6 ms·

How about just the ability for a user to replace the battery? Should be a law to cut down on ewaste.

jrs95 9y ago
Most phones are probably getting recycled now anyways, so it really doesn’t matter. In fact, I would think user serviceability would increase waste because people would throw their old batteries away.
- justonepost 9y ago
  Not if you have a fee on the battery such that you have to provide the old one to get a discount.
derpaderp1 9y ago
If they did that then the NSA couldn't turn back on a "powered off" device while you are asleep to bombard you with ultrasonic waves.
IBM 9y ago
iPhones have the longest life of any smartphone and you can verify that yourself by looking at the used market for it (and any Apple product). User replaceable batteries may ironically decrease that and increase waste.
- justonepost 9y ago
  How would replaceable batteries decrease the life of the smartphone?
  - jhiska 9y ago
    It wouldn't. It would obviously increase the lifespan of it. The spinsters are deliberately confusing "lifespan" with "resale value".
    - IBM 9y ago
      >The spinsters are deliberately confusing "lifespan" with "resale value". I realize I'm responding to someone arguing in bad faith. But lifespan directly influences the resale value.
      - jhiska 9y ago
        Replaceable batteries increase lifespan. The iPhone is a well-made phone which would have greater lifespan if the batteries were replaceable. As it is, users who bought an older iPhone now have to pay middle-men to replace the battery or face degraded performance.
        valuearb 9y ago
        The iPhone already has replaceable batteries. Making them user-replaceable just reduces battery capacity, increases size/weight, all so in 2-3 years you can save about 5% of your purchase cost by replacing the battery yourself. iPhone users buy iPhones because they wanted the best in class functionality, if they wanted to save money they'd buy a phone with a replaceable battery.
  - IBM 9y ago
    It is replaceable (by Apple, authorized and unauthorized third parties). User replaceable batteries could increase waste by being less reliable overall. I know every TV remote I've owned with a battery door eventually ends up with a rubber band around it, and I think that's pretty much a universal experience. Also we've had this debate for years already when Apple went to unibody Macbooks. The reliability and battery life only increased because of the better structural integrity and increased room for battery cells.
    - jhiska 9y ago
      It is not easily replaceable as with any other phone. The issue is not creating waste, but wasting one's money on middle-men for replacing one's phone batteries. >I know every TV remote I've owned with a battery door eventually ends up with a rubber band around it, and I think that's pretty much a universal experience. You're relating a supposedly personal story to make your spin claims more relatable. Maybe you're like the people in late-night TV commercials who seemingly can't open a can of tomatoes without massive bleeding? ;)
      - chrisseaton 9y ago
        > The issue is not creating waste, but wasting one's money on middle-men for replacing one's phone batteries. Well I could say I'm spending that money on having a nicer phone that's sealed and seamless, rather than wasting it.
        jhiska 9y ago
        Sealed, seamless, performance-degraded, costly to service, with planned obsolescence. It's quite obvious that it's a waste of money to pay middle-men to perform basic service on it for stuff a user can do at home with any other phone.
        chrisseaton 9y ago
        Right... but the point was I get something, in return for having to pay middle-men to service it. It's a trade I'm happy with. Maybe you aren't, but it works for me.
- logfromblammo 9y ago
  What metrics are you looking at in the used market to support your hypothesis? Could they be explained by a different hypothesis? I'm still enjoying my 3-year-old non-iPhone, and intend to keep using it until it stops working entirely, whereas my spouse with an iPhone was already voicing suspicion before this announcement that Apple was intentionally slowing their old iPhone through updates, just to provoke an upgrade. With the announcement, I can't fault the reasoning. How much of the used market for iPhones are devices that had been traded in (because slowed by Apple due to old battery), refurbished by the mobile phone company (probably just to replace the battery and reset it to factory settings), and then resold to people whose older model refurbished iPhone now needs yet another new battery? That generates an additional sale of an entire old iPhone, whereas other phones would only generate a sale of a replacement battery at that time. I think you would probably have to look at what mobile phone customers are actually using, right now.
  - IBM 9y ago
    The fact that iPhones are updated for the longest time and are built well is directly related to why you can get as much as you can when you sell a used iPhone. Apple actually has an incentive to create the longest lasting iPhone because the economics of the iPhone Upgrade Plan and every carrier upgrade plan depends on it. That iPhones retain their value over time is a testament to the fact that Apple has not been slowing down old iPhones to make you upgrade (this conspiracy theory predates iOS 10.2.1 by many years).
    - logfromblammo 9y ago
      But I don't intend to sell my non-iPhone, ever. It works as well for me now as it did when I first bought it, so why would I? It's the same reason why I'm never going to sell my 2001 Honda Civic. Have you examined the reasons why iPhone owners sell their older iPhones, and why people buy refurbished used iPhones?
    - CaptSpify 9y ago
      > That iPhones retain their value over time is a testament to the fact that Apple has not been slowing down old iPhones Not at all. It's a testament that there is a market for old iPhones, that is all. People are possibly buying used iPhones despite them being slowed down. > Apple actually has an incentive to create the longest lasting iPhone because the economics of the iPhone Upgrade Plan and every carrier upgrade plan depends on it. Then why don't they? <5 years for an electronic device that hasn't seen any significant upgrades in later models is absurdly short.
mikestew 9y ago
Alternatively, folks buy batteries they don’t need just because they can. I did that with my Galaxy Note, bought a spare because they were $30 and because I could. Never used it, the Note had great battery life. Now it sits on a shelf, waiting for me to recycle it.
- jhiska 9y ago
  Somehow I am reminded of the lyrics "You spin me right round, right round, baby." The spin, I feel, is that somehow being able to replace one's batteries is bad. Whereas having an iPhone with degraded performance and an expensive-to-replace battery is good. You "bought a spare because you could" and "now it sits, waiting for you to recycle it", thus creating waste, but one can argue that anyone buying stuff they don't need creates waste, and that being able to replace one's phone battery isn't about saving the environment but saving one's hard-earned money.
  - mikestew 9y ago
    Alternative ways of looking at things is “spin” in your mind, huh? Well, that’s one way to keep a narrative, I suppose.
    - jhiska 9y ago
      I guess I could call them alternative facts, if you prefer.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    First, you can replace an iPhone battery, just take it to your Apple Store. It's reasonably affordable ($79) or free if still under warranty/Applecare. User-replaceable batteries don't change anything for the environment. Second, user-replaceable batteries don't come for free. They come with a series of trade-offs. Small increases in cost, space, even weight. If you plan to keep your phone for more than 2 years, user-replaceable will be more important to you than if you intend to replace every 2 years. I remember when I switched to MacBook Pros from my Dell laptops. I had two flights a week that were about 5 hours each. I had to buy an extra laptop battery and charger so my Dell would last the entire flight. And sometimes I'd forget to charge both batteries and I'd be back to a dead laptop halfway through the flight. Then I read the reviews of these new MBPs that lasted 7-8 hours instead of 5 hours, that used sealed batteries. I switched and my new MBP worked like a charm, easily lasting the entire flight every time. One big reason Apple made that advance was entirely because they abandoned removable batteries. They were able to fit more battery using a custom form factor that would have been super expensive to make removable. No one had done this as well before, because Apple was the first to implement good embedded battery conditioning software so they would last a couple years without needing replacement. Sealed batteries aren't always better, but they typically are for most users and use cases.
gnopgnip 9y ago
There are quite a few good phones with a user replaceable battery, but that is just not what consumers want most of the time. The LG v20 is the most recent one that comes to mind

Most phones are probably getting recycled now anyways, so it really doesn’t matter. In fact, I would think user serviceability would increase waste because people would throw their old batteries away.

justonepost 9y ago
Not if you have a fee on the battery such that you have to provide the old one to get a discount.

derpaderp1 9y ago

If they did that then the NSA couldn't turn back on a "powered off" device while you are asleep to bombard you with ultrasonic waves.

IBM 9y ago

iPhones have the longest life of any smartphone and you can verify that yourself by looking at the used market for it (and any Apple product). User replaceable batteries may ironically decrease that and increase waste.

justonepost 9y ago
How would replaceable batteries decrease the life of the smartphone?
- jhiska 9y ago
  It wouldn't. It would obviously increase the lifespan of it. The spinsters are deliberately confusing "lifespan" with "resale value".
  - IBM 9y ago
    >The spinsters are deliberately confusing "lifespan" with "resale value". I realize I'm responding to someone arguing in bad faith. But lifespan directly influences the resale value.
    - jhiska 9y ago
      Replaceable batteries increase lifespan. The iPhone is a well-made phone which would have greater lifespan if the batteries were replaceable. As it is, users who bought an older iPhone now have to pay middle-men to replace the battery or face degraded performance.
      - valuearb 9y ago
        The iPhone already has replaceable batteries. Making them user-replaceable just reduces battery capacity, increases size/weight, all so in 2-3 years you can save about 5% of your purchase cost by replacing the battery yourself. iPhone users buy iPhones because they wanted the best in class functionality, if they wanted to save money they'd buy a phone with a replaceable battery.
- IBM 9y ago
  It is replaceable (by Apple, authorized and unauthorized third parties). User replaceable batteries could increase waste by being less reliable overall. I know every TV remote I've owned with a battery door eventually ends up with a rubber band around it, and I think that's pretty much a universal experience. Also we've had this debate for years already when Apple went to unibody Macbooks. The reliability and battery life only increased because of the better structural integrity and increased room for battery cells.
  - jhiska 9y ago
    It is not easily replaceable as with any other phone. The issue is not creating waste, but wasting one's money on middle-men for replacing one's phone batteries. >I know every TV remote I've owned with a battery door eventually ends up with a rubber band around it, and I think that's pretty much a universal experience. You're relating a supposedly personal story to make your spin claims more relatable. Maybe you're like the people in late-night TV commercials who seemingly can't open a can of tomatoes without massive bleeding? ;)
    - chrisseaton 9y ago
      > The issue is not creating waste, but wasting one's money on middle-men for replacing one's phone batteries. Well I could say I'm spending that money on having a nicer phone that's sealed and seamless, rather than wasting it.
      - jhiska 9y ago
        Sealed, seamless, performance-degraded, costly to service, with planned obsolescence. It's quite obvious that it's a waste of money to pay middle-men to perform basic service on it for stuff a user can do at home with any other phone.
        chrisseaton 9y ago
        Right... but the point was I get something, in return for having to pay middle-men to service it. It's a trade I'm happy with. Maybe you aren't, but it works for me.
logfromblammo 9y ago
What metrics are you looking at in the used market to support your hypothesis? Could they be explained by a different hypothesis? I'm still enjoying my 3-year-old non-iPhone, and intend to keep using it until it stops working entirely, whereas my spouse with an iPhone was already voicing suspicion before this announcement that Apple was intentionally slowing their old iPhone through updates, just to provoke an upgrade. With the announcement, I can't fault the reasoning. How much of the used market for iPhones are devices that had been traded in (because slowed by Apple due to old battery), refurbished by the mobile phone company (probably just to replace the battery and reset it to factory settings), and then resold to people whose older model refurbished iPhone now needs yet another new battery? That generates an additional sale of an entire old iPhone, whereas other phones would only generate a sale of a replacement battery at that time. I think you would probably have to look at what mobile phone customers are actually using, right now.
- IBM 9y ago
  The fact that iPhones are updated for the longest time and are built well is directly related to why you can get as much as you can when you sell a used iPhone. Apple actually has an incentive to create the longest lasting iPhone because the economics of the iPhone Upgrade Plan and every carrier upgrade plan depends on it. That iPhones retain their value over time is a testament to the fact that Apple has not been slowing down old iPhones to make you upgrade (this conspiracy theory predates iOS 10.2.1 by many years).
  - logfromblammo 9y ago
    But I don't intend to sell my non-iPhone, ever. It works as well for me now as it did when I first bought it, so why would I? It's the same reason why I'm never going to sell my 2001 Honda Civic. Have you examined the reasons why iPhone owners sell their older iPhones, and why people buy refurbished used iPhones?
  - CaptSpify 9y ago
    > That iPhones retain their value over time is a testament to the fact that Apple has not been slowing down old iPhones Not at all. It's a testament that there is a market for old iPhones, that is all. People are possibly buying used iPhones despite them being slowed down. > Apple actually has an incentive to create the longest lasting iPhone because the economics of the iPhone Upgrade Plan and every carrier upgrade plan depends on it. Then why don't they? <5 years for an electronic device that hasn't seen any significant upgrades in later models is absurdly short.

mikestew 9y ago

Alternatively, folks buy batteries they don’t need just because they can. I did that with my Galaxy Note, bought a spare because they were $30 and because I could. Never used it, the Note had great battery life. Now it sits on a shelf, waiting for me to recycle it.

jhiska 9y ago
Somehow I am reminded of the lyrics "You spin me right round, right round, baby." The spin, I feel, is that somehow being able to replace one's batteries is bad. Whereas having an iPhone with degraded performance and an expensive-to-replace battery is good. You "bought a spare because you could" and "now it sits, waiting for you to recycle it", thus creating waste, but one can argue that anyone buying stuff they don't need creates waste, and that being able to replace one's phone battery isn't about saving the environment but saving one's hard-earned money.
- mikestew 9y ago
  Alternative ways of looking at things is “spin” in your mind, huh? Well, that’s one way to keep a narrative, I suppose.
  - jhiska 9y ago
    I guess I could call them alternative facts, if you prefer.
- valuearb 9y ago
  First, you can replace an iPhone battery, just take it to your Apple Store. It's reasonably affordable ($79) or free if still under warranty/Applecare. User-replaceable batteries don't change anything for the environment. Second, user-replaceable batteries don't come for free. They come with a series of trade-offs. Small increases in cost, space, even weight. If you plan to keep your phone for more than 2 years, user-replaceable will be more important to you than if you intend to replace every 2 years. I remember when I switched to MacBook Pros from my Dell laptops. I had two flights a week that were about 5 hours each. I had to buy an extra laptop battery and charger so my Dell would last the entire flight. And sometimes I'd forget to charge both batteries and I'd be back to a dead laptop halfway through the flight. Then I read the reviews of these new MBPs that lasted 7-8 hours instead of 5 hours, that used sealed batteries. I switched and my new MBP worked like a charm, easily lasting the entire flight every time. One big reason Apple made that advance was entirely because they abandoned removable batteries. They were able to fit more battery using a custom form factor that would have been super expensive to make removable. No one had done this as well before, because Apple was the first to implement good embedded battery conditioning software so they would last a couple years without needing replacement. Sealed batteries aren't always better, but they typically are for most users and use cases.

gnopgnip 9y ago

There are quite a few good phones with a user replaceable battery, but that is just not what consumers want most of the time. The LG v20 is the most recent one that comes to mind