Hacker News Reader

Comment by jeffbee | Hacker News Reader

The facts aren't really on your side of the argument. The glued-together Apple phones are the ones least likely to be in the trash. They are still shipping the latest software on phones from 2015. By contrast, removable-battery phones are all garbage practically as soon as you open the box. The Samsung XCover is only 2 years old, might not even get Android 12, and definitely will never get anything after Android 12.

View on HN

> By contrast, removable-battery phones are all garbage practically as soon as you open the box. The Samsung XCover is only 2 years old, might not even get Android 12, and definitely will never get anything after Android 12.

That isn't a property intrinsic to removable-battery phones; An Apple phone with a removable battery would be the best in terms of software and battery longevity, both of which are factors which serve to prolong the life of the phone.

Imagine a world in which iphones still had user swappable batteries. They would almost certainly retain their appeal and fewer would end up in landfills.

The fact that they've become a luxury brand is a compounding factor you cannot dismiss. You're comparing apples to oranges.

I have had batteries replaced by random repair shops for 40 euros before. If I could have done it for 20 in parts how does that change the calculus compared to a new phone?

Phones are more likely to end up in landfills when batteries and basic repairs aren't user serviceable. The calculus should include externalities like the cost in resources for new phone vs only a new battery.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com