1723
It's official: Smartphones will need to have replaceable batteries by 2027 (www.androidauthority.com)
submitted 3 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
267 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Do you miss phones with replaceable batteries? By 2027, you won't anymore because, by law, almost every smartphone will have them again.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 36 points 3 years ago (3 children)

I have a two-way radio which floats in water and has a replaceable battery. It's just excuses. However I do believe they got rid of replaceable batteries to save on space and thickness of the devices.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Thickness is the only concern I have. I’d love to be able to replace the battery in my iPhone safely and easily, but I don’t really want to give up having a phone that’s less than 10mm thick.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] 10 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    And it had completely different innards and battery capacities. Just grabbing that old battery and putting it in a new phone would seriously limit the runtime on a single charge. Which is kinda the point, I really hope we don't trade replaceable batteries for the need to recharge twice a day or switch batteries to even make it the whole day. Or have a noticeable bulkier phone that won't fit as comfortably in my pocket. Or that it may not survive the rain shower I got surprised by because they skimped on the water proofing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    The main factor to consider in making an ultrathin phone in 2023 has nothing to do with the battery. It's the requirement for a certain level of build quality to be suitable for end consumers. At some point we just need to develop new materials, because we can't make it any more ultrathin without it also becoming ultrafragile using the materials available.

    It hasn't really been a focus since we realised back around the iPhone 5 that making these sweeping compromises for thinness was yielding diminishing returns and causing other problems. Today that's still the thinnest mainline iPhone, only the SE and 12 Mini are thinner. 13 mini is thicker, and there is no 14 mini.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    Ergonomics matter too. At this point going thinner is purely a marketing exercise rather than a practical improvement of any kind. If they were able to businesses would be making them so thin you can't hold them without risking a paper-cut so long as that allowed them to convince people that meant it was better than their current, designed for human hands, smartphone. Same thing with size. Personally I prefer a larger display and am willing to accept slightly worse ergonomics for it but even with more or less average sized hands I definitely find phones with 6 inch or under screens much more comfortable in the hand than the more typical sizes today and I know plenty of people with smaller than average hands (ie, half of the population) who really hate holding modern gigantic phones (and so often have held off on upgrading to a new model until I've steered them to something the same size as their old one.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    Thickness of your phone is now dictated by cameras. Because of focal lengths and what not, they need to be a certain size, that's why they're always with an overhang.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I think you're right. They then quickly learned that it's in their best interest to have a sealed system. Makes it cheaper to obtain higher IP ratings. Sells more devices. It obviously did nothing that hurt sales. Samsung is making an IP68 rated device with replaceable battery and still takes SD cards right now. It's only $600 to boot making it handedly cheaper than flagships. So why isn't it what everyone's pointing at in these threads? Cause the majority of people, even in these very threads, aren't buying it. These are not the factors that decided buying a phone. Otherwise removable batteries, SD cards and 3.5mm jacks would still be ubiquitous, but here we are.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    The Galaxy Xcover 6 pro is a box full of lies in terms of IP68 rating and associated warranty. I have written about my utterly disappointing experience of getting caught in a storm a couple of months after I bought it quite extensively elsewhere. Save to say I will not be buying another samsung product. It seems they have forgotten how they used to make that design work.

    Great phone, just not waterproof at all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    I have an old LG V20 (released in 2016) with a removable battery that's just 7.6mm thick. By comparison the Iphone 14Max is 7.9mm thick, the Samsung S23 Ultra - 8.9mm and the Oneplus 11 - 8.5mm.

    IMO the purpose of non-replaceable batteries is (just like everything else) profit. Companies want to push us to replace the entire phones every two years rather than just the batteries. They've been remarkably effective at doing just that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent