Until Apple started the practice, the concept of sealing in batteries into any electronic appliance was anathema - a completely foreign notion. The reasons for

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.