The glue must be there for other reasons and probably you should not swim with your phone.
As someone who has replaced several batteries, I take pains to make sure I put new glue/sticky gaskets back in place when I do it and I do that for waterproofing not to protect Apple’s business.
What will you define as "valid"?
Using logic I can only conclude that glue is not used or is not effective for water proofing OR there are as you called "other business decision" involved here.
Your alternative means that glue works but Apple uses the water detection stickers to refuse warranty in bad faith, the battery exploded because it was a bad batch => the water sticker is red, sorry no warranty for you!
Anyway the phones are not in reality water proof,so this excuse should not be used by fanbous, let Apple lawyers use it, they are actually paid for it and might even know the reason it is used.
I don't see it as an indictment for Apple to put the pink stickers inside devices. I had a battery replacement warranty denied on my Macbook; said there was water intrusion. I was initially outraged until I recalled the time that I did actually get the laptop significantly wet (partially submerged) and quickly drained and dried it out and felt relief that "Oh, phew! It still works..." And it did still work and only several months later I noticed an unusual battery drain.
I don't know what the truth is, I just disagree with your conclusion based on the logic you present.
What I can prove is that "glue helps you swim with your iPhone is bullshit". In fact logic would tell us that glue is created for sticking things together, if you want water proofing you would use something designed for that purpose.
I linked above an Apple link, and you can find examples where iPhones will get refused warranty because of water damage. This proves that GLUE is less then 1oo% effective.
q.e.d
Prop2 Monkey shit might be better then glue.
Since glue <100% and I used the word "might" then there is a chance that monkey shiot after a monkey eats a special food is better.
q.e.d.
My point is that is a terrible excuse if you demand me to prove that glue is exactly 0% effective, I don't have the lab to prove it but A[ple that has the lab decided not to offer you water proof warranty, so either you are happy with
1 glue , is not effective enough for Apple to offer a warranty
2 glue is effective enough but Apple has some sinister business reason to reject your warranty if their water sticker turns on.
Why are they doing it?
When Samsung or Google phones have issue I never see such fantasies beeing created to defend a giant company that has payed people to do that.
If the glue isn't effective (your premise), I'd expect the phones to behave broadly similarly and you win the bet.
If the glue is effective, I'd expect the 5 no-glue phones to experience more water intrusion and I win the bet.
How about $50K each, plus $5K each for phones, plus $5K each on top to be donated to the FSF? If there is no difference (or if the no-gasket phones outperform), you keep all 10 phones, my $50K, and are out $5K for phones and $5K to FSF. If the glued phones outperform, I keep the 10 phones, your $50K, and am out $5K for phones and $5K to FSF. Either way, the FSF gets $10K. (If you dislike the FSF, pick another remotely reasonable charity and if you win, both of us donate $5K to that charity.)
I'm sure we can find some tech YouTuber to help us film and broadcast the outcome publicly.
You in?
It is Apple fans that ppretend that glue is used for water proofing while Apple claims the phone is not water proof. So this fanboys need to prove the woprld and to Apple that glue purpose is to let you swim with your phone.
This wager seems like an easy $40K, $10K to the charity of your choice, plus uncountable value in internet points if that's right.
Why are you invested in this to contradict Apple documentation ? search this link for "swiming" https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207043 , seems there is damage in many cases, maybe is not imediate so guys like you that change their phones often d not see the consequences.
You have no idea how often I change phones, but the fact that I'm well-experienced with changing batteries on family phones that I own may give you some hints as to the frequency thereof. (I use an XS Max from 2018.)
I even successfully applied warranty few times (Sony and Samsung) when a phone got fucked this way, since the glue wasn't applied properly. New phone for me, yay.
I don't see why there can't just be a separate market segment for people who are willing to sacrifice some ease of repair for ruggedness.
Unregulated free markets are widely accepted to be a bad idea. E-waste is a serious problem that the free market can't solve on its own. Regulation is necessary.
I believe the PinePhone prioritizes repairability but it's obviously not as popular as the iPhone.
> Unregulated free markets are widely accepted to be a bad idea. E-waste is a serious problem that the free market can't solve on its own. Regulation is necessary.
Why is e-waste a serious problem (as opposed to other types of waste)? Couldn't this problem be solved by improving e-waste disposal processes?
Improved? Yes. Solved? Not really. Recycling is not a perfect process by any stretch. Producing less E-waste is just as important because global consumption of the resources that go into it is currently very unsustainable. E-waste management right now is not just unideal, it's more or less a joke. In 2021 less than 20% of E-waste in Europe was being collected and recycled. Recycling is hard. It requires changes at almost all levels of society. Designing repairable electronics on the other hand is essentially a solved problem that the industry has done less and less due to cost. Because the free market ultimately is best at optimising for lowering cost, and not other things like sustainability, safety, and so on. That's where regulations and taxes come in.
And third, if we're sharing anecdotes, i also talk to a lot of people who ended up switching phones due to a dead jack or USB port, and have drawers full of fully functioning phones except for a single, cheap, broken component.
There's no need for glue to ensure water resistance. With a repairable(easily opened, non-soldered parts) phone it would be much easier to repair water damage anyway if you accidentally dropped it into water or something. Most people have no need for keeping their device on them while swimming.
Note that there is a significant difference between "water resistance" and "waterproofness".
A few companies have business/military phones that still have most of the features people were used to. They are a little bigger, but you don't need a case.
Rugged 2-way radios, not just waterproof, but designed to float and to turn on the lights when dropped into water. Perfectly replaceable battery pack, interchangeable with the regular NiMH batteries. All it takes is literally rubber inserts that you need to pop off to access the screws.