5 ms·
Which phones? I ask as someone that's had to replace multiple phones after a trip through the washing machine. Modern phone water resistance is incredible. I'v
by Alupis 6mo ago
Which phones? I ask as someone that's had to replace multiple phones after a trip through the washing machine.
Modern phone water resistance is incredible. I've even seen people literally swim with their phones and not even question if it was a bad idea.
- tencentshill 6mo agoSamsung Galaxy S5 was the last one that attempted it. IP67 with a removable back cover and swappable battery.
- Alupis 6mo agoYes, but IP67 is not nearly as water resistant as IP68, which all modern phones are for the most part. I'm not knowledgeable enough to know if IP68 could be achieved in a phone without glue. There's no clamping mechanism for the backs, they're just press-fit with small clips.
- seba_dos1 6mo agoWho cares though? Sealing the battery in makes the device less drop resistant. I somehow managed to avoid water damage to my phones for decades, while none of my phones managed to avoid being dropped in a way that would most likely be fatal to them if their batteries were sealed in - and yet most of them survived to this day. A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with.
- b112 6mo agoA phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with Some like to read in the bathtub. Statistics say women prefer the bathtub more than the shower. Therefore your position is sexist. (Yes, I'm being an asshat)
- drw85 6mo agoRead a book then?
- dmitrygr 6mo ago> Who cares though? a lot of normal people who daily-use their phones near water and even jump into pools with them. I would bet you $100 that if you asked people "replaceable battery of water proofing to the same level you have it now", ~ nobody will puck the former.
- seba_dos1 6mo agoNot once in my life I had thought "I would like to jump into this pool with my phone", while I did sometimes replace the battery on-the-go which actually made my life easier. It's an absurd take. If anything, I'd be more concerned with beverage spills, but these are still easier to avoid than drops.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- jamiek88 6mo agoWell you are the exception. Especially if you live in a hot area where a lot of people have backyard pools. Being in and out of the water constantly is a very normal in Florida for example. Most the suburban kids in Houston had wristband attachments to their phones in the pool or would be in a floaty taking stupid pics of each other as kids do. Trying to keep a modern phone dry takes away a lot of utility.
- seba_dos1 6mo agoNot a lot of people live in hot areas with plenty of backyard pools, but I can understand that waterproof phones could become more popular there than in the rest of the world based on this property alone (right now they're popular because there's not much choice).
- bigstrat2003 6mo agoThose people are doing a very stupid thing. I don't think that the world should be ordered around "let's make it so people can do stupid things without consequence".
- cozzyd 6mo agoquite a few people put their phones in their back pockets...
- jamiek88 6mo agoI’ve done it and seen it many times. People throw their phones to each other in pools and the beach for photos all the time. One of the best things about modern phones is the waterproofing. IP68 level is amazing. > A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with It’s actually the opposite - a user replacement battery is a gimmick not worth the downsides. Apple know this, and they know their customers a lot better than you do. Your position is niche at best, anachronistic really.
- seba_dos1 6mo agoApple has vested interest in getting their customers to switch to a new phone often, and the average time to upgrade is absurdly low these days (less than 4 years), which is greatly influenced by battery wear and fall damage, so I don't think this argument is very persuasive.
- gf000 6mo ago> user replacement battery It's not really the old kind of replace-ability, though. The only requirement is that you should be able to change it with commercially available tools.
- kube-system 6mo ago> A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with. I submerge my phone as a matter of normal use because I can. I take it into pools and hot tubs, and I clean it in the sink -- I personally wouldn't trade that for a battery door.
- me-vs-cat 6mo agoBeing replaceable does not require a battery door.
- kube-system 6mo agoThe EU regulation we’re talking about essentially does, with an exception for high cycle batteries on waterproof phones
- me-vs-cat 6mo agoNo, it doesn't require a battery door, even for phones that don't meet the exception you mentioned. Over a decade ago, I replaced a phone screen over a few hours, involving a couple dozen screws. During that, I had to remove the battery. (Replacing only the battery would have been easier.) I'm a layman, and all the screws were Phillips. That's sufficient to be replaceable.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- tossaway0 6mo agoHave you had issues because of wear and tear? I trust the water proofing completely until my phone has fallen out of my hands onto the floor. Then I won't chance any submersion and I can't think of an accurate way to test it.
- kube-system 6mo ago
- VorpalWay 6mo agoNothing stops them from adding a gasket and some screws though.
- cannonpr 6mo agoFrom a mechanical perspective ip68 is perfectly achievable mechanically and watches have been achieving it for a long time, however… with what sort of margins for the manufacturer and what sort of cost for the consumer ? Additionally a lot of them require pretty carefully adherence to instructions torques and tolerances to achieve the same waterproof rating. Personally I’d be very happy to have a phone that says, if you swap the battery you might lose the ip68 rating unless you follow the resealing process within tolerances.
- bananamogul 6mo agoMaybe as a society it's better for people to have replacement insurance than to have sealed batteries that make phones so disposable. I wonder if we've defined IP68 as a "must have" without considering the alternatives. I'm thinking the percentage of people who actually "use" IP68 over the course of their phone is pretty small...yet that "requirement" drives a huge design choice. I suspect it's a moot point. Makers have every incentive to drive replacement cycles.
- bananamogul 6mo agoDownvoted for daring to speculate. I love this place.
- kube-system 6mo agoSpills and drops were traditionally most common causes of mobile device insurance claims. We've only seen that change for phones because of their IP ratings in recent years. While manufacturers do have an incentive to get people to buy new phones, many of them with first party insurance do have an incentive not to pay out as many claims.
- mustyoshi 6mo agoPhones aren't disposable because of the lack of replacement batteries. I keep my phones for 3-4 years, and the battery life while degraded isn't really an issue. And that's with recharging it just about every night even if it's not dead.
- tossaway0 6mo agoI replaced my phone because of the battery life, and I would have replaced the battery if it would have been easy, to offer a counter anecdote. I had to make the choice of getting another phone (used in great condition, as I do) or pay half the cost I paid to get the battery replaced but also knowing it would still be heaviy used and more likely to fail in other ways because of use. If labor cost and decreased relaibility weren't factors, swapping the battery would have been the choice. Now the question is: are there more people like me or more people who need a sealed, hard to repair phone? I don't know but if I did I'd accept keeping the current situation.
- retatop 6mo agoMy phone (A Furiphone FLX1, which is kindof a variant of a Gigaset GX6) has a removable back with a gasket and is IP68. One of their promotional videos had them change the battery on video then boot the phone and and unlock it underwater
- wolvoleo 6mo agoYou forget the Xcover and active lines which do IP68. They stopped making Galaxy active phones but the tabs are still there. The Xcovers too.
- numpad0 6mo agoJapan only, but KDDI/Kyocera never stopped IP rated phones with removable battery. TORQUE G07(2026) is IP65/68/69 rated with a coin key locked removable back cover. It also officially support submersion in seawater as well as cleaning with soapy water. Most glued phones support neither. 1: https://k-tai.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/2088291.html https://k-tai.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/2088291.html
- nmeofthestate 6mo agoI googled it - nobody is buying that thing instead of a normal consumer smartphone. It's like a 'Panasonic Toughbook' in phone form.
- numpad0 6mo agoIt's just a consumer phone sold through KDDI retail channels. Not a B2B thing. And it exists because enough consumers in Japan buy one. The original claims in this tree is that waterproof phones with removable backs are somehow impossible and glued shut designs are somehow superior. That's a total BS, so I posted a counter example. Torque phones being rugged in addition to being waterproof, unlike iPhones that are just purified-water-proof, has nothing to do with feasibility of one-upping them with removable backs and rubber gaskets.
- markus92 6mo agoSamsung Galaxy S5 is the first one to cross my mind.
- mattkrause 6mo agoFifteen years ago, I had a Garmin GPS (admittedly not a phone, but similar form factor) that survived a week of knocking around the bottom of a raft. The battery compartment had a rubber gasket and some very tight screws.
- nine_k 6mo agoHow much of the total volume of the device was the case/housing? I suppose the glue-everything approach is partly due to the desire of making a device very thin. There's no room for strong, load-bearing outer case, the internals are load-bearing.
- PunchyHamster 6mo agoYou just need well designed rubber gasket. Thickness is impact resistance thing in those devices
- mattkrause 6mo agoIt's been a long time, but the gasket itself was probably a millimetre or two thick, squeezed extremely tightly by the screws in the battery cover. It ran on AA or AAA batteries, and they took about about half or a third of the depth.
- kennywinker 6mo agoI suspect manufacturing has something to do with gluing too. Afaik screws are expensive compared with glue, and their assembly involves slow humans or expensive robots.
- Groxx 6mo agoHonestly I'd expect that to be SIGNIFICANTLY easier to waterproof than a laundry machine. Partly because laundry is sometimes done warm, and warm softens materials (like gaskets), but mostly because laundry has surfactants that considerably reduce surface tension, making it far easier to slip past gaps. There is a good reason waterproofing claims are specific about the kind of liquid (usually just fresh or salt water, usually without significant movement (i.e. jets, like you get in a shower)).
- e12e 6mo agoNot really comparable perhaps - but I had a Ericsson t18s or similar that went through a full 60C cotton wash cycle (being on at the start of the wash) and was fine after drying off. The thing is - if the battery had been destroyed, that could have been replaced...
- wolvoleo 6mo agoSamsung still make the rugged Xcover range which has both replaceable batteries and waterproofing. And 3.5mm jacks too. These devices are mostly sold in enterprise environments (eg field use, factories) and as such get a lot of wear and tear. But they hold up well. They're not ultra rugged but a good compromise. We use tons of them in our factories, we replaced DECT handheld phones with the Xcovers loaded with ms teams. Not an ideal setup (teams for mobile kinda sucks) but at least this way they can easily communicate with people in the offices.
- Barbing 6mo agoDimensions well worth it: Samsung Galaxy XCover7 169 x 80.1 x 10.2 mm (6.65 x 3.15 x 0.40 in) Apple iPhone 17 Pro 150 x 71.9 x 8.8 mm (5.91 x 2.83 x 0.35 in) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_Xcover_series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_Xcover_series
- wolvoleo 6mo agoYes but they just don't make a small model. Same as their consumer midrange line (A36/A57). They did before. The Xcover 4S was 146.2 x 73.3 x 9.7 mm (5.76 x 2.89 x 0.38 in) Also, these are business rugged models, unlike the iPhone.
- Sohcahtoa82 6mo ago> I've even seen people literally swim with their phones and not even question if it was a bad idea. Which is funny to me, because even with an IP68 phone, I get worried if I even splash a little water on it.
- mhandley 6mo agoBack when replaceable batteries were the norm, I had two Blackberries that survived going through the washer and dryer.
- chupchap 6mo agoI was wading through water with a 3310 in my pocket in 2006. Battery was fine and it worked after it was dried. There was a problem with the keyboard though but that was a cheap swap. And this was a phone without any water resistance.