Hacker News Reader

Comment by IBM | Hacker News Reader

The batteries are replaceable, by Apple or an authorized service store. They're also replaceable by unauthorized third parties if you want to roll the dice on batteries from China.

They aren't user replaceable and that is 100% the correct design choice.

View on HN

> The batteries are replaceable, by Apple or an authorized service store

Ah yes, it'd be a shame if Apple didn't get a pound of flesh from the service techs who pay for the license. Very good point.

It's 100% the correct design choice if your goal is to perpetually force users to upgrade. But hey, at least the phone is sliiiightly slimmer. Because what everyone's desperately been asking for is a slightly slimmer phone.

Why do you think that its the correct design choice? I never had a problem with all of my older phones that had replaceable batteries. Same with sim cards, we are saving so little space and they are now a lot fiddlier to handle and instead of one new size we have two. I don't see the benefit.

The current designs allow for fitting more battery into a smaller space because the available space can be non-contiguous and can contain odd angles while a replaceable battery comes in whatever shape you want as long as the shape is rectangular. By not having accessible batteries the vendor can seal the phone much better and increase its water-resistance. Your older phones were larger, heavier, not water-resistant, and had one more set of user-accessible failure points.

I can’t remember a single phone with a replaceable battery that did not need tape to fix it after a year of usage... and I never bought a replacement battery.

Your experience is either imaginary or ridiculously atypical. Its literally not a real thing. Devices with replaceable batteries don't normally fall apart unless you are in the habit of dropping them all the time. This isn't a design consideration or a justification.

Phones are designed without user replaceable batteries because it makes it slightly cheaper to manufacture, generates revenue from users who require replacement, and makes it less desirable to keep an existing device vs buying a new one.

My Nokia 6230i (which I still sometimes use as a backup), Nexus S, Xperia Pro, and LG F3Q would disagree with that assessment. Maybe treat your devices a bit better?

Well if you personally didn't have a positive experience with such a phone, then I guess it's axiomatically impossible!

Why is this 100% the correct design choice? People are capable of changing the batteries in their remote. They are capable of doing the same with batteries in phones.

> They aren't user replaceable and that is 100% the correct design choice.

Why? Imagine that Apple sold batteries at cost, so people replaced the battery in their phone instead of throwing away the whole phone. The only loser would be Apple, since they sell fewer phones.

So for whom is it the correct design choice, Apple or its customers?

Can you explain WHY its the correct design choice.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com