[progfix]

> Why change the device design to make battery user-replaceable when I can bring it to the repair shop?

You'd rather go to a repair shop and pay a service fee for something that you can probably do in a couple of minutes at home?

[f6v]

I think that making battery replaceable by user will affect the phone design. I had a ton of first-wave Android devices back in the day. I don’t remember carrying an extra battery with me. Maybe someone did, but how many of total users?

Another point is that making a phone water-resistant is likely not trivial when you can take the whole back panel away.

My point is: are these dramatic changes worth it when the battery degrades only couple years after purchase?

[algas]

Yeah, the waterproofing concerns me. Neither of the examples they brought up in the article had ip67 water resistance, which I consider a bare minimum after water damaging too many cheap phones. The best phones are more water resistant than that. As a meche, you'll always get a better water seal with glue than with screws or snaps. I can see this being a real issue.

[Levitz]

I've replaced batteries with tools. It's a slab inside the phone and it tends to get somewhat hot, there really aren't that many places to put them, I have a really hard time believing making repairs difficult is not the main reason defining the current standard.

Now, things like bluetooth earphones, those I'm curious about.

[ChuckNorris89]

>You'd rather go to a repair shop and pay a service fee for something that you can probably do in a couple of minutes at home?

HN userbase in a nutshell