3 ms·
>Non-removable battery phones have won out. It's what consumers decided with their pockets. Consumers would buy toxic and deadly stuff if that's all the market
by Iulioh 3y ago
>Non-removable battery phones have won out. It's what consumers decided with their pockets.
Consumers would buy toxic and deadly stuff if that's all the market will offer as the best value .
Governments are needed to keep companies in check and that's another example.
Honestly, just think about usb and the era before that.
Every consumer could chose what charger to have and every phone had his own, would you say that forcing usb on all phones was insane?
- senttoschool 3y agoPhone numbers quickly adopted USB-C. In fact, phone makers themselves formed a group together with other tech companies and created USB-C. It had nothing to do with the government. Heck, even Apple was slowly transitioning to USB-C and they would have eventually used USB-C for the iPhone regardless of EU laws. >Consumers would buy toxic and deadly stuff if that's all the market will offer as the best value. I disagree with this. Arguably, removable batteries are more dangerous.
- Iulioh 3y ago[flagged]
- senttoschool 3y agoYou're getting way ahead of yourself. Bottom line is, if customers valued removable batteries enough, it would still be a feature for phone makers today.
- WentFullRetard 3y ago[dead]