Future of LG and removable batteries

[Aquila]

that's why i asked what the other benefits are...so far, all you've done is tell me why waterproofing is a weak argument for sealed batteries, which i agree with, but you haven't given any other reasons why it's not unnecessary, given the countless other manufacturers that produce phones with them. so please, present your case...

imagine a world in which the note 7 batteries could have simply been taken out and returned in exchange for a non-explosive, smaller capacity battery from Samsung. cheaper too than a global recall I'd imagine...

We covered Samsung's recall case already; I think it would have made their situation far worse and significantly increased their risk. I also think that they would not have found it possible to recall only the batteries due to both what information they knew (and didn't know) at the time and on what we all know now.

As for the pros and cons of removable and non removable, I'd asked for the pro removable crowd to provide the benefits of removable, aside from the obvious hot swap back to full use case. So far zero answers on that. Remember zero I indicated that most of the benefits of sealed have to do with options that become available and fewer engineering compromises.

 

[Aquila]

I don't know that is fact but I imagine many do. There are a lot of people that buy phones for strange reasons. Look at the majority of Iphone and Samsung customers. My ex wife, my daughter, ex girlfriends all have IPhones.... Two of my brothers buy Samsung....all of the dance moms and kids at my daughter's dance academy mostly have IPhones. None of them can tell you anything about phones except the brand name. Their are two coworkers at my job that have the G4.... They know nothing about phones. The Lan support employees have a mix of Android personal phones because being techies they hate Iphones. Their work phones are Iphone. Only us phone snobs that hang out in forums care about this feature or that feature. Trying explaining Quad DAC s to the average person or high end headphones. They pretend to understand but they could care less.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. We're going on and on about something that at least 99% of users don't care about in any stretch of the imagination. IIRC LG is sitting at less than 5% market share split between their entire portfolio. The V20 therefore is probably less than .5% of devices out there and I'd actually assume that there is significant overlap between the phone super nerds and the V20 users. LG made a device that plays to the wants of a huge part of the old school base of the super nerds, and they did a great job of delivering on that front.

All of that said, their G line seems aimed at mainstream consumers, which means we're likely to continue to see LG chase Apple and Samsung style features and to continue to slim down on differentiating qualities, following in the path of HTC, etc. They will want the G6 to be viewed as an alternative but equally polished option to the iPhone and S8. The V20 can't be that competitor because it's designed for a completely different audiences with different values and different notions of what makes a smartphone "great".

 

[djepperson1]

Ok other side of the arguement i have kids and yes i have lost phones due to not being waterproof. The arguement has always been buy a waterproof case..ugh makes them way to bulky. I personal standpoint love the idea of waterproofing the phone. Plus wireless charging can be awesome

 

[Ntchwaidumela]

"Future of LG and removable batteries"

I hope it'll be just the G6, and they leave the V30 alone. You do not need to seal a phone's battery to achieve IP67 or IP68 water resistance. The Samsung Galaxy S5 and Kyocera DuraForce XD are excellent example of phones that had removable batteries and IP67 & 68 certifications respectively.

Exactly. My question is how many people need a waterproof phone. I would guess that far more people want to be able to replace the battery than need a waterproof phone.

 

[Aquila]

Exactly. My question is how many people need a waterproof phone. I would guess that far more people want to be able to replace the battery than need a waterproof phone.

I think that guess would be the opposite of reality. That's based solely on what they're choosing to spend their money on. For several years the sealed devices have been increasing their market share lead over LG and there's no sign of that trend reversing. At the highest I would estimate that fewer than 3 in every 100,000 consumers will refuse to purchase a device without a removable battery.

 

[TheMarcus]

We covered Samsung's recall case already; I think it would have made their situation far worse and significantly increased their risk. I also think that they would not have found it possible to recall only the batteries due to both what information they knew (and didn't know) at the time and on what we all know now.

As for the pros and cons of removable and non removable, I'd asked for the pro removable crowd to provide the benefits of removable, aside from the obvious hot swap back to full use case. So far zero answers on that. Remember zero I indicated that most of the benefits of sealed have to do with options that become available and fewer engineering compromises.

In other words, there are still no benefits aside from a weak argument for sealed batteries.

 

[Aquila]

In other words, there are still no benefits aside from a weak argument for sealed batteries.

That's not what I said at all. Where did you get that from? You may be new to debate; if so, it is important to be able to state your opponents case clearly in a manner in which they would agree that you are best representing their own case. Creating arguments that I didn't make and arguing against those actually undermines your own.

The statement that you quoted was stating two things: 1) We already covered the Samsung scenario that the person I quoted referenced. That would enable them to go back and read the arguments for and against removable in that specific case that are within this thread. 2) They had indicated that I hadn't made any arguments in favor of sealed batteries; to which I reminded them that I had asked this thread to provide examples of benefits of removable (aside from the obvious) and that I had stated the realm in which my arguments would exist.

As you may have read, in several different posts I asked you and your side to try to imagine benefits of the opposition (my side) - and so far no one has attempted to do that either. So if you would like to begin with that, feel free. If you're instead going to place arguments that I didn't make (and nor did anyone else) and argue against those, then we can't actually discuss anything because of that misrepresentation.

 

[TheMarcus]

As you may have read, in several different posts I asked you and your side to try to imagine benefits of the opposition (my side) - and so far no one has attempted to do that either. So if you would like to begin with that, feel free. If you're instead going to place arguments that I didn't make (and nor did anyone else) and argue against those, then we can't actually discuss anything because of that misrepresentation.

Benefits for removable batteries have been posted again and again in this thread and others. You keep saying water proofing is a weak argument, yet have not provided a single other benefit to sealed in batteries.

Don't claim something is the weakest argument for sealed batteries without providing a single, better reason.

 

[Mooncatt]

As for the pros and cons of removable and non removable, I'd asked for the pro removable crowd to provide the benefits of removable, aside from the obvious hot swap back to full use case. So far zero answers on that. Remember zero I indicated that most of the benefits of sealed have to do with options that become available and fewer engineering compromises.

As you may have read, in several different posts I asked you and your side to try to imagine benefits of the opposition (my side) - and so far no one has attempted to do that either.

My last reply here attempted to do just these things. I won't completely go over it again because I noticed you did like that post, which I'm guessing you read it. So I'll just sum it up like this:

There are many different ways a phone could fail, resulting in becoming completely inoperable. For a given problem, there's a huge point to be made that being able to replace said failed component (batteries in this case) yourself rather cheaply is going to be much preferred over spending extra money and turning over control of your device to some random repair guy and put your data privacy at risk.

Keep in mind, I'm of the opinion that phones in general are not very durable. Even "mil-spec" phones like the V20 are just a marketing trick. I've yet to see anything that the V20 was certified to the drop test, only that it was designed to meet it. Big difference.

 

[Aquila]

Benefits for removable batteries have been posted again and again in this thread and others. You keep saying water proofing is a weak argument, yet have not provided a single other benefit to sealed in batteries.

Don't claim something is the weakest argument for sealed batteries without providing a single, better reason.

Remember zero I indicated that most of the benefits of sealed have to do with options that become available and fewer engineering compromises.

More options and fewer engineering compromises are both benefit categories. To elaborate

More options
The battery can be placed in difference places when it does not have to be accessible by a door or slot.
The battery can be different shapes and sizes when it doesn't have to be accessible by a door or slot.
The battery can be larger if more space (air and plastic housing) aren't required to contain a user removable battery.
I personally don't like glass phones, but sealing the battery enables a glass design.
It is easier to provide water resistance with a sealed battery
There are many more of these

Fewer compromises
A device with a sealed battery has more space available to properly control heat. This could also go in the above category because it means less wear and tear on the battery and less wear and tear on the SoC and other components.
A device with a sealed battery has fewer structural compromises, a seam isn't required and there's no need for a thin door, etc, etc.
A device with a sealed battery has less moving parts being pulled upon or pried upon by people.
There are many more of these

Other
A device with a removable battery encourages consumers to abuse the battery, which promotes bad habits and will diminish their experience with other devices.
Hot swapping never has been "good" for your device. Its damage has been mitigated in recent years but it is still a nearly unconscionable action to perform on a device.
Alternatives exist that will support the vast majority of consumers. These include: Portable chargers, fast charging, batteries that are enormous, displays and processors that both consume less battery to perform identical tasks, smarter software that is capable of preserving battery life longer, etc.
There are many more of these.

There are at least a couple dozen reasons that an OEM would want a battery to be sealed.

Now, the reason I asked for your side to try to generate some of these ideas is because I find it absolutely ridiculous that not one person is capable of imagining a single point counter to their own, whether they would agree with that point or not. To me the inability or unwillingness to do so represents an unwillingness to have a sincere debate. But if you had actually read any of the points I made in prior posts, it'd be likely that the big clues contained within me stating that my position includes "more options and fewer engineering compromises" and the fact that I stated multiple times that my position does not rest on water resistance would have lent some direction towards being able to consider at least one example of either category.

I've also asked you and others to provide the pros and cons of a removable battery - a request that you and everyone else except Mooncatt has so far ignored. So as we have it, there are dozens of reasons an OEM would not want a removable battery and there is only one reason, brought up so far, that a consumer would want it to be removable, and that reason is actually argued against by at least two separate reasons you would want to seal it.

 

[Aquila]

My last reply here attempted to do just these things. I won't completely go over it again because I noticed you did like that post, which I'm guessing you read it. So I'll just sum it up like this:

There are many different ways a phone could fail, resulting in becoming completely inoperable. For a given problem, there's a huge point to be made that being able to replace said failed component (batteries in this case) yourself rather cheaply is going to be much preferred over spending extra money and turning over control of your device to some random repair guy and put your data privacy at risk.

Keep in mind, I'm of the opinion that phones in general are not very durable. Even "mil-spec" phones like the V20 are just a marketing trick. I've yet to see anything that the V20 was certified to the drop test, only that it was designed to meet it. Big difference.

I would agree that there are many ways a device can fail, but I would disagree that being able to swap out batteries would be the solution for very many of those cases. The most typical failures are displays, software and USB ports. Granted you have had pretty rotten luck with a few devices, so I have no problem seeing how being able to mitigate that as easily and cheaply as possible would be a priority for you. It's a very good point and it is one that I account for in saying that there is a certain percentage of people for whom they would be seriously inconvenienced or perhaps be totally unwilling to purchase a phone without a removable battery.

I'd also asked that the pro removable crowd attempt to think of some reasons that it would be preferable to have it sealed. Arguing for what one likes is easy; arguing against one's own case is required to be able to logically promote ones own case above any other.

 

[Ntchwaidumela]

Do they have better phones other than the battery being removable? Or are they just equally good?

Both.

 

[Mooncatt]

Some of this is mostly subjective I think, not drastic reasons for sealed batteries.

The battery can be placed in difference places when it does not have to be accessible by a door or slot. The battery can be different shapes and sizes when it doesn't have to be accessible by a door or slot.

A common reason given, but so far sealed batteries have been your run of the mill rectangular cells. As for being placed in different places, where? Ideally, you'd still want it against the back plate for better heat transfer.

The battery can be larger if more space (air and plastic housing) aren't required to contain a user removable battery.

This could have been a very valid point years ago. Now, even phones like the V20 can be designed with decent sized removable batteries while still being very thin.

A device with a sealed battery has more space available to properly control heat. This could also go in the above category because it means less wear and tear on the battery and less wear and tear on the SoC and other components.

My responses above would be similar. Though just how much extra wear and tear is actually being put on the system? Electronics are able to withstand a fair amount of heat, and phones don't get anywhere near that limit unless physically abused.

A device with a sealed battery has fewer structural compromises, a seam isn't required and there's no need for a thin door, etc, etc.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I think phones are starting to get too thin, sacrificing durability anyway. I've also seen more people on here that are of similar opinions. It would be easy from an engineering standpoint to design things a little thicker and use that extra space to build in more structural integrity (and this is giving me horrible flash backs to my PCB drafting class in college, with the goal of fitting so much on a tiny circuit board... Yes, I have some experience in this regard).

A device with a sealed battery has less moving parts being pulled upon or pried upon by people.

Just how many people do you think are pulling the batteries to excess? I doubt it's very many.

A device with a removable battery encourages consumers to abuse the battery, which promotes bad habits and will diminish their experience with other devices.

I would guess the vast majority with sealed batteries similarly abuse them anyway, making this a moot point.

So while I'm not saying your reasons are invalid, I do think they can be largely mitigated.

 

[TheMarcus]

So, no *real* benefit to the consumer, but a few benefits to the manufacturer.

And, no, a removable battery does not encourage the user to abuse their phone. Unless by abuse you mean use without worrying about when their phone will die? Because that would affect expectations when using other devices with non-removable batteries.

As for displays and processors being more efficient or having smarter software, the hardware still isn't efficient enough and the software isn't smart enough. Year after year, phones are not seeing the same improvements in battery life that they see with other hardware or software improvements. That's why power banks are so popular. That's why quick charging is now a thing. That's why there are still plenty of people who prefer a removable battery to both. Battery life just isn't getting longer or better to match the needs of many users. In my experience, the best battery life I've had on a phone in years was with the G3 on KitKat. Software updates made the battery worse and future hardware upgrades (the G4 and V20) have not shown significant or even noticeably better battery life with these so called improvements to the displays, processor, and software.

Benefits to the user:

- for people who don't upgrade their phones every six months to a year, degraded batteries can be easily replaced.
- damaged batteries can be easily replaced.
- a spare battery is less bulky to carry and "charges" your phone faster than a power bank.
- a spare battery is less bulky to carry and "charges" your phone faster than a charger.
- you don't always have access to an outlet or other charging source and a spare battery fits discreetly in a pocket.
- backup power source in the event of power loss and being unable to charge your device.
- charging your phone frequently isn't good for the battery (so having two not only doubles the battery life of your phone, but it also doubles the life of your battery).
- a removable battery leaves open the option to install a bigger battery ("batteries that are enormous" are more of a benefit for phones with removable batteries than those without — with the latter essentially being a power bank attached to your phone).
- your phone doesn't become a brick if your power button or charging port stops working.
- removing the battery is still a choice, not a requirement. Sealing it takes away from many people without providing a comparable solution, whereas leaving it as an option is hurting no one.
- despite not being waterproof, most phones will still survive a drop in water (especially when you can pull the battery out). My G4 was submerged in about 6 inches of water overnight in the rain. Still worked after that and had no issues. My V20 similarly survived a drop into a toilet.

So, for the consumer, it's those benefits versus waterproofing, whereas every other benefit mentioned benefits the manufacturer.

 

[Ntchwaidumela]

I think that guess would be the opposite of reality. That's based solely on what they're choosing to spend their money on. For several years the sealed devices have been increasing their market share lead over LG and there's no sign of that trend reversing. At the highest I would estimate that fewer than 3 in every 100,000 consumers will refuse to purchase a device without a removable battery.

The manufacturers have forced consumers to purchase phones with sealed batteries. They've dictated what kind of phone you buy and taken away your choice. For instance, I was a devoted Samsung Note user. However, when Samsung took away the option of swapping the battery, mandating that I carry around a charger/battery pack, I switch to the LG V10 (and now V20). I have my choice of swapping out the standard battery or using an extended battery in my normal day of moderately heavy/heavy use. I don't go swimming with my phone tucked into my trunks, shower with my phone, use it when I'm in the restroom, etc. Nor do I carry it around in my hand when in monsoons. So, like most people with good sense, I don't need a waterproof phone. I need a phone that gives ME the choice of how to extend my phone over a normal day of use. I get two full days of my normal use from the extended battery I've installed on my V20. Prior to that, I was able to switch to a fully charged battery prior to getting the extended battery. You've discounted the fact that consumers buy phones without removable batteries because the choice has been removed by the manufacturers. Those who really like Samsung phones, for instance, have no choice. Samsung makes great phones. So do the other manufacturers. But batteries suck! The technology hasn't kept up. And when they try...Note 7 disaster. I ask you: Do you need a waterproof phone? Do you NEED a sealed phone? Or do you have one because that's the only choice you have for the phone you want? So, your figures are skewed based on what the manufacturers offer. Three in every 100,000 consumers??? Exaggerate much? Would you still have the phone you currently use, if it had a replaceable battery option? Or would you spurn it BECAUSE it had that option? Did you buy it because it was sealed? Or would you not have bought if you could replace the battery? Performance figures in there somewhere. What if it gave you great performance AND had a replaceable battery?

 

[Jax112]

WOW too much of info to process in one sitting.

I'm in favor of removable batteries. However I never keep a phone more that 18 months. This problem could be solved if manufacturers would stop trying to make slimmer and sexier devices. Give me a thicker phone with a 5,000 mAh battery with a slight curve on the back. Then it's done.

 

[Aquila]

The last few posts are awesome, now we're getting somewhere Thanks guys

 

[Mike Dee]

That's not what I said at all. Where did you get that from? You may be new to debate; if so, it is important to be able to state your opponents case clearly in a manner in which they would agree that you are best representing their own case. Creating arguments that I didn't make and arguing against those actually undermines your own.

The statement that you quoted was stating two things: 1) We already covered the Samsung scenario that the person I quoted referenced. That would enable them to go back and read the arguments for and against removable in that specific case that are within this thread. 2) They had indicated that I hadn't made any arguments in favor of sealed batteries; to which I reminded them that I had asked this thread to provide examples of benefits of removable (aside from the obvious) and that I had stated the realm in which my arguments would exist.

As you may have read, in several different posts I asked you and your side to try to imagine benefits of the opposition (my side) - and so far no one has attempted to do that either. So if you would like to begin with that, feel free. If you're instead going to place arguments that I didn't make (and nor did anyone else) and argue against those, then we can't actually discuss anything because of that misrepresentation.

Water resistance is not even a good argument for a non removable battery since we all know that we can have a water resistant phone with a removable battery. The only reason to go sealed is to go thinner and look what that did for the Note 7. Lead the way Samsung.

 

[Aquila]

Water resistance is not even a good argument for a non removable battery since we all know that we can have a water resistant phone with a removable battery

Yes, I stated that exact point. You're 100% correct.

 

[clrdust]

Totally agree with you. V20 looks much better. I am not much into swapping batteries so i will prefer a water proof phone over that.