this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
2328 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

58164 readers
4988 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

It had been in the works for a while, but now it has formally been adopted. From the article:

The regulation provides that by 2027 portable batteries incorporated into appliances should be removable and replaceable by the end-user, leaving sufficient time for operators to adapt the design of their products to this requirement.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] SharpMaxwell@lemmy.world 80 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (73 children)

I have seen countless videos on tiktok of people being against this move, and my question is why? why wouldn't anyone want to be able to extend the life of their expensive devices, why wouldn't people want easily repairable batteries that take less than 5 minutes to swap out?

the only argument ive seen against this is "OOH BUT BUT BUT THE AESTHETICS OF THE PHONE" who cares? function should always be over looks. and if anything it will end the trend of phones being glassy slabs and bring some innovation and new designs to the table. which will be interesting to see.

[โ€“] jonatan83@lemmy.fmhy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

If you don't think aesthetics is a valid argument I don't know what to tell you. Just because you don't care about it doesn't mean other people don't, or that it's an invalid opinion.

load more comments (72 replies)