Hacker News Reader

Comment by sliken | Hacker News Reader

Seems laughably unlikely.

Would be nice is somebody like the EU at least required a user replacable battery. Seems insane to replace a top spec phone made out of aluminum and glass just because a battery has died.

Imagine if cars (starting at only 10-12 times as expensive) were thrown away when they needed an oil change. They would last just about as long as phones do.

View on HN

Eh, batteries on the iPhone are "user" replaceable (from personal experience, up to the iPhone 7). It's not the same as swapping a battery out of a plastic case like my old Nokia, but you certainly don't have to throw the whole phone away if the battery dies.

However, I think modern phones will suffer other issues before the battery dies.

Sure, me too, but what percentage of the population actually does this, let alone knows it is possible?

I have a friend who works at a battery/electronics chain, and replacing phone batteries (and screens) has become a substantial part of their business. I couldn't say what percentage of the population knows it's possible but, when your phone breaks or the battery dies, I'd bet a fair number of people google repair options, and from there going to third parties seems fairly common.

Almost everybody using one? At least in Europe are third party stores that replace iPhone batteries (and repair other such damages) all around the towns.

It should be noted that Apple has always been very against third-party stores, and have tried to punish consumers that use third-party stores in an attempt to discourage people from using third-party stores. Not to mention that Apple intentionally makes it hard for third-party stores (not selling parts or even providing information about parts).

And one can likely use that to gauge the public’s demand for repairing.

If you want to buy a phone with a replaceable battery, then do that. Why force everyone to put up with the extra bulk and weight? And at least with apple, replacing the battery does not require replacing the phone.

The "bulk and weight" FUD needs to stop. There is no reason that user replaceable batteries need to be heavier and bulkier than soldered batteries.

Perfect example:

http://www.gizchina.com/2013/09/18/exclusive-hands-video-sta...

http://www.gizchina.com/2013/09/24/jiayu-g5-teardown/

Almost identical in dimensions and appearance to an iPhone 5, yet has expandable storage and a 50% more capacity removable battery. If some small Chinese company can make such a phone, so could Apple, but they deliberately chose not to.

How many g5 batteries exploded on their owners with third party batteries, most of which are crappy?

It's easy to make anything if you have lax enough standards.

How many Samsung devices exploded on their owners with first-party batteries? This is a ridiculous argument -- what aspect of a "non crappy" battery will result in a replaceable version being more bulky?

Obviously the part where non-replaceable batteries are also more expensive designs created to balance maximizing energy while minimizing heat dissipation for a specific model, and studied by the company's own expert teams to specifically fit in the phone they're added in.

Random third party from lowest price manufacturers are usually not.

In fact, as you've shown, even first-party batteries can be dangerous if rushed -- like in the Samsung case you noted.

I don't think it's FUD. I didn't do extensive research, but I quickly googled phones with replaceable batteries and found these two from LG:

LG V20 - 5.7” display, 3200mAh battery, 174g LG V10 - 5.7” display, 3000mAh battery, 192g

And here's a phone from the same manufacturer with a soldered in battery:

LG V30 - 6” display, 3300mAh battery, 159g

That's a bigger display, a bigger battery and an overall lighter weight.

It's easy for me to believe that manufacturers are soldering in batteries to deliver thinner, lighter phones since that's what they claim, and that's what they seem to deliver. But I'm happy to look at your numbers.

FYI, the display is bigger, but the phone is actually smaller due to the "bezelless" design of the LG V30.

The difference in weight is mostly due to the reduced body size, so less materials used.

A thinner phone also generally weighs less due to less material.

The combination of soldered battery (so thinner phone) and "bezelless" design could explain a large part of the difference in weight due to less materials used.

[LG V20 specs] https://www.gsmarena.com/lg_v20-8238.php

[LG V30 specs] https://www.gsmarena.com/lg_v30-8712.php

Yes there is a reason. It is called safety. There is a big difference in making a battery in phone safe to handle and separate stand-alone battery safe to handle. This includes things like puncture resistance, heat dissipation, vibration and shock test. This results in thicker/heavier housings for the replaceable batteries.

"Safe to handle" here does not mean "looks good to me," but tested against mandatory standards.

Battery acid isn't safe to handle, so it's shipped in a container. Same for a battery, if it were unsafe external to the device then there could just be a shipping caddy - remove the battery from caddy, place old battery in caddy and take for recycling. That would probably be safer than the current situation.

There is no reason to suppose that making the battery easy to replace increases bulk and weight to a degree you are capable of detecting in a blind test given identical hardware.

Its about decreasing the lifespan of devices to sell more.

It does increase size a little, as you need to account for the extra thickness used to make the compartment wall and the inside wall of the battery pack. Additional constraints are that these compartments generally have to be straight-walled; you can't realisitically 'build through and around' a modular compartment like you can with an inbuilt component.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com