158
Apple Explains Why It Won’t Make iPhones With Replaceable Batteries (www.inverse.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/apple_enthusiast@lemmy.world
158 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 3 years ago (3 children)

If I remember correctly: If it is watertight, replaceable batteries are not required. EZ way to skirt around this stuff.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Nah.

    To ensure the safety of end-users, this Regulation should provide for a limited derogation for portable batteries from the removability and replaceability requirements set for portable batteries concerning appliances that incorporate portable batteries and that are specifically designed to be used, for the majority of the active service of the appliance, in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion and that are intended to be washable or rinseable.

    From here: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0237_EN.html#title1:~:text=(39)%C2%A0%C2%A0%20To,by%20end%2Dusers

    So watertight is definitely enough of a reason.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago*

    Except this is a bullshit exception because not only is it 100% possible to make waterproof devices with replaceable batteries, they have existed for years already. There is absolutely no technical reason for this, and the exception probably only exists because the corporations influenced the legislators to effectively gut the law.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -40 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (4 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 30 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    We had phones with replaceable batteries for a long time. Many of them were waterproof, but none of them exploded on contact with water.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Yes they have, which tells me no engineers were consulted for this statement. Waterproofing and replaceable batteries is a trivial combination.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    This is simply not the case. Saying it’s ‘trivial’ is like saying it’s trivial to travel to Mars because we’ve sent things there before. Reliably sealing anything with a joint is far from trivial.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent