Hacker News Reader

Comment by Aurornis | Hacker News Reader

As others have mentioned this is for phones with batteries that can’t survive a reasonable number of cycles.

That’s a reasonable exemption, in my opinion. I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery that I don’t need to replace for 3-4 years anyway.

I do wish one manufacturer would make a flagship phone with replaceable battery so all of the uncompromising replaceable battery fans could have a phone that fits their niche demands rather than trying to force everyone else to pay the extra costs (price, size, water intrusion, structural rigidity) that would come with laws forcing all phones to have removable batteries.

View on HN

> a battery that I don’t need to replace for 3-4 years anyway.

This is not just about battery replacement. I used to keep several fully charged batteries stocked in my rucksack whenever I went hiking or anywhere else that was remote. After a day of taking photos in the wild its nice to be able to just chuck in a fresh batttery and off you go.

I feel like this feature of phones was not only lost, but pretty much forgotten about after smartphones stopped including user replaceable batteries.

You can keep several power bricks that will charge any USB-C device now.

yes exactly my point, I dont want to wait to charge up my device with another device. I just want to pop in a fresh 100% battery. It used to be so simple.

My powerbrick connects to the back of my phone. Form factor wise it's pretty close to my extra large StarTac removable battery that I would carry around.

Bully for you!

Id like my user replaceable 100% full batteries back if its ok with you?

Fine with me purchase any phone with that feature you want.

Apologies, my coment came off a bit unecessarily aggressive.

It is my preference to have user replaceable batteries, and my belief is that they were only removed to make phones become obselete quicker and cause higher turnover of purchased phones.

No amount of battery packs can bring that back.

No apologies needed. The market is just not working in your favor.

> It is my preference to have user replaceable batteries, and my belief is that they were only removed to make phones become obselete quicker and cause higher turnover of purchased phones.

My iPhone 12 is six years old. I replaced the battery last year. While it probably won't be workable on cellular networks in six years, outside of physical damage there's little reason it'll stop working. My original iPhone from 2007 still boots up and runs. There's no GSM service for it to talk to but it runs as a WiFi only iPod just fine if I really wanted.

The idea that non-replaceable batteries is a conspiracy to lower the lifetime of devices is sort of silly. Flagship phones are made of incredibly sturdy materials. If they were designed to be disposable they'd have a bunch of sacrificial structural elements to limit their lifetime. Instead they're built as well as they can possibly be built.

A flagship phone will be left behind in CPU power running bloated JavaScript blogs or cellular service long before any internal component fails. Non-replaceable batteries are about hitting a capacity/size target more than anything else. Replaceable batteries enforce constraints on a phone's design that non-replaceable ones do not have.

My 2018 car lost all it's connected features when the 3G network was shut down.

Then go buy one of the phones with replaceable batteries?

https://www.androidcentral.com/best-android-phone-removable-...

There's tons of MagSafe battery packs for iPhones. They charge the phone continuously. There's no need to let the phone drop to zero before attaching the battery pack. There's also cases with integral batteries. I assume there's Android equivalents for various phones.

I'd say these are more convenient than extra swappable batteries. They have integral charge controllers and charge via USB. There's no need to charge them in the phone or have to buy some extra external battery charger.

They’re incredibly wasteful due to inefficient power transfer which is a huge issue with wireless charging.

And it’s not just wireless that’s inefficient; with a usb connection you’ll typically lose at least 15% in a good buck/boost stage and there’s 2 involved in a usb battery pack: one in the battery pack itself to step up/down from pack voltage to the negotiated PD voltage, and then another lossy stage in the phone stepping down to 3.7v.

Replaceable batteries are one thing, but truly hot swappable batteries like you're asking for will absolutely effect the waterproofing and add a lot of weight/size. Is there a reason you can't just bring a battery pack in your rucksack? They make magnetic ones you can slap on the back and be on your way.

Continuing to take photos with a battery pack hanging off a device is no where near as simple as popping in a fresh 100% battery and coninuing as normal.

These don't dangle or impede your use:

https://www.anker.com/products/a1665-5k-ultra-slim-qi2-power...

Thanks for the suggestion.

I would still prefer replaceable batteries back though, and you really dont need to convince me otherwise!

Is that ... just a wall wart with a screen on it? Why is that relevant?

EDIT: Wait no it's a carousel of completely unrelated products because the page redirected (without my input) to https://ankernordics.com/.

Hmmm... I'm not sure what you're seeing to be honest. The link should be to a slim 5000mah magsafe battery that attaches to the back of iPhones.

The Anker Nano Power Bank (5K, MagGo, Slim). No screen, charges via USBC.

Seems like this product, on the Anker Nordic page so that it works for us who for whatever reason are booted from the main Anker website: https://www.ankernordics.com/products/a1665-anker-nano-power...

Yeah, that would work. The first party Apple MagSafe power bank is also a decent alternative.

just to note, wireless charging is very inefficient. From the page you linked:

"Due to a 30% to 45% energy loss in battery cells and conversion circuitry, a fully charged 5,000 mAh power bank typically offers an estimated 2,750 to 3,500mAh to power devices"

Then use the supplied USB-C to USB-C cable for more efficient charging, while using the magnets to stick it to the back of your phone.

External battery banks are a far superior solution now that almost everything has standardized on USB and we have power banks supporting high speed charging.

They can be charged with the same power adapter you use to charge your phone, without the need of an extra docking thing.

They can be used to charge any USB-chargeable device.

They are not tied to your specific model, and thus you're not vendor locked with them, making them cheaper and easier to find anywhere in the world.

They come in multiple capacities, allowing you to plan in advance your energy needs and choose the right size bank for your situation.

They are far more sturdier than any modern battery, which makes them more resistant to puncture and bending.

They don't have external contacts that could potentially short in contact with conductive surfaces.

Lots of advantages, but one major downside: you can't pop the empty battery, put a new one and keep working.

There's a reason professional devices (e.g. cameras) still have replaceable batteries.

I use a lot of rechargeable AAA and AA batteries. They have lower voltage than alkaline batteries (by design apparently), which is not normally an issue, but sometimes is a deal breaker. E.g. my thermostat did not like lower voltage AA batteries and shut down prematurely a number of times.

There's challenges adopting standardized rechargeable batteries, e.g. trying to recharge alkaline batteries risks fire/explosion (and you know that will happen far too often given the number of people out there), but if we have had standard battery sizes, voltages, and capacities for rechargeable batteries, things would be so much better.

Probably not by design. Battery peak storage levels are set by chemistry, and not really subject to tweaking - which is why there are tons of 1.5 V battery types, but not a single 2.0 V battery out there.

But you can plug in the battery pack and keep working…

I have a magnetic wireless power bank that I put on my phone and I can continue using it as normal.

The people who need this feature should go buy one of the phone models with replaceable batteries.

Reading the comments here, it's obvious that the replaceable battery fans can't even agree on what they want. One commenter wants the back covered in tens of screws for waterproofing. Other commenters want the battery quickly replaceable so they can do hot swaps without missing a beat. Some people are sharing links to phones that have replaceable batteries and getting responses from people saying they'd never buy that phone because it's too big, too ugly, or other reasons.

This is an impossible debate because one side has convinced themselves that it's possible to have their cake and eat it, too: They believe that removable batteries can be implemented without any tradeoffs and the only reason they're not removable is so the phones are forced to become e-waste, which requires you to ignore all of the low cost battery replacement services available.

too many CS majors and not enough mechanical engineers on this forum

Nobody needs to do that with a mobile phone.

Indeed. They actually make devices that take pictures, but can't make phone calls or read Facebook. Pro photographers use them.

There are a few flashlights that have USB PD power bank functionality and also run on 18650 or 21700 rechargeable, replaceable Li-ion cells. I bought a Loop Gear SK05 Pro to replace Anker power banks for this use case.

> This is not just about battery replacement. I used to keep several fully charged batteries stocked in my rucksack whenever I went hiking or anywhere else that was remote.

There are several high end phones with removable batteries. You should buy one of them if this feature is important to you.

This movement to force everyone's phones to pay the costs of removable batteries to address these really niche use cases is not great.

> he costs of removable batteries to address these really niche use cases

You seem to have completely missed the primary point of all this, which is to reducew ewaste. That fact that it also satisfies some niche uses cases is a great bonus!

> You seem to have completely missed the primary point of all this, which is to reducew ewaste.

Everyone acting like iPhones and mainstream Android phones become e-waste after 3 years is just making specious arguments.

Why does the average phone user know more about phone batteries and replacing them than all of these commenters acting like iPhones are becoming e-waste after a couple years?

I think I know more people with 4-6 year old iPhones than with an iPhone 17.

Apple stores will replace the battery for you for a very reasonable fee and the phone will carry on for many years more. This is a common thing to do and you can find battery replacement services for popular Android phones too.

External battery banks are a better reducer of e-waste as they'll work for all devices and not just the one cell phone.

Many flagship phones promise 7 years of security updates now. 3-4 years means the battery will only last for half that time, and heavy users (1 cycle per day) will hit that quota in under 2.75 years.

Importantly “last” means that it will have at least 80% battery capacity left.

Degradation is usually nonlinear.

That must be somewhat significant, because after that percent, Apple will start showing "Your battery’s health is significantly degraded" warnings.

Then the law should just make sure that there's a second source at least for the batteries, that technicians have free access to disassembly instructions, and that it can be done without undue effort or risk.

Requiring common tools or technical skills for replacing something that last 4 years is not a hassle to justify enshitiffying phones design as long as you're not vendor locked for such replacement, and a technician can do it in a reasonable amount of time, with reasonable tool and without the risk of degrading the functionality of the device doing so.

I'm old enough to remember the old Nokia phones that had removable cases, removable batteries, and you would have upgrade envy for the last year of your 36 month cell service contract. Then we had wince and early android devices and BlackBerries which were pretty much the same.

Somehow we made it work back then.

The battery doesn't cease functioning after 3-4 years. The benchmark says it should have 80% capacity.

It's also not really that expensive to have phone batteries replaced. Apple will do it for $120 including the battery for their flagship models that cost over $1000. Cheaper for lower end models.

I can't take any arguments seriously that claim these phones are becoming e-waste after 2.75 years. Battery replacement is a common process.

This regulation isn't primarily for fans of replaceable batteries, it's driven by general concerns about e-waste. It's unclear how much it might actually reduce e-waste in practice but it will certainly increase compliance costs.

At least it's a performance standard. If the Government is going to regulate consumer products I would rather it be performance standards than implementation details. If a device doesn't meet performance standards it can trigger warranty requirements.

The big question is, what happens when the manufacturer claims it can survive a reasonable number of cycles, then it turns out it can't. By the time this becomes obvious, the phones will be out of warranty.

Will the manufacturer simply be prohibited from selling those phones (which are probably no longer sold by that time anyways), will they be fined a "cost of doing business" level fine, or will customers have an actual remedy (e.g. full refund even after the 2 year warranty period)?

> I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery

This is a BS excuse. Lots and lots of gadgets with removable batteries and waterproof design as evidence.

> Lots and lots of gadgets with removable batteries and waterproof design as evidence.

And this is a BS rebuttal. None of them achieve the same miniaturization and water tightness as iPhone.

This law is basically government being co-opted by a tiny vocal minority to force their unpopular opinions onto the rest of the public.

If any modest percentage of the market cared about replaceable batteries above all else in their phones, the market would already be packed with removable battery phone options.

AFAIK, the primary reason Apple and others for avoiding removable batteries was the reputational risk and fire hazard of having customers put fake or damaged batteries, because that was long before they started marketing an IP rating.

And by the way, the "water proofing" is only 30 minutes with pressure equivalent to 6 meters deep, tested with water nozzles. That's not a lot. Other gadgets that employ gaskets or positive pressure achieve more. I'm sure they can design for the same rating without hurting easier battery replacement ability with the right incentives.

Not a lot??!!

> I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery that I don’t need to replace for 3-4 years anyway.

What are you doing to your phone that needs all that? Using it as a hammer? Temporary support while building a tunnel?

Dropping it by accident. I sometimes venture away from the carpeted floor of my computer.

And if they had to make it thicker to support a battery door then they would have more internal support. You know, like old phones used to have.

Should we not expect phones to last more than 3-4 years? We aren't in the exponential performance growth and requirements part of the smartphone world anymore, a 5-7 year old phone can be a perfectly functional device. Isn't it unfortunate that a perfectly good phone gets turned to e-waste years before it has to, just because a consumable part of it happens to be non-replaceable?

> Isn't it unfortunate that a perfectly good phone gets turned to e-waste years before it has to

This does not happen. There is a thriving market for used phones, many of which have had the battery replaced.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com