Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

techspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 622 posts

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#611

Post by account42 »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #406
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…

You're right, but all EU states are members of WIPO, and their governments can't take away protection of foreign-owned IP without violating their international obligations.

This is one of the biggest issues with current copyright laws. That what you can do in private while in your own country depends not on what the citizens want but on what other countries want completely undermines the citizen's right of self-determination.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#612

Post by robertlagrant »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #572
robertlagrant wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there is still a difference between software and hardware. This is like saying that for every hardware device I should be able to also spin up my own factory to produce it, and have that bundled into the purchase price.

I feel like you're missing the context. These devices have a chip in them that needs drivers and firmware. That's software. In particular it's the software that interfaces with the operating system. But the software is specific to a given version of the Linux kernel. When a new kernel comes out, you often have to update the software, for which you need the source code. So when the vendor stops doing this without publ…

> Anybody could then copy the software, but it's only useful in combination with their hardware

Well, it would also allow compatible hardware to be manufactured. E.g. "IBM compatible".

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#613

Post by cubefox »

enachtry wrote: post #473
martin8412 wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Nintendo Switch charger isn't standards compliant, and if you use another charger, it might not be able to keep up with the power draw of the Nintendo Switch.

It will be. Supporting USB PD over USB-C is mandatory if they want to keep selling in EU. Nintendo is more than welcome to subvert EU's requirements and find out how that goes.

Probably it will work for the "Switch 2", if there will be such a product.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#614

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

astrange wrote: post #599
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which one conflicts with this proposed replaceable battery legislation?

> The people on here saying phone OSes should be open source and unlocked to make them last longer will find the ecodesign and security regulations actually encourage locking them down so you can't break them.

again: could you specify (meaning cite, obviously) the actual regulations in question which conflict with this battery legislation (you know, the topic)?

it seems like a creative but unlikely contrivance that there is an actual legal conflict there as you describe

you quoting yourself when it doesn't answer the question, without adding more context, leads me to believe that you don't think there is any actual legal conflict there, either

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#615

Post by astrange »

ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #614
astrange wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The people on here saying phone OSes should be open source and unlocked to make them last longer will find the ecodesign and security regulations actually encourage locking them down so you can't break them.

again: could you specify (meaning cite, obviously) the actual regulations in question which conflict with this battery legislation (you know, the topic)? it seems like a creative but unlikely contrivance that there is an actual legal conflict there as you describe you quoting yourself when it doesn't answer the question, without adding more context, leads me to believe that you don't think there is any actual legal c…

I did not say anything conflicted with replaceable battery legislation. I said other legislation conflicts with the things people who like this legislation want out of it. (Though maybe I misworded it.)

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#616

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

astrange wrote: post #615
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

again: could you specify (meaning cite, obviously) the actual regulations in question which conflict with this battery legislation (you know, the topic)? it seems like a creative but unlikely contrivance that there is an actual legal conflict there as you describe you quoting yourself when it doesn't answer the question, without adding more context, leads me to believe that you don't think there is any actual legal c…

I did not say anything conflicted with replaceable battery legislation. I said other legislation conflicts with the things people who like this legislation want out of it. (Though maybe I misworded it.)

in that case, just cite those specific regulations which conflict, because again, the example seems contrived and unlikely (and FUD) without it

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#617

Post by AnthonyMouse »

robertlagrant wrote: post #612
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you're missing the context. These devices have a chip in them that needs drivers and firmware. That's software. In particular it's the software that interfaces with the operating system. But the software is specific to a given version of the Linux kernel. When a new kernel comes out, you often have to update the software, for which you need the source code. So when the vendor stops doing this without publ…

> Anybody could then copy the software, but it's only useful in combination with their hardware Well, it would also allow compatible hardware to be manufactured. E.g. "IBM compatible".

"IBM compatible" was a result of reverse engineering, not open source.

And it also has no meaning in this context. What is "compatible" with a WiFi chip or a storage controller? They're all already compatible with each other. The driver is the thing that converts from the device-specific operations to the APIs provided by the kernel. The kernel APIs are already public and anyone can implement them for their own hardware.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#618

Post by jdmichal »

okanat wrote: post #407
jdmichal wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you. But also, to be fair, I'm pretty sure in that time phone bodies have transitioned from mostly plastic to mostly metal? I'm sure that has something to do with the weight, and I would guess that the metal shell is probably thicker too?

Why should they be thicker? Metals are resilient and strong. That's why we use them to build all sorts of stuff. I expect metal bodies to be thinner not thicker.

I would imagine that thin plastic is more resistant to permanent deformation than thin metal. Or, in other words, when then metal bends, it tends to stay bent. Thin plastic can more easily bend, but then restore to its original shape.

But I'm not a materials engineer. This is just in my lay experience of how thin materials I've encountered perform.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#619

Post by xenadu02 »

isidor3 wrote: post #368
xenadu02 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make this claim but have you ever worked in product design for something trying to achieve an IP water and dust ingress rating? It is far more than "just a gasket and a few screws". The rating can't just be good on unboxing day. You want it to hold even after a few years, several drops on the floor, in cold weather, etc.

Users of cars pretty routinely replace seals that are under a lot more extreme enviroments and abuse than a phone without issue. All of the ones I've dealt with pretty much are "just a gasket and a few screws" Sure, there needs to be some design process to get there, but let's not pretend that doing this would be some unheard of technological advancement.

Cars are much larger and their seals are much larger. They consequently have much more play and far larger tolerances.

If you scaled the forces and subjected the car to the equivalent of dropping a phone on the floor it would be totaled instantly... forget about maintaining waterproofing.

Thus I stand by my original statement: people making claims like "just a gasket and some screws" have never designed a product under similar constraints and are making bad assumptions or straight-up Dunning-Kruger errors left and right.

Re: European Union votes to bring back replaceable phone batteries

#620

Post by xenadu02 »

moffkalast wrote: post #307
xenadu02 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make this claim but have you ever worked in product design for something trying to achieve an IP water and dust ingress rating? It is far more than "just a gasket and a few screws". The rating can't just be good on unboxing day. You want it to hold even after a few years, several drops on the floor, in cold weather, etc.

the easiest way is to just separately encapsulate all parts that need to be removable (i.e. the battery + wireless charging coil in one piece and the rest of the phone in the other), and only have the connectors as the exposed pieces. A gasket around those and contacts far enough away from each other for good measure and you're good to go. Plus the Samsung Active line never needed to go to these extremes to churn out…

That means double the casing which takes up space and adds weight.

I never claimed it was impossible. I'm only pointing out there are far more severe design constraints than a lot of people even understand, yet they confidently proclaim it is both a simple matter of trivial engineering and completely free of consequences.

Post reply on HN