6 ms·

I had one of these phones that would crash under load and the update fixed it. The technical fix was sound. Batteries can't supply full power as they age, and t

I had one of these phones that would crash under load and the update fixed it. The technical fix was sound. Batteries can't supply full power as they age, and the CPU needs high power when it runs faster. It's an annoying reality of battery powered devices that looks like a conspiracy to boost sales.

brokenmachine 2y ago
Imagine a world with replaceable batteries.
- noirscape 2y ago
  Should be coming back in 2027, when the EUs battery regulation goes into effect. While it doesn't iirc require easily swappable batteries (like the Nokia of the olden days, where you just took off the back cover and put a new one in), it's specifically designed to put a stop to the current amount of device waste coming from poor quality batteries.
  - brokenmachine 2y ago
    That's great, I just want them to be replaceable in some way. It's crazy that this has been allowed up until now.
- Syonyk 2y ago
  Imagine the tradeoffs, though. A "user-serviceable battery," by requirements, is going to be a hard shell plastic sort of thing - which means a decent fraction of the "total battery space" is a protective layer, not active cell components - so some significantly reduced capacity compared to having a "non-replaceable" battery ("slightly more difficult to replace"). You also end up having to devote space to whatever mechanisms keep the rear shell in place, and may have a harder time waterproofing it as a result (which seems to be standard anymore - the number of people I see at the gym using their phones in the hot tub or sauna is boggling). Batteries, under light use of phones not kept in pockets, last a very long time - 3-5 years isn't unreasonable, and many will last longer. Batteries, under heavy use of a phone kept in a pocket and run hard, will still typically last 1.5-2 years. So in exchange for "slightly more inconvenience less than annually," you get a good bit more capacity and runtime. Apple, in general, hasn't made their batteries nonsensically hard to replace. They've used the "pull tab sticky" sort of thing for some while, which is far nicer than "glue the whole thing down," and their newer devices are using some sort of electrically released magic (apply 9V to the adhesive, battery pops out). There's no such thing as a free lunch.
  - rpcope1 2y ago
    That's a whole lot of words to just carry water for a bunch of anti-user stuff Apple continues to inflict on their Stockholm Syndrome afflicted customers. The whole water proofing thing is dumb--why is it that every digital watch I've ever owned is simultaneously unbelievably easier to service and also manages to survive being under water way better than any phone I've seen, Apple or otherwise? It's like gasket technology doesn't exist. You could have your shiny metal back and just have it secured with a handful of machine screws. And as far as their batteries not being a pain, they're way harder than a Motorola, for example, and again frankly needlessly so. It's so weird that we just come to expect to be screwed on these phones, when if it was anything else, especially the sort of devices that are more commercially focused than consumer, you'd demand better.
- bigtimesink 2y ago
  Now you're trading off water resistance, size, and capacity. Choose 2.
  - alpaca128 2y ago
    Samsung’s Galaxy S5 or so was water resistant and had a replaceable battery. I remember a test where it survived a full washing machine program without any issue. Oh, and it also had a headphone jack.
  - behnamoh 2y ago
    no one asked for water resistance, but literally everyone said "we want replaceable batteries and don't care about phone thinness either", but Apple doesn't care.
    - bigtimesink 2y ago
      > no one asked for water resistance Manufacturers put water-sensitive indicators in electronics to flag this during warranty claims. Before water resistant phones, people would desperately google for how to save their phones. > don't care about phone thinness either There are rumors the next iPhone with have a thin model. You should also look into the original Motorola Razr. It was the original sexy phone precisely because of how thin it was.
    - Syonyk 2y ago
      I'm pretty sure that a lot of people are very happy with water resistance in exchange for having to do a bit more work to replace a battery (that they don't actually replace). The number of people using their phones in the hot tub, or in the sauna, astounds me on a regular basis. I can't imagine doing that. But, with modern devices being genuinely "drop them in the pool" grade waterproof, neither does it seem likely to be a problem. I'll agree on thinness, though. The number of phones in massive, chunky cases says "A lot of people don't care about thin."
      - jorvi 2y ago
        > I'll agree on thinness, though. The number of phones in massive, chunky cases says "A lot of people don't care about thin." They care about thin, but they also care about the fragility of metal and glass backs.
- acdha 2y ago
  I’m assuming you meant “user replaceable”, because that’s really the key thing to understand here. Almost every phone had those, but most of them switched over half a decade. There was a long period where consumers had tons of options with removable batteries, and the market unequivocally rejected them. It’s always a mistake to assume that people drop hundreds of dollars on worse products based on nebulous claims about marketing, so clearly the average phone buyer thought that they were buying a better product. Why? Removable batteries were useful in two situations: before a phone could last all day, swapping batteries was handy for people who spent a lot of time away from chargers … but most people don’t need that very often, if at all. The other situation is a few years in, when the battery life is starting to be noticeably worse. For that to be a big deal, it has to happen before you want to buy a new phone for other reasons. This is a valid complaint but you only experience it every few years and can fix it by spending the equivalent of a month of phone service and waiting roughly the amount of time it takes you to get lunch. Now, what did we gain? Using a sealed battery made phones far more durable – people used to joke about dropping their phone and having the battery fly out! – and especially made it easier to make them dust and waterproof. It also made them cheaper, smaller, lighter, and sturdier. So basically the average buyer gave up benefits they rarely used in exchange for things they noticed literally every time they picked up the phone. The day the iPhone came out, the entire market re-evaluated what they wanted in a phone and almost everyone decided that they didn’t make 18 hour flights with no charging often enough to give up that solid, luxury feel. Just as Google’s software developers made a crash project to copy the iOS UI, the hardware designers saw the lines around the block at Apple Stores and correctly concluded that nobody minded the drawbacks of a sealed battery.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > This is a valid complaint but you only experience it every few years and can fix it by spending the equivalent of a month of phone service and waiting roughly the amount of time it takes you to get lunch. I don't spend $90-100 on service. So make that three months. With 1/5 or less of the price going to the actual battery. > people used to joke about dropping their phone and having the battery fly out! You can solve that with a screw. > The day the iPhone came out, the entire market re-evaluated what they wanted in a phone and almost everyone decided that they didn’t make 18 hour flights with no charging often enough to give up that solid, luxury feel. Things have changed a lot since then. Batteries are huge, chips are efficient, and phones are thinner. These days the loss of half a millimeter of battery, or making the phone half a millimeter thicker, would be just fine in a ton of cases. > cheaper, smaller, lighter, and sturdier The sliver of thickness is real, but you can keep the same sturdiness, and what kind of price difference do you have in mind? If the phone costs a dollar more but you save more than fifty dollars on battery replacement that's a pretty good deal. > the hardware designers saw the lines around the block at Apple Stores and correctly concluded that nobody minded the drawbacks of a sealed battery. Ugh. People liking a product is not an endorsement of every single aspect of that product!

brokenmachine 2y ago

Imagine a world with replaceable batteries.

noirscape 2y ago
Should be coming back in 2027, when the EUs battery regulation goes into effect. While it doesn't iirc require easily swappable batteries (like the Nokia of the olden days, where you just took off the back cover and put a new one in), it's specifically designed to put a stop to the current amount of device waste coming from poor quality batteries.
- brokenmachine 2y ago
  That's great, I just want them to be replaceable in some way. It's crazy that this has been allowed up until now.
Syonyk 2y ago
Imagine the tradeoffs, though. A "user-serviceable battery," by requirements, is going to be a hard shell plastic sort of thing - which means a decent fraction of the "total battery space" is a protective layer, not active cell components - so some significantly reduced capacity compared to having a "non-replaceable" battery ("slightly more difficult to replace"). You also end up having to devote space to whatever mechanisms keep the rear shell in place, and may have a harder time waterproofing it as a result (which seems to be standard anymore - the number of people I see at the gym using their phones in the hot tub or sauna is boggling). Batteries, under light use of phones not kept in pockets, last a very long time - 3-5 years isn't unreasonable, and many will last longer. Batteries, under heavy use of a phone kept in a pocket and run hard, will still typically last 1.5-2 years. So in exchange for "slightly more inconvenience less than annually," you get a good bit more capacity and runtime. Apple, in general, hasn't made their batteries nonsensically hard to replace. They've used the "pull tab sticky" sort of thing for some while, which is far nicer than "glue the whole thing down," and their newer devices are using some sort of electrically released magic (apply 9V to the adhesive, battery pops out). There's no such thing as a free lunch.
- rpcope1 2y ago
  That's a whole lot of words to just carry water for a bunch of anti-user stuff Apple continues to inflict on their Stockholm Syndrome afflicted customers. The whole water proofing thing is dumb--why is it that every digital watch I've ever owned is simultaneously unbelievably easier to service and also manages to survive being under water way better than any phone I've seen, Apple or otherwise? It's like gasket technology doesn't exist. You could have your shiny metal back and just have it secured with a handful of machine screws. And as far as their batteries not being a pain, they're way harder than a Motorola, for example, and again frankly needlessly so. It's so weird that we just come to expect to be screwed on these phones, when if it was anything else, especially the sort of devices that are more commercially focused than consumer, you'd demand better.
bigtimesink 2y ago
Now you're trading off water resistance, size, and capacity. Choose 2.
- alpaca128 2y ago
  Samsung’s Galaxy S5 or so was water resistant and had a replaceable battery. I remember a test where it survived a full washing machine program without any issue. Oh, and it also had a headphone jack.
- behnamoh 2y ago
  no one asked for water resistance, but literally everyone said "we want replaceable batteries and don't care about phone thinness either", but Apple doesn't care.
  - bigtimesink 2y ago
    > no one asked for water resistance Manufacturers put water-sensitive indicators in electronics to flag this during warranty claims. Before water resistant phones, people would desperately google for how to save their phones. > don't care about phone thinness either There are rumors the next iPhone with have a thin model. You should also look into the original Motorola Razr. It was the original sexy phone precisely because of how thin it was.
  - Syonyk 2y ago
    I'm pretty sure that a lot of people are very happy with water resistance in exchange for having to do a bit more work to replace a battery (that they don't actually replace). The number of people using their phones in the hot tub, or in the sauna, astounds me on a regular basis. I can't imagine doing that. But, with modern devices being genuinely "drop them in the pool" grade waterproof, neither does it seem likely to be a problem. I'll agree on thinness, though. The number of phones in massive, chunky cases says "A lot of people don't care about thin."
    - jorvi 2y ago
      > I'll agree on thinness, though. The number of phones in massive, chunky cases says "A lot of people don't care about thin." They care about thin, but they also care about the fragility of metal and glass backs.
acdha 2y ago
I’m assuming you meant “user replaceable”, because that’s really the key thing to understand here. Almost every phone had those, but most of them switched over half a decade. There was a long period where consumers had tons of options with removable batteries, and the market unequivocally rejected them. It’s always a mistake to assume that people drop hundreds of dollars on worse products based on nebulous claims about marketing, so clearly the average phone buyer thought that they were buying a better product. Why? Removable batteries were useful in two situations: before a phone could last all day, swapping batteries was handy for people who spent a lot of time away from chargers … but most people don’t need that very often, if at all. The other situation is a few years in, when the battery life is starting to be noticeably worse. For that to be a big deal, it has to happen before you want to buy a new phone for other reasons. This is a valid complaint but you only experience it every few years and can fix it by spending the equivalent of a month of phone service and waiting roughly the amount of time it takes you to get lunch. Now, what did we gain? Using a sealed battery made phones far more durable – people used to joke about dropping their phone and having the battery fly out! – and especially made it easier to make them dust and waterproof. It also made them cheaper, smaller, lighter, and sturdier. So basically the average buyer gave up benefits they rarely used in exchange for things they noticed literally every time they picked up the phone. The day the iPhone came out, the entire market re-evaluated what they wanted in a phone and almost everyone decided that they didn’t make 18 hour flights with no charging often enough to give up that solid, luxury feel. Just as Google’s software developers made a crash project to copy the iOS UI, the hardware designers saw the lines around the block at Apple Stores and correctly concluded that nobody minded the drawbacks of a sealed battery.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > This is a valid complaint but you only experience it every few years and can fix it by spending the equivalent of a month of phone service and waiting roughly the amount of time it takes you to get lunch. I don't spend $90-100 on service. So make that three months. With 1/5 or less of the price going to the actual battery. > people used to joke about dropping their phone and having the battery fly out! You can solve that with a screw. > The day the iPhone came out, the entire market re-evaluated what they wanted in a phone and almost everyone decided that they didn’t make 18 hour flights with no charging often enough to give up that solid, luxury feel. Things have changed a lot since then. Batteries are huge, chips are efficient, and phones are thinner. These days the loss of half a millimeter of battery, or making the phone half a millimeter thicker, would be just fine in a ton of cases. > cheaper, smaller, lighter, and sturdier The sliver of thickness is real, but you can keep the same sturdiness, and what kind of price difference do you have in mind? If the phone costs a dollar more but you save more than fifty dollars on battery replacement that's a pretty good deal. > the hardware designers saw the lines around the block at Apple Stores and correctly concluded that nobody minded the drawbacks of a sealed battery. Ugh. People liking a product is not an endorsement of every single aspect of that product!