In a perfect world, sure. But people also want phones these days that are physically durable, have some degree of waterproofing/water resistance, maximum battery life, etc. Many of the demands and expectations of a modern phone aren't easily compatible with a replaceable battery design that can withstand the incompetence of the average end user.

A GoPro fits all of those requirements and has easily replaceable batteries. Now, I understand that the shape and sizes are different. But I wouldn't mind some extra mm of thickness (I already get a pretty big camera bump anyway) if that means I can replace a battery faster.

YOU would not mind, many others would.

We don't have a choice in the first place, minding or not. People who would mind missing a 3.5mm jack or replaceable battery have no say anyway, as none of the flagship devices on the market have either.

Have you ever wondered why none of the flagship devices have one?

If the demand existed the devices would as well.

That only holds if you believe the market has a high level of efficiency.

Maybe if we wait long enough, the distribution of devices being manufactured will match consumer preferences, but I don't believe that to be the case today. The iPhone Mini sold ~millions of units. That may not be enough for Apple, but it's certainly enough to make a profit, yet nobody's building small phones now.

That statement looks like an assumption. Do you care to back it up with some factual sources?

>people also want phones these days that are physically durable,

Anecdotally on this front, I have had to replace the screens of my iphones at least three times in the past (different models). Incidentally, I have never needed to replace the screen of a phone that had a replaceable battery. YMMV, but this seems needlessly defeatist.

>maximum battery life

One could also claim that bespoke charging cables allow for faster charging or longer battery life, but I don't know any iPhone users that are a crying a river for their deprecated non-standard chargers. But again, YMMV I guess.

> some degree of waterproofing/water resistance

Can we have this discussion once? In this thread alone, there's like 50 instances of people making this claim and each time it takes about 20 minutes before at least one person replies that it's not the case, after which no refutals are posted. I'm happy to learn it is false if it is (I never had a phone that I trusted to be waterproof to any degree so I don't have first-hand knowledge), but it gets really tiring to read the same information level over and over as a reason for why we can't have nice things

Taking this comment as an example of someone who actually used a battery-swappable phone in rain on a motorcycle: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835184 (I'm not only taking the person's word for it: the device is also IP certified as waterproof 30 mins at 1m depth)

> (I'm not only taking the person's word for it: the device is also IP certified as waterproof 30 mins at 1m depth)

Many expect phones these days to be the more stringent IP 68, this would correspond to a device with the lesser water resistance of IP X7.

That phone only needs to be restored to IP X5 to handle usage in rain.

So it is great they got it (somewhat? completely?) restored, but it was a device with less water resistance than many flagships phone today, tested with a lower level of water resistance than it was originally rated for.

Fwiw, I also use devices with no IP certification or claims whatsoever in mild rain. It's not because there's a drop on the plastic case that it'll seize up, so the 5th ingress protection level being minimum for rain... I mean, technically yes, practically... depends if you really mean exposure to proper rain for more than the distance between bus stop and door step, say

Edit: wait,

> this would correspond to a device with the lesser water resistance of IP X7.

If 7 is already considered lesser...

> That phone only needs to be restored to IP X5 to handle usage in rain.

I looked it up and level 3 is rain actually ("spraying water"). How is 7 not sufficient for anything but perhaps full-on diving sessions

You severely underestimate the capabilities of modern electronics manufacturers. Sure, it’s harder to produce something that fits all those capabilities. But it’s totally possible. This is exactly the scenario where government regulation is critical to a well-functioning market.

We can make waterproof things that are attached with screws.

The missing part is "at a specific price point".

There is a lot you can do with advanced materials science but as you get close to the high end of capability the cost goes up very rapidly and the ability to scale production is reduced.

Engage with the content of his comment instead of resorting to ad hominem.

He's right - the market wants embedded batteries, although perhaps not directly. Embedded batteries have improved price, battery capacity, water proofing, size, and strength. If the consumer really wanted a removable battery and all that that entails then there would be more phones that offered that. The reality is people misjudge what all that entails. By all means, I would love to just make the iPhone battery directly replaceable without any compromises but that's not reality.

Incorrect. Replaceable battery is a feature that decreases sales. Why would you implement it when battery being weak will cause substantial amount of users to replace phone instead of paying for service to replace the battery ?

If the feature isn't expected and it decrease sales, why would manufacturer put it in ?

And decreasing sales is exactly what the EU wants to accomplish. To stop people buying a whole new phone every couple of years.

Unfortunately I do expect other tricks towards planned obsolescence. Long-term support is now a thing but what they can still do is make phones slower over time. Even Apple did this with the iPhone 6.

If the phones with replaceable batteries break more often (and they most likely will), then people will buy them more often, not less.

Also, a new battery is how much - €100 for an iPhone battery? It's not that expensive.

Why would they break more often? I don't really see that.

We have thousands of Xcovers (also replaceable) in the factories at work and they break no more often than the regular phones in the office environment. In fact people treat them pretty roughly because they're handling heavy requirement and you know how well people look after equipment they didn't pay for :) They're not perfect but they walk the walk.

Another point: I know several people that have Fairphones where almost every component can be user-replaced and I've held them but I don't see them being any more fragile than any other phone, really. And these are not rugged models.

And a Fairphone battery is 40€. An Xcover battery (including NFC antenna which is weirdly enough in the battery) costs similar. The screen 90€. All a lot cheaper than Apple, probably because there is no labor cost. You can just do it yourself or ask a friend who's handy.

You say "the market wants" like consumers are given much choice.

Using that hypothesis, the market also loves cookie banners and prefers subscriptions over one-time payments.

They were given the choice years ago, when some Android phones had removable batteries and touted that as a feature. Nobody seemed to care.

In contrast, users were also given the choice between headphone jack and Bluetooth for years when every phone had both, and clearly chose the jack. BT headphones were rare. But Apple and many other phonemakers figured out they make more money by removing it.

I originally did engage with the comment. Water-resistance absolutely still is physically possible if the replacement battery is waterproof. Water can over time be corrosive at the contacts, but that's a risk for the user. It does not in any way imply that water will enter the internals of the device from the point of contact with the battery. This will require a bit of engineering at the contact to ensure that water doesn't enter the device. As for the size argument, adding 2 mm of thickness is less important than providing five years of extra life.

Wait, are you proposing sealing the phone and sealing the battery separately, but not sealing the contacts between them? That’s… super sketchy for salt water immersion. Unless you add fuses and a BMS and safety mechanisms into the “battery”. In which case wouldn’t customers want to be able to replace the actual battery within the now-a-battery-plus-computer phone accessory once it wears down?

"instead of resorting to ad hominem" Was this edited out or which part do you mean?

calling him a shill for having a different opinion. just an attack on the person. based on nothing and distracts from the substance of his comment.

Are we talking about the same comment? This is what the ad honinem remark was a reply to, just to double check that it's not simply a mix-up:

> People shouldn't have to go to a special store or buy special tools requiring special skills to change a battery.

I don't see how this could be read as a shill (having looked up the word; I'm not a native speaker). But I guess it may also not be my business

I'd rather my phone be waterproof than have a battery I can replace myself

Those are not mutually exclusive at all, and there were waterproof phones with replaceable batteries (without even needing a screwdriver). This is mostly an excuse.

Then read upthread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47835184

I just don't see why we can't have nice things until proven otherwise (especially considering there is already evidence that this works), rather than have glued-shut devices until proven otherwise (by whom then? Apparently IP and practical experiences aren't enough for you)

I clicked the "parent comment" link all the way to the submission, and opened the submission as well. Nothing mentions IP68. Which "we" is this goalpost coming from?

I had an s5. It was neither waterproof nor even water resistant—the enclosure got too banged up to ensure seals stay sealed.

Plenty of phones that were waterproof and had replacable batteries already. This isn't new or even particularily hard to do.

For a simplest example - somehow my watch is waterproof to 200M down and replacing the battery just takes a tiny screwdriver. Gaskets are not particualarly hard to work with.

you can have both. the waterproof was just an excuse to make you either change the phone or go to a specialised center to change the battery, something that is so incovinient/expensive that people just obsolete their phone instead.

I trust that most batteries from iPhones are currently recycled through proper means either by Apple or third party firms.

I don't know how most people will dispose of user replacement batteries, but I suspect the recycle rates will be lower. If you want to ensure higher rates you also need to do something they do in the USA for car lead acid batteries. Charge a deposit fee on the new battery that is returned only when the battery is turned into a valid recycling entity.

Then the 99% have to pay extra to subsidise the compliance phone for the 1%...

We have the technology to have both - it's called a gasket.

How do you feel about the batteries in electric vehicles?

What about wearable devices like a smartwatch, headphones, smart glasses?

Should all these be consumer-replaceable without tools, regardless of the effect on the other things people value in these devices (waterproofing, size and weight, battery life, etc.)?

FYI I do not work for anything close to the consumer tech industry.

In software architecture, we talk about essential complexity and incidental complexity.

Essential complexity is inherent to the problem being solved; it can't be eliminated through better tools, process, or design. Incidental complexity is anything added by poor choices or flawed tools. Every line in a "hello world" program that isn't something pretty close to `print("hello world")` is incidental complexity.

To change the battery in electric vehicles that follow typical present-day design patterns, it's essential to have a way to get some clearance under the vehicles like a lift, ramps, or a pit, and it's essential to have a lift or jack to support the weight of the battery. Everything else is basic hand tools.

It is not essential to use any proprietary tools or software that isn't onboard the car or battery. Requiring anything like that is incidental, and a regulation could forbid it in the name of right to repair, reducing waste, or maintaining a healthy used car market.

For EVs you need at least a hoist/lifter/crane/other power tool to replace a battery. But sure, there's no actual engineering reason they can't be replaced by the user. Same for the smartwatch - you can replace a battery in most ordinary wristwatches that use them, why not the smart ones? IEMs are usually too small and that's where the engineering limitations might matter. Headphones, no problem.

> without tools

With commercially available tools, yes. The argument is that, given the skill, you could pull it off.

Then again, maybe cars are a different category. I really don't have enough skilll to add to this discussion

> The argument is that, given the skill, you could pull it off.

Obviously true for any iPhone battery.

In other words: IKEA-esque. Should be the goal of any so-called modular systems.

Says who? Not all devices can have the same level of repairability by laypeople. What if I complained that todays' CPUs are too miniaturized and that in my time I could swap the individual vacuum tubes in case something went wrong?

If CPU failure was a leading cause of device obsolescence, your argument would make sense. Next, the EU or other regulators should explicitly regulate software mechanisms that prevent owners of a device from installing an alternate OS, enabling open source or aftermarket OS developers to support devices that mainstream vendors no longer want to support.

>Says who?

The EU, just now.

So the EU is the objective truth of the universe, I guess

No, not everything can be repairable or replaceable, but batteries can and should be.