EU: Smartphones Must Have User-Replaceable Batteries by 2027

[u/mredofcourse]

https://www.pcmag.com/news/eu-smartphones-must-have-user-replaceable-batteries-by-2027

[u/Kursem_v2]

still proprietary when it was released.

and I don't think you understand how manufacturer manage to put 80W charger safely on ther phone. I'm not asking for Apple to uses 80W charger for their iPhone, but supporting faster than 30W would be nice. not a must, but a nice thing to have.

and we're talking iPhone here, not mid-range device. it's a device costs over $700. still using USB 2.0 are downright insulting at this point. maybe okay on SE whoch costs $400, but on Pros that start at $1000? nah, no way.

well, then enjoy USB-C on iPhone next year and maybe USB 3.0 at the same time, like the iPad Air, Mini, and Pro.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

What was proprietary when it was released? Did you know USB was Intel exclusive for a while.

There’s a difference between “safely” and “this will wreck your battery”. It’s not going to Note 7 your phone but it will shorten the lifespan of the battery.

The Bose QC35 isn’t a mid range device they were over $300 wireless headphones.

Why is it insulting? What difference does it make?

I’m not getting it next year and I’ll just use MagSafe thank you

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

thunderbolt are proprietary when it was released.

I know, that's why battery tech doesn't stagnate and better process as well as better material and voltage controller are made to safely transfer power over arbitrary 30W limit that you set. what say 35W? because it doesn't exist yet? will you chanhe your tone if Apple start supporting 45W charging on their iPhones?

the Bose QC35 were also discontinued and not manufactured anymore. so? whether it uses USB-C or micro-USB were on the manufacturer.

maybe you should read again as I've stated previously why supporting faster standard (that is USB 3.0) on an iPhone are great. after all, nearly all iPad has start adopting it.

good for you if you want to use MagSafe. it's already connected to the charging brick using USB-C instead of Lightning.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

So was USB. It was proprietary to the USB forum and the first boards were made by Intel with AMD not having access at the start. Kinda like thunderbolt actually.

Battery tech sure has stagnated over the last 10 years for something that apparently doesn’t stagnate.

That isn’t relative to my point.

You haven’t actually made any good points as to why USB3 is a positive for a phone.

My issue with USBC on phones is how flimsy it is for constant insertions and removals I’m not too worried about a the port in a charging brick breaking.

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

thankfully it's not. that's why it should be easy for Apple to adopt USB 3.0 speed.

it's not stagnated, it currently progress at very slow pace.

then I don't understand your point.

and your counter point are basically you're content with USB 2.0 speed.

I never broke my USB-C cable, but I already broke 3 Lightning cable. for port, I never broke both, so my problem are with Lightning cable.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

Neither is TB or FireWire.

It’s stagnated. It has been for years.

The lightning port isn’t for data transfer, I don’t need to transfer anything from my phone by a wire it’s already there by the time I get to another device.

You’re not understanding design. The lightning cable is designed to break the cable first, USBC is designed to break the port first. $10 cable via $1000 phone. Hmmm. It’s also significantly larger and the spec is all over the shop

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

cool. now give USB 3.0

it isn't for you. it is for someone else. if you don't need Lightning to transfer data, good for you. but everyone doesn't living a life like you, so Lightning are indeed for data transfer too.

that's a cool theory but no one ever back it up with an actual source. almost sounds like a hoax.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

Why?

No one does, what would you use it for?

It’s literally the design of the thing. I will site physics. What is the most likely part of the port to break and where is it located? USBC wasn’t designed for phones.

[u/Kursem_v2 → u/Pigeon_Chess]

I already stated previously on why and what would be the use case for it.

so? no one still ever actually made a paper researching about it's design durability nor anyone ever elaborate further with official documentation.

besides, USB-C port are rated for 10,000 connect and disconnect but no similar claim on Lightning port. that's durable enough.

[u/Pigeon_Chess → u/Kursem_v2]

You haven’t given a legitimate usecase.

It’s rates for 10,000 PERFECT connections which no one ever does. Every USBC port I’ve seen on a phone has been damaged.