Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Other Why are we not DEMANDING a return to replaceable batteries?
- Thread starter pgoelz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How many posts do you think will be posted about iPhones blowing up because dumb F**ks buy $2,- chinese spare battery,
and start pointing to...Apple
and start pointing to...Apple
This one is a huge part of the reason. Typical phone cells are three to five times the capacity of the old Nokia and Moto Razr batts which typically ran ~700 mAh. Basically, small firebombs now.
The battery alone in my old Treo was twice the thickness of my iPhone X and 1/3rd the surface area.
If we want to return to holding soap-bar phones, this is the path to take us there.
Last edited:
Simply because you want a waterproof phone with more time without charges. It's economical and better to seal the battery and by getting rid of all support structure you increase space for a bigger battery.
This debacle is happening because the consumer willed it so.
Well, people want thinner lighter phones and have been flocking to the iPhone for those (and other) reasons. If you don't like a design feature of the iPhone, find a phone that does. The great thing about competition is that someone else will have a feature you'll want.
Because WE are not willing to accept the compromises that replaceable batteries would bring. It's not like they just need to add a removable back plate on an iPhone and it's done. The phones would be heavier and bigger and batteries smaller.
If there was a significant market demand for such phones, Apple would make them.
Actually there IS significant market demand for that kind of phone.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/techno...pdated-to-android-8-1-directly/1/1119958.html
However, 1998 called, and they want their phone back.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/techno...pdated-to-android-8-1-directly/1/1119958.html
However, 1998 called, and they want their phone back.
User replaceable batteries aren't the answer, either. We need new battery technology.
I had a galaxy s4 with a removable battery. I can't tell you how hard it was to find a LEGIT battery online. The vast majority were cheap Chinese knockoffs that were sold as being genuine.
Batteries age even on a shelf. If the iPhone 6s had a removable battery, a lot of the battery stock would be nearly as old as the phone, so you couldn't just put in a fresh new battery and be 100% again. Then it goes to how long will apple continue to manufacture new batteries. A 3 year old lithium ion battery that has sat unused on a shelf will have significant capacity loss from time alone.
[doublepost=1514571336][/doublepost]
I had a galaxy s4 with a removable battery. I can't tell you how hard it was to find a LEGIT battery online. The vast majority were cheap Chinese knockoffs that were sold as being genuine.
Batteries age even on a shelf. If the iPhone 6s had a removable battery, a lot of the battery stock would be nearly as old as the phone, so you couldn't just put in a fresh new battery and be 100% again. Then it goes to how long will apple continue to manufacture new batteries. A 3 year old lithium ion battery that has sat unused on a shelf will have significant capacity loss from time alone.
[doublepost=1514571336][/doublepost]
In the Android world, LG was the last high end phone maker to use replaceable batteries. That ended with the v20. The v30 went with sealed batteries and the rest is history. Many people purchased the v20 purely for a removable battery. Those days are dead.
I own a Lumia 950. It has a user replaceable 3AH battery and the phone is no thicker or larger than any other Android or Apple phone with embedded battery. Zero noticeable trade offs.... the only thing it "isn't" is waterproof. If MS hadn't bungled the Windows platform and if it was a tad smaller, I would still be using it. Nice hardware and a great camera.
I dispute the statement that "Consumers decided long ago that they don't want replaceable batteries". More likely consumers simply didn't object when replaceable batteries vanished. Possibly because they were bedazzled by new features and at the time, carriers were subsidizing phones and no one realized what they were actually paying to get a new phone every two years so they didn't mind losing the ability to replace a failing battery.
I don't WANT a waterproof phone if it means I can't replace the battery. I have owned a cell phone since 1998 and in all those years I have NEVER needed it to be waterproof even once. But never mind.... I'm obviously the minority here. The rest of you go ahead and continue to replace your expensive phone when your inexpensive battery gets to the point where it impacts performance.
Paul
I dispute the statement that "Consumers decided long ago that they don't want replaceable batteries". More likely consumers simply didn't object when replaceable batteries vanished. Possibly because they were bedazzled by new features and at the time, carriers were subsidizing phones and no one realized what they were actually paying to get a new phone every two years so they didn't mind losing the ability to replace a failing battery.
I don't WANT a waterproof phone if it means I can't replace the battery. I have owned a cell phone since 1998 and in all those years I have NEVER needed it to be waterproof even once. But never mind.... I'm obviously the minority here. The rest of you go ahead and continue to replace your expensive phone when your inexpensive battery gets to the point where it impacts performance.
Paul
Last edited:
Sure, people many bought the v20, but obviously not enough people purchased it, and LG changed it. That's market demand. Remember that these phones sell in millions. What is 'many'?
Because, back when I had a phone with an easily-replaceable battery, I bought a second battery but never swapped it out.
And if the second battery needed a charge, the only way to do it was to plug it into the phone; or if I wanted to top off the previous battery, again, the only way to do it was to plug it into the phone.
And precious battery volume had to be sacrificed for the case holding the battery, the contacts and their associated wiring, the layers of plastic on the phone's chassis around the battery area, etc -- the removable battery was not a bare, vacuum-wrapped cell, after all. So the battery had to be a smaller capacity than it would have been if it had been built-in to take up maximum internal volume.
For my iPhone 4, I eventually bought a Mophie battery case, which worked okay. I later swapped out the phone's internal battery for a new one from iFixit.com, and it worked fine.
I have never owned a battery-operated device of any kind that didn't eventually require a new battery. I still don't understand why so many people seem completely ignorant of how batteries work. Maybe our education system is truly a failure.
And if the second battery needed a charge, the only way to do it was to plug it into the phone; or if I wanted to top off the previous battery, again, the only way to do it was to plug it into the phone.
And precious battery volume had to be sacrificed for the case holding the battery, the contacts and their associated wiring, the layers of plastic on the phone's chassis around the battery area, etc -- the removable battery was not a bare, vacuum-wrapped cell, after all. So the battery had to be a smaller capacity than it would have been if it had been built-in to take up maximum internal volume.
For my iPhone 4, I eventually bought a Mophie battery case, which worked okay. I later swapped out the phone's internal battery for a new one from iFixit.com, and it worked fine.
I have never owned a battery-operated device of any kind that didn't eventually require a new battery. I still don't understand why so many people seem completely ignorant of how batteries work. Maybe our education system is truly a failure.
LG has always been a fringe player, far below Google, Samsung, Apple, Motorola and others.
Interesting side point, BTW. I don't know about how Apple mounts their battery but I just yesterday replaced the embedded battery in a Nexus 5X. I found that although the battery was indeed a simple shrink wrapped lithium polymer cell, it sat in the phone in an open top plastic battery enclosure that added as much thickness to the assembly as any protective removable battery case. Kinda surprised me.
Paul
Because, all considerations taken, there are real design limitations associated with replaceable batteries. If you don't like designs that incorporate batteries that are not user serviceable, you have a very broad market to choose from. It's that simple - no one's forcing you to chose Apple. If you do, you must accept their design choices.
I guess it probably depends on the phone model and the popularity of it but years ago when I had a Galaxy S3, the USB port was broken - well, it could do a data connection but no charging. I only had 3-4 months before I was eligible for an upgrade through Verizon so I bought a 2nd battery and a wall charger that charged the 'loose' battery. The battery I bought was an "extended" one that gave me 24-36 hours (along with a custom ROM) so in all honesty, it was by no means a hassle as many will try and insinuate it would be.
Was that a swappable-on-the-go battery like what I had in my Sanyo flip phone, though?
I had a Galaxy S3 and my wife had an S4. They were 8.1mm and 7.9mm respectively. I would have NEVER remembered that they were THICKER than iPhone 6s models and newer (only the X gets close at 7.7mm).
I also don't buy the argument that consumers accepted non-replaceable batteries. They had no choice ! Up until my last Android phone, I had a wishlist of two things: Removable battery and external SD card. Doesn't mean I could get both of those things though....
That's true. There was much unhappiness when Apple introduced the original iPhone with a non-replaceable battery because, like you say, it was handy to carry a spare in case your ran out of juice. I did myself.
But the underlying product requirement back then was not really for a replaceable battery. It was for "spare juice on the go". That requirement is now delivered by inexpensive rechargeable power banks and battery cases.
So - to address the OP's original question - nobody DEMANDS user-replaceable batteries now because there's no pressing need.
Just shot yourself in the foot. Zero trade Offs? The Nokia 950 was a turd of a phone, weak cpu, decent camera terrible os. Thicker than an iPhone plus and plastic fantastic. Not to mention the sharp edges which meant holding it when reading was uncomfortable.
Last edited:
Great point, especially for clarifying what the goal of user-replaceable batteries was.
They're even less necessary now because of the power banks and battery cases you mention, plus the fact that charging these days is done over a unified interface -- USB -- instead of the ever-proprietary AC adapters and plugs that we used to have. We can find USB sockets in most public spaces today, sometimes with cables attached, and top up the phone for a few more Twitgrambook posts.
On many days, my car is my primary phone charger anyway.
No idea what that is but with the Galaxy, you snap off the back cover, pull the battery, and snap the cover back on. Took 15-20 seconds if I took my time.... And no, the back cover worked just fine after doing that dozens and dozens of times (no cracks, broken hooks or tabs, etc).
Geezus, this battery thing is SO blown out of proportion.
They are throttling the CPU only when the battery is so degraded that the phone would otherwise SHUT DOWN due to low voltage if the CPU ran at max load. In other words, the throttling is to keep very old phones working at all.
The news organizations pick this up and run amok with headlines of forced obsolescence. The masses jump on board and claim it's a conspiracy to sell phones.
And now the OP wants to regress the phone's design to allow for removable batteries. He must want a much bigger form factor, because that's what it would take to do a removable battery. Forget about an all-glass back. Forget about water resistance (something the masses complained about when Samsung had it first and iPhone didn't).
People need to educate themselves a little before jumping onto the negative bandwagon.
They are throttling the CPU only when the battery is so degraded that the phone would otherwise SHUT DOWN due to low voltage if the CPU ran at max load. In other words, the throttling is to keep very old phones working at all.
The news organizations pick this up and run amok with headlines of forced obsolescence. The masses jump on board and claim it's a conspiracy to sell phones.
And now the OP wants to regress the phone's design to allow for removable batteries. He must want a much bigger form factor, because that's what it would take to do a removable battery. Forget about an all-glass back. Forget about water resistance (something the masses complained about when Samsung had it first and iPhone didn't).
People need to educate themselves a little before jumping onto the negative bandwagon.