They'll make the replacement so expensive nobody will do it. And then there will be a new rule mandating it needs to be a reasonable price. Apple will say it's reasomable because it factors in environmental costs, and so the dance continues.

Can you really guarantee that? I mean, it’s pretty much dependent on individual usage.

And there are exceptions based on capacity and how long you guarantee the battery capacity will be good for. IIRC, if it still has 70% capacity by 3 years time, it doesn’t have to be replaceable at all.

I do not remember reading that, the only exception I remember is for devices that are intended to be used under water, which phones are definitely not

IP68 didn’t exist when the galaxy S5 came out. The fairphone has a replaceable screen and is made by a tiny company that doesn’t have the budget for full waterproof testing. Often phones will have waterproofing but will not spend the money for the expensive testing for certification, see: Pocophone, etc.

That’s the thing though, why is apple the only ones authorized to swap out your battery? That service isn’t free, and they’re massively overcharging you for it.

It’s also not impossible to build a phone that is water resistant and has a swappable battery, but that’s besides the point. Personally I’d rather have a swappable battery.

The soaking rain thing has happened to me with a not particularly water resistant phone and it was fine. The water ratings are more intended for direct splashes and full immersion.

My opinion is that this is a comfort we can do without, especially given the ecology and consumer rights implications (not that a phone with a user replaceable battery is necessarily porous to water, plenty of phones meet both criteria)

I know. I was only pointing out that you can have a waterproof phone and a replaceable battery. Obviously you need to do better than the S5 but it is nothing impossible, even wanting to keep the audio jack and the USB ports.

Unfortunately it won’t.

This legislation isn’t for batteries that replaceable. More like “can be swapped by a technician in 5 minutes” replaceable.

Additionally, if the manufacturer guarantees (IIRC) 70% capacity after 3 years, they don’t have to do anything at all.

To be honest I prefer to use a power bank, it’s more convenient than having to swap batteries (i used to do that too) as you don’t have to power down the device. And one power bank can power many different devices, so i don’t have to buy a new one when i Change phones, and can use the same power bank to charge my earbuds, kindle, smartphone, and a variety of other devices, or lend it to someone.

Having said that, i did have my Nexus 6P battery degrade and had to be RMAd, lucky for me it was within warranty. Battery is the fastest failing component so being replaceable will go a long way in prolonging devices lifetime, but doesn’t have to be user-replaceable.

Wireless charging: because it’s always reliable, convenient, and available.

Do you support any older iOS versions? Anything that uses video, PWA or features added to other browsers >2 years ago? If yes to any of those questions, I have to think you don’t actually support/test in iOS safari. Which btw often works differently between iphone and ipad. And their simulator support only goes back a couple of versions, despite the fact that Safari does not auto-upgrade and is tied to major os releases. So if you have users with older devices, you cannot ever take for granted that your app/website will work fine for them without testing on either a simulator (excludes OS versions over like ~2 years old), or maintaining and testing on a physical library of devices with older versions that you make sure you always refuse updates on.

It’s abysmal to support safari ios unless you don’t care about lower income/education users who have 5 year old devices.

I don’t give a mousefuck about the rendering engine. I want extensions

GeckoView more specifically in this case. But yes.

But they do have mobile arm builds already don’t they? Of course iOS is very different from Android but it’s not like they’d have to do complete port. And it targets the same architecture that’s in macs and they have builds for it obviously.

Thanks. I know you’re not OP, but I’ll take this opportunity to answer anyway.

privacy preserving attribution

…is not as bad as many people think.

The best argument that I believe still has merit is this:

All websites on the internet—including ad networks!—are guests on our computers, and the content they provide are merely suggestions for a user agent to interpret and show us how it chooses.

If you agree with this—and I kinda do—then yeah, PPA shouldn’t exist. You’re probably a staunch user of uBlock (or uMatrix) and don’t want your browser engaging in any privacy-preserving attribution shenanigans.

But here’s the kicker: if you use uBlock, PPA won’t do anything. It can’t, even when left enabled. For the API to be called, ads need to get to your browser first, and uBlock doesn’t allow them to get that far. The only people really affected by PPA are people not using adblocking, i.e. the people being tracked all over the web, who would likely benefit from PPA.

As I said in a previous comment: if PPA works and is widely adopted, I can see the argument for how it’d be better—unfortunately, most people still browse the internet without uBlock. That doesn’t mean I’ll stop installing it on every device I can; I’m simply accepting that’ll never be every device on earth.

And for all that Mozilla is implementing “bullshit,” they’re also the only ones keeping uBlock 100% functional by maintaining manifest V2. They spend time and resources protecting the very thing that trumps their supposed bullshit. That feels not like enshittification to me, but a group trying its best, even while stuck between a rock and a hard place.