Technology

Can't say I have ever needed the water resistance, but I also never drop my phone, so I guess I'm in the minority.

Yeah, if you keep a phone for 5-6 years, you usually only have to change the battery once. I reckon the dust hasn’t settled on this though - I think there will be compromise where battery replacements are cheaper, but still need to be done by a professional

You can have a swappable battery and water resistance. Samsung galaxy s5 had a removable plastic cover and IP67 water resistance, so if the manufacturers tried they could easily have them both.
Also, if you do any repairs on a new phone you lose water resistance (unless you replace the silicone), while on the s5 you could just replace the battery and would just need to press the cover back on. After the repair the phone would still be water resistant, unlike the new phones with glass backs.

I too take a shower every day with my phone in it.

I don't need swappable batteries because they wear out. I need them cuz I'm ADD and constantly forget to charge my phone. Having a spare fully charged battery when I have to head to work on my 60-90 minute commute is invaluable.

I prefer non swappable phone batteries. If I need to charge my phone while out I use USB power bank, which is infinitely more useful than a naked phone battery that can only be used in the phone. Non swappable batteries also allow for phone casing to be much more resilient to impacts and the elements, and can help reduce the phones size.

A phone battery is not to going to reach end of life for 2-3 years in normal use, so it doesn’t seem too much of hardship to get the toolbox out or go to a service centre when it does eventually need replacing.

Maybe require manufactures to not use such incredibly strong glues that some use to secure the batteries, but mandating they be swappable seems the wrong approach to me.

Have you thought about having both? It shouldn't be that hard to make

When Samsung and Apple are seemingly incapable of producing repairable devices while Fairphone comes out of nowhere and are doing it just fine, it's not a question of it being difficult. It's a question of it being profitable. If Fairphone managed to make a repairable device, Apple or Samsung would have managed to create one that is both fully waterproof and repairable if they considered it a priority.

From the view of the industry, the logic is that "if you're not going to have your phone break down in heavy rain, at least make sure you'll have to replace it in three years because the battery starts sucking". There's absolutely no incentive to make a product that will actually last.

Lmao no this is shit. Say goodbye to durability as well as any water resistance while making phones bulkier to boot. You can already swap the battery on most non-fruit-branded phones while maintaining water resistance if you do it right (actually it would "reup" the water resistance if anything due to fresh adhesive, again assuming it's done right).

You can just replace the batteries in most phones for $100 or so. No need to buy another $500-$1000 phone.

You may or may not lose water resistance, but im sure you can live with that vs having to buy another one.

It'll definitely lead to chunkier devices, I just don't really care. Like, smartphones are insanely thin rn, I'd much rather have one that's more capable and built to last that's a few mm thicker

After skimming parts of the actual adopted text (its a 537 [albeit wastefully formatted] pdf, dont blame me), which is mostly an update to the old directive, I think I might be able to address some of these concerns. (Not an expert though)

The article never said a company like Apple couldn’t pair the battery to the device and charge €100 for it.

The important part to remember is that this isn't just about consumer rights. Even the first few pages make it very clear that sustainability and battery recycling play a huge goal, ultimately aiming for a "circular economy". While we should for now not debate what that actually means, one part of that is ensuring less waste. Hence the second part of the adopted text, "waste batteries". If companies would simply start making it unfeasible to actually replace a phones batter, we will probably see an update of the directive.

you have to include the plastic casings to ensure that they aren’t damaged when being pulled out or dropped or thrown in bags so you do end up with a thicker device

Fair point, theres probably no objective argument to put against this. My subjective argument would be that the thinness phones have reached is a bit absurd anyways and one or two mm more wont hurt them. I mean, we all put them in cases anyways. If you absolutely need a thinner phone, buy a thinner case.

I also question the viability of it leaving the EU market

Its absolutely not going to happen. Its more likely that we might see a sort of California effect, where manufacturers that have no reason to produce several versions simply start producing only the EU version and market it as sustainable and environmentally conscious in markets where legislation is more lax.

I’m more in favor of right to repair, or basically requiring the parts such as batteries and displays have to be available to everyone

Completely agree. But this wont be the last we see of this, since batteries will continue to be a topic in EU politics. For now, battery collection and recycling are relatively low in the EU, but is supposed to rise in the coming years/decades. To reach that target, more action will be necessary.

Its also important to mention that the adopted text specifically mentions that end-users should be able to replace their batteries without specialised tools, contrasting it later on with "independent professionals" that should replace batteries in unsafe environments:

"A portable battery should be considered to be removable by the end-user when it can be removed with the use of commercially available tools and without requiring the use of specialised tools, unless they are provided free of charge, or proprietary tools, thermal energy or solvents to disassemble it"

Its not really as easy for non apple repair techs to change the battery. If anyone but a certified person does I bet that would void any water resistance part of the warranty, possibly if anyone but apple specifically does it?

Easily changeable batteries that don't compromise water resistance would be really great, but that will definitely make them bigger.

the eu hes already been through this whole rodeo with the charger debacle, they'll not allow a loophole like that

"Oh no!! Our phones have to be 1 mm thicker in the EU!!" - Apple designers probably

Just don't buy fruit-branded phones and you can generally swap the battery without much hassle.

I had a sony walkman in the late 90s that was waterproof. I could put CDs in it and replace the batteries. They can figure it out.

I’ll take a 1mm thicker phone in exchange for a huge reduction in e-waste any day

I mean, the Galaxy S5 was waterproof (IP67) and had a removable battery... so it should be very possible. I think this was always a BS argument, mostly just a facile excuse for a consumer-hostile decision.

Yeah, waterproof phones existed back when most smartphones had removable batteries, claiming that making the battery non-replaceable was necessary for waterproofing was always a lie to justify making phones more disposable