https://wccftech.com/new-eu-law-demands-replaceable-smartphone-batteries/
Additional video on this:
A new EU law will require all mobile devices to have user-replaceable batteries by 2027. In this episode we take a look at the law, it’s consequences and right to repair.
ColdFusion on YT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fo-k-Qosy8A
About Coldfusion:
Hi, my name is Dagogo Altraide and I create and narrate all the videos on here. This channel aims to let you experience the cutting edge of the world around us in a relaxed atmosphere. Learn the captivating stories about how our world came to be and also learn what’s happening in the cutting edge today.
Carried my (rooted) Huawei 6+years, changed the battery 2 times, never had any problems. But I see why people have. I’m afraid, they will use replaceable batteries as an opportunity to just double the price. Wait for it.
Checkout Fairphone! Almost everything in the phone is easily replaceable by someone who is not even experienced with phone tech (like me). Fair support chain and right to repair without being mandatory. I love this phone.
I mean good I guess? I haven’t had battery issues for years, but my phone went through the washing machine at least once. I hope this isn’t a mistake.
It is a net positive for the right to repair people.
It is more on the general that people should have the option to fix our devices that we own, without having to pay the company that made it to fix it.
Most companies engineer in failures as features so as to make more profit, while in the past many were able to fix simple things, without help, per the manuals.
More hardware and software locks are being implemented.
Edit: added more info on manuals and software locks
Yes, works definitely agree with that. RTR is definitely a plus.
Not everyone washes their phone in the washing machine. I don’t either. So it’s a positive for me.
But the glue helps the thermals!
…which we need because you can’t replace the battery!
deleted by creator
Next: I would like them to prohibit software limitations on hardware shipped in products so that if you ship a product with a hardware which is enabled on any device, you may not disable that hardware on different models. Ex - putting a 60kWh battery pack in all of your cars but limiting the usage in software based on pricing, or installing heaters which are enabled in some models but not in others.
I really hope car manufacturers would start making really cheap and basic versions of their cars. Modern cars are filled to the brim with features I could easily live without and don’t want to pay extra for.
All I really need is electric windows in the front, heated seats, power steering, ABS/traction control, AC, cruise control, radio with USB and bluetooth, heated rear glass and mirros and that’s pretty much it. Reverse camera is nice but not mandatory. The last thing I want for my car is internet access. Abso-fucking-lutely not.
Backup cameras, at least in the US, are a legally mandated feature. Cars cannot come without them.
If anyone ever tries to sell you a car based on ‘it has a backup camera!’, be very skeptical of what else they’re trying to upsell you on that’s legally required.
It won’t happen. You might end up with a “basic” model which, for them, is a zero profit vehicle - possibly even sold at a slight loss. But everything will be installed and cryptographically keyed to your car (like Apple dies with their screens and cameras, “for security”). All the waste will be baked into the car- extra materials you can’t sell, extra weight that reduces efficiency, extra expense should something break or be damaged.
You’ll get a car with a 100kWh battery, ABS, Traction control 4 wheel drive, autopilot (actually it will be 4 levels of cruise control), auto braking, cameras, side air bags, heated and cooled seats, mini fridge, swivel chairs, ac, heat, heads up display, 24” touch screen, battery heaters, dual charging, home-power, solar charging, regenerative braking, the works. You’ll have single, slow charging, 20kWk, no regen braking and no amenities except the minimum required by law in your are (ie backup cam but not front or side, driver/pass airbags but no side) But just adding ac, heat, and terrestrial radio (controlled using a 7” area of the 24” screen) will be 100% profit and only accessible by monthly subscription. And when you sell the car, it will have zero fuctions and require new payments.
I’m calling out car makers, but tech is front and center. Why not sell one, sealed Xbox with a 2TB drive, but charge a monthly fee to unlock all but 500GB. Or 10Gbit wired and 6EWi-Fi, but throttled to 100mb. . Or limited to 2.4G, with 5G being $2.99 and 6G channels bring $3.99. 1GB hardwire is $2.99, 10G is $3.99. For 5.99/mo you can unlock their MaxNet service with 10G and 6E Wi-Fi.
Oculus might sell one SKU of headset with 512GB storage, but 256/512 are $50/100 price tiers. Apple might do the same on phones and iPads.
Laptops might go to soldered ram, discrete gpu, SSD and get you to pay once or monthly for activation of anything more than the minimum. Batteries migh be the same. Or even a 4K screen that is limited to 1080p without a paid unlock.
All of the things you mentioned other than A/C, power steer and ABS are premium. But I drive a car from 2007 so what do I know.
heated rear glass
what’s that for? I assume it’s for the wintertime? ( I live in PH )
Yeah. To melt ice and snow. Now that I think about it heated steering wheel would be nice too.
Heated windscreen is also a good thing to have.
Yeah but Ford has or atleast had a patent for this so it’s not available on other brands
yeah it’s the rear defrost for melting ice and snow in the winter. where I’m from it’s all but mandatory in the winters
Not saying if it is 100% good or not but this might add costs and time. The main reason for that is to simplify the fabrication process so there is a single line without different hardware configurations.
Not allowing it will reduce material waste in some cases that’s true though. And in a way reduce the possibility of subscription models based on hardware unlocked by software which is good.
If they can sell a full-option car for the lowest priced model, then charging extra for the options is just price gouging.
There is a full-option car to reduce assembly line complexity which reduces the manufacturing cost. You have one line and components building one car and then you can pay for what you want. If they build a separate line for a cheaper car it won’t be as cheap anymore. Subscriptions, on the other hand, is a different business model and I don’t agree with subscriptions for cars.
The only reason the stuff is there is because not putting it on certain cars and putting it on others would be more expensive that putting it on all cars. So they took the approach to put everything and simply lock it depending on the consumer needs. That and the fact that some people change their minds and it allows to unlock features after they have bought their vehicle.
It is not price gouging. They are selling them cheaper because it has less features, that’s it. If you add features you pay more. The difference it’s that the hardware is there already, but that doesn’t matter, the price isn’t just the hardware. If it required hardware changes the exact same would happen but the costs of building the car would go up due the increase in complexity of the construction for the car.
If all the cars had all the features unlocked you simply would pay more per vehicle, they wouldn’t suddenly become cheaper.
A separate thing is the subscriptions models… That I agree is completely gouging.
Although the manufacturing process might simplify, negative impact on our planet will most definitely increase.
Tesla and most car companies are starting to do this as a norm. More and more we need to becareful in what we buy…
Thanks for bringing it up!
I have a dive computer, with which I can dive down to 50 meters ( my rating, no the computer’s). The battery is easy to replace.
Wow, that’s awesome!
I’ll believe it when I see Apple give it a fancy marketing name and pretend they invented the entire concept.
I’d lowkey want to see how foldables do under this law
Who says flexible batteries couldn’t be made replaceable? The might have to attach it differently than using glue, but other than that, I don’t see why it can’t be replaceable. Additionally, replaceable does not have to mean that you can just click open a back cover and pull it out. It could also mean that you have to remove x number of screws to remove it, which is still fine.
Just have 2 smaller batteries instead. It is not difficult.
Yes, that will be interesting!
They may have to make them bigger or just rethink the designs.
They do have time, 4 years, 2027 right.
2027 is closer to 3 years, but yeah they still have time to think
Please god stop making phones bigger.
deleted by creator
My smartphone is an older LG which has a replaceable battery. It is shitty as a phone so I also have a very cheap flip phone that works great as a phone and also has a replaceable battery.
I hope this passes with an earlier implementation date and that the manufacturers decide to keep design the same worldwide.
As long as this doesn’t mean even bigger phones or less waterproofing then I’m all for it.
deleted by creator
i bought a little waterproof Panasonic digicam in 2010, i have taken it to do whitewater rafting, to the beach, to swimming pools, it has removable battery, removable memory card and USB connection, lil shit still works to this day
Even older, Sony made a Walkman in the ‘90’s that was waterproof, and also happened to split in half entirely to accept a cassette tape. Any claims that manufacturers “can’t” implement battery compartments or other moving parts while maintaining some level of waterproofing is so far beyond disingenuous bullshit, it’s passed right through and come out the other side. Plenty of those friggin’ things wound up dunked in swimming pools back in the day – mine certainly did – without incident. Consumers spend upwards of $1000 on a flagship smart phone these days. For that kind of money, these fuckers can figure out how to give it both a removable battery and a full feature set.
And before the Apple shills, naysayers, and apologists all leap out of the woodwork (as they’ve been doing incessantly every time this argument comes around), this EU regulation does not stipulate that manufacturers have to use oldschool back-comes-off-with-your-fingers, flies-apart-when-you-drop-it, flip phone style battery covers. That’s a straw man if ever there’s been one. There is nothing stopping them from holding battery compartments shut with screws, which would certainly help with structural integrity and waterproofing concerns. Despite the implication in the synopsis, it does not appear that the need for tools is explicitly prohibited by the regulation. This quote is shown in the video above, but does not actually appear in the text of the regulation:
No tool… or set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part, or basic tools. The process for replacement shall be able to be carried out by a layman.
The text actually states:
Portable batteries incorporated in appliances shall be readily removable and replaceable by the end-user or by independent operators during the lifetime of the appliance, if the batteries have a shorter lifetime than the appliance, or at the latest at the end of the lifetime of the appliance. A battery is readily replaceable where, after its removal from an appliance, it can be substituted by a similar battery, without affecting the functioning or the performance of that appliance.
It’s on page 55, if anyone wants to dig through the thing themselves.
The confusing part of the synopsis is how they awkwardly cut it at "no tools"and went on to list “or set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part, or basic tools”
It’s actually a list of the 3 valid ways to replace a battery under the law:
- With no tools (eg pop off cover)
- With a set of tools that is supplied with the product or spare part (special but included)
- With basic tools (common screwdriver, etc)
So, yes a robust waterproof screwed-in cover should be totally fine.
Potential problem I see here is, what defines as a “common” screwdriver? Cause the most common screwdrivers are MUCH bigger than what phones use. So, can be bought at stores? You can buy torx screws at iFixit, but probably not at local electronics stores, so does that count?
What I mean to say is that, the line has to be drawn somewhere, especially if it’s going to be written in law. Having consumers buy a specialized screen heating machine is too much, but you can’t expect large screws to be on phones, so it has to be somewhere in the middle and clearly defined.
My idea is that maybe it’s better to start with what types of screws. Or if they’re specialized, they have to include it in the box or disclose the specs.
Common screwdriver is a Phillips or flat head. It’s already defined in relation to this legislation.
