8 ms·

> There's absolutely no reason for not making user-replaceable batteries other than planned obsolescence Sure there is a reason (thinner devices, easier water

> There's absolutely no reason for not making user-replaceable batteries other than planned obsolescence Sure there is a reason (thinner devices, easier water resistance, harder for users to damage, etc.). I'm not saying the reasons are necessarily worth the tradeoffs made, but this is not malicious planned obsolescence. The term "planned obsolescence" has become overused in my opinion, mostly in reference to Apple devices.

grishka 6y ago
No one asked for their phones, tablets, and laptops to be even thinner, especially at the expense of serviceability. Everyone knows that batteries stop holding charge after a while. General public knows it and engineers know it. But nope, let's build a device that's ridiculously thin and not designed to come apart at all because screws are so not pretty, right? Water resistance is a feature that most people don't need (me included). It's nice to have, sure, but how many people choose one device over another because of it? As for damage resistance, are you sure about that? Modern gadgets are ridiculously fragile for no good reason.
- noahtallen 6y ago
  A few counterpoints: - A thinner device is likely lighter as well, which people do want. And, people do like the things they own to look good, which subjectively can include “thinness” - Water resistance is very nice for normal use, even if you don’t explicitly want to use your device in wet places. You can use it near the kitchen sink, in the rain, or even in the bath without damaging it. This plays into the next point: - Anecdotally, I think at least iPhones are getting less fragile. I had a lot of problems with earlier iPhones, like bendgate and cracked screens. Not only have I not cracked my screen with recent iPhones, I’ve gotten significantly fewer requests from folks for me to repair their screens. I drop my phone all the time, and it basically refuses to break. And I just use a cheap bumper case. Similar for other folks I know. Along with water resistance (which would come alongside dust resistance), I think devices are pretty sturdy. All of that said, I’m a huge supporter of the right to repair. And I don’t think we have to give up nice designs and even thinness at the cost of repairability. I think if Apple even just changed their stance to be pro-repairability (even selling replacement parts), I’d be happier. I think a heatgun and some torx screwdrivers are cheap enough that it’s not that difficult to teardown an iPhone with some knowledge and practice. My main gripes with repairing iPhones are the lack of quality parts. Buying cheap replacement parts is possible, but they are worse quality, and some things (like Touch ID) don’t work properly. On top of that, I imagine you can still achieve thinness and water resistance with screws rather than glue. So I’m with you there, they could design the products to give us the same features and also be more repairable.
  - GordonS 6y ago
    > A thinner device is likely lighter as well, which people do want I want think and light devices - but not at the cost of everything else. A replaceable battery is important - realistically, how much thinner and lighter does a fixed battery make it? I fully agree that some manufacturers (cough Apple) are obsessed with thinness, but I strongly believe the main driver behind fixed batteries is planned obsolescence.
    - sigstoat 6y ago
      > I fully agree that some manufacturers (cough Apple) are obsessed with thinness, but I strongly believe the main driver behind fixed batteries is planned obsolescence. i've worked with companies making the kinds of products you're concerned about. this never comes up. they are however terrified about lithium batteries in consumer products catching fire, and want to keep you, the user, far away from them. thin flat batteries also tend to stay a bit cooler, which helps in multiple ways.
  - fomine3 6y ago
    > A thinner device is likely lighter as well, which people do want. I really wish it was. Nowadays devices are thin but heavy so it's unrelated.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > No one asked for their phones, tablets, and laptops to be even thinner I asked for this. > Water resistance is a feature that most people don't need I need this. So how can Apple satisfy both of us? How about let them research the market and decide what to do themselves? There's something so arrogant about the right-to-repair and user-serviceable crowd who think devices should be crippled to suit their minority requirements at the expense of the majority.
  - grishka 6y ago
    > There's something so arrogant about the right-to-repair and user-serviceable crowd who think devices should be crippled to suit their minority requirements at the expense of the majority. I want to buy a device once and use it forever. That's it. It's that simple. The glued-together construction artificially limits the lifespan of the device. And, actually, it's possible to have both. I remember there were water-resistant Sony phones that had user-replaceable batteries.
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      > I want to buy a device once and use it forever. Ok... but most people don't. So you aren't going to get that. You can't expect phone development projects costing hundreds of millions of dollars to cater to your particular views. And guess what more: people who buy a device just once aren't going to be anyone's priority for anything. > And, actually, it's possible to have both. I remember there were water-resistant Sony phones that had user-replaceable batteries. How thick were they, though?
      - grishka 6y ago
        > Ok... but most people don't. So you aren't going to get that. You can't expect phone development projects costing hundreds of millions of dollars to cater to your particular views. Imagine HTC unveiled a new phone that is the Desire S but with a modern-ish multi-core CPU and a non-potato camera. Everything else — the design, the size, the screen, the removable battery — is the same. How many people would buy one, given that the current 7" glass slabs remain a (prevalent) option? And, I mean, people buy and keep iPhone SE (1st gen) and 5S for that same reason. The SE wasn't a flop, despite having a small screen no waterproofing. There's definitely a market for these. > How thick were they, though? I don't remember the exact model to google it, so given the period, I'd bet at least 8 mm.
- valuearb 6y ago
  Sales of devices in the real world rebut every single one of your points. Customers notice lightness and thinness when they heft phones and tankers, and overwhelmingly choose light and thin.
  - grishka 6y ago
    If only there was any choice.
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      There is, but Samsung, Apple, etc. are under no obligation to cater to you.
      - TeMPOraL 6y ago
        There isn't, not along the axes GP is talking about. Which makes the "market data" irrelevant.
      - grishka 6y ago
        Okay, where do I get my 4" flagship with a removable battery and a headphone jack, eh? Nowhere? Then you can't call that a choice. In 2020, all phones are the exact same thing with minor differences.
        valuearb 6y ago
        That’s not true but don’t let it stop you from demanding phone makers make custom models for every handful of people who want unique features. Of course if you believe your design actually has a market, it’s never been an easier time in world history to manufacture your own smartphone designs with easy availability of parts, android, Kickstarter, Chinese contract manufacturers, etc. Are you are the type of person who complains but never does anything about it?
ohazi 6y ago
User replaceable doesn't need to mean tool-free removal. You can use tiny phillips/hex/torx screws instead of glue to hold the back in place. You can use thin rubber gaskets and silicone grease to seal the case instead of a custom punched adhesive sheet that is nearly impossible to replace without destroying the device or compromising future water resistance. Literally every water resistant wristwatch made before Apple entered the market used to work this way. They're designed to have batteries replaced or mechanical bits serviced every few years and are expected to continue to be water resistant, and many of them are extremely thin. I'm surprised that no phones do this, as it seems like it could be marketed as a super premium build-quality feature ("built like a dive watch"). The batteries are already connectorized instead of soldered. You can use replaceable pull-tab-removable adhesive strips to hold the battery in place if needed, instead of glue that exceeds the yield strength of the material it's attached to. Some of these things might cost a few cents more, but none of them should materially affect thinness, rigidity, water resistance, etc.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- m-ee 6y ago
  Gluing everything together will absolutely affect your drop tests, and your conversations with ID, and your conversations with manufacturing who don’t want to have 18 screws in the assembly. There are many more stakeholders other than consumers and evil bean counters who don’t want you buy a third party battery. I’ve seen drop tests alone dictate the use of adehesives.

grishka 6y ago

No one asked for their phones, tablets, and laptops to be even thinner, especially at the expense of serviceability. Everyone knows that batteries stop holding charge after a while. General public knows it and engineers know it. But nope, let's build a device that's ridiculously thin and not designed to come apart at all because screws are so not pretty, right? Water resistance is a feature that most people don't need (me included). It's nice to have, sure, but how many people choose one device over another because of it? As for damage resistance, are you sure about that? Modern gadgets are ridiculously fragile for no good reason.

noahtallen 6y ago
A few counterpoints: - A thinner device is likely lighter as well, which people do want. And, people do like the things they own to look good, which subjectively can include “thinness” - Water resistance is very nice for normal use, even if you don’t explicitly want to use your device in wet places. You can use it near the kitchen sink, in the rain, or even in the bath without damaging it. This plays into the next point: - Anecdotally, I think at least iPhones are getting less fragile. I had a lot of problems with earlier iPhones, like bendgate and cracked screens. Not only have I not cracked my screen with recent iPhones, I’ve gotten significantly fewer requests from folks for me to repair their screens. I drop my phone all the time, and it basically refuses to break. And I just use a cheap bumper case. Similar for other folks I know. Along with water resistance (which would come alongside dust resistance), I think devices are pretty sturdy. All of that said, I’m a huge supporter of the right to repair. And I don’t think we have to give up nice designs and even thinness at the cost of repairability. I think if Apple even just changed their stance to be pro-repairability (even selling replacement parts), I’d be happier. I think a heatgun and some torx screwdrivers are cheap enough that it’s not that difficult to teardown an iPhone with some knowledge and practice. My main gripes with repairing iPhones are the lack of quality parts. Buying cheap replacement parts is possible, but they are worse quality, and some things (like Touch ID) don’t work properly. On top of that, I imagine you can still achieve thinness and water resistance with screws rather than glue. So I’m with you there, they could design the products to give us the same features and also be more repairable.
- GordonS 6y ago
  > A thinner device is likely lighter as well, which people do want I want think and light devices - but not at the cost of everything else. A replaceable battery is important - realistically, how much thinner and lighter does a fixed battery make it? I fully agree that some manufacturers (cough Apple) are obsessed with thinness, but I strongly believe the main driver behind fixed batteries is planned obsolescence.
  - sigstoat 6y ago
    > I fully agree that some manufacturers (cough Apple) are obsessed with thinness, but I strongly believe the main driver behind fixed batteries is planned obsolescence. i've worked with companies making the kinds of products you're concerned about. this never comes up. they are however terrified about lithium batteries in consumer products catching fire, and want to keep you, the user, far away from them. thin flat batteries also tend to stay a bit cooler, which helps in multiple ways.
- fomine3 6y ago
  > A thinner device is likely lighter as well, which people do want. I really wish it was. Nowadays devices are thin but heavy so it's unrelated.
chrisseaton 6y ago
> No one asked for their phones, tablets, and laptops to be even thinner I asked for this. > Water resistance is a feature that most people don't need I need this. So how can Apple satisfy both of us? How about let them research the market and decide what to do themselves? There's something so arrogant about the right-to-repair and user-serviceable crowd who think devices should be crippled to suit their minority requirements at the expense of the majority.
- grishka 6y ago
  > There's something so arrogant about the right-to-repair and user-serviceable crowd who think devices should be crippled to suit their minority requirements at the expense of the majority. I want to buy a device once and use it forever. That's it. It's that simple. The glued-together construction artificially limits the lifespan of the device. And, actually, it's possible to have both. I remember there were water-resistant Sony phones that had user-replaceable batteries.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    > I want to buy a device once and use it forever. Ok... but most people don't. So you aren't going to get that. You can't expect phone development projects costing hundreds of millions of dollars to cater to your particular views. And guess what more: people who buy a device just once aren't going to be anyone's priority for anything. > And, actually, it's possible to have both. I remember there were water-resistant Sony phones that had user-replaceable batteries. How thick were they, though?
    - grishka 6y ago
      > Ok... but most people don't. So you aren't going to get that. You can't expect phone development projects costing hundreds of millions of dollars to cater to your particular views. Imagine HTC unveiled a new phone that is the Desire S but with a modern-ish multi-core CPU and a non-potato camera. Everything else — the design, the size, the screen, the removable battery — is the same. How many people would buy one, given that the current 7" glass slabs remain a (prevalent) option? And, I mean, people buy and keep iPhone SE (1st gen) and 5S for that same reason. The SE wasn't a flop, despite having a small screen no waterproofing. There's definitely a market for these. > How thick were they, though? I don't remember the exact model to google it, so given the period, I'd bet at least 8 mm.
valuearb 6y ago
Sales of devices in the real world rebut every single one of your points. Customers notice lightness and thinness when they heft phones and tankers, and overwhelmingly choose light and thin.
- grishka 6y ago
  If only there was any choice.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    There is, but Samsung, Apple, etc. are under no obligation to cater to you.
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      There isn't, not along the axes GP is talking about. Which makes the "market data" irrelevant.
    - grishka 6y ago
      Okay, where do I get my 4" flagship with a removable battery and a headphone jack, eh? Nowhere? Then you can't call that a choice. In 2020, all phones are the exact same thing with minor differences.
      - valuearb 6y ago
        That’s not true but don’t let it stop you from demanding phone makers make custom models for every handful of people who want unique features. Of course if you believe your design actually has a market, it’s never been an easier time in world history to manufacture your own smartphone designs with easy availability of parts, android, Kickstarter, Chinese contract manufacturers, etc. Are you are the type of person who complains but never does anything about it?

ohazi 6y ago

User replaceable doesn't need to mean tool-free removal. You can use tiny phillips/hex/torx screws instead of glue to hold the back in place. You can use thin rubber gaskets and silicone grease to seal the case instead of a custom punched adhesive sheet that is nearly impossible to replace without destroying the device or compromising future water resistance. Literally every water resistant wristwatch made before Apple entered the market used to work this way. They're designed to have batteries replaced or mechanical bits serviced every few years and are expected to continue to be water resistant, and many of them are extremely thin. I'm surprised that no phones do this, as it seems like it could be marketed as a super premium build-quality feature ("built like a dive watch"). The batteries are already connectorized instead of soldered. You can use replaceable pull-tab-removable adhesive strips to hold the battery in place if needed, instead of glue that exceeds the yield strength of the material it's attached to. Some of these things might cost a few cents more, but none of them should materially affect thinness, rigidity, water resistance, etc.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
m-ee 6y ago
Gluing everything together will absolutely affect your drop tests, and your conversations with ID, and your conversations with manufacturing who don’t want to have 18 screws in the assembly. There are many more stakeholders other than consumers and evil bean counters who don’t want you buy a third party battery. I’ve seen drop tests alone dictate the use of adehesives.