Title is incorrect. Glue is still allowed under this law as long as it doesn't require heat to take apart the device.
Also waterproof devices don't need to have user replaceable batteries. They need to be replaceable but by a professional.
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
120 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
58303 readers
11 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So this essentially means that Apple can just keep making phones the way they always have, and have you go to the “professionals” at the Apple Store to replace your battery?
It essentially means that anyone can just keep making phones like that. Personally I'd take IP67/IP68 over "user replaceable battery" any day as it still can be replaced but to me watertightness is one of the most important features for such device. I already had two "waterproof" phones with replaceable battery but both were leaking water inside (Galaxy S5 and Motorola Defy).
Indeed it does.
Best tech news I've heard in a long time, the current phones designed to last only a few years are such a ridiculous waste.
It's amazing to me how many people have been convinced that sealed-in batteries are somehow necessary for waterproofing, given the array of electronics, like watches, that have been around for a long time with both waterproofing and replaceable batteries.
I dunno if that's exactly comparable. Yes, you're technically correct...but then we should expect phones to either be thicker or have smaller battery capacity to compensate. That's probably a fine trade-off for you (and probably for me), but that's not universally true.
Personally, I think 'form factor' is another silly argument.
Add a few mm in thickness in return for a device that lasts many years longer? That's an obvious benefit to the consumer (imo) and an easy way to reduce electronic waste.
Moreover, these paper-thin phones need big, sturdy cases to prevent bending in the pocket, so why not build a sturdier phone, and attach a thinner case, for the same resultant thickness?
To me, these are flimsy excuses the c-suite uses to justify unjustifiable levels of planned obsolescence, and the accompanying profit margins.
view more: next ›