I'm guessing it makes the design of the phone circuitry easier? You don't have to make the case removable?
The idea that it forces you to buy a new phone never seemed like a good reason to me.
I'm guessing it makes the design of the phone circuitry easier? You don't have to make the case removable?
The idea that it forces you to buy a new phone never seemed like a good reason to me.
There are design tradeoffs to make the batteries user-replaceable. E.g., the batteries are going to need a casing and socket that make them OK for users to handle and replace. The phone's going to need additional casing pieces, latches, and seals, etc. The phone's going to be a little bigger, heavier and more expensive. Maybe not a great tradeoff for something needed once every 2-3 years.
I just looked up and Apple is charging $50-$70 to replace your battery, depending on the model. So ~$25-$45 more expensive than a cheap DIY kit from amazon. Considering the various risks of DIY, that's really not that bad to do once every 2-3 years, IMO.
> Maybe not a great tradeoff for something needed once every 2-3 years.
The use case for a replaceable battery is for emergency situations, not just when the original stops holding a charge. I would much rather go back to that time when I could discreetly slip in a replacement than have to use a phone attached to a giant brick with a flimsy USB cable.
Consumers are the ones who have insisted — with their wallets — that they prefer phones without user-swappable batteries.
Companies have switched to non-replaceable batteries because it's good for their bottom line. It's definitely market forces that are in play, but not the ones in the textbooks where consumers hold all the cards.
Option 1:
- has a removable battery, headphone jack and/or stereo speakers
- security / OS updates stop in 6 months (or never happen or are years behind)
- camera is OK
- getting kind of slow
- proprietary version of Android with bloatware
Option 2:
- no removable battery, headphone jack or stereo speakers
- security / OS updates for 2-3 years
- camera is better in low light
- it's fast right now
It's like evolution, except there aren't enough options and the timeline is too short and bad features are too coupled with good features.
The case for user-replaceable batteries isn't just to be able to replace them when they wear out. It's also to be able to carry a spare or two for when you want to use the device for an extended period of time. (No, external power banks don't really address this use case).
Can you elaborate on why not? For me they address it far better than swapping out the internal battery, since you don't have to interrupt that extended use by powering down the phone to make the switch. They're also way easier to recharge simultaneously, without needing a bank of dummy phones.
But I get what you’re saying otherwise.
I plug my phone into a usb-c charger for 10 minutes and I've got 2~3 hours of charge.
If I really need to be away for a long period, a portable battery pack works just fine (still only needs to be plugged in for a few minutes to get me hours of charge).
I don't really have problems with my battery dying during normal use. I DO have problems with gradually reduced battery life as the battery degrades.
Because it reduces the cost of production.
1. There is an industry drive to make phones thinner, and one way to do that is to minimize the casing that a battery requires.
2. Waterproofing is a desirable feature, which is much harder to do when you have an accessible battery, especially in conjunction with 1.
3. Very few customers ever replace their battery.
4. Phones held together with adhesive and made from glass/metal feel and look better than plastic that snaps together. When marketing a premium product it has to look and feel premium.