken. I would put good money on this being true for most people.
I think if the EU really wanted to reduce phone waste they'd make it easier or cheaper to fix screens. Still, this doesn't seem like a terrible move. I bet you can make it relatively easy to replace batteries without compromising much. Look at the Macbook Neo for example.
I had to replace my previous phone because my banking app dropped support for that Android version, and was going to stop working. The hardware was fine.
(I always buy phones in the cheapest tier, so that happens sooner)
Would it be cheaper in the long run to buy a newer phone less often? Get a "this year flagship" and use it for 5 years rather than a couple year old model and use it for 2-3?
A flagship is ~1000, a good enough phone is ~200. So, no.
Those cheap phones are made out of garbage and are chock-full of bloatware and spyware. This also applies to Samsung flagships so I guess more expensive doesn't always mean better.
I don't think so, this was the first time it happened like that.
No. You get a 2 year old flagship phone for $200-300 outright, instead of $1500+
Samsung also makes the A-series Galaxies which are a pretty solid mid-tier phones that are supported for years, too.
That's just plain bullshit? I just checked my local second hand marketplace, and 2 year old flagship models seem to go for about 35-50% of the current equivalent newest model price.
I'm really unsure how broken screens happen. Don't you have a protective case on your phone? I've had smartphones for over 20 years, and have never broken a screen. Am I just lucky? More careful? I drop my phones too, but have never broken the screen. The only thing that ever failed on any phone I've owned has been the battery.
Yeah protective case helps A LOT. I've broken two phones basically two weeks from buying them by dropping them on the floor before I put them in protective case. Costly mistakes, I don't do them anymore. Nowadays I buy the case together with the phone.
I don't know if it's just my luck, I never drop my phone, but when I buy new, I'm guaranteed to drop it several times a day for the first two weeks of owning it. The protective case is a phone saver
some phones are slippery without the case!
For me i had a case and a screen protection film bit the phone dropped on stone pavement exactly so that a higher part of the stone hit the screen edge between the case and the panzer glass.
My phones all fail from internal hardware faults. Also never broken a screen.
I had a S3 that the battery would only last 12 hours or so, but the EMMC failed before the battery did.
Batteries die slowly. If your phone only lasts 12 hours under modest usage, it's approaching where some people would say the battery was failing
People drop their phones. It's not complicated.
You might just be lucky. Tempering glass is a tricky business and it can be very very strong if impacted in some places but extremely weak in others.
Attempted to take picture. Dropped phone from chest height. Center of screen hit corner of I-beam sitting on ground that I was standing at the end of. Bought a screen protector after that.
Dropped it off the top of some pallet racking, ping ponged down, broke the button and cracked the screen at the bottom near the button. Bought a case (and kept the screen protector on under it, lol)
Left it sitting on top of trailer tongue tool box to run timer to check/flip lunch that was being grilled in the vicinity. Trailer was involved in a minor industrial accident. Phone got tossed and crunched. Lunch was fine.
Exposed the 3rd one to, IDK, something, that etched it without hurting the case. IDK what that would be though since I can't think of anything that I have around or use that would do that.
Current phone has survived since 2022. Last month the case finally wore out to the point where corners were coming apart and it would sometimes get caught on its way in/out of pockets and got replaced.
I think it's just some people. I break my phone every couple years; I've never willingly upgraded or replaced a phone. The same thing happens with watches. It's a wonder I still have limbs.
On the other hand, my wife has never broken a phone, and has basically only upgraded when it becomes too old to be usable any more (due to battery issues or OS version causing problems). She's careful and sensible.
I’m not crazy like some people, but I’ve broken screens many times and every time it has been in a case, one time it was in a case I specifically bought for extra protection.
Half of my screen breaks have been from getting out of my car with my phone in my lap and gravel on the ground.
Another way I’ve broken screens is from my phone falling out of my pocket and onto rocks/concrete. That has happened twice.
And the final way has been from getting smashed in my pocket. I slipped while scrambling some rocks and my phone(in a case I bought for this long backpacking trip) got smashed on my hip, another time I was running around at my friend’s house at night and ran into a wheel barrow, smashing it on my thigh.
Never had a battery fail.
A note: My current iPhone 16 pro is built like a tank, and the glass is truly extraordinary.
I knew there exist people for whom paying for phone insurance is a good idea! Thanks! In Norway you can get an insurance just for the screen, which is like half of the full one IIRC.
same, my iphone 13 mini was great except for the fact i had to charge it twice a day in the end.
I still have my iPhone mini 12, in the desperate hope that it can last until Apple have another outbreak of common sense and decide that a mini iPhone has a place in the market.
Battery is starting to fade during the day, despite minimal use.
I think replaceable batteries should be mandatory and 10 years of security updates. In these times, phones are really expensive (however you pay for them) and we shouldn’t stand for planned obsolescence in any form.
I recently broke my 12 Mini beyond reasonable repair during a battery replacement recently (mostly just bad luck, I've been doing my own mobile repair for a long time). I bought a 17 to replace it, and promptly returned it in favor of a used 13 Mini. It's wild to me how large the smallest mainstream phone you can buy these days has become.
I honestly know I could “optimize” my phone replacement schedule based on resale values of phones etc, but for the last ~15ish years I just replace my iPhone when the battery starts shitting itself (3-5 years each in my experience)
[dead]
> most people are going to want a new a phone.
This is going to be harder, or, at least, harder to replace your current phone with something objectively better. RAM and Flash shortages / high prices are likely going to last for years, wars are additionally jeopardizing production of electronic components, and the current crop of mobile devices is already insanely powerful. It's going to be pretty hard to sell most people an upgrade that feels meaningful when it's going to be like 30% more expensive.
Running AI locally could be a big selling point for an upgrade, but see the problems with RAM and general production capacity overload. I's not going to be a mass-market thing.
>Running AI locally could be a big selling point
Actually will push a lot of people away. I don't want any hardware that has special relationships with AI LLM's.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
But what if you asked the right question, "what is the biggest problem with your phone?"
Most would answer, "the battery dies too soon. It doesn't last all day like it used to."
> I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Possibly true, and equally true of the screen, the charging port, or any other component.
"Repairability" isn't a feature people list unprompted, it's a property they notice the moment a £5 part bricks their phone.
The street-corner survey tells you what people currently notice, not what they'd value if the option existed.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new phone
In a market where batteries are glued in and replacement costs a meaningful fraction of a new device, of course people upgrade on that timeline. Change the cost structure and the behaviour changes with it.
Fair point that we'd want data, but the original claim rests on the same intuition, just pointed the opposite way.
The broader framing (that repairability is an idiosyncratic preference being imposed on a majority who don't want it) gets this backwards. Most people don't want to care about repairability, in the same way most people don't want to care about food safety standards. They want the option to exist without having to think about it. That's what the law provides.
> you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery"
Before that, you wrote "One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are" and it's exactly what I could say here. Not everyone has lots of money and for some people extending the life of their phones is important. They really do wish they could replace the battery without hassle and without paying a shop to do it.
With the storage cost crisis which will make future phone more expensive I'm sure a lot of people will wish they could prolong the lifetime of theri current device with a battery swap.
>With the storage cost crisis
On that note, mandating an SD card slot as a requirement would be a very much welcome next step.
Manufacturers selling space-crippled devices just to upsell "premium" models is such an environmental waste (at the very least).
> On that note, mandating an SD card slot as a requirement would be a very much welcome next step.
Fuck that. Who are you to subjugate us with your preferences. Limiting what a phone can possibly be by mandating features such as SD cards is so unimaginative. There's always a segment of HN that truly wants to be tyrants and impose their preferences on the entire marketplace and consumers.
Nothing is stopping something like Framework laptops from existing in the marketplace right now besides demand. Y'all can all celebrate it on HN in your bubble but to mandate that the entire market goes in this direction reveals your frustrations more than anything.
You hate that people don't share your preferences and would go so far as to use the legal system to distort the marketplace just to satisfy your own preferences. It doesn't matter if it puts constraints on what a product can be, so long as it fulfills your needs.
So basically, it's a simpler path to impose your preferences on others than it is to actually do any work to build something or find something that matches your preferences.
Completely selfish. Just admit you have disdain for everybody else and you think you know better than the marketplace about what people want, and therefore should have the authority to dictate how everything should be designed and built while doing none of the work.
A healthy reaction to this frustration is to go build the thing you want, show people that it's better, and compete against the status quo - giving everybody more options and choices. You're not there though, and neither are the societies in the EU.
It's sad to see this kind of mindset take over Europe and it's clear it holds back Europe of reaching the heights of innovation and creativity that the world is hoping to see come from a continent that once pushed humanity to higher levels of existence and consciousness.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm or truly a straight-faced attempt to teach us about "healthy reactions" to things
'im not owned! im not owned!!', i continue to insist as i slowly shrink and transform into a corn cob
I like their attempt to teach us about "selfishness" even more.
Product regulations are "selfish", mmmkay. Requiring seat belts in cars is starting up tyranny¹.
Ditto for rear-view cameras. How dare they! Those authoritarian Europeans²!
_____
¹ According to this guy — and we know it's a guy, don't we?
² Rear view cameras are required on all new vehicles sold in the US.
Mmmmmkay.
Now go ahead an explain how having a microSD¹ slot may hurt someone who has a device that reads/writes data².
Not hurt shareholder value. I'm talking about people³ here.
I'll wait. Very curious to hear your perspective here.
_____
¹ Technology that has existed for 2+ decades at this point, is the defacto standard for removable storage in phones, laptops, cameras, audio recorders, etc, supported by devices that sell for $5 new and relied on by the highest end pro gear, current spec making it forwards and backwards compatible for the foreseeable future.
Something that takes virtually no physical space and costs virtually nothing to add to a device that already needs to operate on gigabytes of data (we're not talking about forcing that, say, on a thermostat).
² Particularly, one which can run into a "Storage full" error.
³ Physical human beings (including, but not limited to, the end users), and specifically not your (or some CEO's) feelings about it.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Are you sure about this? I've heard this complaint from a lot of non-tech people who are old enough to remember flip phones with replaceable batteries. It might be age related.
My old flip “feature phone” could go about two weeks on a charge. I miss that.
You can still buy phones with weeks of runtime, they’re just not „smart“
I don't think any single person I know would say they would exchange replaceable batteries for a 1mm thinner phone, waterproof up to 100m instead of 10m, or a $5 difference in price.
In fact, the only place I would ever expect somebody to claim otherwise is here.
I'd love thick phone with big battery, the current ones are already thin enough to be uncomfortable without a case, but the available models seem to be "ok if you want battery you want some rugged brick 3 android versions behind with everything else worse"
I don't know a single person that would dive with their phone or care about the thiness of the bezel.
> I don't think any single person I know would say they would exchange replaceable batteries for a 1mm thinner phone, waterproof up to 100m instead of 10m, or a $5 difference in price.
Well, yes it's quite easy to argue against strawmen. I don't know anyone who would favor a built-in shoehorn over a replaceable battery either.
Although on your waterproof point, that's just a single dimension metric used for comms. It's not really about specifically descending to 100m. A 100m rated device responds better to water. In a general sense, it's more robust. Even if I don't go diving.
I know plenty. But not among the 18-20 year olds that do not know it any different, sure. But certainly my grandpa. Just thinking that you do not need a power-bank and just bring an extra battery on a longer trip will get millions of people interested.
I struggle to see the difference between "bringing an extra battery" and "bringing a power bank".
Except that the latter has more functionality than the former, and should be prefereable.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone.
Not true. In recent years smartphones do not advance much, and would be perfectly fine to keep working if not for the dying battery.
> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
The degree of "possible" varies greatly depending on the available expertise and spare parts. Right now in EU it's cost prohibitive for both coz the special labor required is expensive and almost no official spare parts for consumers. So of coz this will be no data to support your claim.
I think the data for your last sentence does exist. When Apple was forced to replace broken batteries on the 12, lots of people opted to replace the phone and there was a corresponding drop in iPhone sales.
It’s a pretty commonly used canonical example of revealed preferences.
> One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are.
<proceeds to state opinions contrary to what the overwhelming majority of elected representatives of the people of Europe just expressed>
Were you trying to prove your own point?
Counter-point - people might not know what they want until they experience it.
Yeah, for someone that changes phone every 3 years or earlier, that's not a desired feature.
But many people did that change precisely because battery got weak, and there have been less and less reasons to keep on the most modern model for a while now.
Non-technical users might not be aware of much.
E.g. most peoples don't really think or ask that their tap water be free of cholera and other harmful substances, and yet we might want to make sure that continues to be the case. So it's not strong argument worth arguing about.
The real argument is - how much a compromise a replaceable vs non-replacable battery is. And I suspect the biggest part of non-replaceable batteries is actually superficial vanity considerations (gee, is it 7mm or 6.5mm), and planed obsolescence making more money. But the technical aspects are still a valid debate.
> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
I don’t understand. If we want to see the data we do need to make batteries replaceable.
>compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.
What sort of compromise do you envision? I mean, toasters still have a crumb tray on the bottom that open so you can clean them even though no one does. Am I "missing out" on sleek, streamlined toaster designs because manufacturers feel they have to put a door in the bottom?
Half of cellphone users hold onto phone for 3+ years and experience battery degradation, and cell phone battery life is the #1 complain/concern about cellphone users. They might not immediately demand swappable batteries (particularly if they're too young to have ever owned a cellphone with swappable batteries) but I suspect if you prompted them, that the response rate would be very high, and that this isn't just an echo chamber concern.
I think that’s the wrong way of framing it. If, before the launch of the iPhone, you asked what people wanted from their phones you’d be there a very long time before anyone described something like an iPhone (no buttons, capacitive touch interface, etc). And yet, once they were offered it, people flocked to it.
This regulation is targeted to devices with poor battery lives. Just because it hasn’t occurred to people to ask for the feature doesn’t mean they won’t appreciate it.
That's an odd reply since by that argument they also flocked to a phone with no replaceable battery, which was pretty standard in the 2000s.
But you could be right. I guess this will be an experiment to watch: If EU consumers show a strong preference for replaceable batteries once they become more widely available, we can expect manufacturers to start offering it in other markets as well.
I think everything is a tradeoff and at that point people took the trade. But the place smartphones take in our lives today compared to 2006 is radically different, I wouldn’t assume much carries over.
>they also flocked to a phone with no replaceable battery,
Did they flock to a phone with no replaceable battery the same way we flocked to phones with no headphone jack?
Are laws typically enacted to compel companies to follow consumer demand? I think that’s what the market itself is best at.
Instead this law is designed to provide the public with a good everyone can benefit from - less waste of valuable electronic components polluting our environment.
And even if those same consumers would choose a thinner phone over a replaceable battery, they will probably also enjoy being able to fully charge it more often for less money.
The biggest problem with my phone is that it took too long to find one that isn't comically large (I have an iPhone 13 Mini). The second biggest problem is that the battery is not what it used to be. It lasts 2 days on a full charge instead of 3. The battery will need to be replaced in a few years.
I feel like I will be using this phone until it crumbles to dust. Apple shows no interest in making decently sized phones. I would support the EU enacting legislation to enforce at least one phone in each lineup to be no bigger than 60 mm x 125 mm. (iPhone Mini is ok, but it's still bigger than what I prefer.)
Smaller and lighter phones are an accessibility concern. Miniaturization has been the goal for computers since they were invented. It is incomprehensible that designers and manufacturers are reversing course. My options right now are basically do nothing or replace my phone with a watch.
I appreciate such a law very much. I find it very irritating how people always want new phones. And I think there are three major reasons to upgrade to a new phone:
1. lifestyle
2. software updates
3. battery capacity
While it is hard to change the first, the other two can be influenced by laws. And while the second is rather complex, the third is quite simple. Since the manufacturers have few incentives to produce phones with replaceable batteries, there are very few options on the market to choose from. Most have other major limitations, like slow CPU/GPU, crappy cameras, or else.
So eliminating one factor of unnecessary waste is absolutely a good idea. I just hope it doesn't backfire in some weird way. And I don't say that replaceable batteries don't come at a cost, they do. But that cost is much lower than many assume and not that easy to measure, because currently, you can compare only apples with oranges.
We had replaceable batteries in phones for years. There's no reason battery replacement has to involve 20 steps and require ungluing the screen.
Exactly, this isn't something new. It was removed for no reason other than aesthetics and possibly to force users to buy a new device every few years.
May I remind you that the fist few iPhones were not water proof, yet the battery was not removable.
Laptops are not waterproof but those batteries are also no longer removable.
There are even fully water resistant (and IP rated phones) currently made with replaceable batteries. Best of all worlds
This doesn't require the battery to be replaceable. It requires either the battery to still be good after 1000 charges or for it to be replaceable, either one.
Although some of this depends on how you define replaceable.
A quick google will show you’re relying too much on your own views of what people desire for phone improvements. This law will lead to much needed changes and improvements in a mature and arguably stale market.
> One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are. If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Yes, and if you asked every passerby what feature they would like to add to the streets, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish there were more accessibility ramps".
Luckily for us, we're not governed by "passerby" people.
Me and partner are both on iPhone 14 Pro. And this is more than powerful and sufficient for our daily use, except the battery is around 82%. I'd happily replace the battery right now for a more powerful one.
You can pay Apple to replace it for you, and the cost is not that high. £90 or so.
If the battery swap fails, you’ll get a as-new replacement phone and you also won’t be charged.
In exchange for this monetary cost and the inconvenience of leaving your phone at an Apple Store for 1 hour; you get peace of mind and a highly rated water/dust proof phone.
(Seriously, I’ve seen people diving with iPhones - no case - recording videos.)
I've done exactly that with my iPhone 14 Pro. Battery was degraded down to 72%, iOS suggested in the Settings app to get the battery replaced either at an Apple Store or at an authorized service center. I made an appointment at the Apple Genius Bar and took care of it in a little over an hour for $99. A lot cheaper than buying a brand new phone!
>and by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone
That remains to be seen. This could accelerate cultural change around desiring shiny new toy being seen as cool
I used to be in this camp, and before we had the charge limit and power saving mode it was true, but now? I'm no longer sure.
Like, I've had my phone for 6 years now and the battery is still going strong with the 80% charge limit always on throughout its lifetime. Meanwhile the USB-c port is shot to fuck and disconnects constantly, it can't connect to 5G, leaving me without a connection in lots of locations cause there are no fallback towers, and the OS support has basically been over for a year now. Cameras are no longer up to snuff either and I could use a storage upgrade.
My previous phone had a replacable battery, which I replaced once before the GPS and wifi chip died and turned it into an air gapped brick. Everything else seems to fail at a similar rate.
Still it's not really about if it lasts as long or not. It's about having the right to repair devices and to reduce waste at large. First batteries, then displays, main boards, etc. Each law builds on the previous one as precedent.
Modern phones have 7 years of software support, but the battery lasts only around 3 years.
The battery in my iPhone 11 pro (6.5 years old) is still basically fine as long as I charge it every day. None of my previous smart phones were able to keep enough charge to be useful after 3-4 years.
Pixel 8 is nearly 3 years old. Battery is still perfectly fine.
My Pixel 4a would also still be fine. If Google had not killed the battery. I think by now Google has asked (=paid) people to swap batteries on at least 3 different Pixel phones.
"…by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone."
Why? There have been few new features in recent years and new phones have restrictions not wanted by many. Google is closing the Android ecosystem and making it more proprietary so I'll keep my phone as long as I'm able.
The non-replaceable battery has to be one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on consumers. It's great that it's about to be broken.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone
Why? My phone works almost perfectly still three and a half years after I bought it. Except the battery lasts shorter.
If I go to battery health in settings it says:
> Important Battery Message
> Your battery's health is significantly degraded. An Apple Authorised Service Provider can replace the battery to restore full performance and capacity.
> Find Your Service Options
Aside from my current phone, I also have a very old iPod Touch. That old iPod Touch would have been usable still as well, if it wasn’t for the fact that it takes somewhere around 10 minutes of active use until it goes from full charge to zero charge. In other words, unusable for bringing with me anywhere plainly because of the battery.
Replaceable battery would have been great. Both for my iPhone and my iPod Touch. Even if it meant they would have been a bit thicker than they currently are.
> asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, [...] before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
'If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses'....Henry Ford
Nobody cares about repairability....until they are hit hard by it.
Anecdote: Around 5y ago, the lightning connector of my wife's iPhone died after 3y usage.
We brought it to an Apple Store and the official answer was "Sorry, we don't fix that on this model. Here is a 200€ discount on a new one"... The phone was still worth >900€ at the time.
Let's be clear: This kind of commercial practice are unacceptable both ecologically and ethically speaking. It is terrible customer service.
A lot of high end phones (outside Apple) at the time would have their USB-C port fixed in matter of few hours for <100€ in any random "I Fix it" store.
The battery is the exact same shit.
> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people
Not really. The battery just needs to have a connector rather than soldered, and no other things blocking the battery once the back-case is opened. Realistically, a service shop will do the replacement like how watch-batteries are typically replaced.
I don't know, I see people every day using old smartphonereachinfg for a power outlet everywhere they can because their phone do not last a day. Most think going to a shop to ask them to replace the battery will cost an arm.
I think that law doesn't even go far enough, they should standardize a battery format. When like me you are used to open smartphones and replace batteries you realize how very similar they are all in footprint and could be compatible with each other with very minimal effort. If there were only a couple of standardized formats you could find new batteries in every small shop/airports whatever and easily have spares. Chance is that other electronic devices or toys would also adopt them.
I had a perfectly fine iPhone 11 I bought new. The first thing I replaced in it was battery. I had to pay for “genuine” Apple battery + certified laboratory. The price was higher than the price of my iPhone as second hand, but I liked this phone.
Then I sold it, because I ran out of 64GB space. If I could add an sd card, I would probably use this phone longer, instead of contributing to consumerism and creating more e-waste.
I wish that people would think about sustainability and using their devices for longer rather than chasing “new and shiny” every year Apple releases the “best iPhone we ever made”
The ideal phone for me:
Modern iPhone batteries are basically user replaceable are they not? They are metal encased and the adhesive can be electronically disabled. They don't seem "worse" to me?
> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people
Sometimes we have to acknowledge the externalities of our lifestyle and take things down a notch.
Even if most throw out their old phones, now at least it'll be trivial to shuck these devices to get the battery for recycling, while sending the device for refurb or further recycling.
A key component to effective recycling is separation, and this is one step in that direction
More replaceable batteries can have secondary effects that most people would probably like though - like the ability to by a used phone on ebay/FB marketplace that doesn't have an abysmal battery.
Screen and battery replacements are by far the number one repair service that people avail. The data is clear. I'm afraid you're completely wrong.
With the battery no longer a concern, more people will opt to buy used phones rather than cheap new phones.
Som even if most people change phone before the battery gets really bad (I doubt that this is really the case), the end result will still be that fewer new phones will be purchased.
Now we just need a law that requires hardware makers unlock their devices when they stop providing updates.
I'm curious about the environmental argument here. At face value it makes sense, but is there some hard data that shows that there is a meaningful number of consumers that buy new phones only (or "mostly") because of battery degradation?
The article (granted, probably not the best source of information) has some numbers like "number of phones sold", but doesn't actually tackle the crux of the issue: how many of those phone sales would be prevented by having user swappable batteries?
I feel we don't have these data yet. What we do have is repair statistics for cell phones, where battery replacement accounts for 22% (in the US) of a $18.5B market. https://worldmetrics.org/cell-phone-repair-statistics/
My previous phone was refurbished and was great in all ways except for battery life. I have now bought a new phone that I wouldn't have bought if batteries were replaceable.
Having said that, I do like having waterproof phones, and I expect this rule would make that harder.
So I guess newer iPhones and iPad allow you charge up to 80%, which extends battery life, for idiosyncratic reasons? I’m sure there must have been a reason and demand for that.
I guess I run my iPhone on low battery mode a lot, due to idiosyncratic reasons too. Maybe I do.
Apple battery replacement costs anywhere from $70 (for a ~$400 phone) to $120 (for a ~$1000+ phone). In many global markets you can get a brand new phone for that much.
With the replaceable batteries the people at least have a choice. Without the option for a battery swap you had to buy a new device and throw away a otherwise totally fine one.
In last 5 years or so me and my wife have purchased 5 new phones. Except for one, where the phone slipped from a flat countertop due to having a glass back, in all other cases the reason was battery life getting worse, with no other issues with the phone at all. So I have to disagree with you here.
I am using mobile phones since 1996, I will gladly accept the "worse" experience.
And no, I don't want a new phone just because the battery wears out, it did not lost the ability to do phone calls and SMS in the process.
We are on the year of Android 17, my oldest device still runs Android 12 perfectly well, with the apps I care about.
A lot of people buy new phones only because their battery doesn't get through the day anymore.
Very ironic, you almost got it, post.
I don’t know what’s with tech people and their insistence that most people who use tech are mindless zombies.
How about you ask people if they want a non-swappable battery for 1 mm less thickness?
Can I have a thicker phone but narrower
I currently have a 12 mini, but I'd love to go back to the iphone 4 size, or even a blackberry curve. Would be fine for comms, and I suspect I'd spend less time doom-scrolling on it.
> this law will force phone manufacturers to compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.
Okay, you're claiming two things: (i) replaceable batteries will compromise some other features, and (ii) most people want those features more than they want a replaceable battery.
Can you name 3 of those features? I personally can't.
> because this law will force phone manufacturers to compromise the things that most people want
Hopefully this will help bring the headphone jack back.
If we run this experiment and most people say they wish they could replace their battery would you concede you are actually the one with idiosyncratic preferences?
most of the time I replace my phone because the battery degraded so badly and a replacement is expensive.
Its not enough by itself that the phone has amassed scratches and is 20% slower or has a 30% worse camera optic than the current generation, or that updates will only continue for a year or two more.
But the slowdown (associated with battery degradation btw) and fact that it doesn’t get me through a whole day definitely move the needle into me buying a new phone.
Given that probably one in twenty people you'd meet would have between 5 and 10% of battery left: probably most of those.
(and yes, I know that power banks exist)
Case in point: 8% battery left, going down to 7% typing this comment.
Everything you just described as "what people want" translated in my brain to "what they're programmed to want".
Some products on the market are there to address some inherent need or desire people have; some are for more manufactured needs/desires.
To me the intent of this law looks to put a floor on the environmental cost of providing for the manufactured variants.
I think most people who are capable of figuring out how buying a new phone impacts their financial goals would be in favor of this
you act like making batteries disposable will fundamentally alter the usability of the phone.
Right to repair has never been about requirement to repair. Obviously we can't force people to repair their phones instead of buying a new one, because that would involve replacing the market economy with a planned economy. This would be extremely difficult to pull off and would be wildly unpopular.
At the same time, 5.78 billion people have a smartphone worldwide. It is obviously wildly unsustainable to live in a world where 5.78 billion people have to throw away their old phone and buy a new one every 2-3 years. However, phone manufacturers have figured out that if they force people to, they can amass ridiculous levels of wealth because the demand for new phones would be constantly high. So obviously the incentives here are completely wrong. This has happened before with lightbulbs in the 20th century and is a legitimate form of market failure that needs to be resolved, as it wastes a lot of consumer spending to replace what consumers already had (like the parable of the broken window).
For many years since phone manufacturers started gluing phones together with a consumable part inside, consumers have been denied the ability to replace their battery. Where the option does exist, it's often very inconvenient, difficult, or with a price inflated to be nearly as expensive as buying a new one.
Phones stopped advancing significantly many years ago. Phone manufacturers now re-release practically the same phone with slight CPU and camera improvements, something completely unheard of until relatively recently. Lately the main marketing trend for new phones has been AI, but this is a nonsense trend because most of modern AI runs in the cloud, and very few are actually utilizing any local AI features, so the only "AI" thing about the phone is just a preinstalled ChatGPT-like app you can get on any other phone. So clearly they have run out of things to improve, and things to market around. In a normally functioning market, this would mean phones have become a solved technology and we can stop replacing our phones as often, maybe once every 10 years if you're careful with your phone. But this is not what we see precisely because phone manufacturers have been manufacturing problems that are most easily solved by buying a new phone, which they will push people to do whatever way they can for profit. The phone industry has failed to regulate itself, and so this is why we are seeing a push for this type of regulation.
I think most americans are happy to have usb-c on their Iphones.
No one cares, and having replaceable batteries is not gonna make any difference software and hardware support as usual will drive most people to upgrade their phones or their computers or anything else electronic for that matter.
Owner of an 11Pro iPhone soon to be obsolete after seven years. I probably will upgrade sometime in the next two years nine years with the same electronic device is long enough.
I got my moneys worth. very satisfied with the longevity and resale value of most of the Apple products in comparison to the competition.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change...
... the answer would depend on which street corner you asked.
> people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are
Yes, they are. They also tend to state that "most people" agree with them. This is called subjectivity.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone.
Extreme consumer brain coupled with privilege. Billions of people can’t afford a new phone every couple years, they buy things and use them until they are past the point of repair, only buying a replacement when they have no other choice.
Can you honestly even say this year’s new flagships, or any from the last decade, represent meaningful improvement for most people outside the tech bubble and influencer sphere? Smartphones have been “good enough” for a long time.
Apple is about to deprecate the iphone 11/SE 2020 version. Am gonna repurpose them as webcams given the 12MP camera put in there is arguably better than the brand new ones they put on new macs.
The phone now has a limited lifespan though because of this prior stupidity where eventually am gonna get into spicy pillow territory. At that point the phone prematurely dies.
We are going into a period where we are throwing away devices with 12mp+ cameras, and processors arguably faster than most desktops. It was arguable when the phones were old and legacy, but at this point the cameras on there are stupidly good.
We need these phones to be repurposed for a second life and actually capture their manufacture energy costs.
Frankly, if Apple allowed old iphones to be used for server usage, it is kind of crazy how efficient per dollar that would be.
> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people
I challenge you to give me an example of how this law might result in a phone that is worse for most people.
This law does not require a slide-off phone cover. It does not require a screwed-on backplate. It does not forbid the use of chemical adhesives. It does not stipulate how a phone should or shouldn't be designed.
It basically just requires the manufacturer to offer replacement batteries and to enable the replacement to be done with commercially available tools. I'd wager the overwhelming majority of phones are already compliant, pending availability of a replacement battery from the manufacturer.
I'm quite confident I could replace the battery on my Sony Xperia 1 iii with a heat gun and my basic iFixit toolkit.
"Normal people" (tiresome and unnecessarily reductive meme) do not necessarily care about how it's implemented, but they certainly care about planned obsolescence, which is the target of this law. It just another way to enforce reasonable service life and reduce e-waste. That's the goal of this regulation.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby if they want their phone to have a replaceable battery, I don't think you would be there very long before receiving a "yes". I think that's a more honest framing of the question.
> I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences. But that's nonsense, because the law doesn't actually require people to replace batteries rather than replacing their phone
How could they replace their batteries if they wanted to, unless the manufacturer makes it possible? The goal is not to force individuals to not replace their phones, but rather to provide that as an option at all, for those who want it.
> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
At the very least, we'd need only data showing that that number is non-zero. From where did you get the idea that we need to prove "most" people would choose to take advantage of this option?
> The goal is not to force individuals to not replace their phones, but rather to provide that as an option at all, for those who want it.
But my point is that you need to recognize that in so doing, you are taking away the option of having other things, such as waterproofing, larger batteries, smaller/lighter phones, etc. There is no free lunch.
> But my point is that you need to recognize that in so doing, you are taking away the option of having other things, such as waterproofing, larger batteries, smaller/lighter phones, etc. There is no free lunch.
1. Waterproofing is possible with replaceable batteries.
2. Larger batteries are possible with replaceable batteries. In fact, replaceable batteries makes this easier. I'm old enough to remember when you could buy a bigger battery for your cell phone that came with a bulged cover to accommodate it. If you don't want that though, you will have the choice to avoid it.
3. Smaller/lighter phones are possible with user-replaceable batteries. You could even use a smaller/lighter battery, too, if you wanted
These options aren't being taken away. We're just adding another option.
Consumers may not know that a feature is something they want until they don't have it anymore.
Invert the situation. If every iPhone in history had a replaceable battery, until 2027 when the newest iPhone did not have a replaceable battery, I think we can all agree that the uproar would be significant.
bookmarking this to revisit after couple years.
How the hell can we have more data on people replacing their batteries if the batteries are not user replaceable?
Most people want new phones because of shit software updates and marketing not because out of necessity.
Totally agree. It makes you wonder who the EU polled regarding this initiative? Who initiated it and why?
I provide food and services for the homeless in my area working with friends outside of any non-profit. That the phone people get from non-profits become unusable in some number of months is a big complaint. Batteries dying is significant part of this (lack of security updates is another part). Replaceable batteries are something that a lot of people would want (especially the option to have several batteries).
Just as much, there's a certain HN complaint form that basically goes "any complaint about the crap that sold now is just programmer/civil-rights-fan/etc idiosyncrasy, real people want exactly this crap 'cause markets never lie".
This is not about charging your phone.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
I doubt most people wouldn't even think that this is a thing they can wish for or that this is even within realm of possibility.
It has to be explicitly named as an option - as, I'm afraid, people have forgotten that you can have "nice things".
Also I feel rather uncomfortable every time somebody purports to be representitive of or know that "most people" want.
Following the bottle-cap madness, I don't think any current data shows the actual issue was resolved. Even worse, the effect on marine life is still not measured, and afaik reduction of harm was the primary goal. Instead of brutally high fines on fishing net waste, we got bottle-cap madness.
We have so much experience with scientific method, yet these massive decisions are adhoc, that's how the whole world works. We never tested what would happen by allowing mass production of plastic, or phones, or whatever, so these antipatches are going by the "feels" as well, with no individual taking responsibility for failures.
A bit off topic, but I recently had a drink that didn't have the attached bottle cap while travelling abroad, and my god, was it a minor annoyance to have to hold the bottle cap in my hand while drinking. I also almost dropped it because I expected it to stay attached. Funny how fast we adapt.
There is monitoring of beach pollution but data publication is typically delayed, like, we know it went down by 30% from 2015-2016 to 2020-2021, we will have data on a regulation that went into force in late 2024 only in a few years.
[0]
https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-upda...
I think you're plain wrong. I have never talked to anyone in my life about phones who didn't want replaceable batteries and wasn't annoyed by the throwaway culture. It's a top priority for the people I know, though by far not important enough for most of them to go for something like a Fairphone.
However, these preferences don't really matter anyway because nobody is forced to replace the battery and not buy a new phone when their phone has replaceable batteries.
I envision somone keeping a phone long time, not updating it and evtualluy the spying hooks get obsolete and so phone gets more secure, as tech companies move on with new apis and drop support for the old ones. This might be the biggest win. Ms still has customers using win95
> I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences.
Welcome to democracy and lawmaking in 2026. We know better than you!
It would take a great deal of lawmaking to make phones more worse, for most people, than phone manufacturers and mobile app developers already do. You want to talk about idiosyncratic preferences, really? Here?
Imagine getting a car without a replaceable battery.
Buddy. You are on the Hacker News. It's like you wanted to get skewered on purpose. Of course we want replaceable batteries! Anyone over the age of 30 will remember the convenience of throwing another charged battery in your car/backpack/briefcase and heading out for the day. Carefree. Also, what a treat to be able to properly restart or power off my phone (no, I mean REALLY power it off) by ripping out the battery!
What's next, having TV remote controls with non-removable rechargeable batteries, for the "convenience"?! Gimme a break. I love tech progress, but leave your hands off my removable batteries! And my 3.5mm audio jack, now that I think about it! :-)
> One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are.
Least self-aware HN user out there.
Do you really think the European commission got lobbied hard by HN folks?
This law will make phones better for most people, who would rather keep their phone for a decade rather than having to every three years buy a new phone optimized for some vanity metric that looks good on Engadget reviews.
LOL, please do the experiment for real and be amazed! :D
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".
Not my experience at all. The (few) non-tech people I've talked to about phones soon getting batteries again like it. People believe the idea that non-removable batteries are a conspiracy by the phone companies to sell you more phones the same way cartels manipulated the lightbulb market (Phoebus cartel).
My own hesitation with HM echo chamberification is federation. Nobody cares. And until you can point to a concrete benefit to end users, you should stop and think about why you’re pushing it this hard.
But I don’t think this is the case with phone batteries. I’ve had many conversations with friends and family that came down to replace the battery or upgrade the phone.
I feel the same way about soldered on CPUs, RAM and SSDs in laptops and other computers. The benefits of doing this are marginal at best. We all know the real reason is forced obsolescence.
We all know this is why battery replacement is hard too.
what are you on about? most people i know have 4 year old phones which are just fine and want only the battery changed. my phone was 6 years old this year and it hurt me that I had to change it because of the battery. otherwise it was a perfectly fine phone.
[dead]
Recently replaced the battery and charging port of my Fairphone. 5 screws, two plucked components, done. Hopefully this means that soon you won't have to buy a specific company's phone for this marvelous experience.
The Fairphone 5 is only IP55 rated (dust protected, and water droplet resistant). Most flagship phones are IP68 rated (fully dust sealed, and water submersible). IP68 phones are sealed with a single-use adhesive gasket, and replacing battery requires breaking (and replacing) this seal. If the seal is improperly applied, the phone is no longer protected from dust or water.
There is also a middle ground of IP67 from the Samsung Galaxy S5. I'm personally fine with the Fairphone level (they clearly prioritise easy and frequent disassembly; that's their entire brand) but for someone who wants to be able to submerge it just below the surface and walk through pouring rain for hours, that would be enough
I just spent a few hours [this past weekend] trying to replace a battery on an old iPod Touch and botching it (I'll blame my crappy soldering iron). Everything about that was a massive pain, prying the case open, dealing with all the glue inside, de-soldering the old battery.
I thought I did everything right but then the thing wouldn't turn on. Could be a bad battery (ordered on Amazon so zero guarantees). Then when I tried to de-solder and re-solder my new battery the pads came off it. Very annoying.
The US can't regulate it's own economy so the EU has to do it for them
I certainly understand the value of replaceable batteries. OTOH, I'm concerned about what this will mean for how many common upper end phones are IP67 submersion rated. I don't want that to go back to being a feature only of clunky super expensive phones, and I would rather have IP67 over a replaceable battery.
Now, if I'm lucky, they will mandate both a replaceable battery and that the phones be ip55 or better, after battery replacement.
Just like how it already work with watches. You can replace batteries yourself, but waterproofing is not guaranteed. If you want to be certain that the waterproof rating is maintained, you have to sent it to an authorised service provider.
Yeah great
“let’s just pass a law that says ‘no trade offs’, problem solved”
You will need to have a factory to replace the battery and also run tests to prove that the phone still works with water then
"I would rather have IP67 over a replaceable battery"
Not me, and not most people.
Have you done a survey?
You read this in some report right? (surely the same report the EU read to justify this law). So got a link for us?
This is excellent news. Now make them have user-unlockable and user-relockable bootloaders...
You wish.
I worry that this ends up, like other EU consumer-protection regulation, as an own goal.
- The cheapest phones available in the EU (and purchasable online) all have glued-in batteries, not swappable ones. Forcing consumers to use phones with swappable batteries may just mean that the bottom of the market disappears, and consumers will be left paying more for their phones. And would they rather pay less or have swappable batteries?
- This will cause some cascade of engineering changes, which will make phones thicker or less waterproof. Again, it's not clear to me that the tradeoff is being fairly reflected here.
It's replaceable with commercially available tools, it doesn't mean that you should be able to pop off the battery during the day at any point.
This doesn't restrict the design space that much at all.
... other EU consumer-protection regulation ...
like unified charging cable, free EU roaming or intercountry bank payments that are instant and almost free, air travel protections?
- efficient vaccuums - efficient bulbs - no roaming costs if somebody leaves a message on your voicemail - insurance companies and banks can't charge you as they see fit - toxic free food - toxic free meat - farming without killing the rest of the living things - Best of all: China and USA can't dictate the rules everytime
Like the experience of opening any website for the last decade and being greeted with a cookie popup is more the direction the parent comment was intending I'm assuming.
Some regulations are good, some are bad, all have second and third order effects that need to be weighed against benefits.
and you comfortably ignore all the adds that get in your face when opening any news or commerce site. you would not need these popups with agree and list of third party data aggregators if you were not selling all that visitor information to anyone. alas eu requires you to notify visitors about it. its not like eu says "you must show annoying popups" its page authors choose to do so to be able to sell the data. even knowing that this will annoy the visitors. and then blame EU
> if you were not selling all that visitor information to anyone
Do you understand how rare it is for a company to actually sell its user data?
Visitor data. And i think these companies them selves do not fully understand what visitor data they pass on just to get that ad revenue.
Put this JS on your page, we'll give you some money.
Unified charging cable: what if the standard had been set much earlier? For example, in 2008? We'd all be on Micro-USB, far inferior to USB-C. Right now USB-C feels great, but do you really think this is the end-all, be-all? I think the cost of this mandatory standardization will become apparent a few years from now.
Not having cheap plastic junk that ends up as toxic landfill is a pro, not a con.
"Cheap" isn't enough, especially if it's cheap through externalizing cost.
Say that to the people who can't afford them!
They then end up paying more by buying five awful low-range phones that each last a year instead of one mid-range that will last more. No, I would rather everyone paid more for a phone. I find it hard to believe that the difference in price will make it impossible for them to buy it, if so, that's a separate problem. This + mandated software support may finally make it viable to just buy a used phone, too.
This is especially beneficial for poorer folks, who won't have to buy a whole new phone when a battery dies.
Plus, what you're talking about is a failure of socioeconomic policy, not one to be fixed by giving poor people junk.
What good is a replaceable battery if the device becomes obsoleted by changing communication standards first? How long before 4G and 5G are phased out? What if we could have forward compatibility in our mobile network protocols?
one step at a time
I have never used a phone without easily replaceable battery (where "easily" means no screwdriver necessary, just pop the backcover and pull the battery out). It just happened this way, but I think I'd refuse to buy one anyway, as aside of obvious repairability and maintainability issues having the battery sealed in is also a big factor that makes dropping the phone so dangerous. When I drop my phone, the battery is easily set free to disperse its kinetic energy away from more fragile parts of the device, so it's much harder to break the phone this way. I have made some small dents and scratches from drops over the years, but no serious damage.
This is not what the laws is about, though: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835530
It's replaceable without special tools, heating, solvents. It can easily feature a screw or a million other solutions.
While this is a good step forward, it feels like complaining about the 0.025% of plastic from straws in the ocean while ignoring the 75% of plastic from fishing nets.
I own a 2020 Kona EV. The battery cannot be upgraded. Eventually, I'll have to replace the entire car to get a longer range. BEVs should be mandated to have upgradable batteries and modular interfaces so that the shell can continue to be reused, the batteries (and BMS) upgraded, and old batteries easily recycled.
Useful life of most of the cars is on par with their battery longevity, as long as you have proper thermal management and your usage patterns are not outliers.
Focusing on being able to upgrade battery (and to be clear - upgrade, not replaced/repair) is solving 1% problem.
Cars have basically unlimited useful life because every component (arguably with the exception of the frame) can be repaired. It's surprisingly affordable to rebuild an engine and make it as good as new. I can buy a car made in the 50s today, that's a 70 year old car. And I can keep servicing it and keep it going for another 70 years.
The main enemy of cars is rust, but for that there are cost effective mitigations now. The real reason people ditch cars is always they get tired of the old car and want something more modern, not because the car is at the end of its "useful life".
Batteries are not like that. They actually have a useful life that degrades over time, which makes them non-servicable.
What I would like to see is serviceable batteries, where you can replace individual damaged cells and keep the battery going. Everyone would benefit from that, especially the used EV market, which would help stem the massive depreciation hits EV buyers are facing now.
I still drive the car I bought 20 years ago. How long should the useful life of a car be?
Given the huge environmental cost involved in manufacturing a car, 20 years seems fair.
I’m still driving a 26-year old Nissan Micra – though it’s now on its last legs: the Irish climate isn’t kind to steel and we’ve had to have the under-carriage re-welded three times in the past five years. :(
EV batteries are expected to offer about 60-70% of capacity at 20 years. I think that's really good compared to general wear and tear of the car.
But let's go back to the original point, about being able to UPGRADE (not repair/replace) battery in the car. 20 years old car is worth like $1k-2k, which is fraction of the cost of the new battery.
While it's cool thing to do for hobbyists, it makes 0 economical sense.
If you want pricing for older cars, I recommend carsandbids.com. For example, here is a 2008 Audi RS4, that is currently bid to $18,000. It has 111,000 miles on it. https://carsandbids.com/auctions/3oj8pvR7/2008-audi-rs4-seda...
What an old car is worth depends on many factors, but age is not the most important one. The average age of passenger cars on the road in the U.S. is 14 years old -- I think 14.5 years now. I don't think we have data on average appraised value of passenger cars on the road, but I would guess it would be in the range of 10-15K.
You bought a car with some range, you are fine with it. Why you have to replace it with longer range?
Should I be able to eventually replace gas tank with the larger one in my ICE vehicle?
> you are fine with it.
Why not ask me my motivations instead of assuming them?
I'm not fine with the range; I bought an EV to stop burning fossil fuels, my 24-year-old RAV4 was on its last leg, and there was a $6K bonus for trade-ins (my RAV4 would have been about $5k in parts).
Plus, the long-term cost savings kick in after about 8 years, which I blogged about at: https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2019/08/06/typesetting-markdow...
> Why you have to replace it with longer range?
Because I want to explore the interior of BC, drive across Canada on fewer charges, visit family, go on road trips, etc. Just yesterday I spent 30 minutes trying to charge my Kona. It's a long and boring story, but suffice to say our charging infrastructure here sucks, and is not as simple, quick, or convenient as "tap-to-pay" (with a credit card) at petrol stations.
> Should I be able to eventually replace gas tank with the larger one in my ICE vehicle?
FWIW, that is actually a thing you can do. It is mostly done for SUVs and pickups since the primary use case for the extra range is off-pavement driving and the upgrade is simpler.
Yes to both. Why not?
Batteries degrade, you know.
Yes, which is why they are replacable, and Hyundai is bound by law to keep making batteries for OP's Kona for a good while even after the production stops.
Unfortunately Hyundai is not required by law to keep making batteries. They are only legally required to provide for warranty support for up to 10 years after a car is made. Usually that means you keep making parts, but I'm not sure how this works with EVs.
But the window is 10 years. After that, you rely on market forces -- if there is a profit to be made from making the part, then it is made. Heavily cars rely on aftermarket parts, but the question of a battery is a bit different.
Again, we need open source cars, with open source designs, so that batteries can be repaired, upgraded, and replaced by an aftermarket. I keep pushing this and hope I'm not being tedious, but people are underestimating the risk to the consumer.
That will probably come when EV marketshare is higher and innovation plateaus. I definitely appreciate the phone thing as someone typing from an iPhone SE. I also think phone batteries degrade faster than cars, right? I think my phone is from 2022 and I’m definitely starting to feel it.
I don't see how that's even remotely comparable. It's not like you can replace the battery in your phone with a larger one. You will be able to buy a new battery for your car, that's already guaranteed in the EU - but it will be the same capacity as what you got.
I don't know why is this even an argument really, like.....in a petrol car, do you expect to be able to fit it with a bigger fuel tank after 10 years? or a more powerful engine? Until very recently even software updates to the infotainment weren't really a thing, if you wanted a newer interface you had to change the entire car(I'm not saying this was a good thing, just that generally the expectation is that the product will work the way it was when you bought it).
> It's not like you can replace the battery in your phone with a larger one.
That was totally a thing for phones in the past. Depending on the model you could get a larger pack that had a bulge on the back of the device to have extra battery time. There was a similar thing with a number of laptops.
I do agree its kind of a questionable thing on something like a car. I imagine packaging concerns would really get in the way of adding a bit extra.
it's all virtue signalling. Always has been.
Disagree. I want a replaceable battery in my phone. They can get to extensible memory next. And it's not because you don't care about something that you should remove this freedom from me. And don't tell me that the market will self regulate in the best interests of the consumer or other nonsense like that.
I want replaceable CPU and memory in my phone as well. I demand the government force device manufacturers to use socketed CPUs using standardized sockets and SO-DIMM memory. And it's not because you don't care about something that you should remove this freedom from me.
I mean, why not? Fairphones showed it can be done, to an extent. At least this should be pursued. One step at a time, though.
It's not for me at least. Nobody can prove their inner intent to you but most people will know from themselves that their actions are sometimes misunderstood (especially when something worked/came out badly) but that they genuinely mean well
Great, now do storage!
People shouldn't have to pay $$$ for a 128GB upgrade when a 1TB microSDXC card is under $200. It feels like a trick to sell cloud storage and new phones.
The system like iOS is still closed. Once Apple ends support for a device, being able to swap a battery won’t help much
Every single Pixel upgrade I made - every single one - in the last decade has been because of battery life.
This law will be tragic for Google and Apple. What will compel people to upgrade their functional phones?
There was nothing stopping you (and others) getting the battery swapped previously for a fraction of the price of a new device.
Yeah this is what I don’t get. People are actually blowing hundreds of dollars on new phones rather than having Apple (not the cheapest option certainly) replace the battery for $89
Yeah and it'll likely cost the same for the majority of people who won't bother replacing them at home.
> Every single Pixel upgrade I made - every single one
You make it sound like a large number. I’m keeping iPhones for 4 years now and upgrading because of cameras. Are pixels really that bad?
It feels like life got nerfed when I lost the ability to just swap in my extra battery when my phone died.
Awesome!
And next, hopefully, replaceable software.
Which will do much more for phone longevity.
They (Samsung, Apple, etc.) should never have been allowed to glue it behind the screen. Threaded fasteners and a silicone gasket cover is good enough for 99.999% of the public use-case.
Via firsthand observation of people in the world. Go ahead and check the number of people on the street that need the edge case of using the phone under IEC standard 60529. Now go ahead and check out how many people on the street want to be able to replace their battery.
How about computers to have replaceable SSDs? There's no point you can exchange the battery when the hard-soldered SSD dies first. (I had more dead SSDs than batteries)
At least there's a choice there. I've never bought a computer with a soldered-on SSD.
And get rid of soldered RAM while we're at it as well.
This should be mandatory, although I never had a computer where the SSD was not replaceable.
Some were a bit of a pain in the ass to replace though.
Bonus: reasonably accessible replaceable batteries double up as a hardware off switch.
https://archive.ph/INeg6
As long as it does not make the phone bigger or compromise the water resistance, I support the requirement.
But it is not super high on my list. Every 2 or 3 years I pay less than $100 to have a new OE battery installed, takes about an hour. There are other features I would put a higher priority on - like a good small phone option now and again.
They should have standardized 3 to 5 battery sizes (and their connectors, voltages, etc.), so that the same battery could be used across many different devices, which would bring down the cost even more.
I still sometimes miss the Samsung Galaxy I had that had a microSD slot, a removable battery, and a headphone jack.
Phones have lost so much in a decade.
Same but from the other side. The new phone (without SD, removable battery, or headphone jack) is already acquired and laying in my drawer, but I have yet to bite into the lemon and start making the switch. Too damn convenient compared to the abstract threat of software updates... I'm dreading the new situation so much
I have a Samsung Galaxy from 2022 that has exactly that and it's still supported by manufacturer. Unfortunately it's a Samsung Galaxy Tab Active4 Pro.
Neat. That may allow repurposing phones as mini home servers too.
Lithium batteries in things running 24/7 unsupervised always makes me a bit nervous
Replacing the battery on my iphone takes 30 minutes and the only tools needed are a couple of screwdrivers and a new display adhesive. In exchange, the phone is a lot more waterproof. For me, it's a good tradeoff.
What's next? Mandating that the screens be "replaceable" as well? Having used a fairphone before, I can tell from experience that easily replaceable parts are more prone to breaking from dust and moisture etc.
Will this affect the water-resistance of current iPhones? I thought that was why the batteries are not easily replaceable by users, because of the seals/gaskets.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dyL6hMZvWQ
Most wristwatches provide much stronger water resistance while still being very user serviceable with a $20 watch tool kit. Whatever the phone makers are peddling are mostly excuses.
Also the latest pixel watch has a new mechanism without glue that has a rubber gasket and screws.
There are multiple watches, cameras, etc., with a lot of physical buttons even, all with replaceable batteries and weather-resistant (or even better, water proof). This is a bad excuse.
water resistance + easily battery exchange for repairs is very viable (AFIK always had been, too.)
like this law isn't about users causally replacing batteries like on very old phones
but about an repair shop easily and without risk of breaking your phone being able to replace it without only holding on your phone for idk. 10 minutes
So that you can just drop by (once they have the replacement parts) wait a moment and have a new battery.
This means in the worst case something like needing to a add a bit of additional seal/wax/glue or similar to improve sealing is very much fully viable (Id the sealing agent is generally buy able.)
It just is something you have to design in from the get to go. And it's easier to not do so at all. And maybe if you obsess if your phone is 1/10mm smaller or not that gets in your way too. And not doing so is more profitable as people will buy successor products more likely, even if just very slightly more likely.
But in general? That really isn't the problem.
Also even if it where the problem. What is better? Having a less waterproof phone, but not needing to buy a new one for another one or two years or having to buy one now?
Galaxy S5 worked quite well. IP67 and a removable battery.
While I'd be perfectly content with an IP67 iPhone with interchangeable battery, the current iPhones are IP68 which is a significant step up in dust/water ingress protection. IP68 devices generally require a sealant, IP67 normally doesn't, making it easier to do a battery hatch etc.
IP68 doesn't require a sealant if you just use enough pressure. Phones are just too thin to screw on the back plate and use a proper gasket. Which is stupid in the first place because most people then go and put a bulky cover on them.
and applying a sealant isn't per-see the problem either
iff
- it's generally commercially available
- and re-applicable after replacement with just generic tools
- and removing the battery doesn't risk breaking your phone due to physical strong binding glue being used as sealant etc.
As a dump example you can design the phone as a sealed unit with the battery department being "outside" the seal. Then have the battery also sealed and apply a bit of "sealant" (wax?, glue?) on the electrical contacts braking the seal on both sides. As the battery and battery compartment back have to only be waterproof and not "rigid" this probably fits "just fine" into most phones (except the most over the top slim ones).
Which is probably more the actual problem. Thinks like phone makers over-obsessing with making phones slimmer on a sub 1mm standard ... and then people anyway putting "thick" cases on the phone to protect it...
I wish them same regulation would be enforced on toothbrushes
This must be paired with strong lithium battery import regulation. Even the highest quality OEM batteries can fail in dangerous ways (See many models of Samsung, Surface or Macbook). Cheap, dangerous Chinese imports must be eliminated as an option, because the secondhand owners doing this replacement will likely buy the cheapest replacement battery available on the market.
the largest danger with pouch cells will always be mishandling followed by bad BMS.
it's so routine that they get abused that every llm I asked blamed leaving laptops plugged in for a spicy pillow.
I hate to say it, but the lack of removable batteries serves a purpose. It wasn't done just because 'screw consumers'.
It was done because:
* It makes phones massively easier to waterproof
* It allows for larger batteries
* It allows for more compact and lighter phones
Consumers, based on what they buy, have shown again and again that they want these features.
It also simplifies manufacture and lowers costs, which everyone likes.
I like removable batteries. If I had the option, I'd get a phone with that feature. But I know that I am certainly in the minority, as is almost everyone in this thread.
It's also worth pointing out that these days, battery and software have advanced to the point where degradation is quite slow in many cases. The phone will often outlive its useful life due to specs rather than battery.
I hope this puts more pressure to extend the software life-span.
This is good. I recently had to replace a generally working phone because the battery was dying and there was no cost effective & reliable means of replacing.
A proper gasket and screws needs to be the standard solution here.
Anyone know how much harder water resistance gets with replaceable batteries?
In order to have my iPhone 11's battery replaced by my local apple authorised repair shop, inexplicably I have to leave my phone with them for days. Since the phone is old they have to order the battery from Apple and that could take up to a week, according to them. Of course it's impossible to stay without my phone for a week+ so my only option is to buy a new phone if I want to fix my battery capacity issues.
Find a repair shop that will order the battery in advance?
There aren’t any 3rd party repair shops close to me that are in Apple’s Independent Repair Provider network, so if I were to choose a random repair shop my only real option with them would be a battery from a 3rd party manufacturer, which I’ve had bad experiences with before. I wouldn’t mind as much if I could easily replace it again myself if it started swelling like last time.
Yeah it's tough when all you have locally are the aftermarket options. I'm lucky to have two Apple certified shops within a few minutes of my home, and in a pinch two Apple stores within 20-30 minutes.
I bought a 12 Mini a couple years ago to be the shared phone the kids would take if they were out somewhere that we wanted to have communications ability, and it came with a third party battery. It hasn't been awful, exactly, but the life on the battery seems very low even for a mini.
(every time I pick up the 12 mini, I feel tempted to find the nicest 13 mini I can find and set it up for myself. what a fantastic size, makes my 17 pro seem huge)
Ironically the EU also demands phones are water proof.
And they say this will save consumers money, but I will this not also make all new phones way more expensive?
No because phones should be priced as what people pay for them... It's an open market.
Please bring back the 3.5mm headphone jack!
Removing it is one of the most annoying things ever in a phone. Yes, Bluetooth is getting better, but the jack always works perfectly. Why can't we have both?
The IP rating will degrade the moment they bring it back. The jacks will either corrode or let water inside the phone and kill it entirely. Nobody wants to deal with that giant hole.
It seems like the whole world could massively benefit from this much like the other great innovation out of the EU -- the Common Charger Directive (aka USB-C).
Gigaset makes IP68/MIL-STD-810H smartphones with removable batteries and sold the battery for 30€, don't fall for the "but watterproof".
What good are replaceable batteries if the software becomes obsolete and un-upgradeable by the time you need to replace the battery?
https://energy-efficient-products.ec.europa.eu/product-list/...:
- rules on disassembly and repair, including obligations for producers to make critical spare parts available within 5-10 working days, and for 7 years after the end of sales of the product model on the EU market
- availability of operating system upgrades for longer periods (at least 5 years from the date of the end of placement on the market of the last unit of a product model)
the secondary market for old phones seems strong?
Because people don't understand the security implications of non-updated software?
Phones cannot have non-updated software due to another EU Regulation: Cyber Resilience Act. You need to support devices at least for 5 years starting from December 2027.
And after 5 years? My phone runs mainline Linux and thus will have lifetime updates, just like my laptop.
If it's a choice between no phone and an old, software-EOL phone I can't blame them.
Frankly so long as my browser, VPN and mail app are updated I'm happy.
EU is late by 19 years. No one cares anymore about user replaceable batteries.
seems reasonable on its own, but knowing the track record of EU regulations... Even this sounds dodgy
This is about user replaceable batteries, which is subtly different for me. Batteries that can be replaced by a shop, with some specialized tools and knowledge are important to me from a sustainability perspective since that extends the life of the phone.
Batteries that can be popped out and replaced by your average consumer are something beyond that, and have certain consumer benefits like being able to bring along a backup or something, but aren't that important to me.
What if they also mandate that each phone manufacturer has to bring back iPhone 4 sized phones. Just saying. But would be great.
Next: replaceable storage? Since flash-based storage is widely known as a consumable that tends to fail first.
You mean the kind of "first" that comes right after shattered screens, worn batteries, and loose charging ports? :P
I agree in spirit though: storage chips wearing out seems to be common from my limited experience and it would be good if you could solder on, or slide in, a new chip with some standard procedure
Screen, battery and charging port replacements are already routine at any repair shop, at least for the devices I buy.
Thank you, EU, for having the courage to pass the pro-consumer regulations that my own government lacks. Often, as happened when the iPhone got rid of the proprietary Lightning connector, the benefits extend well beyond your borders.
The right to repair legislation the EU passed is heartening. Now, let's see if they actually enforce it.
There is a shocking amount of apathy on the part of people who think this doesn't affect them because they personally have no desire to use their car out of warranty or to take a car to an independent mechanic. It affects them because it affects resale price, which affects depreciation which hits their pocketbooks directly. Even if they lease the car.
There is a reason that EVs are getting hammered and even ICE vehicles are seeing steeper depreciation curves, and that's because they are becoming more disposable and harder to repair. People are talking about "useful life" of a car as if this was a disposable consumer device, and not a durable good that can be repaired and maintained for decades as long as the ability to replace components is out there. Toyota famously said "Our mission is to build cars that last for 30 years in the third world" and what do you know Toyotas don't depreciate nearly as much as other cars and people still pay 5 figures for 20 year old landrovers.
We also used to build toasters and refrigerators that easily last 50, 60 years or even 100 years if properly maintained. There is no reason cars can't do the same, and for some cars this is possible, but not for modern cars and certainly not for modern EVs. This can change.
[offtopic] Ive always wondered why a conversion has not been offered ( by someone ) for apple phones to make, it so the battery can be replaced by end user? It would be a case modification somehow. Some kind of new "back"
This is a bad development. This is likely the end of waterproof phones in the EU market. Customers preferred phones that had non-removable batteries. Previously all phones had replaceable batteries. This is due to market forces.
So this means no iPhone Air 2 in Europe? I can hardly see Apple wiggle around the special tools requirement when these batteries are glued and sealed shut in the devices.
[edit] didn’t see the fine print with the cycles requirement etc. so it seems Apple etc is still safe.
Was there ever a plan for an iPhone Air 2? They're struggling to sell the stock they have.
good idea - but not effective enough.
if you gonna go about e-waste then go by repairability and part prices and part supply. then let the market sort itself out.
as someone said - either standardize batteries or ensure that device makers can cap the cost of battery replacement from 3rd parties.
most phones these days - the screen gets damaged before batteries.
what about laptops ? other e-devices ?
Aside from an easily swap-able battery I would love for an iPhone with a double thickness screen that was less susceptible to cracking and built-in rubber bumpers so I wouldn't need a case.
I'll take what is a screen protector for 500, Alex.
Both options have pros and cons but IMHO the cons for replaceable are more.
Since 2020 phone hardware and especially battery has become much better, reliable and long lasting, at least at not dirt cheap ones. It will fail long after the screen brakes or the software updates stop. And a replaceable battery degrades the design.
On the other side a new battery makes an old phone like new. But again it only costs 15-20E to change it in a non-repl phone.
The only real reason to promote battery repl is to reduce e-waste.
And next we could have mandatory security patching for 5 years to make it worth replacing the battery on an old phone. I would say right to repair should apply to the firmware/OS as well.
Already exists in the EU: https://www.reddit.com/r/Smartphones/comments/1lad1a4/eus_ne...
Ah, I must be living under a rock, thanks :)
I made my local store to change the battery of my iPhone 6s for 39€. And here we are again, for the next ten years.
I understood that the move to non-replaceable batteries was at least partially driven by water resistance
*Edit. Not sure why people are downvoting. I didn't make a positive declaration. HN didn't used to be this way for completely milquetoast comments.
It probably makes things easier, but its unlikely that the industry that found a way to make foldables waterproof couldn't figure out a way to put rubber gaskets on battery covers. And in fact, they did, there were several devices introduced in the transition period that had both features.
Rubber gaskets wear out. Best practice is to replace them every time you open the cover. We can put them in, but the replacement battery better come with the gasket because you can't safely replace the battery without a new gasket.
Galaxy S5 was IP67-rated (1 metre depth, 30 minutes) and had a user-replaceable back cover / battery
Also a notification LED, OLED screen, bezels to pick the device up by, headphone jack, unlockable, a continuous light sensor... peak smartphone, save perhaps for the meager 200 Hz accelerometer refresh rate (modern phones have 500 Hz usually, I have no idea what for but I personally love toying with FFT plots)
If the headphone port flap was perfectly sealed….
*charge port flap
Waterproof phones all still have charging ports and no flaps. Not sure how but that seems to be solved. Maybe that one part's connectors are encased in glue?
Yes and don't forget consumer preferences. This is Hacker News where they are still clamoring for a "small smartphone" because everything else is too big. Shocker, small phones don't sell. Neither do bulky ones when compared to sleek iPhones.
Haven't modern smartphones had non-replaceable batteries long before they had any kind of water resistance ratings?
Not sure if I should be repeating the same answer below each instance of the question but here goes: See the Samsung Galaxy S5 for example as having a good waterproofing rating and user-replaceable battery
Anything except full support of the EU during European hours gets downvoted
Every post about the EU here gets absolutely flooded by negative comments of people who tell me that whatever the EU proposed won't work, governments shouldn't do these things, the proposed legislation is ineffective, it doesn't go far enough, they're just trying to extract money from our successful American companies, and so on and so forth. It's just a neverending diarrhoea of anti-government anti-European underbelly sentiment.
That sounds like seeing a pattern where there is none (apophenia). Do you have examples of posts that wouldn't be downvoted outside of times where Europe/Africa is awake, or that weren't only because it was posted outside of said hours?
Earlier this year I downgraded my S24 ultra to an iphone 13 mini and then to the first gen iphone SE. I replaced the battery myself on the SE and couldn't be happier. Less screen time and more IRL time. People should just use less of their phones and for battery longevity they should not let their phones go daily below 20%.
No one on this planet should use their phone more than 2 hours per day. Period. More is just plain stupid.
This might be shifting us closer to worse overall design/performance to accommodate swapability. The pouch cells are very fragile, with the phone itself being the physical protection for the cell. If end users begin to handle these, you likely have to add additional packaging to the cell which increases the overall dimensions or reduces total capacity to maintain the same size.
Maybe it's for our own good, maybe we have to suck it up and lose a little capacity to meet sustainability goals. Or maybe this won't do much for the environment.
I am not sure people actually care that much about dimensions.
Most phones today only look thin on promotional material. With the massive camera bump that is sometimes thicker than the phone itself, and the way most people use cases, in the end, you have quite a brick. Also a glass back panel, which to me is one of the worst materials for that purpose, but it looks good on the store stand.
So to me, a removable battery will not affect the phone dimensions as much as it will affect the look, which may piss off the marketing guys, and I take it as a positive!
Seriously, bring back the removable plastic back covers, plastic may look cheap, but to me, it is the best material, and if you put on a case, as most people do, you won't even see it!
Obviously it helps with the design to embed. But it's also obvious so hard to replace batteries are by design to make those phones throw away after the 1000cycle or whatever batties last.
A good middle ground would have been to enforce an easy to replace specification..but then we are up to interpretation.
This won’t do much for the environment.
Even today, phone batteries get replaced until the phone is no longer able to run today’s software.
I recently swapped a broken display + the battery of a smartphone. It's definitely possible with recent devices (although apple might be different).
You need some skill and patience to cut it open etc. without damage, so most people should probably go to a repair shop.
I know a common refrain with my friends is "IDGAF about an extra few centimeters, give me an audio jack". I think consumers are down for thicker phones if they get something for it. In this case, a phone that lasts longer
People say that but then they don’t buy the phones.
There is a difference between revealed and stated preference.
Where in the market can I buy a thicker phone with a 3.5mm jack that has comparable features to those of best sellers? How can I reveal a preference that isn't offered.
I'm pretty sure most companies optimize for what the consumers actually want.
They optimize for enriching shareholders and experiments like exploring the market for brick phones is a needlessly costly one when existing trends can be exploited.
You assume that everyone needs more battery life. That need is highly variable based on different use and access to chargers.
They need a standardized battery. Something with common terminals and width available in a range of thicknesses and lengths would be ideal.
They should extend the principle to laptops, obviously.
I think most (all?) would already comply. What laptop do you see as not having a user replacable battery? Even MacBook can be swapped out pretty easily [1].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgTon2jqI-A
I won't name brands, but there are lots of low cost "tablet with keyboard" laptops with glued battery. Just a couple of months ago I had to ditch one.
Anyway, if most comply, why not make it mandatory? Or are these kind of directives only aimed at picking fights with manufacturers?
Note that I am not suggesting that all laptops should have USB-C chargers, that's a separate directive. I mean user replaceable batteries available for at least 5 years, without requiring major surgery to replace.
MacBooks are not easy at all. I did it twice and it's an annoying, dangerous mess (danger of tearing the battery open). Apple won't even bother with it. If you want an "official job", they will just replace the whole top shell including the keyboard, because they can't be bothered to remove the glue. And of course it's expensive because of that.
8 minutes to complete, using only a screw driver and credit card, once every three or four years, is definitely "annoying". But, I'd still say it's also "pretty easy" (I never said "easy"). My reference frame may be different than yours.
Have you actually done it? Mine were 15" MacBooks, not 13" like in the video – maybe that makes a difference. It took me about 20 minutes. In the video the outer two battery packs just pop up without much resistance – that is not how it was in my case. It needed lots of acetone and patience and it was a messy process. I also had to apply quite a lot of force and was worried I might tear a battery pack open in the process (they were already swollen and looked like they might explode any moment).
The noname replacement batteries also have nowhere near the same capacity that the Apple batteries had originally.
For context to HN readers reading all the naysayer comments: Here's old HN post about EU and USB-C regulation
"EU reaches deal to make USB-C a common charger for most electronic devices"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31652291
And 1 year later: "Apple says iPhones will switch to USB-C chargers to comply with new EU law"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33358353
It's interesting to see almost all the exact sentiment. I think barring some niches, most people are happy with USB-C transition.
I understand the scepticism but the expectation of "perfection" from regulators (incremental improvement disliked) while fanfare for incremental startup / tech improvement is a weird, cognitive dissonance of HN
I still remember the people arguing that lightning is just fine and we don't need usb-c. It's true, they existed.
Nowadays, good luck to find someone arguing that lightning iphones are better than usb-c.
I guess it would cost them dearly to recognize that they owe that to the eu regulation.
In the us they say vote with your wallet, obviously it didn't work..
> I still remember the people arguing that lightning is just fine and we don't need usb-c. It's true, they existed.
Before that, many of them argued that powerpcs were better than x86. :)
Hopefully the EU can get the battery situation to mirror the charging cable situation. IE force them all to adopt an industry standard.
Considering that this, and other, regulation is officially aimed at reducing e-waste, the EU should commit to publish independent data on the amount of e-waste and phones replacement rates now and every year afterwards in order to measure the real world impact.
Too often, including in HN comments, those regulations are presented as "obviously" good policies. Well, data are better than assumptions.
I don't know if this is standard, but at least for some previously enacted electronics regulations I know they look into the real-world effects. I think I was looking for information on how they calculate the battery life for the new smartphone energy labels (e.g. is the browsing test over WiFi or the LTE/NR modem) when I found some document about how much energy they're expecting to save with this regulation. It showed a base path of expected energy consumption development, and then how the regulation is expected to modify that
Edit: not the one I saw before, but found a similar document via https://energy-efficient-products.ec.europa.eu -> policy making -> "EIA reports and related analyses" -> 2025 overview report https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/418195ae-4919-45fa-a959-3... -> see e.g. the graphic at the top of page 79
The shaded area is the effect that they think is attributable to regulations, e.g. -2.2TWh electricity per year in the category of phones and tablets when comparing 2010 and 2030
As another example, for "Servers and data storage products" they expect almost no change due to regulation: the consumption is expected to go from 48 to 67 TWh (2010 till 2030) and that it would have been 70 TWh without regulations. If I'm reading it right, this small improvement would be due to the 2019 "information requirement ... including the maximum allowed operating temperature for the equipment ... to stimulate data centres to choose equipment that supports higher operating temperatures, to enable further reduction of the cooling load."
Page 42 shows that they also take into account 'additional acquisition costs' (how much more expensive devices are because of this, I think that means?), but that this added expense is well below the energy costs that would have been incurred otherwise. Of course, that's what I'd say too about my regulations :) but I don't know of another information source for this so this is the best info I have atm
I wonder if this is the reason for Google not majorly renewing their Pixel line since Pixel 9 till 11.
As a non-European I want to say: thanks EU
I thought USB-C was already required.
> The move comes amid EU-wide efforts to cut the continent’s carbon footprint and tackle mounting waste [...]
...
> [...] if specialised tools are required, they must be provided free of charge when the phone or tablet is purchased.
So if a family buys several phones and tablets that all use the same specialized tool to change their batteries they end up with several identical specialized tools?
From a reducing waste perspective wouldn't it be better to just require that the tool be available for free for some reasonable amount of time such as however long the manufacturer is required to support the device?
[dead]
What percent of iphone users would take a sleeker, slimmer phone over a replaceable battery?
I don't think hackers (in the Hacker News sense of the word) are generally iphone users, considering apple's hostility and condescension towards customers, fighting consumer rights forced by regulators, and device lock-down. People who already compromised on that for a status symbol would probably take the shiny new toy over functionality, sure
good. now do the software enshittification part, which is the real driver of device obsolescence. being able to replace the battery is nice, but if the new battery lasts half as long because the software needs twice as much resources to perform the same tasks - you're not really fixing anything.
Well, Nokia phones used to be good phones with replaceable batteries.
If only we had batteries that would last for 20 years...
my naive opinion is that this will result in more bulky phones, with worse quality batteries.
Well, 9 more months until I’m going to replace my iPhone 12!
Hot swap batteries! Who's going to offer THAT first?
I honestly would not have upgraded my iPhone 13 Pro if I could have just swapped the battery. That phone seemed to get better battery life than current models.
Europeans are very good at making companies do unnecessary things.
I recently bought a Supernote Manta. It's an e-ink writing tablet. Guess what: it has a back which can be opened, and its innards are easily accessible. I could pop in an SD card, and the battery can be replaced, too. It's thin and light.
We are being gaslighted by Apple. They keep telling us that it's impossible to have a thin and light device with a user-replaceable battery, or even, heaven forbid, an SD card slot. I beg to differ: there are some compromises (it won't be as seamless perhaps and Jony Ive or whoever won't be able to wax poetic about the materials), but it can be done.
I would imagine something similar is true for waterproofing. There are certainly ways to have a separate battery and phone, with a waterproofed connector.
So Apple will skip the iPhone 18 replaceable battery? I will wait another year to upgrade my 7-year-old phone, but I wouldn't buy 18 if they don't include this.
Finally! Great to have them back.
I don't own EVs but I hope this is forced on EVs (cars and bikes)... that's the only reason I don't buy one.
I hope someday EU will implement requirements for phones -> You must be able to flash any firmware (OS) on your phone, without any restrictions.
This is much more important, than batteries.
If this happens, all phones worldwide will have replaceable batteries. It makes no financial sense to have EU and non EU models of phones with seperate manufacturing lines...
GOOD.
Finally!
I mean, I paid like $100 to have apple do it on my iphone 13 mini. It took a few hours and my phone works approximately like new. If a $800 phone's battery lasts 4 years, it's very much worth $100 to get even a couple more years out of it...
Next time I will also by previous generation rather than the newest model.
Legally can this be satisfied by shipping a MagSafe battery pack or is that considered insufficient?
Seems like I will be buying new iPhone in 2028.
Now all we need is that they honor the requirement for at least one physical nano-SIM so that we are not beholden to carriers to do something as simple as switching phones when travelling--or in an emergency.
I dont care about replacing the battery but doing a 'battery pull' is very useful sometimes. Esp when Android locks up.
This is amazing news.
However, doesn't Apple already provides this? You can go to store and switch your battery for like 60 EUR or so.
They’re just going to change the software for thebattery so that it only charges to 80% capacity so that it meets the requirement of 1000 cycles no one is actually getting replaceable batteries. Edit: commercially available tools. All right so you just sell that tool on your shop.
Awesome! hopefully apple will just stop selling their filth here entirely.
Dude I dream of a day where there will batteryless phones with no requirement to charge. That would be pure bliss.
Like, a landline?
Nfc tags don't have battery and they draw power from the em waves of the scanner. Maybe in a few centuries we will power our phones using the cell towers.
But landline requires wire. A portable mobile phone without battery and no requirement to charge.
This is idiotic. What's next, disallowing unified memory or SoC with packaged memory? These people think they know better than world experts on these matters.
Have they researched durability with replaceable batteries and can promise us phones won't break more often?
Don't remember that being necessary to taketh away, and now that they're required to giveth it back we don't want it anymore?!
Replacable charge sockets too please.
that is THE reason i ended up getting a new phone several times.
Your phone manufacturer loves you.
and now these voices from right wing, that EU is a communistic union resonate more and more. Now they tell you what to do and how to do.not by market forces.
if anyone can replace the phone, it's much harder to track how it was recycle with phone with battery. same with cars btw.
they trying to change the world by just issuing the order. That usually never works fine.
Now do screens.
and software.
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
[dead]
[dead]
Damn, recently I had a phone with a battery that wasn’t properly glued and it would turn off when shaken. I hope this doesn’t become the norm from now on.
Never had this issue with several cellphones I had in ye olden times when all cellphones had removable batteries. All it takes is a properly designed connector.
Yeah, none of my Nokias with a removable back cover and battery had that issue. What you realistically might've had was instead that you dropped your phone on the floor and the battery came flying out.
Behold: the widget of the future.
A spring.
I am simply not a fan of this type of legislation. It reminds me of CA bullet button. I also don’t quite understand the purpose. Official retail cost from Apple in the US ~$120. Third-party you can usually get it around $60. Sure the battery does not have quick accessibility but I can replace it pretty cheaply.
Agreed. This rule will likely be irrelevant in 5-10 years when battery technology improves, and it has such a huge carve out (batteries that maintain 80% capacity after 1000 cycles are exempt) every phone manufacture can get around it. Phone makers can meet this regulation by artificially limiting battery capacity through software to protect battery health. Or they could put in a 10,000 mAh battery and only allow the user to use 8,000 of it, and use the rest as buffer.
A better example is the EU cookie consent law. The intent was to make websites stop using cookies, but what resulted was websites didn't change anything except put up annoying consent banners, and made the internet experience worse.
If the battery lasts 10 years basically then that's fair, but ease of repair is very useful.
$60 has different value in other parts of the world.
Sure but how does this legislation help that? Not to mention that would mean labor is going to be a lot cheaper so the largest cost may be the battery itself. That $60 would come down.
Phone manufacturers should be able to seal their phones to prevent unwanted substance egress and to compete on aesthetics. They should also make the seal breachable with consumer-grade hand tools like a hairdryer, suction cup, and plastic wedges.
The inside of the phone should use standard screws and securing mechanisms, and batteries should not be glued to the phone.
I actually really like what Apple's been doing with its new batteries by sealing them in metal. That way if a user is being careless and accidentally slips a screwdriver under the back of their phone, the risk that they puncture their battery and start a fire is greatly reduced.
It secures the most dangerous component of your device in a way that makes it easy for anyone to remove and replace safely. I'm sure Apple has a robot to rip the battery out of its case at its recycling plant, and if the phone gets dropped in a lake or something, if that battery eventually catastrophically fails, at least it's wrapped in a suit of armor.
Yikes, I don't live in the EU, but I absolutely don't want this. Maybe I'm mistaken and they could have achieved the same with removable batteries, but my phone is completely waterproof, dustproof, and has survived more than a few hard drops with no case. I would definitely take that over a replaceable battery. Again, I acknowledge they might not be mutually exclusive.
As the law is written, the latest iPhones, for example, would be compliant (battery is replaceable with commercially available tools under the self-repair program), and they are completely waterproof and dustproof. Some manufacturers now use glued seals for their phones and would probably need to change their approach in design, but I think the majority would be okay with minimal changes.
Like others have pointed out, if phones can certify using batteries with 1000 cycles of charge above 80%, they'll also be exempt, so this will likely only affect very cheap models.
I don't have the same experience at all. For me, battery life is the #1 reason of obsolescence of my smartphones.
With respect, maybe read the article? You're against it, because you didn't read what is being mandated and instead just invented worst-case scenarios instead. You're against your own Strawman.
The proposal is: batteries must be removable using commercially available tools, if the manufacturer requires specialist tools then they must provide them for free.
Essentially they're banning specialized tools, and mandating that repair shops and consumers must be able to purchase replacement batteries for "at least five years."
For context the iPhone was already altered to be compliant with this law and none of the issues you raised were notably worse in the iPhone Air, or 17.
This likely will eliminate specialist software to "sync" batteries, and non-standard screws/attachment mechanisms.
> You're against your own Strawman.
> The proposal is: batteries must be removable using commercially available tools
That's exactly what he's against, plus the premise "Making batteries removable prevents them from being waterproof, dustproof, and collision resistant". Which may be true or false, but not a straw man.
Thanks, and yes, exactly this. As I acknowledged in my comment, maybe phones can be made waterproof, dustproof, and dropproof while also being user serviceable. If there is a tradeoff, I'll take waterproof over user-battery-replaceable. Apparently conditionals make me a strawman...
It absolutely is a Strawman. There's no basis in fact for why using commercial tools instead of specialist tools would result in worse "waterproof, dustproof, or collision resistance." It is completely fictional claim invented whole cloth.
Again, multiple phones have already become compliant with this law and didn't lose or compromise any of those things.
So you OR they, will need to explain the basis for the claim, otherwise it is just a Strawman you're poking baselessly.
I guess the headline is what sets up the straw man -- I didn't think we were arguing about the narrower claim "all phones with replaceable batteries should be removable using commercial tools", just whether they should be replaceable at all. I still think it's reasonable to expect that mandating phones be openable would have tradeoffs in waterproofing, so your disagreement should be factual/historical, not about good faith.