3 ms·

Mobile phones are extremely small, feature-packed, and quickly-advancing compared to any of these things. Plenty of Android phonemakers have teased repairable p

Mobile phones are extremely small, feature-packed, and quickly-advancing compared to any of these things. Plenty of Android phonemakers have teased repairable phones, but the drawbacks don't make them worthwhile. I think the market has spoken. Apple deserves criticism for desktop PC repairability, though. At least in the past. There were several iterations of Mac mini or other desktops that they intentionally made harder to repairable with no gain. I don't even mean the T2 chips that at least have a semi-plausible excuse, I mean like soldering in the RAM or gluing together the body. Again the market has spoken; I think even the creative pro market went to Windows long ago.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
The rate of advancement of PCs in the 90s was faster than it is for mobile phones today and many of those devices can run modern software to this day. Moreover, in both cases the primary difference is that the CPUs get faster and you get more memory and storage for the same price, which is irrelevant for the people using their phones primarily to make phone calls and send text messages, because the older hardware could do that when it was new and can still do it now. Which would allow people who need only that to buy a used phone and give people who need more than that someone to sell their old phone to. Making a phone modular isn't that complicated -- they, in fact, used to do it. Many flip phones had replaceable batteries that the user could so easily remove that they made external chargers in case you wanted two batteries. The amount of space and weight required to put a processor in a socket of the type traditionally used in laptops is negligible, even for a phone, but would significantly lower the cost of repairs because a broken connector on the logic board wouldn't require you to replace the expensive SoC. The electronics in many modern phones are already layered to preserve space and the contact points between layers are a natural position for modular component boundaries.
- hot_gril 3y ago
  Re 1990s PCs: If you're talking about the late 90s, not really. They standardized on x86(-64?) CPU talking to modular RAM and disk, in big boxes with plenty of room. Overall 30 years went by with basically the same standard because it was sufficient. Early 90s I'm honestly too young to talk about, but afaik both hardware and software were more unique and became obsolete more quickly, and today we're actually trending that way again. Re processor sockets etc: When is the last time you had to throw away the phone you use because of a bad CPU? Bad connector on logic board? The whole thing is a single solid piece now, it doesn't really fail. It's basically screen and battery, and both are actually not that hard to replace on iPhones.
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    > overall 30 years went by with basically the same standard. That mobile phones lack any kind of meaningful standard is rather the problem, but the form factor hasn't significantly changed since the original iPhone. > When is the last time you had to throw away the phone you use because of a bad CPU? That's the point. The CPU doesn't go bad, but it's expensive, and right now if a kid snaps off the USB connector on your phone you may have to replace the entire logic board including the CPU. Likewise if you're attempting a repair of something else and you damage one of the tiny fragile internal connectors in the process. Then you need a new logic board, but that could be a $20 part instead of a $200 one if everything else wasn't soldered to it. > Bad connector on logic board, what connectors? The whole thing is a single solid piece now, it doesn't really fail. It's basically screen and battery, and both are actually not that hard to replace on iPhones. There are often separate connectors for not just the screen and battery but the camera(s), earpiece, antenna(s), and also stuff like this: https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Taptic_Engine https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Taptic_Engine As I said, there are already a lot of connectors in the thing. Adding two or three more wouldn't be a big deal, but would do a lot in terms of repair cost by separating the things most likely to break from the things with the highest cost. It would also give you the ability to do upgrades. Any kind of standard for attaching more memory or storage would significantly extend the practical life of most devices, because it's generally not the CPU that becomes too slow.
    - hot_gril 3y ago
      Lack of standardization is the problem for repairability at least, but it has helped with progress. It's not like the government mandated a standard for desktop PCs, it just made sense for the industry. I'm not convinced that phone upgrades would work too well, due to incompatibilities. Except for storage. I think if the govt wants to be helpful here, mandating a microSD slot (at least an internal one) would improve longevity far more than the other things combined.
      - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
        > Lack of standardization is the problem for repairability at least, but it has helped with progress. What progress? How would having a standard memory or storage connector suitable to the form factor stifle progress? > It's not like the government mandated a standard for desktop PCs, it just made sense for the industry. It makes sense in any industry where there are a large number of companies that have to interoperate with each other. The big problem with phones is that there aren't a large number of companies -- the SoCs are pretty much all made by Qualcomm, Apple and Samsung and Apple and Samsung don't sell a lot of chips to third party OEMs. What they ought to do is break them up so there is some real competition in the market, or at least stop letting them buy up their competitors. But if that isn't going to happen then something else needs to happen, because the status quo is broken. > I'm not convinced that phone upgrades would work too well, due to incompatibilities. There is a new form factor for memory called CAMM, quite space efficient. Suppose there was a smaller version of that suitable for phones, all the phones used it, and then compatibility exists in the sense that every phone using DDR5 is compatible with every other phone using DDR5, but if your phone takes DDR6 then you need DDR6, also a standard, just a newer one. Why would this not work? It works for everything else.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

The rate of advancement of PCs in the 90s was faster than it is for mobile phones today and many of those devices can run modern software to this day. Moreover, in both cases the primary difference is that the CPUs get faster and you get more memory and storage for the same price, which is irrelevant for the people using their phones primarily to make phone calls and send text messages, because the older hardware could do that when it was new and can still do it now. Which would allow people who need only that to buy a used phone and give people who need more than that someone to sell their old phone to. Making a phone modular isn't that complicated -- they, in fact, used to do it. Many flip phones had replaceable batteries that the user could so easily remove that they made external chargers in case you wanted two batteries. The amount of space and weight required to put a processor in a socket of the type traditionally used in laptops is negligible, even for a phone, but would significantly lower the cost of repairs because a broken connector on the logic board wouldn't require you to replace the expensive SoC. The electronics in many modern phones are already layered to preserve space and the contact points between layers are a natural position for modular component boundaries.

hot_gril 3y ago
Re 1990s PCs: If you're talking about the late 90s, not really. They standardized on x86(-64?) CPU talking to modular RAM and disk, in big boxes with plenty of room. Overall 30 years went by with basically the same standard because it was sufficient. Early 90s I'm honestly too young to talk about, but afaik both hardware and software were more unique and became obsolete more quickly, and today we're actually trending that way again. Re processor sockets etc: When is the last time you had to throw away the phone you use because of a bad CPU? Bad connector on logic board? The whole thing is a single solid piece now, it doesn't really fail. It's basically screen and battery, and both are actually not that hard to replace on iPhones.
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > overall 30 years went by with basically the same standard. That mobile phones lack any kind of meaningful standard is rather the problem, but the form factor hasn't significantly changed since the original iPhone. > When is the last time you had to throw away the phone you use because of a bad CPU? That's the point. The CPU doesn't go bad, but it's expensive, and right now if a kid snaps off the USB connector on your phone you may have to replace the entire logic board including the CPU. Likewise if you're attempting a repair of something else and you damage one of the tiny fragile internal connectors in the process. Then you need a new logic board, but that could be a $20 part instead of a $200 one if everything else wasn't soldered to it. > Bad connector on logic board, what connectors? The whole thing is a single solid piece now, it doesn't really fail. It's basically screen and battery, and both are actually not that hard to replace on iPhones. There are often separate connectors for not just the screen and battery but the camera(s), earpiece, antenna(s), and also stuff like this: https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Taptic_Engine https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/Taptic_Engine As I said, there are already a lot of connectors in the thing. Adding two or three more wouldn't be a big deal, but would do a lot in terms of repair cost by separating the things most likely to break from the things with the highest cost. It would also give you the ability to do upgrades. Any kind of standard for attaching more memory or storage would significantly extend the practical life of most devices, because it's generally not the CPU that becomes too slow.
  - hot_gril 3y ago
    Lack of standardization is the problem for repairability at least, but it has helped with progress. It's not like the government mandated a standard for desktop PCs, it just made sense for the industry. I'm not convinced that phone upgrades would work too well, due to incompatibilities. Except for storage. I think if the govt wants to be helpful here, mandating a microSD slot (at least an internal one) would improve longevity far more than the other things combined.
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      > Lack of standardization is the problem for repairability at least, but it has helped with progress. What progress? How would having a standard memory or storage connector suitable to the form factor stifle progress? > It's not like the government mandated a standard for desktop PCs, it just made sense for the industry. It makes sense in any industry where there are a large number of companies that have to interoperate with each other. The big problem with phones is that there aren't a large number of companies -- the SoCs are pretty much all made by Qualcomm, Apple and Samsung and Apple and Samsung don't sell a lot of chips to third party OEMs. What they ought to do is break them up so there is some real competition in the market, or at least stop letting them buy up their competitors. But if that isn't going to happen then something else needs to happen, because the status quo is broken. > I'm not convinced that phone upgrades would work too well, due to incompatibilities. There is a new form factor for memory called CAMM, quite space efficient. Suppose there was a smaller version of that suitable for phones, all the phones used it, and then compatibility exists in the sense that every phone using DDR5 is compatible with every other phone using DDR5, but if your phone takes DDR6 then you need DDR6, also a standard, just a newer one. Why would this not work? It works for everything else.