One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are. If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".<p>It's okay to have idiosyncratic preferences (I certainly do), but people should recognize that this law will make phones _worse_ for most people, because this law will force phone manufacturers to compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.<p>I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences. But that's nonsense, because the law doesn't actually require people to replace batteries rather than replacing their phone, and by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone. At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.
Your experience is not at all what I see out there. Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day. They hate having to set up a new phone when their old one is totally fine other than the battery.<p>For the people I know that do upgrade their phones regularly, they typically want to give their old phone to someone who would love a usable phone, but can't afford a new one. Giving a phone with a shot and non-replaceable battery effectively destroys the value of the gift.<p>I know many people who can't afford to by new, and they avoid buying older or used phones because they fear the battery may be shot.<p>We obviously have different opinions regarding what most people want... totally fine.
I can't speak to the experience with Android but Apple offers both in-store battery replacement or Mail-in battery replacement for $70-120 which to me seems very reasonable. Could it be cheaper? Sure, maybe I guess? But $70-120 is a lot less than a new phone. And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail.<p><a href="https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery-replacement" rel="nofollow">https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery-replacement</a>
In many part of the world a lot of people buy second hand phones exclusively and they are the first customers for battery replacement. $70-120 is quite steep for them.
> And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail<p>The ancients managed to design around replaceable batteries, I don't think these techniques have been entirely lost to time.
how long are you willing to be without your phone? banking apps, public transit tickets, calls, messages, digital signatures. this is luxury not many can afford these days to be offline for days.
When I did it two months ago it took them an hour. Be generous and say they’re backed up and sometimes it takes two hours. Is that too long to be without your phone?
There are many small shops that swap batteries just fine in an hour, at least in Europe.
The battery costs $7-$12 to produce and ship to your location, so kind of strange to say $70-$120 is cheap.<p>It's a philosophical thing, sure. But the EU is taking the approach that businesses should make honest money by selling quality products, not through consumer-hostile practices like inflating the cost of spare parts + labour for fixing stuff.<p>In the past our family has had several Android phones where the battery was easily replaceable. We even had a couple of Motorolas where the screen was a simple and cheap thing to replace. That seems to be increasingly a thing of the past.<p>With those phones, I have never once experienced a failure mode related to seams / screws holding the phone together. If it's one thing that's extremely well known technology, it's fasteners and gaskets for consumer products.
Your claim of $7-12 for production and shipping requires citation, and availability of a lookalike on alibaba isn't sufficient citation.<p>Your claim that you "never once experienced a failure mode" is anecdata and it's pretty useless. Did you ever get your device wet because of the battery door and gasket not being aligned perfectly? Lots of people did.
For someone complaining about anecdata and a lack of citations, you're surprisingly eager to offer your own argument that basically boils down to "trust me, bro".
Do you manage to talk like that to people outside without getting punched in the face?
I just checked for my iPhone 14 Pro and the mail-in battery replacement is free. Maybe because I have Apple Care?
> And this way we don't need to compromise the shell of the phone with seams and things that can fail.<p>My older Samsung Galaxy had an easy clip-off back cover and easily replaceable battery. Nothing related to that ever failed.<p>Whereas two newer Pixel phones have had issues with the back cover glue coming loose, leading to interior damage.<p>Given that, the idea that a case that can be opened easily “compromises the shell of the phone” sounds like a weak excuse for some other deficiency or agenda.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day<p>I don't disagree with this, but I also think it's because the battery often dies around the time most people would consider upgrading anyway. The battery isn't the only reason people upgrade, it's just a forcing factor.<p>If batteries normally last 3-5 years, I don't think we're going to start seeing most people keep their phones for 7-10 years. I still think we're going to see people upgrading around the 3-5 year mark. I would point to the current market as evidence of this. An iPhone battery replacement is somewhere between $50-$100 right now which is drastically cheaper than a new iPhone and yet we still see the 3-5 year upgrade cycle. Maybe making it something you can do at home in a few minutes will result in a few more people just choosing to replace the battery vs the entire phone, but I don't see it drastically changing things since a cheap alternative to replacing the phone already exists and yet we still see the 3-5 year replacement cycle.
We're going to start seeing people keep the phones longer and longer. It used to be people were amazed at the upgrade between iPhone versions, and now they struggle to identify a difference.
> most people would consider upgrading anyway<p>most people would buy one phone and keep it forever if they could, because most people can't actually afford to be replacing their phone frequently.<p>The only reason they do is because they get slower, or battery gets worn out or whatever else. If their one phone actually lasted forever they would likely happily keep it forever
It would seem that "different opinions are out there" is not really a good basis for "one opinion enforced by EU directive", though.
Even going directly to Apple for out-of-warranty battery replacement is almost always way cheaper than getting another phone.
> They hate having to set up a new phone when their old one is totally fine other than the battery.<p>That is why I have the battery replaced every few years.
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day.<p>I am not sure if your statistic is correct or people giving you excuses to get the latest model. If we speak iphones, flipping the battery is cheap and fast process, incomparable with the hassle of doing re-setup.<p>I am not sure if the process is equally or more simple with android phones though, but in my circle noone buys new phone because of the battery (often the battery is used as excuse to get a newer model).
> I am not sure if the process is equally or more simple with android phones though, but in my circle noone buys new phone because of the battery (often the battery is used as excuse to get a newer model).<p>Your circle sounds pretty strange honestly. Everyone in it lies to you about why they do things, but you secretly know their real motivations?
> Most people I know only get new phones because their battery will no longer get them through the day<p>Getting the battery replaced is already trivial and cheap. Revealed preference is that most people say they want it, but don't. This won't even decrease the cost or difficulty (you'll still need a screwdriver).
But replacing a replaceable battery is trivialer and cheaperer.<p>I've replaced more batteries (and screens) than I can count, and it's increasingly difficult and complicated. 5 years ago or so I'd agree with you, but now there's no phone I can easily open without heat gun, controlling the air so no spec of dust land on the lenses (and a blower to remove in case it happens), and almost always I need adhesive (B7000) to patch or replace the original one to keep similar level of weather proofing. It's easy if you pay 100 bucks someone else to do it, sure.<p>Back in the days of my HTC Desire I could carry an extra battery, or two, in the pocket, without issue. Nowadays I'm married to a power bank that needs to be plugged for the duration.
It isn't trivial (you can't do it yourself) nor cheap (79€ for Samsung phones).
That's at most 1/10th the cost of the average Samsung phone.<p>That's cheap. If you think that a <i>safe</i> first-party replacement battery will sell for less than the 79€ that the whole replacement effort takes, then you're fooling yourself.<p>I strongly suspect that there's also not good language for blocking against third-party batteries (and the phone manufacturers would have good reason to do so because it might result in overheating or worse with really bad third-party batteries).
> <i>this law will force phone manufacturers to compromise the things that most people want in order to provide something that most people don't want.</i><p>Okay, you're claiming two things: (i) replaceable batteries will compromise some other features, and (ii) most people want those features more than they want a replaceable battery.<p>Can you name 3 of those features? I personally can't.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".<p>I have experience saying the exact opposite, although this was a few years ago.<p>OnePlus set up a marketing booth on my campus in 2018 or 2019 or so, and they did exactly this, with a large sign asking people what they want out of a phone. They asked passerbys what they want out of a phone, and they let people put their requests on a board.<p>When I put my request up, I wasn't the first one to request replaceable batteries and a headphone jack. (At the time, OnePlus had removed the jack from their most recent phone, after advertising their previous phone in comparison to Apple's jackless phone).
I think phone manufacturers will figure it out once it is a requirement. Was switching everyone to USB-C annoying for Apple? Sure. Are we in a better place because the EU forced it. You betcha. That's the point.<p>I don't love everything the EU does (cookie banners!?) but this is one where I have confidence that the consumer will ultimately benefit.<p>As others have noted, most people do not replace their phones every two years anymore, there just isn't any big reason to.
Cookie banners is malicious compliance. The ultimate goal being for you yo think it was bad legislation instead of how every company is fucking you for your privacy.<p>They’re winning.
I'd say it was bad legislation because this was a foreseeable outcome. I actually worked on cookie banners, and we did user testing, a full 80% of people closed it before reading single word and thought it was an ad.<p>This type of ambush agree to XYZ or you can't come in that we see with EULA's and privacy polices is unfair, just like if some scammer demanded people sign a fifty page contract before they enter the supermarket. This is something people understand intuitively.<p>It was foreseeable, and the end result is very little has changed as far as consumer privacy. Most people just agree to get the box to go away, if you actually want privacy your best bet is still a private browsing session and a VPN.
It was bad legislation because it didn't achieve anything except make visiting websites more annoying.<p>I don't care what the politicians intended. The outcome is no improvement in privacy but more annoying banners.
The cookie banners typically have an opt out. How is that not a privacy improvement?
The same way that the legislation that abolished slavery was bad because it didn’t account for the prison systems leasing out unpaid workers leading to even worse conditions for black folk in the US?<p>People talk as if the EU should have done nothing, or that the rule should be repealed, the GDPR forced people to have a functioning deny all.<p>The real lesson here is that people would rather annoy their users for money than create good products. Its a case <i>for</i> regulation.
Everyone moving to USB-C was the same standard, though; now you can use the same charger with your phone, laptop, tablet, other random gadgets, etc. If you forget your charger you can buy one virtually anywhere, or borrow someone else's, since they're all the same.<p>Everyone moving to "battery must be replaceable without tools" doesn't do anything useful for most users. Yeah, now you can carry an extra battery on a camping trip, I guess, though you could also carry a portable USB-C charger and use it for more than just your phone. It isn't particularly useful that it doesn't take tools to replace the battery when it starts failing, five years after your phone was discontinued, if you can't find a replacement battery for that exact model.
I also want headphone jacks back - which I'm sure will be less popular here than batteries. We used to have waterproof phones with both.<p>I'm not sure about the rules around required ability but I'd like that too
I've come to realize (I think) that this actually does have a lot to do with waterproofness <i>ratings</i> -- a legibility trap.<p>I notice that Fairphone excludes headphones from their latest devices, and attributes it to the necessary of doing so in order to get an "IP55" rating.<p>I'm not sure if that ultimately makes sense (and suspect that it... doesn't), but the legibility trap of that ratings system might actually be part of the cause of the current market absence of a feature so many people still talk about after years of its unavailability.
Phones back then were <i>definitely</i> not as durable as modern ones. Whether you like it or not, it's easier to waterproof a completely insulated system.
Every phone should have a SCSI port with an included terminator in the box.
> Was switching everyone to USB-C annoying for Apple? Sure.<p>Doubt. They have already switched over every other line they had.<p>I believe it was more of a marketing stunt, they calculated that n% of customers will be upset with the change, so they waited for the EU ruling so now they can just point these n% to blame the EU who will take the blame instead of them.
> Are we in a better place because the EU forced it. You betcha. That's the point.<p>Speak for yourself, I've gained nothing but annoyance. (I'm willing to accept a theoretical greater good argument - but I'm not precisely sold)
Apple was a key member of the USB-C consortium, it was always planned to be their universal connector. They waited on switching to avoid public backlash about "why are you switching wires when I already bought all of these wires?". They generally give connectors 10 years before changing them (see 32-pin 2003 - 2012 etc). Doesn't invalidate your larger point, but it incorrectly describes the history of USB-C adoption by Apple.
It used to be true that it made sense to replace your phone every few years because new ones were so much better. But like... I have a Pixel 8 and there's not really anything in a newer phone that's compelling enough to spend any money on...
same, my iphone 13 mini was great except for the fact i had to charge it twice a day in the end.
I still have my iPhone mini 12, in the desperate hope that it can last until Apple have another outbreak of common sense and decide that a mini iPhone has a place in the market.<p>Battery is starting to fade during the day, despite minimal use.<p>I think replaceable batteries should be mandatory and 10 years of security updates. In these times, phones are really expensive (however you pay for them) and we shouldn’t stand for planned obsolescence in any form.
I honestly know I could “optimize” my phone replacement schedule based on resale values of phones etc, but for the last ~15ish years I just replace my iPhone when the battery starts shitting itself (3-5 years each in my experience)
I agree, but also battery life has <i>significantly</i> improved over the last decade. Every phone I or my friends have replaced recently has been because the screen has broken. I would put good money on this being true for most people.<p>I think if the EU really wanted to reduce phone waste they'd make it easier or cheaper to fix screens. Still, this doesn't seem like a terrible move. I bet you can make it relatively easy to replace batteries without compromising much. Look at the Macbook Neo for example.
I had to replace my previous phone because my banking app dropped support for that Android version, and was going to stop working. The hardware was fine.<p>(I always buy phones in the cheapest tier, so that happens sooner)
I'm really unsure how broken screens happen. Don't you have a protective case on your phone? I've had smartphones for over 20 years, and have never broken a screen. Am I just lucky? More careful? I drop my phones too, but have never broken the screen. The only thing that ever failed on any phone I've owned has been the battery.
For me i had a case and a screen protection film bit the phone dropped on stone pavement exactly so that a higher part of the stone hit the screen edge between the case and the panzer glass.
Yeah protective case helps A LOT. I've broken two phones basically two weeks from buying them by dropping them on the floor before I put them in protective case. Costly mistakes, I don't do them anymore. Nowadays I buy the case together with the phone.<p>I don't know if it's just my luck, I never drop my phone, but when I buy new, I'm guaranteed to drop it several times a day for the first two weeks of owning it. The protective case is a phone saver
My phones all fail from internal hardware faults. Also never broken a screen.<p>I had a S3 that the battery would only last 12 hours or so, but the EMMC failed before the battery did.
People drop their phones. It's not complicated.<p>You might just be lucky. Tempering glass is a tricky business and it can be very very strong if impacted in some places but extremely weak in others.
Attempted to take picture. Dropped phone from chest height. Center of screen hit corner of I-beam sitting on ground that I was standing at the end of. Bought a screen protector after that.<p>Dropped it off the top of some pallet racking, ping ponged down, broke the button and cracked the screen at the bottom near the button. Bought a case (and kept the screen protector on under it, lol)<p>Left it sitting on top of trailer tongue tool box to run timer to check/flip lunch that was being grilled in the vicinity. Trailer was involved in a minor industrial accident. Phone got tossed and crunched. Lunch was fine.<p>Exposed the 3rd one to, IDK, something, that etched it without hurting the case. IDK what that would be though since I can't think of anything that I have around or use that would do that.<p>Current phone has survived since 2022. Last month the case finally wore out to the point where corners were coming apart and it would sometimes get caught on its way in/out of pockets and got replaced.
I’m not crazy like some people, but I’ve broken screens many times and every time it has been in a case, one time it was in a case I specifically bought for extra protection.<p>Half of my screen breaks have been from getting out of my car with my phone in my lap and gravel on the ground.<p>Another way I’ve broken screens is from my phone falling out of my pocket and onto rocks/concrete. That has happened twice.<p>And the final way has been from getting smashed <i>in</i> my pocket. I slipped while scrambling some rocks and my phone(in a case I bought for this long backpacking trip) got smashed on my hip, another time I was running around at my friend’s house at night and ran into a wheel barrow, smashing it on my thigh.<p>Never had a battery fail.<p>A note: My current iPhone 16 pro is built like a tank, and the glass is truly extraordinary.
[dead]
I don't know, I see people every day using old smartphonereachinfg for a power outlet everywhere they can because their phone do not last a day. Most think going to a shop to ask them to replace the battery will cost an arm.<p>I think that law doesn't even go far enough, they should standardize a battery format. When like me you are used to open smartphones and replace batteries you realize how very similar they are all in footprint and could be compatible with each other with very minimal effort. If there were only a couple of standardized formats you could find new batteries in every small shop/airports whatever and easily have spares. Chance is that other electronic devices or toys would also adopt them.
> <i>most people are going to want a new a phone.</i><p>This is going to be harder, or, at least, harder to replace your current phone with something objectively better. RAM and Flash shortages / high prices are likely going to last for years, wars are additionally jeopardizing production of electronic components, and the current crop of mobile devices is already insanely powerful. It's going to be pretty hard to sell most people an upgrade that feels meaningful when it's going to be like 30% more expensive.<p>Running AI locally could be a big selling point for an upgrade, but see the problems with RAM and general production capacity overload. I's not going to be a mass-market thing.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".<p>But what if you asked the right question, "what is the biggest problem with your phone?"<p>Most would answer, "the battery dies too soon. It doesn't last all day like it used to."
I don't think any single person I know would say they would exchange replaceable batteries for a 1mm thinner phone, waterproof up to 100m instead of 10m, or a $5 difference in price.<p>In fact, the only place I would ever expect somebody to claim otherwise is here.
I'd love thick phone with big battery, the current ones are already thin enough to be uncomfortable without a case, but the available models seem to be "ok if you want battery you want some rugged brick 3 android versions behind with everything else worse"
> I don't think any single person I know would say they would exchange replaceable batteries for a 1mm thinner phone, waterproof up to 100m instead of 10m, or a $5 difference in price.<p>Well, yes it's quite easy to argue against strawmen. I don't know anyone who would favor a built-in shoehorn over a replaceable battery either.<p>Although on your waterproof point, that's just a single dimension metric used for comms. It's not really about specifically descending to 100m. A 100m rated device responds better to water. In a general sense, it's more robust. Even if I don't go diving.
I don't know a single person that would dive with their phone or care about the thiness of the bezel.
I know plenty. But not among the 18-20 year olds that do not know it any different, sure. But certainly my grandpa. Just thinking that you do not need a power-bank and just bring an extra battery on a longer trip will get millions of people interested.
> I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".<p>Possibly true, and equally true of the screen, the charging port, or any other component.<p>"Repairability" isn't a feature people list unprompted, it's a property they notice the moment a £5 part bricks their phone.<p>The street-corner survey tells you what people currently notice, not what they'd value if the option existed.<p>> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new phone<p>In a market where batteries are glued in and replacement costs a meaningful fraction of a new device, of course people upgrade on that timeline. Change the cost structure and the behaviour changes with it.<p>Fair point that we'd want data, but the original claim rests on the same intuition, just pointed the opposite way.<p>The broader framing (that repairability is an idiosyncratic preference being imposed on a majority who don't want it) gets this backwards. Most people don't want to <i>care</i> about repairability, in the same way most people don't want to care about food safety standards. They want the option to exist <i>without having to think about it</i>. That's what the law provides.
> you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery"<p>Before that, you wrote "One of the most frustrating things about HN is that people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are" and it's exactly what I could say here. Not everyone has lots of money and for some people extending the life of their phones is important. They really <i>do</i> wish they could replace the battery without hassle and without paying a shop to do it.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".<p>Are you sure about this? I've heard this complaint from a lot of non-tech people who are old enough to remember flip phones with replaceable batteries. It might be age related.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone.<p>Not true. In recent years smartphones do not advance much, and would be perfectly fine to keep working if not for the dying battery.<p>> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.<p>The degree of "possible" varies greatly depending on the available expertise and spare parts. Right now in EU it's cost prohibitive for both coz the special labor required is expensive and almost no official spare parts for consumers. So of coz this will be no data to support your claim.
So I guess newer iPhones and iPad allow you charge up to 80%, which extends battery life, for idiosyncratic reasons? I’m sure there must have been a reason and demand for that.<p>I guess I run my iPhone on low battery mode a lot, due to idiosyncratic reasons too. Maybe I do.<p>Apple battery replacement costs anywhere from $70 (for a ~$400 phone) to $120 (for a ~$1000+ phone). In many global markets you can get a brand new phone for that much.
I think the data for your last sentence does exist. When Apple was forced to replace broken batteries on the 12, lots of people opted to replace the phone and there was a corresponding drop in iPhone sales.<p>It’s a pretty commonly used canonical example of revealed preferences.
Counter-point - people might not know what they want until they experience it.<p>Yeah, for someone that changes phone every 3 years or earlier, that's not a desired feature.<p>But many people did that change precisely <i>because</i> battery got weak, and there have been less and less reasons to keep on the most modern model for a while now.
Are laws typically enacted to compel companies to follow consumer demand? I think that’s what the market itself is best at.<p>Instead this law is designed to provide the public with a good everyone can benefit from - less waste of valuable electronic components polluting our environment.<p>And even if those same consumers would choose a thinner phone over a replaceable battery, they will probably also enjoy being able to fully charge it more often for less money.
> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.<p>I don’t understand. If we want to see the data we do need to make batteries replaceable.
We had replaceable batteries in phones for years. There's no reason battery replacement has to involve 20 steps and require ungluing the screen.
There are even fully water resistant (and IP rated phones) currently made with replaceable batteries. Best of all worlds
Exactly, this isn't something new. It was removed for no reason other than aesthetics and possibly to force users to buy a new device every few years.<p>May I remind you that the fist few iPhones were not water proof, yet the battery was not removable.<p>Laptops are not waterproof but those batteries are also no longer removable.
Modern iPhone batteries are basically user replaceable are they not? They are metal encased and the adhesive can be electronically disabled. They don't seem "worse" to me?<p>> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people<p>Sometimes we have to acknowledge the externalities of our lifestyle and take things down a notch.<p>Even if most throw out their old phones, now at least it'll be trivial to shuck these devices to get the battery for recycling, while sending the device for refurb or further recycling.<p>A key component to effective recycling is separation, and this is one step in that direction
Non-technical users might not be aware of much.<p>E.g. most peoples don't really think or ask that their tap water be free of cholera and other harmful substances, and yet we might want to make sure that continues to be the case. So it's not strong argument worth arguing about.<p>The real argument is - how much a compromise a replaceable vs non-replacable battery is. And I suspect the biggest part of non-replaceable batteries is actually superficial vanity considerations (gee, is it 7mm or 6.5mm), and planed obsolescence making more money. But the technical aspects are still a valid debate.
This doesn't require the battery to be replaceable. It requires either the battery to still be good after 1000 charges <i>or</i> for it to be replaceable, either one.<p>Although some of this depends on how you define replaceable.
Me and partner are both on iPhone 14 Pro. And this is more than powerful and sufficient for our daily use, except the battery is around 82%. I'd happily replace the battery right now for a more powerful one.
You can pay Apple to replace it for you, and the cost is not that high. £90 or so.<p>If the battery swap fails, you’ll get a as-new replacement phone and you also won’t be charged.<p>In exchange for this monetary cost and the inconvenience of leaving your phone at an Apple Store for 1 hour; you get peace of mind and a highly rated water/dust proof phone.<p>(Seriously, I’ve seen people diving with iPhones - no case - recording videos.)
I've done exactly that with my iPhone 14 Pro. Battery was degraded down to 72%, iOS suggested in the Settings app to get the battery replaced either at an Apple Store or at an authorized service center. I made an appointment at the Apple Genius Bar and took care of it in a little over an hour for $99. A lot cheaper than buying a brand new phone!
Modern phones have 7 years of software support, but the battery lasts only around 3 years.
Half of cellphone users hold onto phone for 3+ years and experience battery degradation, and cell phone battery life is the #1 complain/concern about cellphone users. They might not immediately demand swappable batteries (particularly if they're too young to have ever owned a cellphone with swappable batteries) but I suspect if you prompted them, that the response rate would be very high, and that this isn't just an echo chamber concern.
<i>"…by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone."</i><p>Why? There have been few new features in recent years and new phones have restrictions not wanted by many. Google is closing the Android ecosystem and making it more proprietary so I'll keep my phone as long as I'm able.<p>The non-replaceable battery has to be one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on consumers. It's great that it's about to be broken.
>and by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone<p>That remains to be seen. This could accelerate cultural change around desiring shiny new toy being seen as cool
I used to be in this camp, and before we had the charge limit and power saving mode it was true, but now? I'm no longer sure.<p>Like, I've had my phone for 6 years now and the battery is still going strong with the 80% charge limit always on throughout its lifetime. Meanwhile the USB-c port is shot to fuck and disconnects constantly, it can't connect to 5G, leaving me without a connection in lots of locations cause there are no fallback towers, and the OS support has basically been over for a year now. Cameras are no longer up to snuff either and I could use a storage upgrade.<p>My previous phone had a replacable battery, which I replaced once before the GPS and wifi chip died and turned it into an air gapped brick. Everything else seems to fail at a similar rate.<p>Still it's not really about if it lasts as long or not. It's about having the right to repair devices and to reduce waste at large. First batteries, then displays, main boards, etc. Each law builds on the previous one as precedent.
I think that’s the wrong way of framing it. If, before the launch of the iPhone, you asked what people wanted from their phones you’d be there a very long time before anyone described something like an iPhone (no buttons, capacitive touch interface, etc). And yet, once they were offered it, people flocked to it.<p>This regulation is targeted to devices with poor battery lives. Just because it hasn’t occurred to people to ask for the feature doesn’t mean they won’t appreciate it.
That's an odd reply since by that argument they also flocked to a phone with no replaceable battery, which was pretty standard in the 2000s.<p>But you could be right. I guess this will be an experiment to watch: If EU consumers show a strong preference for replaceable batteries once they become more widely available, we can expect manufacturers to start offering it in other markets as well.
>they also flocked to a phone with no replaceable battery,<p>Did they flock to a phone with no replaceable battery the same way we flocked to phones with no headphone jack?
I think everything is a tradeoff and at that point people took the trade. But the place smartphones take in our lives today compared to 2006 is radically different, I wouldn’t assume much carries over.
I am using mobile phones since 1996, I will gladly accept the "worse" experience.<p>And no, I don't want a new phone just because the battery wears out, it did not lost the ability to do phone calls and SMS in the process.<p>We are on the year of Android 17, my oldest device still runs Android 12 perfectly well, with the apps I care about.
If we run this experiment and most people say they wish they could replace their battery would you concede you are actually the one with idiosyncratic preferences?
> asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, [...] before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".<p>'If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses'....Henry Ford<p>Nobody cares about repairability....until they are hit hard by it.<p>Anecdote: Around 5y ago, the lightning connector of my wife's iPhone died after 3y usage.<p>We brought it to an Apple Store and the official answer was "Sorry, we don't fix that on this model. Here is a 200€ discount on a new one"... The phone was still worth >900€ at the time.<p>Let's be clear: This kind of commercial practice are unacceptable both ecologically and ethically speaking. It is terrible customer service.<p>A lot of high end phones (outside Apple) at the time would have their USB-C port fixed in matter of few hours for <100€ in any random "I Fix it" store.<p>The battery is the exact same shit.
I'm curious about the environmental argument here. At face value it makes sense, but is there some hard data that shows that there is a meaningful number of consumers that buy new phones only (or "mostly") because of battery degradation?<p>The article (granted, probably not the best source of information) has some numbers like "number of phones sold", but doesn't actually tackle the crux of the issue: how many of those phone sales would be <i>prevented</i> by having user swappable batteries?
My previous phone was refurbished and was great in all ways except for battery life. I have now bought a new phone that I wouldn't have bought if batteries were replaceable.<p>Having said that, I do like having waterproof phones, and I expect this rule would make that harder.
With the replaceable batteries the people at least have a choice. Without the option for a battery swap you had to buy a new device and throw away a otherwise totally fine one.
A lot of people buy new phones only because their battery doesn't get through the day anymore.<p>Very ironic, you almost got it, post.
More replaceable batteries can have secondary effects that most people would probably like though - like the ability to by a used phone on ebay/FB marketplace that doesn't have an abysmal battery.
most of the time I replace my phone because the battery degraded so badly and a replacement is expensive.<p>Its not enough <i>by itself</i> that the phone has amassed scratches and is 20% slower or has a 30% worse camera optic than the current generation, or that updates will only continue for a year or two more.<p>But the slowdown (associated with battery degradation btw) and fact that it doesn’t get me through a whole day definitely move the needle into me buying a new phone.
I don’t know what’s with tech people and their insistence that most people who use tech are mindless zombies.
How about you ask people if they want a non-swappable battery for 1 mm less thickness?
Can I have a thicker phone but narrower<p>I currently have a 12 mini, but I'd love to go back to the iphone 4 size, or even a blackberry curve. Would be fine for comms, and I suspect I'd spend less time doom-scrolling on it.
I think most people who are capable of figuring out how buying a new phone impacts their financial goals would be in favor of this
Given that probably one in twenty people you'd meet would have between 5 and 10% of battery left: probably most of those.<p>(and yes, I know that power banks exist)
I think most americans are happy to have usb-c on their Iphones.
No one cares, and having replaceable batteries is not gonna make any difference software and hardware support as usual will drive most people to upgrade their phones or their computers or anything else electronic for that matter.<p>Owner of an 11Pro iPhone soon to be obsolete after seven years. I probably will upgrade sometime in the next two years nine years with the same electronic device is long enough.<p>I got my moneys worth. very satisfied with the longevity and resale value of most of the Apple products in comparison to the competition.
bookmarking this to revisit after couple years.
Right to repair has never been about requirement to repair. Obviously we can't force people to repair their phones instead of buying a new one, because that would involve replacing the market economy with a planned economy. This would be extremely difficult to pull off and would be wildly unpopular.<p>At the same time, 5.78 billion people have a smartphone worldwide. It is obviously wildly unsustainable to live in a world where 5.78 billion people have to throw away their old phone and buy a new one every 2-3 years. However, phone manufacturers have figured out that if they force people to, they can amass ridiculous levels of wealth because the demand for new phones would be constantly high. So obviously the incentives here are completely wrong. This has happened before with lightbulbs in the 20th century and is a legitimate form of market failure that needs to be resolved, as it wastes a lot of consumer spending to replace what consumers already had (like the parable of the broken window).<p>For many years since phone manufacturers started gluing phones together with a consumable part inside, consumers have been denied the ability to replace their battery. Where the option does exist, it's often very inconvenient, difficult, or with a price inflated to be nearly as expensive as buying a new one.<p>Phones stopped advancing significantly many years ago. Phone manufacturers now re-release practically the same phone with slight CPU and camera improvements, something completely unheard of until relatively recently. Lately the main marketing trend for new phones has been AI, but this is a nonsense trend because most of modern AI runs in the cloud, and very few are actually utilizing any local AI features, so the only "AI" thing about the phone is just a preinstalled ChatGPT-like app you can get on any other phone. So clearly they have run out of things to improve, and things to market around. In a normally functioning market, this would mean phones have become a solved technology and we can stop replacing our phones as often, maybe once every 10 years if you're careful with your phone. But this is not what we see precisely because phone manufacturers have been manufacturing problems that are most easily solved by buying a new phone, which they will push people to do whatever way they can for profit. The phone industry has failed to regulate itself, and so this is why we are seeing a push for this type of regulation.
> by the time batteries wear out, most people are going to want a new a phone.<p>Extreme consumer brain coupled with privilege. Billions of people can’t afford a new phone every couple years, they buy things and use them until they are past the point of repair, only buying a replacement when they have no other choice.<p>Can you honestly even say this year’s new flagships, or any from the last decade, represent meaningful improvement for most people outside the tech bubble and influencer sphere? Smartphones have been “good enough” for a long time.
Apple is about to deprecate the iphone 11/SE 2020 version. Am gonna repurpose them as webcams given the 12MP camera put in there is arguably better than the brand new ones they put on new macs.<p>The phone now has a limited lifespan though because of this prior stupidity where eventually am gonna get into spicy pillow territory. At that point the phone prematurely dies.<p>We are going into a period where we are throwing away devices with 12mp+ cameras, and processors arguably faster than most desktops. It was arguable when the phones were old and legacy, but at this point the cameras on there are stupidly good.<p>We need these phones to be repurposed for a second life and actually capture their manufacture energy costs.<p>Frankly, if Apple allowed old iphones to be used for server usage, it is kind of crazy how efficient per dollar that would be.
Following the bottle-cap madness, I don't think any current data shows the actual issue was resolved. Even worse, the effect on marine life is still not measured, and afaik reduction of harm was the primary goal. Instead of brutally high fines on fishing net waste, we got bottle-cap madness.<p>We have so much experience with scientific method, yet these massive decisions are adhoc, that's how the whole world works. We never tested what would happen by allowing mass production of plastic, or phones, or whatever, so these antipatches are going by the "feels" as well, with no individual taking responsibility for failures.
A bit off topic, but I recently had a drink that didn't have the attached bottle cap while travelling abroad, and my god, was it a minor annoyance to have to hold the bottle cap in my hand while drinking. I also almost dropped it because I expected it to stay attached. Funny how fast we adapt.
There is monitoring of beach pollution but data publication is typically delayed, like, we know it went down by 30% from 2015-2016 to 2020-2021, we will have data on a regulation that went into force in late 2024 only in a few years.<p>[0]<p><a href="https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-updates/marine-litter-eu-coastline-down-almost-one-third-2025-02-04_en" rel="nofollow">https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-upda...</a>
This is not about charging your phone.
> this law will make phones _worse_ for most people<p>I challenge you to give me an example of how this law might result in a phone that is worse for most people.<p>This law does not require a slide-off phone cover. It does not require a screwed-on backplate. It does not forbid the use of chemical adhesives. It does not stipulate how a phone should or shouldn't be designed.<p>It basically just requires the manufacturer to offer replacement batteries and to enable the replacement to be done with commercially available tools. I'd wager the overwhelming majority of phones are already compliant, pending availability of a replacement battery from the manufacturer.<p>I'm quite confident I could replace the battery on my Sony Xperia 1 iii with a heat gun and my basic iFixit toolkit.
<i>> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".</i><p>If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby if they want their phone to have a replaceable battery, I don't think you would be there very long before receiving a "yes". I think that's a more honest framing of the question.<p><i>> I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences. But that's nonsense, because the law doesn't actually require people to replace batteries rather than replacing their phone</i><p>How could they replace their batteries if they wanted to, unless the manufacturer makes it possible? The goal is not to force individuals to not replace their phones, but rather to provide that as an option at all, for those who want it.<p><i>> At the very least we'd need to see some data that shows that most people replace batteries when it is possible to do so.</i><p>At the very least, we'd need only data showing that that number is non-zero. From where did you get the idea that we need to prove <i>"most"</i> people would choose to take advantage of this option?
> The goal is not to force individuals to not replace their phones, but rather to provide that as an option at all, for those who want it.<p>But my point is that you need to recognize that in so doing, you are taking away the option of having other things, such as waterproofing, larger batteries, smaller/lighter phones, etc. There is no free lunch.
<i>> But my point is that you need to recognize that in so doing, you are taking away the option of having other things, such as waterproofing, larger batteries, smaller/lighter phones, etc. There is no free lunch.</i><p>1. Waterproofing is possible with replaceable batteries.<p>2. Larger batteries are possible with replaceable batteries. In fact, replaceable batteries makes this <i>easier</i>. I'm old enough to remember when you could buy a bigger battery for your cell phone that came with a bulged cover to accommodate it. If you don't want that though, you will have the choice to avoid it.<p>3. Smaller/lighter phones are possible with user-replaceable batteries. You could even use a smaller/lighter battery, too, if you wanted<p>These options aren't being taken away. We're just adding another option.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change about their phone, I think you would be there all day before someone said "I wish I could replace the battery".<p>I doubt most people wouldn't even think that this is a thing they can wish for or that this is even within realm of possibility.<p>It has to be explicitly named as an option - as, I'm afraid, people have forgotten that you can have "nice things".<p>Also I feel rather uncomfortable every time somebody purports to be representitive of or know that "most people" want.
> If you stood on the street corner and asked every passerby what they would change...<p>... the answer would depend on which street corner you asked.<p>> people seem so unaware of how idiosyncratic their preferences are<p>Yes, they are. They also tend to state that "most people" agree with them. This is called subjectivity.
I think you're plain wrong. I have never talked to anyone in my life about phones who didn't want replaceable batteries and wasn't annoyed by the throwaway culture. It's a top priority for the people I know, though by far not important enough for most of them to go for something like a Fairphone.<p>However, these preferences don't really matter anyway because nobody is forced to replace the battery and <i>not</i> buy a new phone when their phone has replaceable batteries.
I envision somone keeping a phone long time, not updating it and evtualluy the spying hooks get obsolete and so phone gets more secure, as tech companies move on with new apis and drop support for the old ones. This might be the biggest win. Ms still has customers using win95
> I suppose someone will say that this law is necessary for environmental reasons, regardless of people's preferences.<p>Welcome to democracy and lawmaking in 2026. We know better than you!
It would take a great deal of lawmaking to make phones more <i>worse,</i> for most people, than phone manufacturers and mobile app developers already do. You want to talk about idiosyncratic preferences, really? <i>Here?</i>
My own hesitation with HM echo chamberification is federation. <i>Nobody cares</i>. And until you can point to a concrete benefit to end users, you should stop and think about why you’re pushing it this hard.<p>But I don’t think this is the case with phone batteries. I’ve had many conversations with friends and family that came down to replace the battery or upgrade the phone.<p>I feel the same way about soldered on CPUs, RAM and SSDs in laptops and other computers. The benefits of doing this are marginal at best. We all know the real reason is forced obsolescence.<p>We all know this is why battery replacement is hard too.
[dead]