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?
> 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.
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).
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!!!).
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.
Your claim of $7-12 for production and shipping requires citation, and availability of a lookalike on alibaba isn't sufficient citation.
Your claim that you "never once experienced a failure mode" is anecdata and it's pretty useless. Did you ever get your device wet because of the battery door and gasket not being aligned perfectly? Lots of people did.
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'.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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?
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.
> 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).
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 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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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 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’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 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 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.
> 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.
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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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 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.
> 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.
> 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.
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.
>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?
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.
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”
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
"…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.
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
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.
> 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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
> 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).
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
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?
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
> 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.
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?
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.
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).
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.
> 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
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.
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.
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 ?
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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
> 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.
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
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".
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
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.
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.
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.
> 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
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.
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.
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.
>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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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. :(
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
[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"
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.
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...
- 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 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.
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)
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).
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
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.
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.
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.
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].
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.
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.
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
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
> 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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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
The only reason I upgraded to my current model was to get USBC (thanks Europe!!!).
https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery-replacement
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.
Your claim that you "never once experienced a failure mode" is anecdata and it's pretty useless. Did you ever get your device wet because of the battery door and gasket not being aligned perfectly? Lots of people did.
The ancients managed to design around replaceable batteries, I don't think these techniques have been entirely lost to time.
Incorrect. Here are 115 phones with removable batteries and rated for > 0 water protection.
Just making shit up.
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.
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
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).
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.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/VNZewnrkDng
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).
That is why I have the battery replaced every few years.
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).
Your circle sounds pretty strange honestly. Everyone in it lies to you about why they do things, but you secretly know their real motivations?
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.
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 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 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.
They’re winning.
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…
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.
I don't care what the politicians intended. The outcome is no improvement in privacy but more annoying banners.
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'm not sure about the rules around required ability but I'd like that too
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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)
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 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.
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 always buy phones in the cheapest tier, so that happens sooner)
Samsung also makes the A-series Galaxies which are a pretty solid mid-tier phones that are supported for years, too.
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
I had a S3 that the battery would only last 12 hours or so, but the EMMC failed before the battery did.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Actually will push a lot of people away. I don't want any hardware that has special relationships with AI LLM's.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
In fact, the only place I would ever expect somebody to claim otherwise is here.
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.
<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?
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.
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.
It’s a pretty commonly used canonical example of revealed preferences.
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?
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.
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”
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.
I don’t understand. If we want to see the data we do need to make batteries replaceable.
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.
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.
Although some of this depends on how you define replaceable.
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.
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.
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.)
That remains to be seen. This could accelerate cultural change around desiring shiny new toy being seen as cool
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.
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.
> 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
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.
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.
Did they flock to a phone with no replaceable battery the same way we flocked to phones with no headphone jack?
'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.
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.
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?
Having said that, I do like having waterproof phones, and I expect this rule would make that harder.
Very ironic, you almost got it, post.
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.
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.
Most people want new phones because of shit software updates and marketing not because out of necessity.
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.
(and yes, I know that power banks exist)
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
[0]
https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-upda...
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.
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).
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?
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.
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.
... 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.
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.
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.
Welcome to democracy and lawmaking in 2026. We know better than you!
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.
Low cost phones will be most affected.
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.
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.
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.
The battery compartment had a rubber gasket and some very tight screws.
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'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.
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 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.
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.
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)
> 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.
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.
I suspect it's a moot point. Makers have every incentive to drive replacement cycles.
The thing is - if the battery had been destroyed, that could have been replaced...
So manufactures might just responds to this by making your phone heavier with a bigger battery that is being under utilized.
In that experiment, it’s also unclear if the 30% lower limit or the 80% upper limit is more important. I suspect the former.
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.
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 same thing happened to Pixels 6a after 500 cycles.
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.
That is not an argument.
It’s like complaining about items from TEMU aren’t high quality and expecting the government to do more.
Typically that's subject to some sort of recall or remediation through a service centre?
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.
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.
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.
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 :)
> 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
LTE has been up for 15 year in the US as of now. Chances are it may not be up after another 15 years.
Not really. Take a 4000 mAh rated cell, advertise it as "rated for 3500 mAh" and that's it.
So it does not seem a big deal
It isn't quite that linear in practice but realistically it will still be at least 5+ years.
I’m pretty sure that’s more or less already the case, so…
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?
(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).
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
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.
https://rugone.net/products/xever-7
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.
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.
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.
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.
If the feature isn't expected and it decrease sales, why would manufacturer put it in ?
Using that hypothesis, the market also loves cookie banners and prefers subscriptions over one-time payments.
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 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)
We're talking about IP68, where you can take a new phone with you on a long swim.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
Obviously true for any iPhone battery.
The EU, just now.
Now we can scale up volume, swap them out, be free to purchase from a different manufacturer, and have scaled up recycling services.
Phones are definitely a more difficult use case.
But then I think someone will figure out to make these batteries so expensive, that it won't change a 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.
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.
Nowadays they are doubling in performance every... 5 years?
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.
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
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.
This is also reflected in the increasing support durations from major manufacturers.
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
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".
- 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.
This doesn't restrict the design space that much at all.
like unified charging cable, free EU roaming or intercountry bank payments that are instant and almost free, air travel protections?
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.
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.
> If a battery can do 1000 cycles and remain above 80% capacity it is exempt
All of those can be achieved with replaceable batteries.
https://m.gsmarena.com/results.php3?chkRemovableBattery=sele...
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.
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
Do you actually need it? For what?
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.
Sometimes "better phone" drives "sell more phones"
Sometimes it doesn't.
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
I guess there is some built in spare capacity, but that may still qualify for the exemption?
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
Is there a definition for a cycle? 80->85%? 33->72? 22-83? 87->96? Would each of these be a "cycle"?
Had i gone a little slower, it would have been a very easy repair.
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.
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?
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
What a disappointment.
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 ...
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.
the definition of a battery cycle is very well established. there isnt really any room to finagle it.
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.
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.
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.
But that then brings in a "how many years" question.
They do claim it at least for iPhone 15 "under ideal conditions": https://support.apple.com/en-us/101575
> Video Playback: Up to 27* hours
> *: 25 hours in the EU
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
If Apple resorts to those tactics, then there is no limit in moving the goalposts.
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.
I'm confused why that still isn't the case today given all the EU headlines we've seen over the years.
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.
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.
Also, given that iphones almost already pass the requirements, where is the harm to innovation?
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.
--- 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)
No heat or solvents required. Sounds good.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
Heat pads exist even in the most basic repair shops. It's not advanced technology, no need to over-engineer it.
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.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835530
This law will be tragic for Google and Apple. What will compel people to upgrade their functional phones?
No one on this planet should use their phone more than 2 hours per day. Period. More is just plain stupid.
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.
Focusing on being able to upgrade battery (and to be clear - upgrade, not replaced/repair) is solving 1% problem.
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.
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.
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. :(
Should I be able to eventually replace gas tank with the larger one in my ICE vehicle?
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.
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.
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.
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).
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 replaceable without special tools, heating, solvents. It can easily feature a screw or a million other solutions.
Phones have lost so much in a decade.
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.
And next, hopefully, replaceable software.
Which will do much more for phone longevity.
Lithium batteries in things running 24/7 unsupervised always makes me a bit nervous
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.
And they say this will save consumers money, but I will this not also make all new phones way more expensive?
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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dyL6hMZvWQ
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?
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...
- 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)
Frankly so long as my browser, VPN and mail app are updated I'm happy.
A proper gasket and screws needs to be the standard solution here.
Some were a bit of a pain in the ass to replace though.
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
[edit] didn’t see the fine print with the cycles requirement etc. so it seems Apple etc is still safe.
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.
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!
A good middle ground would have been to enforce an easy to replace specification..but then we are up to interpretation.
Even today, phone batteries get replaced until the phone is no longer able to run today’s software.
You need some skill and patience to cut it open etc. without damage, so most people should probably go to a repair shop.
There is a difference between revealed and stated preference.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgTon2jqI-A
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.
Too often, including in HN comments, those regulations are presented as "obviously" good policies. Well, data are better than assumptions.
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
...
> [...] 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?
*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.
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)
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.
Next time I will also by previous generation rather than the newest model.
This is much more important, than batteries.
However, doesn't Apple already provides this? You can go to store and switch your battery for like 60 EUR or so.
A spring.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.