This sounds like a good time for the masses to demand phones that last 10 to 20 years, have removable batteries this does not affect water proof ratings despite popular belief, have software defined protocols that can be upgraded or removable modules for modem and other devices 4G, 5G, 6G, 7G+ and so on.
back
7 comments
The problem is that the masses seem unlikely to enjoy the bulk and complexity that comes with such an infinitely modular phone, and they definitely won't enjoy the higher cost. I think people sort of have this idea in their heads that manufacturers can easily make something just as cheap and usable while lasting forever and they just don't for profit reasons. But I see very little evidence that's actually the case and applying some critical thinking and engineering experience suggests Apple is probably not just holding out on us having the infinitely upgradeable iPhone of our dreams. Again I'm sure they could make one, but they realize the market is small especially at the likely price point and given other tradeoffs they'd have to make.
Not sure about that. Apple is famously hostile to the idea of independent upgrades and repairs (to the point they employ DRM in the inter-component communication), but the example of the Framework laptops proves you can have modular, performant and compact laptop.
Or ThinkPad devices - epitome of serviceability.
Not that I'm a huge fan of Framework but I think that can work.
People don't want this. They want to go their carrier, pick the phone that fits with the amount of money they think they can shell out a month all in (including the service), and then go on with the rest of their lives and forget about what phone they have for the next 5+ years.
> have removable batteries
No thanks, upgradeable is enough. I don’t want to optimize for something that happens once every… 5 years? I’m perfectly happy with my phone not exploding in 5 pieces when it falls on the ground.
This is hilarious back-solving to somehow justify the general public’s supposed need / desire for an INCREDIBLY nerdy product that you yourself certainly happen to have wanted for some time now, and certainly at least in large part for pre-existing ideological / philosophical reasons.
If this solved any cost problem in any sort of compelling way, it would’ve happened at some point in the past ~20 years, during which the price of a smartphone, even against inflation, had absolutely skyrocketed.
I just replaced my XS Max (from 2018?) and the only reason I did is an elderly relative lost hers and I gave her my old one. 5.5 years is a good run, it could have been longer.
Won't someone please think of the poor phone manufacturers?
Apple is only the ... checks charts ... richest company in the world. How will they survive with tariffs?
I like how my 15$ Casio mechanical watch is 30m water resistant yet the battery can be swapped in 2 minutes with a basic screwdriver. If only phone manufacturers can copy this crazy technology.
Because it's not water resistant anymore when the battery is swapped?
My slightly more expensive watch requires new sealing rings to retain guaranteed water resistance after opening it up. Could be a warranty thing but I wouldn't bet my watch on it ;)
OK? So it's replacing $0.30 worth of part (plus $0.05 for silicone grease probably) instead of replacing the whole watch, right?
Different phone manufacturers are different. Apple now famously changed the design of the last iPhone so it must be opened from the front (expensive screen!) rather than from the back like with the previous model - to make it even harder for the end user to seek he'll outside of apple services.
This is just an example of the intentional hostility. Make deliberate changes that harm costumer in the long run.
Apple changed the design to make the phones more serviceable. Why is that hostile?
https://www.ifixit.com/News/100693/more-modular-than-ever-be...
I would be so pissed off if I were using a phone today from 10-20 years ago…
For some small minority of people (who are overrepresented in this forum, but not in the general population), sure, they’d pull it off and be happy. But there is not mass market appeal here.
Haven’t startups and such tried to create modular, upgradable phones? And have any single one of them taken off with even 0.1% of market share?
>I would be so pissed off if I were using a phone today from 10-20 years ago…
Phones today evolve at a glacial pace compared to the pace from 20 years ago. So it's a poor argument IMHO.
A flagships from 5 years ago (with a fresh battery) is just as usable today as it was when it came out. This wasn't the case 20 years ago.
This is true. We've had all the tools we wanted: GPS, Music, Camera, Web and of course: Phone.
If the target lifespan was 10 years, we would reduce consumption by half and double the value for the end user.
I think the fact that a good chunk of people are living in their phones, makes it a hard sell but that doesn't mean someone shouldn't step up and do it for the street cred.
Once you get to the 5+ year timespan you start running into xG transitions, and modularity won't realistically be enough for phones to bypass those leaps (certification alone ensures that).
You walked back OPs statement there as well. 5 years is very different than 10-20 years. I'd wager most think that phones designed to last 5 years is perfectly reasonable.
Big difference between 5 years ago and 20 years ago…