this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
609 points (94.8% liked)

Technology

60123 readers
3423 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

SO. MUCH. THIS.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] protovack -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

its not some conspiracy. the more complex, durable and water proof a phone is, the harder its going to be to repair or replace a component or battery. the nice thing is that now that the technology is mature and basically good enough to do anything fairly well, people won't need to upgrade for tech or feature reasons anymore. Now it will just be a trade-off between durability and water/dirt resistance, and repairability.

Also, people have no clue how to care for batteries. phones get left in hot cars at 100% charge, left in the sun at the beach at 100%. There is no BMS or hardware battery protection mechanism that can protect against that. Those batteries are fucked and will need to be replaced. And replacement means breaking the water seal around the phone, so it's annoying and expensive. it's just the way it is. you are responsible for your battery, and the better you treat it, the longer it will last.

[–] WHYAREWEALLCAPS 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We have had watertight user serviceable with external batteries handheld amateur radios for decades. Your arguments are baloney. Phones are only this way because manufacturers want them to be this way.

[–] protovack 1 points 1 year ago

but they are nowhere close to as thin, and nowhere close to the same complexity

load more comments (2 replies)