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

Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 208 posts

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#171

Post by mitxela »

tvbusy wrote: post #44
eloisant wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't need to be able to swap a spare battery like we did 15 years ago. However when your battery is old, and drains fast, it's really nice to be able to order a new one and easily change it by removing 4 screws. Not having to perform surgery on your phone, heating it to remove glue, etc.

I'll never forget the feeling when you get an old phone, replace the battery and it's like brand new again. People no longer need to replace their phone every year anymore so being able to just replace the screen and battery makes the device practically brand new.

Another thing you can do: scroll through your app list and delete all the ones you don't use.

And if you keep your phone in flight mode when you're not using it, you'll quadruple your battery life or more. Both because the radio is off, and also because apps aren't waking up the CPU to spy on you every few minutes, since they can't transmit it.

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#172

Post by mitxela »

streetfighter64 wrote: post #105
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Soon you'll end up regulating all phones to be modular. That would be great, obviously there would be tradeoffs (not as thin, potentially less waterproof) but that seems like the right direction to go in.

I don't really see the value of regulation requiring a certain preference, given that there are tradeoffs. I owned a modular phone previously, and it was, as you say, not as thin and not waterproof, and not dustproof either. Given that it takes like 30 minutes to change the screen or battery on my current phone (which is not modular), I don't see why my preference should be disallowed by EU regulation?

I doubt any EU court will stop you selling a waterproof phone, but they will stop you making your flagship phone waterproof specifically for the purpose of making it hard to repair. They do have common sense, you know.

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#173

Post by mitxela »

999900000999 wrote: post #160
MBCook wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Screens too

Screens generally break because you dropped the phone and you can take out have the components that way. But no matter what your battery is at 80 or 70 percent in 2 years. Power connectors are much harder to engineer to be replaced. Something has to connect at some point

Delete unused apps and set your phone to flight mode when not using it. This does wonders to your battery life. A 5 year old phone can last a week.

Of course this doesn't work if you're expecting to receive calls or notifications.

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#174

Post by mitxela »

maccard wrote: post #91
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Batteries always have a limited lifetime. "back in the day" we had waterproof phones with user replacable batteries, you could just buy another battery and replace it yourself. I have no idea why we can't do this now.

Were they waterproof? I certainly don’t remember my Nokia 3210 being even splash resistant. > I have no idea why we can’t do this now For better worse I think the answer is quite simple - a combo of ease of manufacturing, a long term trend of slimmer devices that is broadly supported by customer behaviour, and an extra place to suggest a device upgrade instead of a repair. You’re more than able to get pretty much any…

Almost everything is splash resistant for some definition of a splash. I bet any modern smartphone does better than any dumbphone with buttons, because water can't permeate either of the big flat sides. If the water doesn't get inside, it can't cause damage.

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#175

Post by mitxela »

Ekaros wrote: post #33
GJim wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whereas, given a large part of the HN demographic works in the AdTech industry..... Being in favour of the GDPR will bring out downvotes and FUD from the people whose very salaries are dependent on invading your privacy.

I really don't get the big deal with GDRP. Consider what you are storing and why you are storing. Decide if those things align. If they do not, well don't implement that in first place. And I suppose LLMs are perfect for the boiler plate documentation so not big effort there either. Somethings are big more challenging like getting the data for customer when asking or deleting it when reasonable. But as user I also li…

The thing is American businesses try to read the entire thing in excruciating detail and proactively comply with every possibility they can think of while European businesses just make a good faith effort to comply with the spirit, and if an authority tells them they can't do something, they stop doing it.

Based on this behavior I'd have to infer American courts are punitive oriented (so you must never slip up) while European courts are resolution oriented (so good faith is enough and stop worrying so much).

My inference also explains why American businesses don't listen to European courts until the fines get big. They get some small penalty on their first violation and think "that's all?" and continue the violation, then four or five cases later the penalty gets big enough to make them comply. See Apple with the interop rulings.

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#176

Post by mitxela »

gmueckl wrote: post #61
mschuster91 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Real examples of organisations I have come across who have to comply with GDPR include a local community theatre, a parish church etc. They are keep fairly simple information, and not exchanging it with anyone, but they still have to put effort into ensuring compliance. Yeah, and that is precisely where you want something like the GDPR to be as well! Large corporations are one thing, they have compliance department…

Well, wait until you are at the receiving end. It can get nasty pretty quickly. What does each one of your systems store exactly? Do they allow configuration of reasonable data retention policies for PII? What do your systems log? How do you make sure that only the minimum amount of PII (including user IP addresses) is logged and that the covered logs are destroyed at the end of a reasonable retention period? How do…

Actually I want to ask you why you don't know what your system does, not even approximately?

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#177

Post by mitxela »

gmueckl wrote: post #148
mschuster91 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Repeat customers, certainly, there's only so many of them you can have. I'm talking about small shops with 5-10 people heading out to service calls, and a lot of these is "throwaway" customers that need a water faucet changed or whatnot. At least here in Germany, in most rental contracts the responsibilities are split between landlord and renter, with the landlord being responsible for the heating, the water mains an…

I know all of that. Still, I can't make the overall numbers for Germany work out in a way that gets to a customer base of any scale for plumbers.

250 work days in a year assuming no weekends and no other vacation (because it makes a round number). 2000 work days in 8 years. You can't see how a plumber might see more than 0.5 customers per day?

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#178

Post by mitxela »

rickdeckard wrote: post #138

The notable weak spot for this regulation (like some others) is that the member countries agreed to execute it NATIONALLY, so EU member states had to turn the directive into national law and begin enforcement in 2026. Now the EU is already quite challenged to stand up against US, China (and Korea) when it comes to enforcing such regulation and dealing with accusations from US/China/Korea of "sanctioning sales of thei…

That's how all EU regulations work, the EU is not sovereign, it's more like a localised UN

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#179

Post by mitxela »

cbg0 wrote: post #30
p-e-w wrote: post #6

Why would they? The worst thing that can realistically happen is a $1-$5 billion fine a few years from now, which they only need to pay a few years after that when they have exhausted their legal remedies. That’s easy to calculate with, and almost certainly cheaper than compliance.

Fines like this always come with a legal obligation to adhere to the requirements, it's never just a cost of doing business.

And then they don't adhere, and get fined again

Re: Smartphone makers don't bother to comply with EU repairability requirements

#180

Post by wolvoleo »

WarmWash wrote: post #141
wolvoleo wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We shouldn't really want a silicon valley. See how much trouble the US has trying to get meta to stop abusive practices to minors. Not having a silicon valley is a good thing.

The US isn't totally dependant on foreign states to have a modern economy. Delete the US and China and all Europe has left is 6 weeks vacation.

That's just the world now. Delete China and the US has no more electronics and raw materials either. You wanted globalization and well that's what you got.

Besides, 6 weeks vacation is great. Also we don't need to have so much stuff, I don't even own or want a car, something that's very hard to do without in America. We don't have this exhausting desire to make things a race and to be number 1.

Post reply on HN