[Alupis]

Yes, but IP67 is not nearly as water resistant as IP68, which all modern phones are for the most part.

I'm not knowledgeable enough to know if IP68 could be achieved in a phone without glue. There's no clamping mechanism for the backs, they're just press-fit with small clips.

[cannonpr]

From a mechanical perspective ip68 is perfectly achievable mechanically and watches have been achieving it for a long time, however… with what sort of margins for the manufacturer and what sort of cost for the consumer ? Additionally a lot of them require pretty carefully adherence to instructions torques and tolerances to achieve the same waterproof rating. Personally I’d be very happy to have a phone that says, if you swap the battery you might lose the ip68 rating unless you follow the resealing process within tolerances.

[retatop]

My phone (A Furiphone FLX1, which is kindof a variant of a Gigaset GX6) has a removable back with a gasket and is IP68. One of their promotional videos had them change the battery on video then boot the phone and and unlock it underwater

[seba_dos1]

Who cares though? Sealing the battery in makes the device less drop resistant. I somehow managed to avoid water damage to my phones for decades, while none of my phones managed to avoid being dropped in a way that would most likely be fatal to them if their batteries were sealed in - and yet most of them survived to this day.

A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with.

[kube-system]

> A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with.

I submerge my phone as a matter of normal use because I can. I take it into pools and hot tubs, and I clean it in the sink -- I personally wouldn't trade that for a battery door.

[tossaway0]

Have you had issues because of wear and tear? I trust the water proofing completely until my phone has fallen out of my hands onto the floor.

Then I won't chance any submersion and I can't think of an accurate way to test it.

[kube-system]

I have never had an issue, but I certainly wouldn’t do it with a phone that had visible damage.

[me-vs-cat]

Being replaceable does not require a battery door.

[kube-system]

The EU regulation we’re talking about essentially does, with an exception for high cycle batteries on waterproof phones

[me-vs-cat]

No, it doesn't require a battery door, even for phones that don't meet the exception you mentioned.

Over a decade ago, I replaced a phone screen over a few hours, involving a couple dozen screws. During that, I had to remove the battery. (Replacing only the battery would have been easier.) I'm a layman, and all the screws were Phillips. That's sufficient to be replaceable.

[jamiek88]

I’ve done it and seen it many times. People throw their phones to each other in pools and the beach for photos all the time. One of the best things about modern phones is the waterproofing. IP68 level is amazing.

> A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with

It’s actually the opposite - a user replacement battery is a gimmick not worth the downsides.

Apple know this, and they know their customers a lot better than you do.

Your position is niche at best, anachronistic really.

[seba_dos1]

Apple has vested interest in getting their customers to switch to a new phone often, and the average time to upgrade is absurdly low these days (less than 4 years), which is greatly influenced by battery wear and fall damage, so I don't think this argument is very persuasive.

[gf000]

> user replacement battery

It's not really the old kind of replace-ability, though. The only requirement is that you should be able to change it with commercially available tools.

[dmitrygr]

> Who cares though?

a lot of normal people who daily-use their phones near water and even jump into pools with them. I would bet you $100 that if you asked people "replaceable battery of water proofing to the same level you have it now", ~ nobody will puck the former.

[seba_dos1]

Not once in my life I had thought "I would like to jump into this pool with my phone", while I did sometimes replace the battery on-the-go which actually made my life easier. It's an absurd take. If anything, I'd be more concerned with beverage spills, but these are still easier to avoid than drops.

[jamiek88]

Well you are the exception. Especially if you live in a hot area where a lot of people have backyard pools. Being in and out of the water constantly is a very normal in Florida for example.

Most the suburban kids in Houston had wristband attachments to their phones in the pool or would be in a floaty taking stupid pics of each other as kids do. Trying to keep a modern phone dry takes away a lot of utility.

[seba_dos1]

Not a lot of people live in hot areas with plenty of backyard pools, but I can understand that waterproof phones could become more popular there than in the rest of the world based on this property alone (right now they're popular because there's not much choice).

[bigstrat2003]

Those people are doing a very stupid thing. I don't think that the world should be ordered around "let's make it so people can do stupid things without consequence".

[dmitrygr]

Those people are the public buying the phones. Companies make phones that more people will buy. Turns out your desire for a bulky phone with a replaceable battery is less common than their desire for a phone that does not get destroyed when dropped into a pool.

[b112]

A phone needs to handle some rain droplets falling on its screen, anything more than that is a gimmick that's not worth the downsides it comes with

Some like to read in the bathtub. Statistics say women prefer the bathtub more than the shower. Therefore your position is sexist.

(Yes, I'm being an asshat)

[drw85]

Read a book then?

[cozzyd]

quite a few people put their phones in their back pockets...

[bananamogul]

Maybe as a society it's better for people to have replacement insurance than to have sealed batteries that make phones so disposable. I wonder if we've defined IP68 as a "must have" without considering the alternatives. I'm thinking the percentage of people who actually "use" IP68 over the course of their phone is pretty small...yet that "requirement" drives a huge design choice.

I suspect it's a moot point. Makers have every incentive to drive replacement cycles.

[mustyoshi]

Phones aren't disposable because of the lack of replacement batteries.

I keep my phones for 3-4 years, and the battery life while degraded isn't really an issue.

And that's with recharging it just about every night even if it's not dead.

[tossaway0]

I replaced my phone because of the battery life, and I would have replaced the battery if it would have been easy, to offer a counter anecdote.

I had to make the choice of getting another phone (used in great condition, as I do) or pay half the cost I paid to get the battery replaced but also knowing it would still be heaviy used and more likely to fail in other ways because of use.

If labor cost and decreased relaibility weren't factors, swapping the battery would have been the choice.

Now the question is: are there more people like me or more people who need a sealed, hard to repair phone? I don't know but if I did I'd accept keeping the current situation.

[kube-system]

Spills and drops were traditionally most common causes of mobile device insurance claims. We've only seen that change for phones because of their IP ratings in recent years.

While manufacturers do have an incentive to get people to buy new phones, many of them with first party insurance do have an incentive not to pay out as many claims.

[bananamogul]

Downvoted for daring to speculate. I love this place.

[VorpalWay]

Nothing stops them from adding a gasket and some screws though.