6 ms·

It's true that most end-users cannot replace the batteries in their phones unaided. However, it should be a trivial task for any electronics repair shop. Cars

It's true that most end-users cannot replace the batteries in their phones unaided. However, it should be a trivial task for any electronics repair shop. Cars need new oil every year or so. Drivers don't generally throw out the entire car.

jdsully 5y ago
They frequently do for more expensive repairs, e.g. a $3k transmission replacement. An oil change is $100, vs tens of thousands for the car, or less than 1% the cost. Batteries on the hand are over $100 to replace for a phone that was likely only $1k brand new and now worth only a small fraction of that.
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago
  Thanks, I don't drive and always get screwed up when I try to use car metaphors. But your transmission replacement is a better example: A $3K repair for a $10K car is 30% of the car's value, so much more than a $100 battery replacement for a $500 phone. (And, I've had shops replace my phone's battery for less than $50.)
  - zenexer 5y ago
    A transmission repair is not a normal repair you should expect to experience unless your car is quite old, though. I've never owned a new car, and I've never had a transmission die on me. By the time it's getting close to that point, the whole care is on life support anyway. Any regular repair a normal car needs is probably something the average person can do with little to no technical knowledge. Changing the battery, headlights, or oil in your car is trivial compared to changing the battery in most phones. That's a subjective assessment, but I think I'm a fairly average person when it comes to repairing phones and cars: I don't do either on a regular basis and have no special experience that would enable me to do either type of repair better than the average person. I'm good at breaking phones when I try to replace batteries, but I have yet to break a car when changing the oil or headlights. I shouldn't need to take my car to a shop to replace disposable components--I don't need to take my car to a shop to replace disposable components. I shouldn't need to take my phone to a shop to replace disposable components, yet here we are. I can try to do it myself, but I guarantee if I try to replace the battery in my Nexus 6P or first-gen Pixel, I'll crack the screen. Even repair shops probably have high failure rates on battery replacements for those two devices.
sudosysgen 5y ago
It takes an inordinate amount of time for a repair shop to replace batteries, meaning that it costs 5x more to replace than it should.
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago
  I guess we have different definitions of "inordinate". Field replaceable batteries would of course be ideal, but that would result in thicker devices and/or smaller batteries.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    For some phones it can take upwards of an hour to swap a battery and there is a solid risk of irreparable damage.
    - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
      Okay, that is inordinate! I've had places replace my iPhone battery in less than 15 minutes.
hilbert42 5y ago
Until Apple started the practice, the concept of sealing in batteries into any electronic appliance was anathema - a completely foreign notion. The reasons for not sealing in batteries were so obvious that no one back then would have ever given the matter a second thought. Some reasons for not permanently sealing them in: First, batteries usually leak given sufficient time, and if one cannot remove them then damage to one's equipment will result. Second, even with smartphones that use lithium batteries which are less prone to leak, old batteries often swell and can crush the internal electronics of the smartphone. In fact, this has happened to me and it rendered the phone inoperable. Third, batteries that are sealed in cannot be inspected for swelling etc. As in my case, this proved dangerous. Phones with removable battery compartments and whose batteries start swelling are obvious, as the back battery cover always pops off and thus the danger is clearly obvious. A potentially dangerous battery that's been sealed in is rarely obvious. Forth, removable batteries can be swapped out within seconds, this allows for an immediate exchange of battery when the first one goes flat. It's much, much quicker to exchange a flat battery with a charged one than it is to recharge the internal battery via the USB cable. Fifth, when a removable battery is beginning to lose capacity and die, it is much more likely to be replaced at an early stage than if the phone is sealed - as it's very easy to do so. Take my case mentioned above, if the battery had been removable then I'd have a new battery installed by now. Sixth, new batteries typically cost only one fifth of the price of having a repair shop change the battery. It seems to me that the Right to Repair movement may be successful in lobbying government to have the law changed to ensure that users can change smartphone batteries. There are two ways of achieving this: the first is by regulation which would state that after such and such a date all smartphones would have removable batteries, and the second method is by way of a tax or surcharge levied at the point of sale - for example, all smartphones sold after a certain date will be subject to a 15% tax/surcharge unless they have removable batteries (if that were mandated then manufacturers would rush to implement the changes as the losses in sales would far exceed the necessary cost of design changes). As usual, the US will likely be the laggard in mandating such changes. Given the mood in Europe and some other countries, these changes will likely be first mandated there. I'll cheer loudly when that happens. Incidentally, the same tax surcharge ought to be levied onto phones that have the FM Radio circuity disabled. There's a very good reason to keep FM working in phones and that is in case of emergency when the cellular network is down, in bushfires, floods etc. The phone function may be out but at least FM broadcasts can keep those in danger informed with official news and reports. That governments haven't mandated this requirement for FM is as fucking disgrace. Remember, it's no longer that phones are considered a luxury, it's just a fact that everyone expects others to have one in one's possession at all times. As such, governments have a responsibility to accept smartphones as a necessary adjunct to an emergency service/utility etc.

jdsully 5y ago

They frequently do for more expensive repairs, e.g. a $3k transmission replacement. An oil change is $100, vs tens of thousands for the car, or less than 1% the cost. Batteries on the hand are over $100 to replace for a phone that was likely only $1k brand new and now worth only a small fraction of that.

Wowfunhappy 5y ago
Thanks, I don't drive and always get screwed up when I try to use car metaphors. But your transmission replacement is a better example: A $3K repair for a $10K car is 30% of the car's value, so much more than a $100 battery replacement for a $500 phone. (And, I've had shops replace my phone's battery for less than $50.)
- zenexer 5y ago
  A transmission repair is not a normal repair you should expect to experience unless your car is quite old, though. I've never owned a new car, and I've never had a transmission die on me. By the time it's getting close to that point, the whole care is on life support anyway. Any regular repair a normal car needs is probably something the average person can do with little to no technical knowledge. Changing the battery, headlights, or oil in your car is trivial compared to changing the battery in most phones. That's a subjective assessment, but I think I'm a fairly average person when it comes to repairing phones and cars: I don't do either on a regular basis and have no special experience that would enable me to do either type of repair better than the average person. I'm good at breaking phones when I try to replace batteries, but I have yet to break a car when changing the oil or headlights. I shouldn't need to take my car to a shop to replace disposable components--I don't need to take my car to a shop to replace disposable components. I shouldn't need to take my phone to a shop to replace disposable components, yet here we are. I can try to do it myself, but I guarantee if I try to replace the battery in my Nexus 6P or first-gen Pixel, I'll crack the screen. Even repair shops probably have high failure rates on battery replacements for those two devices.

sudosysgen 5y ago

It takes an inordinate amount of time for a repair shop to replace batteries, meaning that it costs 5x more to replace than it should.

Wowfunhappy 5y ago
I guess we have different definitions of "inordinate". Field replaceable batteries would of course be ideal, but that would result in thicker devices and/or smaller batteries.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  For some phones it can take upwards of an hour to swap a battery and there is a solid risk of irreparable damage.
  - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
    Okay, that is inordinate! I've had places replace my iPhone battery in less than 15 minutes.

hilbert42 5y ago

Until Apple started the practice, the concept of sealing in batteries into any electronic appliance was anathema - a completely foreign notion. The reasons for not sealing in batteries were so obvious that no one back then would have ever given the matter a second thought. Some reasons for not permanently sealing them in: First, batteries usually leak given sufficient time, and if one cannot remove them then damage to one's equipment will result. Second, even with smartphones that use lithium batteries which are less prone to leak, old batteries often swell and can crush the internal electronics of the smartphone. In fact, this has happened to me and it rendered the phone inoperable. Third, batteries that are sealed in cannot be inspected for swelling etc. As in my case, this proved dangerous. Phones with removable battery compartments and whose batteries start swelling are obvious, as the back battery cover always pops off and thus the danger is clearly obvious. A potentially dangerous battery that's been sealed in is rarely obvious. Forth, removable batteries can be swapped out within seconds, this allows for an immediate exchange of battery when the first one goes flat. It's much, much quicker to exchange a flat battery with a charged one than it is to recharge the internal battery via the USB cable. Fifth, when a removable battery is beginning to lose capacity and die, it is much more likely to be replaced at an early stage than if the phone is sealed - as it's very easy to do so. Take my case mentioned above, if the battery had been removable then I'd have a new battery installed by now. Sixth, new batteries typically cost only one fifth of the price of having a repair shop change the battery. It seems to me that the Right to Repair movement may be successful in lobbying government to have the law changed to ensure that users can change smartphone batteries. There are two ways of achieving this: the first is by regulation which would state that after such and such a date all smartphones would have removable batteries, and the second method is by way of a tax or surcharge levied at the point of sale - for example, all smartphones sold after a certain date will be subject to a 15% tax/surcharge unless they have removable batteries (if that were mandated then manufacturers would rush to implement the changes as the losses in sales would far exceed the necessary cost of design changes). As usual, the US will likely be the laggard in mandating such changes. Given the mood in Europe and some other countries, these changes will likely be first mandated there. I'll cheer loudly when that happens. Incidentally, the same tax surcharge ought to be levied onto phones that have the FM Radio circuity disabled. There's a very good reason to keep FM working in phones and that is in case of emergency when the cellular network is down, in bushfires, floods etc. The phone function may be out but at least FM broadcasts can keep those in danger informed with official news and reports. That governments haven't mandated this requirement for FM is as fucking disgrace. Remember, it's no longer that phones are considered a luxury, it's just a fact that everyone expects others to have one in one's possession at all times. As such, governments have a responsibility to accept smartphones as a necessary adjunct to an emergency service/utility etc.