4 ms·

> By 2027, all phones released in the EU must have a battery the user can easily replace with no tools or expertise. The article is wrong. The rule is that obs

> By 2027, all phones released in the EU must have a battery the user can easily replace with no tools or expertise. The article is wrong. The rule is that obscure tools must not be required: > A portable battery shall be considered readily removable by the end-user where it can be removed from a product with the use of commercially available tools, without requiring the use of specialised tools [...]

wilg 3y ago
How is specialized defined?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- packetlost 3y ago
  If glue is considered unspecialized this does basically nothing for repairability.
  - mdorazio 3y ago
    The comma placement makes the glue answer a bit strange, but I'm interpreting it to mean glues are no-go unless the manufacturer provides a solvent and re-gluing kit as well. Full text from [1] (emphasis mine): > A portable battery should be considered to be removable by the end-user when it can be removed with the use of commercially available tools and without requiring the use of specialised tools, unless they are provided free of charge, or proprietary tools, thermal energy or solvents to disassemble it. Commercially available tools are considered to be tools available on the market to all end-users without the need for them to provide evidence of any proprietary rights and that can be used with no restriction, except health and safety-related restrictions. Also answers the above question regarding "specialised" - that would be anything not fitting the "commercially available" definition. [1] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-2-2023-INIT/en/pdf https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-2-2023-INIT...
    - jsmith45 3y ago
      So I read this as: 1. tools must be commercially available. 2. Tools must not be specialized, unless provided free of charge. (Reminder, part of the idea that the idea is that throwing away batteries is gradually getting outlawed, so end users need to be able to extract the battery before they throw away/recycle/or provide to eWaste facilities the rest of the device.). 3. Tools must not be proprietary. 4. Use of thermal energy cannot be required. 5. Use of solvents cannot be required. And finally a clarification about the definition of commercially available. Number 2 seems like it is independent of commercially available. Otherwise the "free of charge" part would make no sense. Furthermore, replacement is actually a secondary motivation of this law. A slightly more primary motivation is to ensure users can remove the batteries before throwing away the device or handing the rest to an eWaste facicity as applicable. I'd assume anything that the average consumer cannot expect to find at a local tool shop would be considered specialized.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - fluoridation 3y ago
    Glue is not a tool, since a tool is an object that serves a function and that is not consumed in its operation. Other things that are not tools: lubricants, (some) abrasives, pigments, reagents, solvents.
- Mountain_Skies 3y ago
  Probably will be up to the courts to decide, in which case companies can choose to gamble fines and rectification costs should they choose to define 'specialized tools' more strictly than the court they end up facing does.
- nashashmi 3y ago
  I can tell you what today is a specialized tool. A machine that takes a phone apart with heat and glues it back together. And special screw heads. Anything else like use of knives should be considered special if slots are not designated for them.
guestbest 3y ago
I had to use special tools to remove the batter from the iPhone 6 I owned, but that was back before they started gluing the battery to the screen. It only took 15-20 minutes. The phones since then have chipsets that will mark as fraudulent batteries any OEM battery. If only I could go back to 2015
- gruez 3y ago
  I had to use special tools to remove the batter from the iPhone 6 I owned, but that was back before they started gluing the battery to the screen. It only took 15-20 minutes. Looking at the ifixit guide for iphone 6s[1], it doesn't look like you need any special tools (as defined by the regulation). Sure, they're not exactly tools that a typical person has in their toolbox, but they're all "commercially available". ifixit even offers them for sale in their guide. [1] https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+6+Battery+Replacement/29363 https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+6+Battery+Replacement/29...
  - tap-snap-or-nap 3y ago
    iPhone 6 plus is as far as I can do repairs at home without much equipment. The newer ones seem like a nightmare to repair.
    - myspy 3y ago
      Didn't they redesign the interior of the iPhone 14 (normal) to be more easily repairable? Not end user repairable yet, but more than previous designs? I guess they make first steps in that direction.
aeternum 3y ago
The 'obscure' tools are like $5 on amazon/temu/alibaba and include exactly what you need to make the job easy for that specific model. Seems like this law is once again a step backwards. No consideration at all of tradeoffs, IE how much dust/water proofing do we lose and how much bulk/weight it will add.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  > The 'obscure' tools are like $5 on amazon/temu/alibaba and include exactly what you need to make the job easy for that specific model. There are not enough reasons for every model to need a different specific set of tools. There's one common reason: to make service difficult. > No consideration at all of tradeoffs, IE how much dust/water proofing do we lose and how much bulk/weight it will add. Seems like it's all about tradeoffs. They're trading whatever hypothetical advances you're referring to here for less tech waste and lower consumer costs. They're deciding that it's an area in which manufacturers aren't allowed to innovate, because the innovations are trivial compared to the externalities that they impose.
  - aeternum 3y ago
    If consumers cared to make those tradeoffs, you would see phones with removable batteries with the most market share. You don't because that's not actually what most consumers want, and thus the misguided need to regulate it.
    - majewsky 3y ago
      Counter-hypotheses: - Consumers optimize for what looks nicest in the store, and it's easy for the store to bury the nonreplacability of the battery under a thick layer of tech mumbojumbo. - Most consumers (at least here in Germany) get their phones from their phone plans, so they are limited by what the phone companies offer with their contracts.
    - gsich 3y ago
      This is the wrong conclusion. Lack of products does not equal "the customer doesn't want it". The customer has no choice.

wilg 3y ago

How is specialized defined?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
packetlost 3y ago
If glue is considered unspecialized this does basically nothing for repairability.
- mdorazio 3y ago
  The comma placement makes the glue answer a bit strange, but I'm interpreting it to mean glues are no-go unless the manufacturer provides a solvent and re-gluing kit as well. Full text from [1] (emphasis mine): > A portable battery should be considered to be removable by the end-user when it can be removed with the use of commercially available tools and without requiring the use of specialised tools, unless they are provided free of charge, or proprietary tools, thermal energy or solvents to disassemble it. Commercially available tools are considered to be tools available on the market to all end-users without the need for them to provide evidence of any proprietary rights and that can be used with no restriction, except health and safety-related restrictions. Also answers the above question regarding "specialised" - that would be anything not fitting the "commercially available" definition. [1] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-2-2023-INIT/en/pdf https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/PE-2-2023-INIT...
  - jsmith45 3y ago
    So I read this as: 1. tools must be commercially available. 2. Tools must not be specialized, unless provided free of charge. (Reminder, part of the idea that the idea is that throwing away batteries is gradually getting outlawed, so end users need to be able to extract the battery before they throw away/recycle/or provide to eWaste facilities the rest of the device.). 3. Tools must not be proprietary. 4. Use of thermal energy cannot be required. 5. Use of solvents cannot be required. And finally a clarification about the definition of commercially available. Number 2 seems like it is independent of commercially available. Otherwise the "free of charge" part would make no sense. Furthermore, replacement is actually a secondary motivation of this law. A slightly more primary motivation is to ensure users can remove the batteries before throwing away the device or handing the rest to an eWaste facicity as applicable. I'd assume anything that the average consumer cannot expect to find at a local tool shop would be considered specialized.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- fluoridation 3y ago
  Glue is not a tool, since a tool is an object that serves a function and that is not consumed in its operation. Other things that are not tools: lubricants, (some) abrasives, pigments, reagents, solvents.
Mountain_Skies 3y ago
Probably will be up to the courts to decide, in which case companies can choose to gamble fines and rectification costs should they choose to define 'specialized tools' more strictly than the court they end up facing does.
nashashmi 3y ago
I can tell you what today is a specialized tool. A machine that takes a phone apart with heat and glues it back together. And special screw heads. Anything else like use of knives should be considered special if slots are not designated for them.

guestbest 3y ago

I had to use special tools to remove the batter from the iPhone 6 I owned, but that was back before they started gluing the battery to the screen. It only took 15-20 minutes. The phones since then have chipsets that will mark as fraudulent batteries any OEM battery. If only I could go back to 2015

gruez 3y ago
I had to use special tools to remove the batter from the iPhone 6 I owned, but that was back before they started gluing the battery to the screen. It only took 15-20 minutes. Looking at the ifixit guide for iphone 6s[1], it doesn't look like you need any special tools (as defined by the regulation). Sure, they're not exactly tools that a typical person has in their toolbox, but they're all "commercially available". ifixit even offers them for sale in their guide. [1] https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+6+Battery+Replacement/29363 https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iPhone+6+Battery+Replacement/29...
- tap-snap-or-nap 3y ago
  iPhone 6 plus is as far as I can do repairs at home without much equipment. The newer ones seem like a nightmare to repair.
  - myspy 3y ago
    Didn't they redesign the interior of the iPhone 14 (normal) to be more easily repairable? Not end user repairable yet, but more than previous designs? I guess they make first steps in that direction.

aeternum 3y ago

The 'obscure' tools are like $5 on amazon/temu/alibaba and include exactly what you need to make the job easy for that specific model. Seems like this law is once again a step backwards. No consideration at all of tradeoffs, IE how much dust/water proofing do we lose and how much bulk/weight it will add.

pessimizer 3y ago
> The 'obscure' tools are like $5 on amazon/temu/alibaba and include exactly what you need to make the job easy for that specific model. There are not enough reasons for every model to need a different specific set of tools. There's one common reason: to make service difficult. > No consideration at all of tradeoffs, IE how much dust/water proofing do we lose and how much bulk/weight it will add. Seems like it's all about tradeoffs. They're trading whatever hypothetical advances you're referring to here for less tech waste and lower consumer costs. They're deciding that it's an area in which manufacturers aren't allowed to innovate, because the innovations are trivial compared to the externalities that they impose.
- aeternum 3y ago
  If consumers cared to make those tradeoffs, you would see phones with removable batteries with the most market share. You don't because that's not actually what most consumers want, and thus the misguided need to regulate it.
  - majewsky 3y ago
    Counter-hypotheses: - Consumers optimize for what looks nicest in the store, and it's easy for the store to bury the nonreplacability of the battery under a thick layer of tech mumbojumbo. - Most consumers (at least here in Germany) get their phones from their phone plans, so they are limited by what the phone companies offer with their contracts.
  - gsich 3y ago
    This is the wrong conclusion. Lack of products does not equal "the customer doesn't want it". The customer has no choice.