221–230 of 560 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Continuing to take photos with a battery pack hanging off a device is no where near as simple as popping in a fresh 100% battery and coninuing as normal.
These don't dangle or impede your use: https://www.anker.com/products/a1665-5k-ultra-slim-qi2-power...
I would still prefer replaceable batteries back though, and you really dont need to convince me otherwise!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the top smartphone manufacturers hit that bar, at least for their mid and high end phones. The focus on apple is misleading and weird. This will only impact bottom barrel phones.
Remember ios 10.2.1? Batterygate?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2 mm thicker and 58 grams heavier than the latest iPhone.
Oh yeah so it's utter trash and not worthy of our attention. Imagine carrying a whole 58 grams more, during a whole day, impossible for the average tech worker's atrophied muscles
As others have mentioned this is for phones with batteries that can’t survive a reasonable number of cycles. That’s a reasonable exemption, in my opinion. I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery that I don’t need to replace for 3-4 years anyway. I do wish one manufacturer would make a flagship phone with replaceable battery so all of the uncompromising…
This is a BS excuse. Lots and lots of gadgets with removable batteries and waterproof design as evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it can technically be done At what cost though?! And no, I am not talking about money. Any device (and any product really) is a set of tradeoffs. I like it when different producers select a different subset of priorities for their offer. Competition at work. One of the reasons we witnessed such an awesome evolution in the smartphone market. I hate it when a bureaucrat dictates a set of demands with absolutely zero…
The tradeoff was discussed in a sibling thread: it's heavier by 58 grams and thicker by 2mm. That's it. That's the tradeoff. Why go crazy on the guy?
Headline is misleading as the loopholes written into the regulation will likely end up exempting many/most phones
My initial reaction as an EU citizen is “oh hell no” because it gave me flashbacks to removable covers with clips that broke my nails. But after reading the article where it mentions that the battery is also considered removable if standard tools should be used, I’m quite okay with it. I welcome getting more rugged and durable devices.
Serious question: how are you worse off with a cover that breaks your nails vs. the status quo: a cover that’s glued on and a battery that’s glued in? If they did bring that back, couldn’t you just not open the cover and be just as happy?
It is my assumption that any cover that still requires screws that it will be both more sturdy and easier to close flush.
The current status quo of having sleek devices while having batteries relatively easily replaced yourself or even quite cheaply in every phone shop. I’m not so bothered by the status quo.
Classic EU move, the last-minute 1000-cycle exemption undercuts the entire regulation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My low-cost plastic Casio watch based on a very old design is waterproof and battery can be swapped out by undoing 4 philips screws, no glue. Its buttons can also be operated under water while staying waterproof. What is this whicraft?
I get it for watches, but I've never understood the mass-market need for a waterproof phone, outside of a few niche hobbies. Are people showering and swimming with their phones or something? Or dropping them in their toilets? The wettest my phone has ever been in 8 years is in my pocket while it's raining.
I don't want to take extra care and caution just to have a life and a fone. Theoretically this thing makes my life easier and I want it to act like it damnit.