5 ms·

EU legislation could bring back user replaceable batteries

19 points by voisin 4y ago

tosc 4y ago
The chargers thing was borderline, but this is clearly absurd. Phones with user replaceable batteries have shorter working lives and shorter battery life for the volume than those without.
- nequo 4y ago
  Is there a technological constraint that causes that? Would Apple be able to manufacture a phone in which the replaceable battery has the same performance as the glued in batteries today?
  - _aavaa_ 4y ago
    I don’t see how. User replaceable batteries require extra protection around the battery and extra volume for the mechanisms required for taking it in and out. They’ll never get the difference in lifespan and charge capacity to go to zero, but it might be able to get it low enough that a few more years of hardware improvements will cancel out the difference.
  - olliej 4y ago
    > Is there a technological constraint that causes that? Yes. We went through all of this when iPhones were first released, and it subsequently turned out people would rather a single battery that lasts longer than buying and carrying around multiple batteries. An old school replaceable battery means that the battery is smaller because the cells themselves needs a case, so you lose a half mm or so battery size in each dimension, which based on https://www.devicespecifications.com/en/model-battery/c3625217 https://www.devicespecifications.com/en/model-battery/c36252... would be 3.5% battery loss without even considering further volume loss due to the new mounting hardware you'd need, then additional structural elements to compensate for the loss of structural rigidity. In terms of device lifetime: the clips and what not used to keep batteries in place were always the first parts of phones to fail, so reintroducing the highest failure element is going to impact device lief time. Then there are other aspects to device construction that benefit from being a functionally single solidly connected component: the total device rigidity can be much higher as you aren't losing a bunch of the device chassis, the device can be much more impermeable to water, etc.
    - yazzku 4y ago
      3.5% loss seems more than an acceptable trade-off to reduce e-waste. What is the total expected loss with today's technology?
      - tosc 4y ago
        User replacable batteries mean more e-waste, not less.
        yazzku 4y ago
        How is it more e-waste? With a glued-in battery you throw away the battery and the whole of the device. With the battery it's just the battery, and that probably is easier to recycle?
        olliej 4y ago
        Glued in batteries can be replaced, and frequently are, and if nothing else refurbishing companies exist. Refurbishing fails however if there isn't any software support for the hardware, and that's what causes a phone to become e-waste. The old school swappable batteries had batteries that died in negligible time and had to be discarded regularly, mechanical failure on the mounting bracket/clips to support the battery swap on the other hand send the device to the trash because they can't be fixed.
        terribleperson 4y ago
        It means more battery e-waste, but if it enables longer phone lifespan mightn't it lead to less total e-waste?
        tosc 4y ago
        It will lead to shorter phone lifespans. In addition to extra waste with every battery, and smaller batteries that have a shorter usefully life, replaceable batteries mean a weaker phone that is more prone to breakage.
IronWolve 4y ago
I use to get high capacity extended batteries for my phones, now phones have internal batteries, so I carry a battery pack. Phones are as powerful as laptops now, and should have some standards on repair, usb-c, and battery replacement, imho.
- yazzku 4y ago
  USB-C legislation is already set. It's also mentioned in the article.
3836293648 4y ago
If user replaceable batteries are so much worse, which makes sense, we need to force companies and customers to return their devices once they're done with them. That it makes one each cycle worse doesn't matter if it makes it so the materials only have a single cycle.
londgine 4y ago
I have a Samsung Galaxy xcover 5. It has a battery that I can pop out and replace with no tools (like in the olden days). I bought an extra battery, and now when I go traveling I just swap batteries if needed. It's better than having to attach it to a battery pack while moving around. The only problem is that it's full of Samsung garbage, and unrootable

19 points by voisin 4y ago

tosc 4y ago

The chargers thing was borderline, but this is clearly absurd. Phones with user replaceable batteries have shorter working lives and shorter battery life for the volume than those without.

nequo 4y ago
Is there a technological constraint that causes that? Would Apple be able to manufacture a phone in which the replaceable battery has the same performance as the glued in batteries today?
- _aavaa_ 4y ago
  I don’t see how. User replaceable batteries require extra protection around the battery and extra volume for the mechanisms required for taking it in and out. They’ll never get the difference in lifespan and charge capacity to go to zero, but it might be able to get it low enough that a few more years of hardware improvements will cancel out the difference.
- olliej 4y ago
  > Is there a technological constraint that causes that? Yes. We went through all of this when iPhones were first released, and it subsequently turned out people would rather a single battery that lasts longer than buying and carrying around multiple batteries. An old school replaceable battery means that the battery is smaller because the cells themselves needs a case, so you lose a half mm or so battery size in each dimension, which based on https://www.devicespecifications.com/en/model-battery/c3625217 https://www.devicespecifications.com/en/model-battery/c36252... would be 3.5% battery loss without even considering further volume loss due to the new mounting hardware you'd need, then additional structural elements to compensate for the loss of structural rigidity. In terms of device lifetime: the clips and what not used to keep batteries in place were always the first parts of phones to fail, so reintroducing the highest failure element is going to impact device lief time. Then there are other aspects to device construction that benefit from being a functionally single solidly connected component: the total device rigidity can be much higher as you aren't losing a bunch of the device chassis, the device can be much more impermeable to water, etc.
  - yazzku 4y ago
    3.5% loss seems more than an acceptable trade-off to reduce e-waste. What is the total expected loss with today's technology?
    - tosc 4y ago
      User replacable batteries mean more e-waste, not less.
      - yazzku 4y ago
        How is it more e-waste? With a glued-in battery you throw away the battery and the whole of the device. With the battery it's just the battery, and that probably is easier to recycle?
        olliej 4y ago
        Glued in batteries can be replaced, and frequently are, and if nothing else refurbishing companies exist. Refurbishing fails however if there isn't any software support for the hardware, and that's what causes a phone to become e-waste. The old school swappable batteries had batteries that died in negligible time and had to be discarded regularly, mechanical failure on the mounting bracket/clips to support the battery swap on the other hand send the device to the trash because they can't be fixed.
      - terribleperson 4y ago
        It means more battery e-waste, but if it enables longer phone lifespan mightn't it lead to less total e-waste?
        tosc 4y ago
        It will lead to shorter phone lifespans. In addition to extra waste with every battery, and smaller batteries that have a shorter usefully life, replaceable batteries mean a weaker phone that is more prone to breakage.

IronWolve 4y ago

I use to get high capacity extended batteries for my phones, now phones have internal batteries, so I carry a battery pack. Phones are as powerful as laptops now, and should have some standards on repair, usb-c, and battery replacement, imho.

yazzku 4y ago
USB-C legislation is already set. It's also mentioned in the article.

3836293648 4y ago

If user replaceable batteries are so much worse, which makes sense, we need to force companies and customers to return their devices once they're done with them. That it makes one each cycle worse doesn't matter if it makes it so the materials only have a single cycle.

londgine 4y ago

I have a Samsung Galaxy xcover 5. It has a battery that I can pop out and replace with no tools (like in the olden days). I bought an extra battery, and now when I go traveling I just swap batteries if needed. It's better than having to attach it to a battery pack while moving around. The only problem is that it's full of Samsung garbage, and unrootable