zlacker

>>skille+(OP)
I feel like the elephant in the room is that there's no phone battery that's going to stay useful in anywhere close to that time frame, and replacing phone batteries is usually a losing proposition. I've tried, several times. Fake, low-quality batteries are rampant (usually degrading within weeks), and genuine ones are prohibitively expensive -- usually a significant fraction of the cost of a new phone.

>>wheels+B7
I replaced the batteries in my mom's iPhone and dad's Motorola at about the same time last year. I agree it should be easier to do, but it's definitely not a losing proposition. They both turned out very well and cost < $20 each.

I'd love a return to the old snap-fit plastic cases. Besides the ease of battery replacement, those phones seemed much more durable. Maybe because there was something that gave way on impact? I remember watching in horror as the plastic cover of an old LG shot under the display shelving at Home Depot at approximately the same speed the phone hit the concrete floor. I never used a case with one of those phones, nor did I ever crack a screen. It was tricky digging that cover out from under the shelving, however.

>>alamor+ri
When you refer to snap-fit plastic cases being more durable, I presume you're not talking about water and dust resistance.

>>tshadd+en
You can't have it all

>>hollan+oo
Right.

You can't have the thinnest/sleekest possible phone and an easily removable battery. Have to choose.

Frustrating thing is, mainstream phone manufacturers don't give you a choice. There's no option to buy e.g. an a slightly more ruggedized iPhone that is 15% bulkier but gives you easy battery access. That's a thing I'd buy, even if it cost a bit more.

The quest for "sleekness at all costs" made more sense 15-20 years ago, when full-spec smartphones and laptops were clunkier.

Hopefully the tide is turning. Apple is offering beefier and thicker laptops (M1/M2 Macbook Pros) and likewise now gives buyers an option for a beefier "Explorer Edition" watch. No battery access sadly. But hopefully the pendulum might swing the other way a little now.

>>JohnBo+rK
> You can't have the thinnest/sleekest possible phone and an easily removable battery.

Is this true? Plastic covers seemed thinner than the glass/metal shells that have replaced them. Also, from my limited experience, the batteries in the glued-together phones have adhesive strips that secure them inside the case, which again add a little extra thickness.

I could be wrong about those things, but I stand by my assertion that the plastic snap-fit phones were more durable. Durable enough that they didn't need cases for protection, which above all else rob a phone of its thinness/sleekness.

The first time I dropped a glued-together phone, I cracked the screen. I thought it must have been a fluke, since I'd dropped plastic phones tons and they'd always been fine. I was so sure it was a weird one-off I refused to get a case after having the screen replaced. My girlfriend called me an idiot. Two months later, I dropped the phone again. Now I have a case.