3 ms·

R2R enthusiasts are incapable of seeing any decision from a perspective that isn't their own personal fetish for tinkering. So any and all advantages of sealing

by EPWN3D 3y ago

R2R enthusiasts are incapable of seeing any decision from a perspective that isn't their own personal fetish for tinkering. So any and all advantages of sealing the battery into the chassis are just waved away and not acknowledged at all. Lighter devices? That's irrelevant, no one cares about device weight. Cheaper to manufacture? That's just a ploy to gasp make more money! How dare they?! Waterproofing? Well I don't go SCUBA diving with my phone, so clearly no one else does. And if they do, just put it in a ziplock bag! And so on.

smoldesu 3y ago
There are reasonable levels of supply chain integration, and then there is user-hostility. With Apple we've seen both sides of the coin, so you'll have to excuse the people who accuse them out the gate. It stands to reason that a company as large as Apple is capable of making decisions that impact large amounts of people. It's not just Right to Repair enthusiasts that care about that impact, it's extended to regulatory bodies that are tired of meaningless standards competition and arbitrary market separation. Apple can excuse these base truths with whatever feature or novelty they choose, but it doesn't overwrite the insidious functionality of their choices. You're basically describing the situation in reverse, from the perspective of foreign markets and regulatory watchdogs: "Another special, licensed connector for data and power? Why do consumers need that!" "An App Store? Why give Apple complete control over a feature as basic as installing software?" "Only one browser engine? How are new technologies intended to compete on a platform that doesn't acknowledge newcomers?" So on and so forth.
TapamN 3y ago
These "advantages" to sealing the battery are incredibly weak/false. The weight difference from sealing the battery is negligible. If it saved several hundred of grams, it would one thing, but a replaceable battery adds at most tens of grams. Even if the sticker price of device is cheaper, I would still have to pay more to replace the entire device once the battery is worn. This is the primary reason for most companies sealing the battery, to force buying an entire phone. Having a replaceable battery would save me money. Sealing the battery was not responsible for waterproof phones. There were already waterproof phones with replaceable batteries.
hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
On the contrary, I find in amazing to see the lengths that Apple apologists will go to point out these spurious reasons why Apple included non-removable batteries. The only point that you really list that is defensible is waterproofing. Lighter devices? Cheaper to manufacture? The idea that making a removable battery would make a phone noticeably heavier or impact the cost more than a cent or two is laughable. Even with the waterproofing, I'm dumbfounded on how one hand people can laud Apple for their truly amazing engineering capabilities (I may question its utility but the Vision Pro is really an incredible piece of engineering), yet somehow a waterproof removable battery (which some other phones have) is beyond their grasp.
- threeseed 3y ago
  Removable batteries requires valuable space for the mechanism to hold the battery, transfer the power from the battery, eject the battery etc. It doesn't come for free. At least based on what I've seen on camera mechanisms you're taking about 10-20% reduction in the battery cell.
  - blkhawk 3y ago
    Since the EU law is about making batteries "removable with normal tools" one could argue that encapsulating the battery like a camcorder battery with a plastic hull isn't needed. A normal pouch with contacts will do. Assuming "All day battery life" (24h) a 1% reduction in battery life is about equal to 15minutes but frankly I can't see the replaceable battery reduce the capacity at all if you are doing halfway good engineering - there is plenty of void space in an iPhone even now. By that I mean space over/under PCBs where the battery cannot go because it is still just a rectangular polygon even in say the iphone 15. I think it has 2 rectangular smaller cells with a casing around them to make an L shape. So why doesn't apple forgo the "casing" and take that sweet 10 to 20% extra capacity? :)

by EPWN3D 3y ago

smoldesu 3y ago

There are reasonable levels of supply chain integration, and then there is user-hostility. With Apple we've seen both sides of the coin, so you'll have to excuse the people who accuse them out the gate. It stands to reason that a company as large as Apple is capable of making decisions that impact large amounts of people. It's not just Right to Repair enthusiasts that care about that impact, it's extended to regulatory bodies that are tired of meaningless standards competition and arbitrary market separation. Apple can excuse these base truths with whatever feature or novelty they choose, but it doesn't overwrite the insidious functionality of their choices. You're basically describing the situation in reverse, from the perspective of foreign markets and regulatory watchdogs: "Another special, licensed connector for data and power? Why do consumers need that!" "An App Store? Why give Apple complete control over a feature as basic as installing software?" "Only one browser engine? How are new technologies intended to compete on a platform that doesn't acknowledge newcomers?" So on and so forth.

TapamN 3y ago

These "advantages" to sealing the battery are incredibly weak/false. The weight difference from sealing the battery is negligible. If it saved several hundred of grams, it would one thing, but a replaceable battery adds at most tens of grams. Even if the sticker price of device is cheaper, I would still have to pay more to replace the entire device once the battery is worn. This is the primary reason for most companies sealing the battery, to force buying an entire phone. Having a replaceable battery would save me money. Sealing the battery was not responsible for waterproof phones. There were already waterproof phones with replaceable batteries.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

On the contrary, I find in amazing to see the lengths that Apple apologists will go to point out these spurious reasons why Apple included non-removable batteries. The only point that you really list that is defensible is waterproofing. Lighter devices? Cheaper to manufacture? The idea that making a removable battery would make a phone noticeably heavier or impact the cost more than a cent or two is laughable. Even with the waterproofing, I'm dumbfounded on how one hand people can laud Apple for their truly amazing engineering capabilities (I may question its utility but the Vision Pro is really an incredible piece of engineering), yet somehow a waterproof removable battery (which some other phones have) is beyond their grasp.

threeseed 3y ago
Removable batteries requires valuable space for the mechanism to hold the battery, transfer the power from the battery, eject the battery etc. It doesn't come for free. At least based on what I've seen on camera mechanisms you're taking about 10-20% reduction in the battery cell.
- blkhawk 3y ago
  Since the EU law is about making batteries "removable with normal tools" one could argue that encapsulating the battery like a camcorder battery with a plastic hull isn't needed. A normal pouch with contacts will do. Assuming "All day battery life" (24h) a 1% reduction in battery life is about equal to 15minutes but frankly I can't see the replaceable battery reduce the capacity at all if you are doing halfway good engineering - there is plenty of void space in an iPhone even now. By that I mean space over/under PCBs where the battery cannot go because it is still just a rectangular polygon even in say the iphone 15. I think it has 2 rectangular smaller cells with a casing around them to make an L shape. So why doesn't apple forgo the "casing" and take that sweet 10 to 20% extra capacity? :)