3 ms·

> I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery This is a BS excuse. Lots and lots of gadgets with

• pembrook 5mo ago
  > Lots and lots of gadgets with removable batteries and waterproof design as evidence. And this is a BS rebuttal. None of them achieve the same miniaturization and water tightness as iPhone. This law is basically government being co-opted by a tiny vocal minority to force their unpopular opinions onto the rest of the public. If any modest percentage of the market cared about replaceable batteries above all else in their phones, the market would already be packed with removable battery phone options.
  • manoDev 5mo ago
    AFAIK, the primary reason Apple and others for avoiding removable batteries was the reputational risk and fire hazard of having customers put fake or damaged batteries, because that was long before they started marketing an IP rating. And by the way, the "water proofing" is only 30 minutes with pressure equivalent to 6 meters deep, tested with water nozzles. That's not a lot. Other gadgets that employ gaskets or positive pressure achieve more. I'm sure they can design for the same rating without hurting easier battery replacement ability with the right incentives.
    • IAmBroom 5mo ago
      Not a lot??!!