European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries • Hacker News Board

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#391

Post by Nextgrid » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:00 AM UTC

timeon wrote: post #304

snuxoll wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My GoPro's are waterproof yet they have removable batteries. It's not impossible, but it does mean they have to be every so slightly thicker.

> so slightly thicker. Maybe if they decrease size of display, it wouldn't be that bulky. And we would finally get a phone again that is not wannabe tablet.

> Maybe if they decrease size of display

But how are you gonna show all the ads, dark patterns and newsletter signup forms? We can't afford to miss out on all that growth and engagement.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#392

Post by crabbone » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:01 AM UTC

ephbit wrote: post #243

unglaublich wrote: post #7

The problem is not really the battery anymore, it's the software mainly. It's all closed source and is often deprecated before the hardware is dead. Then the manufacturer makes it hard to unlock bootloaders; keeps drivers closed source and effectively bricks the device. For recurring sales are the backbone of modern economy so we must force obsolescence. Why would you want to replace a battery in a useless device? Pl…

> Please, EU: bring a law that forces manufacturers to release their drivers / firmware whenever they stop updating a digital device. I don't see much hope of such a thing being decided soon, if ever. The incentives for politicians are mostly not aligned in this direction. The much more realistic path towards having devices/software that can be used for more than 3-5 years is IMO if more people started supporting pro…

These phones are unusable in a large part because of marketplace lock-in, and in another large part due to unavailable drivers. These things cannot be changed through "grassroots movement", these need to be recognized as mobile phone companies violations of consumer rights and be treated as such.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#393

Post by evilos » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:05 AM UTC

kgantchev wrote: post #380

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Controlling water in machines is not new, neither is phone design. It's been done a million ways and all of those ways have certain trade offs. It's just another design challenge and the flipside of your comment is a suggestion that there isn't some person other than me that is up to the challenge. Customers can make their own judgements about looks and size versus (replaceable battery) functionality as they always h…

I'm sure many people want a repairable smartphone and a replaceable battery. Of course, there are many that don't. I don't understand how it make sense to force those people, that don't want a repairable phone and a replaceable battery, to get such a smartphone.

Because the cost of the waste these throw-away phones generate isn't priced in. There is a societal cost that isn't being paid by the firm or the consumer.

Honestly, it probably only adds a few bucks to the BOM and the consumer who doesn't care about repairability still likely comes out better off in the long run because their phone lasts them longer and/or resells for more because it isn't junk after 3 years.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#394

Post by crabbone » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:06 AM UTC

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #219

unglaublich wrote: post #7

The problem is not really the battery anymore, it's the software mainly. It's all closed source and is often deprecated before the hardware is dead. Then the manufacturer makes it hard to unlock bootloaders; keeps drivers closed source and effectively bricks the device. For recurring sales are the backbone of modern economy so we must force obsolescence. Why would you want to replace a battery in a useless device? Pl…

Why don't they sell updates? Even if they open source everything, I'd pay for them to support my phone for longer and I imagine the margins on a SW update outweigh the cost of producing more hardware.

> Why don't they sell updates?

Because given limited resources, companies prefer to spend their resources on what pays the most. Manufacturing updates may be comparable or even more expensive than making new devices.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#395

Post by crabbone » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:11 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #191

unglaublich wrote: post #7

The problem is not really the battery anymore, it's the software mainly. It's all closed source and is often deprecated before the hardware is dead. Then the manufacturer makes it hard to unlock bootloaders; keeps drivers closed source and effectively bricks the device. For recurring sales are the backbone of modern economy so we must force obsolescence. Why would you want to replace a battery in a useless device? Pl…

Back in the feature phone days there were zero updates. If one was lucky, maybe with developer tools there was a firmware update, and even those happened at most once.

This is apples to oranges.

Feature phones weren't a substitute for personal computers. They weren't as necessary of an accessory as it is today. On the other hand, standards governing how those phones worked weren't changing as fast, so, given good care, you could use your phone for 10+ years.

Updates today are a way to force users into buying a new phone (eg. my banking up decided not to support an older version of Android, phone vendor doesn't produce updates -- I have to buy a new device).

There weren't updates because there weren't banking apps which could've forced you to abandon your perfectly functioning device.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#396

Post by landemva » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:14 AM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #370

unglaublich wrote: post #7

The problem is not really the battery anymore, it's the software mainly. It's all closed source and is often deprecated before the hardware is dead. Then the manufacturer makes it hard to unlock bootloaders; keeps drivers closed source and effectively bricks the device. For recurring sales are the backbone of modern economy so we must force obsolescence. Why would you want to replace a battery in a useless device? Pl…

Is this really [0] the most [1] important issue [2] that the EU should be focusing [3] on? Going by HN traffic, it appears that what the EU is for is to redesign the iPhone to get the details right that techies disagree with Applle on. We live in extreme times with some remarkable challenges - the EU is wasting bandwidth on this triviality. And it isn't a phone manufacturer, it is probably not going to make phones ch…

>> We live in extreme times

I thought fear-driven hyperbole ended with the expiry of covid lockdowns. On to the next end of the world story.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#397

Post by evilos » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:16 AM UTC

tpmoney wrote: post #251

johnfernow wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iFixit sells iPhone XS Max batteries for $35, nearly a third of the cost Apple is charging. $99 may not be a ton in some regions of the world, but it is enough that many are unwilling to spend that kind of money on a 5 year old phone, versus for $35, it's a low enough amount that many might just stick with their phone and replace the battery, leading to less e-waste. And while $99 may not be a lot in some regions of…

>but it is enough that many are unwilling to spend that kind of money on a 5 year old phone, versus for $35, it's a low enough amount that many might just stick with their phone and replace the battery, leading to less e-waste. Are there people that find spending $99 on a battery replacement expensive that are really making the decision to replace their whole phone for 5-10x that amount?

My brand new android phone cost me $50, no plan attached or anything like that. Granted, that was a steal but I've never paid more than ~ $300 for my phones and I use them for 3 to 4 years.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#398

Post by malermeister » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:25 AM UTC

cududa wrote: post #286

imran-iq wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The samsung galaxy s5[0] had a easily replaceable battery while keeping its waterproof rating --- 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_S5

"By the end of 2014, it was reported that sales of the S5 were 40% down on the previous S4 model, prompting management changes at Samsung". This was the last user replaceable battery mainline Galaxy phone. This was also the same generation of the iPhone 6, which was dramatically thinner than the S5 and it's replaceable battery. The market spoke.

Yeah but the market isn't a goal in and of itself. When the market says to do the thing that'll lead to us burning our limited resources faster in a time of ecological crisis, then it might make sense to nudge it into a more sustainable direction.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#399

Post by dehrmann » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:38 AM UTC

danpalmer wrote: post #6

I love the EU's focus on consumer protections and I'm all for progressive policies on environmental issues, but this and the USB-C issue strike me as misguided, policies from people who aren't qualified to to make the decisions they are making, and aren't listening to experts. I'm glad we're getting USB-C on the iPhone, but it wasn't a huge problem and it was probably coming anyway in the next few years. But replacea…

One reason I like not having user-replaceable batteries is it makes the phones smaller, or the batteries bigger. I'd rather have an extra 50% capacity and pay $100 to replace the battery once in my phone's life than not have the capacity and go through two replacement cycles.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#400

Post by toyg » Sat, Jun 17, 2023, 1:51 AM UTC

pmoriarty wrote: post #378

pwg wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP permissions, i.e., copyrights, are not natural rights, they are instead government "grants" of protection. And protection granted by government decree can also be taken away by government decree. So no "permission" to release would be necessary if government's modified ther copyright laws to withdraw their granted protections after some "event" occurred. The bigger problem is not the permission, it is actually fin…

"IP permissions, i.e., copyrights, are not natural rights, they are instead government "grants" of protection" There's no such thing as a natural right, period. They're all imaginary creations of humans.

Nobody cares about what pmoriarty1 thinks of a word when the legal and political worlds have well-established meanings for those words; meanings that indicate the parent poster is correct in stating IP rights are not "natural" in genesis.

There is a recent movement trying to redefine them as such, led by moneyed interests that would obviously stand to profit from such arguments; but legal history is very clear: IP was never conceived on the grounds of being "natural" or "innate" in any way, but as a device to sustain certain economic sectors. IP is no more natural than subsidies for carmakers are natural.