Originally Posted by
Saracen
The fiest thing I picked up was
If it's voluntary, manufacturers choosing (for whatever reason, be it safety or built-in obsolescence) not to build in repairability will simply not volunteer, and we're no further forward.
While I wouldn't dispute the design inferences you mention for a moment, as a consumer, I'd like to know if a product is of the 'bin it if battery fails' category, because it would influence my purchase decision.
Personally, I'd go for 'thicker, heavier and repairable' over 'slim but bin' every time. But I know people likely to go the other way too.
My £5 dirt-cheap phone is in FAR better condition, after 10 years, than a friend's 8-month old top-of-range iPhone. Why? Partly, I take care of my possessions, and he doesn't. When I asked him about it, he said (paraphrasing) ...
Different people have different approaches. To me, being able to replace the battery would be one of about the top three or four criteria in a purchase decision, and a few ml of thickness or grams of weight wouldn't be in the same universe as that list, because I'm after a tool to do a job not a fashion accessory. But my friend loves having shiny, new gadgets .... and loses interest pretty quickly too.
We need products designed to suit both my friend and myself, but I'd certainly like to know which is which, because it'd often change the purchase decision (assuming an alternative exists), so I'd support not only a labelling scheme, but a mandatory not voluntary one. My friend wouldn't care.
It feels, now that we're Brexiting (allegedly) that I'm making a habit of saying this, but the EU does have some good ideas, especially on consumer protection. This is one.