Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
Waterproofing wasn't a thing back when devices started having non-replaceable batteries. So that's not an excuse. Weight isn't an excuse. It's so when the battery goes, most people will go an get a new device. It's pure greed.
|
If it was pure greed then some companies would make such phones so they could grab market share from the companies “screwing their users”.
I’m not saying the trade offs are what you would choose, or I would choose...but all of these have reasonable engineering explanations.
What isn’t reasonable is that in such a hyper competitive field like smart phones...any company could thrive for long doing things “just for greed”.
It’s like when Jobs forbid Adobe Flash from being supported on the iPhone. People railed about the greed...as if the ONLY reason Steve Jobs had for not supporting flash was to force people to use the App Store.
And for a time...the Android community capitalized on this “customer hostile” action of Apple's. Oh...Android was going to support flash and that’s why you should buy an Android tablet over an iPad.
What happened? No Android tablet or smartphone supports flash. Those few who tried had terrible user experiences. Eventually Adobe killed the product...after the entire market shifted to HTML 5, Jobs choice of technology that he supported.
BUT....Jobs could have been wrong. Adobe, Google and Samsung could have made Flash work on Android and it would have been a terrific differentiator. Just as having memory card support and 3.5” headphone jacks are today.
If having user replaceable batteries was solely a good thing..,and there were no positive trade offs for sealing the battery in....then some manufacturers would be making those devices.