Removable batteries in smartphones will be mandatory in the EU starting in 2027

There's an exception for batteries that "retain at least 80% of its original capacity after 1,000 charge cycles." Coincidentally, iPhones and probably other flagships already qualify for this exception.

As others have mentioned this is for phones with batteries that can’t survive a reasonable number of cycles.

That’s a reasonable exemption, in my opinion. I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery that I don’t need to replace for 3-4 years anyway.

I do wish one manufacturer would make a flagship phone with replaceable battery so all of the uncompromising replaceable battery fans could have a phone that fits their niche demands rather than trying to force everyone else to pay the extra costs (price, size, water intrusion, structural rigidity) that would come with laws forcing all phones to have removable batteries.

I think it may help to clarify that there are two Regulations which seem to have been muddled in the comments:

* Regulation 2023/1670 provides, inter alia, that smartphone manufacturers must make replacement batteries available to consumers, except where the 80%/1000 cycle criteria is met, in which case replacement batteries can be made only available to professional repairers. There is also a requirement for it being able to replace the battery but this does permit use of non-trivial tools under certain circumstances.

* Regulation 2023/1542 provides that portable batteries (not limited to smartphones) must be readily end-user replaceable if they meet certain criteria unless the strict waterproofing/medical industry criteria are met.

I just called the shop to replace the perfectly fine e-Call battery in my soon four year old Hyundai car. 250€ to change a battery that has a ten year lifespan. I am not allowed to replace it on my own as it would invalidate the five year long guarantee provided by the manufacturer (not the one by law). Why is this stuff not considered as well?

Also curious whether the "specialized devices" exemptions are AND requirements. Even if those are AND, wouldn’t smartphone manufacturers try to satisfy all three of them?

I've a plan: 2027 I'm buying a Motorola with first-party support for GrapheneOS and a replaceable battery. Things are looking up!

The number of people worried about a slightly thicker phone are absolutely baffling to me. I honestly think there is no hope for us broadly. Normally I'd say that people cannot deal with minor inconveniences -- but this does not even register as an inconvenience.

From my view, this is a _perceived_ downgrade in luxury status. Not even a real downgrade in luxury status -- and not a downgrade in convenience whatsoever.

Can I play devil's advocate for a moment? Imagine that Apple decides to protest this new rule. They say: We will stop stelling iPhones in the EU. However, you can buy from non-EU countries (US, Canada, AUS/NZ, UK, etc.), and we will ship to you, or you can use a third party shipper. I know, I know, HN crowd loves to play legal games like this ("this one weird trick...") -- they rarely work in the Real World.

Real legal question: What prevents this "legal hack"?

Rule does not apply to gadgets that already retain 80% charge capacity at 1k charge cycles.

What is the share of the smartphone market that this applies to?

Not perfect, but the “80% capacity after 1000 cycles” part at least creates some decent incentives imo.

My initial reaction as an EU citizen is “oh hell no” because it gave me flashbacks to removable covers with clips that broke my nails. But after reading the article where it mentions that the battery is also considered removable if standard tools should be used, I’m quite okay with it. I welcome getting more rugged and durable devices.

I like the idea in principle, but I hope the implementation does not just result in thicker phones with worse water resistance and higher prices.

The real win would be if batteries are replaceable without specialized tools, parts are available for several years, and manufacturers are not allowed to use software pairing to block third-party repair.

Otherwise we may technically get “replaceable batteries”, but not the practical right to keep a phone alive longer.

I tend to find these days that OS version obsolescence and charge port damage happen far sooner than the battery losing significant capacity

Classic EU move, the last-minute 1000-cycle exemption undercuts the entire regulation.

All new phones sold in the EU already include information on declared battery life and the number of charge cycles before reaching 80% battery health. The vast majority of phones will meet this requirement.

Ooh, can the batteries also trigger pop-up consent dialogs?

By then who knows maybe China's nuclear battery will be available to the public.

Headline is misleading as the loopholes written into the regulation will likely end up exempting many/most phones

In principle, this is the kind of right sentiment but for the wrong things.

I can't remember a phone that died because of the battery since the era of Ni-Cd cells in early cell phones. I don't think I've never discarded a phone with a li-ion battery because of the battery. It's always physical breakage or getting too slow to be usable, because of age.

Sure, I don't spend a cycle per day. Not even every other day. That's probably rare, I get that. But much rather than because of dying batteries I'd like EU to mandate

- the phone should come with full keys so that I can own the machine if I want to - or at the very least the hardware must become unlockable once the support period ends - individual components should be made available for independent repairs - repairs must not need software pairing of hardware components on unlocked devices

because of right to own and right to repair which shouldn't be "rights" but nonnegotiable traits of physical properties like they used to be.

This is a waste of money. All flagship phones have hit the requirements so do not need to make them removable. It might impact some of the budget garbage but not yet clear. All this will do is increase compliance costs.

80% after 1000 cycles. I hope that doesn’t mean faking battery health instead.

Smartwatches should also be on the list. My Apple Watch 8 is at 76% maximum capacity. Apparently it costs $99 to have Apple replace the battery, which is probably not worth it.

I wish the EU would tackle standardization of tool batteries. It's so stupid that every brand has their own battery system.

What is a “special tool”? A Philips screwdriver is pretty clearly not, but is a T-5 Torx? A security T-5? A Tri-wing? A Pentalobe?

I'm still mad about not being able to buy a phone with an external RF connector.

Controversial I know, but EU regulations are largely reasonable and mostly come down to good practices. For example I was part of a team building a crewing application for container ships and largely I agree with almost all of the conclusions we came to in making the app GDPR compliant.

The link is not working for me, but I hope they have defined what "removable" means (removable without special tools) If not, a lot of companies are going to argue that they already make removable batteries

It would be nice to have mandatory SD cards..

And make all these batteries compatible among all smartphone brands

Absolutely trash aftermarket batteries that are e-waste in 6 months here we come!

A better law would be standardized batteries only. Being hard/impossible to replace is only part of the problem. When third-party "compatible" batteries are the only option available 3 years after release, this will just make it easier for people to turn their phones into bombs.

It be nice if this was true of laptops as well, along with a requirement that they can run plugged in, with no battery installed, so people don't have to keep their puffy proprietary battery even though it can't hold a charge any more.

Right to repair for the win.

I want a phone with li-ion 18650! Because having a replaceable batteries won’t prevent the manufacturer from increasing those batteries prices so it’s equal to non replaceable ones. It would be great to have 18650 as a standard in all electronics, so you just carry dozens of them when you go out and you are set up for the weekend, no recharging, maybe even add hot swap too.

I'm not a fan of regulation in general but over the last decade it has been extremely frustrating with the removal of replaceable SD cards and batteries from Androids.

I never put my phones in my back pocket nor do I wear butt hugging leggings, so having a thick phone stick out my ass and make it look bad isn't on my list of worries. I end up purchasing thick waterproof cases for these slim phones anyways.

What's most confusing is the premium phones lack replaceable SD cards and batteries - it's like they are trying to take the worst ideas from the Apple ecosystem and simply don't understand why some people use Androids.

Surprisingly, it's the cheaper models that carry replaceable SD cards and batteries - I would have imagined the opposite!

I often go on trips and hikes with poor cellular coverage and having some SD cards with useful information or being able to swap them out as the camera gets full is really helpful. Attaching drives over the USB port isn't really practical.

When I do have cellular coverage, I might have to rapidly download a LOT of data, which overheats the phone and discharges the battery. With a replaceable battery, this isn't even an issue.

The benefits of replaceable batteries cannot be overstated when you're not on the grid or take great care of the phone where they last more than a few years. I can have a few batteries charged, during the day using solar that I can then just swap them in as evening sets in, instead of having to plug the phone into a powerbank and pray it doesn't shut off as I keep using it.

...and Apple will be exempt due to a loophole in the law (80% after 1k cycles) making the law utterly pointless.

This should be for the market to decide, not EU bureaucrats.

If I want a thicker, clunkier, less waterproof phone with a user-replaceable battery, I can already buy a Fairphone or a Samsung Galaxy XCover6 Pro, or whatever.

The reason people buy iPhones and flagship Samsung phones is they want the benefits that come from a design that doesn't have to make sacrifices to accomodate a user-replaceable battery.

Why not anything that has a battery? Why just cellphones?

I think this was discussed recently on HN. It’s not a bad idea. There’s nothing about this that “ruins” anything else. This is not specific for phones even if everyone focuses on them. The usual arguments are waterproofing and thinness but we can still have them with removable batteries.

So now the EU want to design phones too. What could possible go wrong.

Another anti poor person law

The introduction of glue into the assembly of consumer electronics is a crime against humanity and the Earth. If Timex could make iron-man watches 100-meter waterproof with Phillips-head jeweler's screws back in the '80s, there's no good reason smartphones and laptops can't. And there's a whole host of bad reasons to eschew screws.

Does this need a law? Most phones have replaceable battery.

so more regulations to raise prices extract tax revenues by EU

Regulatory Superpower

I am european and proud.. but what has europe created in the last 20 years worth of mention

While sounding nice in theory, these sorts of regulations will certainly curtail innovation while providing very, very little value elsewhere.

If people wanted removable batteries in their phones, they would buy them a lot. They don't.

Regulatory Superpower

I am european and proud.. but what has europe created in the last 20 years worth of mention

I can't really think of a single product or service that is from Europe. I can think of several things that are American and a couple from Korea and Japan. Even China.

I don't think this trajectory is going to change, rather Europe seems to be doubling down on whatever hasn't been working. Sucks for young Europeans.

I like the idea in principle, but I hope the implementation does not just result in thicker phones with worse water resistance and higher prices.

Otherwise we may technically get “replaceable batteries”, but not the practical right to keep a phone alive longer.

By then who knows maybe China's nuclear battery will be available to the public.

I'm still mad about not being able to buy a phone with an external RF connector.

Also curious whether the "specialized devices" exemptions are AND requirements. Even if those are AND, wouldn’t smartphone manufacturers try to satisfy all three of them?

> I am not allowed to replace it on my own as it would invalidate the five year long guarantee provided by the manufacturer. Why is this stuff not considered as well?

They're the ones paying for repairs, so it doesn't seem that unreasonable? That said: If you can prove the car is being maintained according to the manufacturer's specifications they can't require you to go to a brand dealership. That's just not necessarily easy to prove.

Why are you replacing it if it is perfectly fine?

Classic EU move, the last-minute 1000-cycle exemption undercuts the entire regulation.

Headline is misleading as the loopholes written into the regulation will likely end up exempting many/most phones

Real legal question: What prevents this "legal hack"?

Rule does not apply to gadgets that already retain 80% charge capacity at 1k charge cycles.

What is the share of the smartphone market that this applies to?

As others have mentioned this is for phones with batteries that can’t survive a reasonable number of cycles.

And make all these batteries compatible among all smartphone brands

Not perfect, but the “80% capacity after 1000 cycles” part at least creates some decent incentives imo.

I think it may help to clarify that there are two Regulations which seem to have been muddled in the comments:

Ooh, can the batteries also trigger pop-up consent dialogs?

I tend to find these days that OS version obsolescence and charge port damage happen far sooner than the battery losing significant capacity

Right to repair for the win.

so more regulations to raise prices extract tax revenues by EU

So now the EU want to design phones too. What could possible go wrong.

Another anti poor person law

Absolutely trash aftermarket batteries that are e-waste in 6 months here we come!

I can't really think of a single product or service that is from Europe. I can think of several things that are American and a couple from Korea and Japan. Even China.

I don't think this trajectory is going to change, rather Europe seems to be doubling down on whatever hasn't been working. Sucks for young Europeans.

Looks like saner minds prevailed. Almost nobody needs or wants that. Having to pay a street corner repair shop to replace a battery only after 3 or 4 years of usage is completely worth a price to pay for having thinner batteries.

Would have been even more classic EU to not add the exception and have all Europeans stuck with a slower, bulkier, and more expensive "EU edition" of a phone.

The previous discussion of the bill on HN noted that the newest version of the bill is the one without the exemption. Is that incorrect?

Didn't they remove many of the exemptions in the final, adopted bill?

JFTR: achieving that capacity retention is a question of charge settings. Pretty much any Lithium ion battery can achieve it if you don't charge it to the absolute maximum possible each time.

It's quite simple. While you can charge a "good old" Lithium ion battery to 4.2V, you already start getting slow degradation at that point. Charging it to 4.1V or 4.05V massively reduces that. But at the same time, those 100 or 150mV are a notable amount of charge, up to 20%. So… yeah. It's a tradeoff.

For reference: https://nenpower.com/blog/how-does-charging-voltage-impact-t...

https://e2e.ti.com/cfs-file/__key/communityserver-discussion... page 15

Last time this was discussed, it was stated that the text exempting based on cycle counts was removed from the final, adopted version. Is that incorrect?

i’m ok with this and an $80 battery replacement in exchange for better waterproofing

Is there any other details on what it means.

There is a difference between:

- Having a manufacturer promise that the battery will last with little oversight on how testing is done and no specific warranty.

- A lifetime warranty where any battery that gives less than 80% of its rating for 1000 cycles has to be replaced free of charge. With the added obligation that measurements should be user-readable and accurate (no cheating the cycle counter and battery gauge).

Still, the majority of the population would get a phone with replaceable battery.

Huh, my iPhones have never come close to this. They are always under 80% capacity before 1000 charge cycles.

displayedBatteryHealthPercent = max(80, actualBatteryHealthPercent);

(I suspect the health figures displayed are already somewhat fudged to try and downplay the reality of battery degradation?)

Didn't Apple once ship a patch to limit CPU performance on iPhones because battery degradation was a widespread issue?

That had me thinking as well. What if the manufacturer says that to get to that number you are only allowed to charge it to 80% ever? My iPhone pro battery is at 92% at 417 cycles over 20 months.

1,000 charge cycles is hardly even 4 years. I’m not sure what this regulation is trying to fix. That ultimately means landfills will be filled with more iPhone Ns.

Legal hacks like this could work if you don't care about your market share and using dodgy import constructions. That likely won't fly if you are Apple and selling in the EU through an EU based legal entity for compliance reasons already.

The simple issue is that the EU market is a rather large market that Apple can't really afford to lose a major portion of. Iphones are a good chunk of their revenue and a lot of that is EU customers. Also, most iphone users get their phones via their mobile subscription and don't buy direct from Apple. Those phones would have to comply with local rules.

When the EU says our way or the highway, the highway could be rather costly. As others are suggesting, all Apple needs to do is certify their phones water proof and/or put a slightly better battery in their phones (> 1000 cycles). That sounds like it should be doable for them.

They'll probably emphasize their awesome new batteries and water proofing of their devices in the usual announcements later this year and that will be it. Expect that to be something you hear a lot about in phone announcements from other manufacturers in the next half year. And maybe some vendors will actually do the other thing, which would be implement actually easy to swap batteries. It might a good way to differentiate in the market. And lots of Android phone makers struggle with that right now.

This is not possible. Any product sold in the EU, regardless of where it is shipped from, must comply with EU rules and standards (e.g., safety, environmental, digital market rules…). Customs can and do block non-compliant imports.

If Apple wants to keep any of their other services and products, they will also be subject to consumer protection regulation meaning they can’t geoblock consumers and they have to ensure their unsafe products don’t end up with EU citizens.

Possible EU tariffs on electronics could have some effect.

IMO Nothing legal would need to be done. I think practical reasons like shipping time, shipping cost, and the annoyance of using a phone from one region with telecoms in another region would drastically reduce sales. Also you're not going to get 1st party support and that effects Apple devices more than others.

Loosing their #2 market instead of absorbing a modest compliance cost?

You can bet it will be measured in such a way that the major companies’ devices will qualify. And that it will have little bearing on the retained charge amount you’ll have in real life use. I’m at 82% and 714 cycles. But it’s a joke to suggest that all cycles are equal. Some people never go outside the 20-80 band, others charge to 100% and keep it there all day, then burn it down to 10%. Both of those generate “cycles” but are very far apart.

My iphone 15 pro max. manufactured in Aug 2023. 536 cycles. is at 84%. I doubt it will make it to 1k at above 80%.

0%.

Wait, that’s not true: In true regulatory capture fashion, I’ll bet the exemption requires some sort of testing/certification that makes it significantly more expensive for smaller firms to bring devices to market.

> a battery that I don’t need to replace for 3-4 years anyway.

This is not just about battery replacement. I used to keep several fully charged batteries stocked in my rucksack whenever I went hiking or anywhere else that was remote. After a day of taking photos in the wild its nice to be able to just chuck in a fresh batttery and off you go.

I feel like this feature of phones was not only lost, but pretty much forgotten about after smartphones stopped including user replaceable batteries.

Many flagship phones promise 7 years of security updates now. 3-4 years means the battery will only last for half that time, and heavy users (1 cycle per day) will hit that quota in under 2.75 years.

This regulation isn't primarily for fans of replaceable batteries, it's driven by general concerns about e-waste. It's unclear how much it might actually reduce e-waste in practice but it will certainly increase compliance costs.

> I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery that I don’t need to replace for 3-4 years anyway.

What are you doing to your phone that needs all that? Using it as a hammer? Temporary support while building a tunnel?

The big question is, what happens when the manufacturer claims it can survive a reasonable number of cycles, then it turns out it can't. By the time this becomes obvious, the phones will be out of warranty.

Will the manufacturer simply be prohibited from selling those phones (which are probably no longer sold by that time anyways), will they be fined a "cost of doing business" level fine, or will customers have an actual remedy (e.g. full refund even after the 2 year warranty period)?

> I don’t want to pay the extra penalties of reduced structural rigidity and water tightness for a battery

This is a BS excuse. Lots and lots of gadgets with removable batteries and waterproof design as evidence.

Should we not expect phones to last more than 3-4 years? We aren't in the exponential performance growth and requirements part of the smartphone world anymore, a 5-7 year old phone can be a perfectly functional device. Isn't it unfortunate that a perfectly good phone gets turned to e-waste years before it has to, just because a consumable part of it happens to be non-replaceable?

The size and shape of the battery depends on the size and shape of the phone, as well as the internal structure (which is highly variable). At that point you might as well just legislate that everyone build iPhone 17's.

I've a plan: 2027 I'm buying a Motorola with first-party support for GrapheneOS and a replaceable battery. Things are looking up!

There is almost zero chance that the Motorola phones will come with a replaceable battery and likely fall under the exemption anyways. The GOS supported phones will all be flagship level devices (i.e. Signature/RAZR).

Yes! Hope they deliver some decent enough device

80% after 1000 cycles. I hope that doesn’t mean faking battery health instead.

Would be easy to say "if the software says "< 80%" after 1000 cycles, the warranty applies and the manufacturer has to replace it for free.

I guess the law won't say that though.

When has a legally mandated metric ever been gamed into a loophole? /s

From my view, this is a _perceived_ downgrade in luxury status. Not even a real downgrade in luxury status -- and not a downgrade in convenience whatsoever.

I wish the EU would tackle standardization of tool batteries. It's so stupid that every brand has their own battery system.

I wish they would stop trying to over regulate everything. If you want to use your tool battery in another brand just get an adapter.

The Power for All Alliance exists, just buy into their system.

Serious question: how are you worse off with a cover that breaks your nails vs. the status quo: a cover that’s glued on and a battery that’s glued in? If they did bring that back, couldn’t you just not open the cover and be just as happy?

So in order to save your nails you rather buy a new device? Makes total sense.

Why not anything that has a battery? Why just cellphones?

The regulation does cover everything that uses batteries.

It would be nice to have mandatory SD cards..

SD cards and phone jacks!

This should be for the market to decide, not EU bureaucrats.

If I want a thicker, clunkier, less waterproof phone with a user-replaceable battery, I can already buy a Fairphone or a Samsung Galaxy XCover6 Pro, or whatever.

The reason people buy iPhones and flagship Samsung phones is they want the benefits that come from a design that doesn't have to make sacrifices to accomodate a user-replaceable battery.

Do you still believe in free markets? What other things? Santa? The Easter Bunny?

They're not real you know.

> This should be for the market to decide, not EU bureaucrats.

Ohh sweet summer child... We are in an era of obscene consolidation, in pretty much every sector, wealth is being consolidated to degrees unseen before, oligopolies enshrine their dominance via regulatory capture and a plethora of unfair practices. There's just no competition left to suggest that "markets can decide" of anything beneficial for our skinny bottom lines..

In principle, this is the kind of right sentiment but for the wrong things.

Sure, I don't spend a cycle per day. Not even every other day. That's probably rare, I get that. But much rather than because of dying batteries I'd like EU to mandate

because of right to own and right to repair which shouldn't be "rights" but nonnegotiable traits of physical properties like they used to be.

> getting too slow to be usable

Not sure what the behavior is like on Android, but iOS will throttle performance if your battery has degraded past a certain state. So I'm sure that there are many iPhone users that are replacing their phone due to what they think is poor performance related to the age of the phone, when it's really due to the age of the battery.

I’ve definitely replaced iphones because the battery wasn’t holding a charge. My understanding is that this is a pretty common issue, no?

Smartwatches should also be on the list. My Apple Watch 8 is at 76% maximum capacity. Apparently it costs $99 to have Apple replace the battery, which is probably not worth it.

Agreed. $100 to replace a battery that must cost them maybe $10 is criminal. Source: https://counterpointresearch.com/en/insights/bom-analysis-ap...

> All flagship phones have hit the requirements

Lots of non-flagship phones making e-waste. This is a sensibly-tailored regulation, targeting the problem instead of specifying a solution because some bureaucrat likes replaceable batteries.

I'm not sure I have a way to fact-check this, but the link claims

> That is significantly more than many batteries on the market today can achieve (often around 500–800 cycles).

based on many comments in this thread your statement is not accurate.

for example my iphone 15 pro is at 83% with 654 cycles. clearly it will drop below 80% in less than 1000 cycles

While sounding nice in theory, these sorts of regulations will certainly curtail innovation while providing very, very little value elsewhere.

If people wanted removable batteries in their phones, they would buy them a lot. They don't.

...and Apple will be exempt due to a loophole in the law (80% after 1k cycles) making the law utterly pointless.

I keep hearing this over and over, but it's neglected to add that it sets a minimum durability requirement which applies only for a very small niche of ruggedized waterproof devices

Unless your device complies to MIL-STD-810G CN1 and has the certification to back it up your product will be required to add user replaceable batteries

Are you sure the loophole exists?

AFAIK, this is the regulation:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1542/oj/eng

I don't see that exemption listed. The other ones are, but not that one.

This makes no sense but I still see it mindlessly repeated to exhaustion. That mention is in no way Apple specific, it’s a quality of the battery itself. Any manufacturer is in the same position, not like Apple has a monopoly on batteries that hold 80% charge after 1000 cycles.

Yup, that’s a pretty wild loophole. I think they’re targeting the lower end of the market probably to reduce most of the ewaste.

not really! at the very least it requires more thought around battery quality

the choice for budget devices is now

1. better battery

2. removability (likely more expensive and complicates water-tightness )

> If a special tool is required for replacement, the manufacturer must provide it free of charge.

Also, removeable by who? Its all very well saying its removeable, but thats useless if only possible by a skilled techinician with tools. I dont see the term 'user-removable' anywhere.

Does this need a law? Most phones have replaceable battery.

> Easy replacement: Batteries must be replaceable using standard tools (e.g., screwdrivers).

> No barriers: The use of adhesives that can only be removed with heat or solvents is prohibited.

> Tools: If a special tool is required for replacement, the manufacturer must provide it free of charge.

> Spare parts guarantee: Replacement batteries must be available to end users at a reasonable price for at least 5 years.

When it comes to most phones I've seen...

Easy replacement: Currently, special tools are needed to heat the glue holding on the screen, picks to pry it up, and then there are various ways to release the glue holding in the battery.

No barriers: Currently, there are adhesives used for both the screen and battery. Depending on the phone this may require a solvent, heat, or electrical release... maybe a combination of these.

Tools: Currently, tools are not provided with the phone and kits need to be purchased in addition to the battery to complete the repair.

Spare parts guarantee: I think this is very hit and miss based on the manufacturer, but I suspect most replacement batteries people are buying are not coming from the OEM.

What is a “special tool”? A Philips screwdriver is pretty clearly not, but is a T-5 Torx? A security T-5? A Tri-wing? A Pentalobe?

"Special tool" is not used in the actual regulation; the requirement is that replacement must be possible with basic tools, defined:

> (50) 'basic tools' means a screwdriver for slotted heads, a screwdriver for cross recess screws, a screwdriver for hexalobular recess heads [Torx], a hexagon socket key, a combination wrench, combination pliers, combination pliers for wire stripping and terminal crimping, half round nose pliers, diagonal cutters, multigrip pliers, locking pliers, a prying lever, tweezers, magnifying glass, a spudger and a pick;

(Excepted devices can require "commercially available tools" which is defined exactly as you'd expect.)

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1670/oj

> 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 […] to disassemble it.

> Commercially available tools are considered to be tools available on the market to all end-users without the need for them to provide evidence of any proprietary rights and that can be used with no restriction, except health and safety-related restrictions.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1542/oj

Why does the Pentalobe exist in the first place?

Any tool you can’t get at a random local hardware store.

Of course you can build a waterproof smartphone with screws (except the screen has to be bonded to the glass for capacitive touch to work and the glass to the frame so there’s still some glueing involved), but it would probably have 1cm bezels around the screen.

I'm not a fan of regulation in general but over the last decade it has been extremely frustrating with the removal of replaceable SD cards and batteries from Androids.

Surprisingly, it's the cheaper models that carry replaceable SD cards and batteries - I would have imagined the opposite!

When I do have cellular coverage, I might have to rapidly download a LOT of data, which overheats the phone and discharges the battery. With a replaceable battery, this isn't even an issue.

I think in general not being able to replace the battery toolless is quite an acceptable compromise nowadays. The needed mechanism and the protective shell the replaceable battery needs definitely takes up space which can be used for more capacity instead. You have (sometimes quite insane) fast charging and also powerbanks which support it. Also quality batteries can be quite durable.

The real problem I think is the hostility towards repair, glue everywhere, no spare parts, etc.

A slightly thicker back so that in four years time it will take me 5 minutes versus 60 minutes to change the battery? Yes, that sounds like something I am not interested in.

I would also consider swapping a battery once every four years a minor inconvenience.

> this does not even register as an inconvenience

You don’t have any idiosyncratic product preferences?

I'd like a thicker, smaller phone (like 5") which can actually be operated with one hand. Ideally it should also be durable enough to not need a protective cover.

(My Kyocera Duraforce came close; too bad it was locked to AT&T.)

How tf did phones even become a "luxury" status symbol? They're just portable computers that also happen to be covered in nasty germs. People are freaking weird.

Because the reason for it is not valued by most of us. I do not care about a removable battery. I do not care. I value it at zero. So yes, I do not want to be inconvenienced for something I value at zero.

I want my phone 5 times thicker, just put as many batteries as you can fit in there.

The number of people who profess to care about user-replaceable batteries is absolutely baffling to me.

It would save you an $80 trip to the Apple Store (or non-Apple equivalent) every three or four years. What am I missing?

It's even crazier when you consider how many people buy their fancy thin iPhones and then immediately slap some ugly and/or bulky case on them.

> If people wanted removable batteries in their phones, they would buy them a lot. They don't.

This argument gets thrown about every time companies make anti-consumer changes, and it completely ignores the information asymmetry and other dynamics at play. When I go to the store to buy a new phone, where does it list on the box how repairable the device is? Where does it show how expensive the repair will be? If I'm locked in the apple ecosystem, where do I buy an iPhone with a replaceable battery?

Your assumption that the market is driven by informed consumer choices presupposes that every buyer is an expert.

Which flagship phones with replaceable batteries can customers buy?

Samsung was the last major brand in the US to have one, and they made the choice to remove it.

I want removeable batteries in my phone, largely because it means I don't have to buy them a lot!

I ran my LG G5 with replaceable batteries from 2016 through 2021, at which point there were no affordable replaceable-battery phones left. I bought quite a few replacement batteries, even trying aftermarket batteries with varying levels of success after the OEM LG ones were discontinued.

That is, of course, a problem for manufacturers that want to sell a lot of phones.

Innovation generally happens because of some kind of impediment to doing things the old way. So this is more likely drive innovation than curtail it.

> "If people wanted removable batteries in their phones, they would buy them a lot. They don't."

For that to happen there obviously needs to be a supply worth writing home about. Furthermore, speaking purely for myself, a removable battery is not a must but a nice-to-have. A lot of slabs that have removable batteries are out of the game for entirely different reasons.

I absolutely would buy a Samsung Smartphone with replacable battery. The last one which had this was the S5 I think...

Even with a battery that can be replaced using a tiny screwdriver, this still doesn’t make it DIY for probably 80-90% of smartphone users.

that isnt how markets really work. you could say that if apple had two otherwise identical iphones except one has removable battery and one doesn't. but the enshittification cycle works via a ratcheting effect. once you achieve a certain level of dominance and lock-in, you can start getting away with all kinds of anti-consumer strategies to make more money and not get punished for it, and your competitors will follow suit. as long as you can ratchet above whatever detrimental thing you want to get away with is you'll probably be fine.

you can look at the lightning connector as an example. if you said "if people wanted usb connectivity they wouldn't buy iphones", nobody would take you seriously. and when apple was forced to switch, it absolutely didnt tank their sales because people just loved the lightning connector so much. the bad thing went away and it was great.

Nonsense. It just mandates easier repairability and spare parts availability, not ad-hoc replacement. Also this does not apply if the battery is able to retain 80% of its original capacity after 1,000 charge cycles so "innovative" manufacturers just need to use high quality batteries.

...is what people said when they brought in the mandate for usb charging but it didnt.

It turns out market consolidation is usually the biggest innovation killer.

Why are you replacing it if it is perfectly fine?

Because I lose the manufacturer-provided five-year-guarantee if I don't.

> I am not allowed to replace it on my own as it would invalidate the five year long guarantee provided by the manufacturer. Why is this stuff not considered as well?

Recalls don’t require you to have had maintained the car at the dealership previousy

TIL. Thanks for letting me know.