Should have stuck with removable batteries?

[Kirk Maluo]

So the Anode and Cathode come in direct contact with each other in the defective batteries. It's ironic, but how much money would Samsung have saved by having a removable battery in the Note 7 and just having to swap out everyone's battery instead of the whole phone?

 

[felloffthetruck]

Beating a dead horse here. I agree 100% though.

 

[LegalAmerican]

I don't think too many people would argue and say that a removable battery isn't awesome. The problem though, is that we have to decide if we're willing to trade off some things for it. For me, I prefer premium build plus water resistance over a removable battery. Even if the battery was removable and the entire problem could be remedied by them sending me a new battery, I would still be waiting for that battery to arrive just as I'm waiting to go in and swap my Note 7.

When it comes right down to it, this whole ordeal doesn't bother me in the slightest. I'll be getting a new device that has had a potential issue resolved. That is fantastic in my mind.

 

[coolbreeze78]

Yay, let's see if we can get this brilliant theory posted every day on every board. Ships sailed kids. It's not gonna happen.

 

[chyeo1979]

There must have been at least hundreds of phone models till now since the age of smartphone started, and this is the first time there is such a big scale & serious battery problem. I wouldn't want to give up the great looks and design of Note 7 or future phones simply because of this very rare issue which should not be happening again.

 

[1213 1213]

It would have been dumb for them to keep removable battery. That would have meant not using glass and sticking with plastic, and it was only when they switched to glass their sales seriously went up. Looks matter, people voted with their wallets on this so stop beating a dead horse.

You could argue for something like what the v20 does, but that means no wireless charging and no ip68, and a switch to metal.

 

[avalvo]

I have an Olypmus camera with a moveable zoom lens, a replaceable battery and SD card that is waterproof to ten feet. Samsung could have made the battery replaceable. They just did not want to.

 

[wirelessgal]

I'm probably the only person who prefers removable batteries over design. Don't get me wrong, I love the design of the Note 5 and Note 7. IMO, they are the most beautiful phones including the S7 Edge on the market. However, ever since Samsung switched to partial metal on the Note 4, the RF and call quality went downhill. I had amazing RF when I had the Note 2. I didn't own the Note 3, but knew many have and they got amazing RF. I had their S series from the S2 i9100 - S5, all plastic phones with removable batteries and they all had amazing RF. Then the S6 came out and it's a beautiful phone but RF and battery life is horrible. I think Samsung should've stuck with the plastic design in order to have a removable battery with the metal bezels. I love the design of the Note 4. They could've refined it. If I'm not mistaken, didn't the Note 4 sell more than the Note 5?

I'm not saying for Samsung to make all their phones with removable batteries. I think they should have left the Note series alone and work with the design elements of the Note 4. This would set Samsung a part from all the manufacturers. Well, except for LG but they blew it with the G5. I'm not going to lie, I am interested in the V20.

 

[team420]

I've owned a few phones with sealed batteries, and up till now, never had a problem. I personally prefer the ip68 over replaceable battery... I've had the need to replace my batteries (till now, but samsung is eating that) but i have had a few water damaged phones, that should never have been damaged by the tiny amount of moisture that found it's way in... ie, condensation...