• @b3nsn0wA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 year ago

    And I’m saying that toolless repairability (if that’s even actually mandated) doesn’t require phones to have lower IP ratings or disruptive thickness. The difference between the Xcover6’s 1.5m for 60 minutes and the iPhone 14’s 6m for 60 minutes is already marginal at best, and the Xcover6 is not engineered to be a thin phone, Samsung obviously doesn’t want it to eat into their S23 or A54 sales.

    I trust that Apple would be able to engineer a phone exactly to your desires even with the mandate present, they just currently have no incentive to do so. They are, however, very much incentivized to enforce device failures, put disposable components in devices that are extremely hard to dispose of, and push people towards buying electronics at a higher frequency than necessary through exorbitant repair costs and discouraging self repair. Once those incentives flip around, you’ll see some awesome phones from them even with the design goals – unless they just throw a temper tantrum because they don’t like being pushed around.

    The Fairphone 5, arriving this year, is already going to be significantly thinner, while sacrificing nothing of the repairability. (Which includes a lot more than just a pop off back, it also has a removable screen, as opposed to having the whole phone built on the screen.) And it’s not hard to add some o-rings. If a small company can figure this out while having to stay price-competitive while also being constrained by the low volume and the fair trade materials that are more expensive due to the smaller market and the audits for human rights violations, then it should be a walk in the park for Apple with their resources.