• @RaoulDuke@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    411 year ago

    Good. Non-replaceable batteries benefit no one but device manufacturers and miners of lithium, cobalt, etc.

    • @Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      221 year ago

      I don’t think it would really benefit or harm the lithium miners and battery manufacturers - in fact it might benefit them more if they could sell their batteries directly to consumers and skip the middleman, keeping those profits for themselves.

  • Eggyhead
    link
    fedilink
    371 year ago

    EU doing all the heavy regulatory lifting that American politicians are too afraid to touch. As both an American and an avid Apple enthusiast, I sincerely appreciate it.

    Apple will do something to ensure only batteries from them work right, mark my words.

    • Virkkunen
      link
      fedilink
      141 year ago

      Apple will do something to ensure only batteries from them work right, mark my words.

      They tried doing this with the upcoming USB C cables but EU stepped in by making sure that every cable will work without any limitations on transfer and charging speeds.

      I fully expect Apple claim that the EU is an environmental terrorist by having “disposable batteries being thrown out after their charge is depleted” and that somehow having batteries being certified by Apple prevents that.

    • FiskFisk33
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      Apple will do something to ensure only batteries from them work right, mark my words.

      Still a slight win though!

      • Untitled9999
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Well if only official Apple batteries will work, then that means Apple will jack up the price to something ridiculous, because they’ll be the only option for a battery.

        So hopefully third party batteries would work as well. I think third party batteries work in iPhones at the moment. So if we’re able to install them much more easily then that would be very good.

        • anaximander
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          The EU is also working on Right To Repair legislation that iirc has something to say about reasonable prices for repair supplies and spare parts. In that case, even if only Apple-made batteries work, they’d still be affordable, or at least within a reasonable percentage of what they actually cost and not marked up enormously.

    • @kek_w_lol@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Certainly. But I hope the EU regulators do the same trick as they did with the USB C port rregulation. It is against the rules to make it a walled garden.

  • @TheOtherJake@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    23
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They need to hit the final nail on the head. All smart phones sold in Europe must have fully documented and open source hardware including the entire chipset, all peripherals, and the modem, with all registers and interfaces documented, the full API, and all programing documentation along with a public toolchain that can reproduce the software as shipped with the device and updated with any changes made to future iterations as soon as the updated software is made available.

    This law would make these devices lifetime devices, if you choose; as in your lifetime. It would murder the disposable hardware culture, and it should happen now. Moore’s law is dead. The race is over.

    • @narc0tic_bird@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      I doubt manufacturers would want to put millions upon millions into research and development if they’d have to open source it all anyways.

      • @TheOtherJake@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        They want to sell to every large market and will do what they are required to do in order to access this market. All of these companies have the ability to completely reverse engineer any competing hardware. There are no secrets. Proprietary is not about protecting business or IP. It only exists to exploit the end user. All of these tools and documentation already exist. In the past they were public. The only reason they are not public now is because corporations realized the can get away with it. Capitalism ruins everything you allow it to touch. The only way to stop it is by force. Corporations are the worthless sludge of humanity. You are what matters, not them. They have no rights.

    • @Moonrise2473@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      At least we can start with unlockable bootloader. Or at least, the second you’re discontinuing OS updates, you must give a bootloader unlocking tool + kernel sources. Including apple, shame that a device like an iPhone X is “e-waste” now that won’t receive updates

      • @TheOtherJake@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        8
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Governments already have requirements like this for military and government hardware. All it takes is altering a few lines to existing requirements. Ultimately, you should expect more from both the manufacturer and the government. This is about ownership. You either buy what you pay for or you rent it. Anyone selling you anything should have no further ownership of any kind, digital rights included. Anything less is theft. This blind spot is leading to digital feudalism and it is criminal. Don’t allow anyone to steal from you. This is a fundamental human right.

        • @dandelion@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          I briefly worked in safety critical software, so adjacent to defence and aeronautical in the UK. I recall that when the UK was asking for the source code for windows running on the trident subs at the time (which is terrifying thought at the best of times. A whole new meaning to blue screen of death) that UK gov had asked to inspect the source code but was told to swivel. IIRC US and China were both allowed to look. That was all on the grapevine though, and I was still a kid so obv take with a pinch of salt, but I’m inclined to believe it.

          I had more direct experience in my role validating software to run on military aircraft. We were contracted in to “prove” that the software was up to do-178b security stand and bug free via line by line inspection and some other techniques (which was a joy as you can imagine). I never got the impression that the source would be shared with the government, only that it had to meet the standard.

          Interesting sidenote there, was that because it was for defence, being up to the standard was really marketing more than legal requirement. We’d find bugs that would trigger hard reboots of the hardware and the message was always “thanks for letting us know, but it’s too expensive to get the original contractors back to fix it so we’ll just ignore it”. I think they’d have been legally obliged to do something for civilian aircraft but military is a different game.

          (Again should emphasise these are vague memories from working a gap year before my masters, so take with pinch of salt.)

  • anarchism
    link
    fedilink
    191 year ago

    wonder how apple will react to this. lack of user repairability is a considerable source of revenue for them.

    • @Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      I wouldn’t be surprised if they tried to do the same thing as the printer companies. and install authentication chips in the battery modules so that only official apple batteries could be installed in Apple devices - then sell their batteries at marked up prices

      “We made them easily available and replaceable, what more could you want?”

      • OrangeCorvus
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        I don’t like Apple but battery is the one thing I wouldn’t mess around with and buy from a cheap 3rd party vendor. Batteries tend to go boom and if it’s a cheap knock-off you increase your chances. Since it will be law we will most likely get a bunch of 3rd party vendors, I would maybe see myself buying from an established battery manufacturer but not from a quick Amazon search or from the small repair shop on the corner.

        • @Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          While you have a point there, I wouldn’t be surprised if we had reputable third party battery companies sell phone batteries as well

          • Especially if the smartphone battery size is standardized to a set of standards (I doubt that will happen, but it’s nice to dream) hell if this happened Energizer and Duracell might also jump on the lithium bandwagon.
      • thisn
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        They are already matching serial numbers in software to verify if a part is still the original one, so I guess the next logical step would be indeed to switch to authentication modules. With that they would allow users to change the parts on their own while still making lots of money

  • @pomfritten@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    161 year ago

    The European Parliament just caused a major headache for smartphone and tablet manufacturers.

    Laughs in Fairphone.

  • crib
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    it’s sad that replaceable batteries got extinct in just a few years. In my opinion replaceable battery is a great selling point and I know I’m not the only one so I’m surprised that the market are not able to provide this…
    Especially now a days when phones have stagnated and having a 5 year old phone is nothing strange anymore.

    I used to have a replaceable battery to my old LG G3 and it was great to just swap batteries and directly having a fully charged phone. Now I always have to have power banks or try to charge up during train rides or whatever and having to worry that I don’t have enough juice

    • sab
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      I have an old phone that works fine except it cannot be charged. Was looking into charging the battery in a friend’s identical phone, and putting the charged battery into mine.

      I would have to dismantle the entire phone and remove the screen just to get to the battery. Absolutely ridiculous.

      I replaced it with a Fairphone, which I promote every time I get the chance to.

  • Hazrod
    link
    fedilink
    91 year ago

    Yes ! I loved that. My previous phone has a dead battery, and I can’t get it replaced because the manufacturer doesn’t make the battery anymore.

  • brie
    link
    fedilink
    9
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    is this (page 55) the approved text? It seems kind of vague on what constitutes “readily removable and replaceable.”

    • 00
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, this is the adopted text. Its basically an update of the text you linked, which is the regulation from 2020. The relevant part you want might be (38) and (39):

      (38) […] 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 […]

      (39) To ensure the safety of end-users, this Regulation should provide for a limited derogation for portable batteries from the removability and replaceability requirements set for portable batteries concerning appliances that incorporate portable batteries and that are specifically designed to be used, for the majority of the active service of the appliance, in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion and that are intended to be washable or rinseable. This derogation should only apply when it is not possible, by way of redesign of the appliance, to ensure the safety of the end-user and the safe continued use of the appliance after the end-user has correctly followed the instructions to remove and replace the battery. Where the derogation applies, the product should be designed in such a way as to make the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals, and not by end-users.

      • Markoff
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        with the use of commercially available tools and without requiring the use of specialised tools

        It’s contradictory, what about commercially available specialized tools? Who defines what’s specialized and not?

        • @schnapsidee@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          I mean…you can be pedantic about it, but to me this reads fairly clearly as “If it can’t be removed with a screwdriver, it’s not allowed.”

          • Markoff
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            The evil is always in details, thats why with their Incandescent light bulb ban, these are now sold as heating devices/lamps, so much for their bans/rules. That’s why I pointed out commercially available tools can be at same time specialized tools, they should rather mention something like it must be tools owned by 50% households according stats and do simple survey about screwdrivers.

            • TheSaneWriter
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              I’m going to be honest, I think that this is a case where companies will always dodge the rules unless the consequences are so severe they’re unwilling to risk it. Something like forced downsizing, or a fine proportional to annual revenue. That would make companies significantly more hesitant to try and tread the line.

  • @rm_dash_r_star@lemm.ee
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    7
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Thank you EU. Both my laptop and phone have non-replaceable batteries. It’s ridiculous I have to buy a whole new device when the battery wears out. A Li-Ion batter lasts three years, I can easily get double that off the device itself. It’s anti-consumer and bad for the environment, replacing a whole device and disposing of it rather than replacing the battery.

    • @supercriticalcheese@feddit.it
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Yes, I had to replace battery on 2-3year old iPhone same years ago. And also had battery issues after 3 years on my previous android phone.

      Once replaced the iPhone battery on a non apple approved repair shop, it wasn’t good for long. Whatever it was due to the repair shop putting a cheap battery or Apple scumbagery I have no idea.

  • TheDeadGuy
    link
    fedilink
    61 year ago

    Awesome, just like 7 years ago it was standard. Phones with good specs are gonna last forever with this change

  • terribleplan
    link
    fedilink
    English
    61 year ago

    2027 seems kinda weak sauce. Maybe it is more reasonable than I feel given I don’t know much about hardware design timelines, but I honestly was hoping for more of a middle finger to companies that have embraced the anti-consumer practice of using non-replaceable batteries.

    • @kilgore@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      141 year ago

      Well if the deadline was 2025, then the EU just probably wouldn’t have any new smart phones until 2027 anyway. I think its a decent compromise that gives manufacturers a chance to redesign their new models.

      • terribleplan
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        Yeah, as I said IDK what device timelines are, but for some reason I can’t imagine apple not releasing an iPhone in the EU for 4 years… the charge port mandate was not super impactful/difficult for Apple to comply with. I am still not convinced Apple isn’t going to drop the charge port entirely in favor of their magsafe wireless thing (again, anti-consumer IMO), or at the very least will be putting out an EU-only SKU with USB-C.

  • @Mishmash2000@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    61 year ago

    Brilliant! I miss the days of being able to slap on a massive oversize battery to get you through the day! :-D Carrying around powerbanks and cables is such a huge step back!

  • @Griseowulfin@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    I personally don’t understand the purpose of this law. I’ve never discarded a phone due to battery issues (iPhone user). It’s usually just been a slow device, sometimes due to a failing charging port or 3.5mm Jack. I’d rather have the opportunity to replace ports, screens, and buttons.

    Do any of you guys experience issues needing a battery replacement that often?

    • @Moonrise2473@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      They’ll appeal this arguing that using their proprietary equipment that can be rented for €100/week, the battery is user replaceable

      • @LwL@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        The text specifically disallows this, at least.

        Though some sort of ID-verification so you can only put in official Apple batteries for a stupid markup seems likely.

    • @mustbe3to20signs@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They will try their best to follow the law in the most annoying way. You can do it on your own but your warranty is gone and important security features will be ‘unavailable’ like fingerprint on iPhones with replaced screens or the introduction of ‘registered USB-C cables only’.