3 ms·
It's a valid complaint when non-removable batteries are only there to increase frequency of device replacement. It's valid when batteries don't last anywhere ne
by anexprogrammer 10y ago
It's a valid complaint when non-removable batteries are only there to increase frequency of device replacement. It's valid when batteries don't last anywhere near a day once you've installed some things.
In prehistoric times, when batteries lasted ages, many device docks had a slot to charge your spare battery as well.
Progress?
- kec 10y agoPrehistoric mobile phones had effectively 0 energy drain other than the PA in the cell radio. Modern devices have many more sources of significant power drain including multiple PAs, high resolution screens, high quality cameras, and compute which is within a couple orders of magnitude of desktop machines. The death of the user serviceable battery isn't planned obsolescence, it's a tradeoff to shove the most energy storage possible into a given volume.
- Karunamon 10y agoI strongly question how much energy storage is being lost by having the battery sit on some contacts behind a removable backplate rather than be soldered in place in the same spot anyways.
- visarga 10y agoI'm wondering, if they allowed an extra millimeter of thickness to the phone, if it would still be having these issues. Instead, it would have been a Note 7 with 4 extra hours of functioning time, not an exploding phone.
- anexprogrammer 10y agoMarket doesn't ever seem to bear that out. S3 mAh matched Nexus 4 and similar, iPhone 4&5 were a lot less. Pixel XL is only thing I can think of with more mAh than an LG V20. There may be others.
- oldmanjay 10y agoThe point is not that the complaint is invalid. The point is that it is not an interesting enough contribution to be repeated endlessly.