Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
EU Drops Battery Removal Requirement for Apple Watch and AirPods
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well they are IP54, which means if they fall out of your ear and into a puddle, they will likely be dead. And airpods are IP57, meaning they can survive 1m of water for 30 minutes.
Personally that matters to me far more than replacing a battery, since the only battery problem I have ever had with my AirPods are them dying because I have no charging routine whatsoever for them because they last for weeks. Lol.
mansplains
macrumors 68000
You get a ❤️ for Director Feng as I only recently discovered his channel, and his 'Flash Chip Formatting "Physically" technique lol!! But my point is he replaces the water resistant seals. However with AirPods it is a no go unless they are totally redesigned, you destroy them trying to get the tiny batteries out. I think they could do more with the Apple Watch though, as again you destroy them I believe or are at high risk of doing so to replace the batteries in them.
Thanks, didn't realise they used pull tabs.
I am so sorry for wishing to 'easily' replace the battery to increase a multi thousand dollar machine lifespan... like how Apple used to do by making its batteries easily user replaceable. But I have ben advised they use pull tabs which is an improvement over the glue. I hope they use the glue that is removed with a 9V battery connected like in the iPhone though as a minimum going forward...
jarman92
macrumors 68020
You can wish that all you want; the problem arises when you demand that your wish be forcibly imposed by the power of the State.
BaldiMac
macrumors G3
Hmm… Seems like a pretty loaded way to describe wanting a law passed through a democratic process.
I don't think much of a citation is needed.
Even if you include the cases, the amount of material used for AirPods is negligible compared to the total amount of material used for all consumer electronics.
Of course you should still dispose them properly so that the materials are (hopefully) recycled.
Speaking of which, gold, lithium and cobalt used in AirPods Pro 3 are almost fully recycled materials:
It is doable heck there were earbuds 8 years ago that had magnetically detachable batteries. At least they should make the case battery easily replaceable. What is clear is that these companies need to be forced into making better decisions, the iPhones are more repairable now because they were forced to.
Yet repairs are possible on swiss watches that are 100x its price with even smaller components.... I honestly don't buy into the fact it could not be repaired if they wanted... Its just doesn't make sense at this price point I think.
You are clearly not reducing the matter of „contribution to the global e-waste problem“ to weight, are you?
AirPods can not be recycled AT ALL. so their „contribution“ is disproportionally high.
So you dislike consumer laws when it favours consumers and not the giant greedy corporations? I bet you're an Apple shareholder.
Abazigal
Contributor
Anyone who read the original article would have know that this rule would not apply to iPhones and AirPods.
What this goes to show is that with hardware engineering, everything is a trade off, even the ability to easily swap out your batteries. All other things equal, I can agree that the ability to replace a device’s battery by myself might be better than not having said option, but the problem is that “all other things equal” simply doesn’t exist in the real world. Wanting a certain feature to be implemented (especially one which not everybody might want) often means compromising on another feature (that other people might care about).
The end result may not be a product that is better in an absolute sense, just one which is a little better for some people, while also being worse for others.
What this goes to show is that with hardware engineering, everything is a trade off, even the ability to easily swap out your batteries. All other things equal, I can agree that the ability to replace a device’s battery by myself might be better than not having said option, but the problem is that “all other things equal” simply doesn’t exist in the real world. Wanting a certain feature to be implemented (especially one which not everybody might want) often means compromising on another feature (that other people might care about).
The end result may not be a product that is better in an absolute sense, just one which is a little better for some people, while also being worse for others.
surferfb
macrumors 68030
Oftentimes the consumer laws don’t actually make things better for consumers though.
In a universe where this regulation requires AirPods to get thicker and heavier, or less water resistant, I’d argue that’s a very high price to pay for the tiny percentage of users who would take advantage of the removal battery feature. It’d make the product worse for almost everyone to please a tiny minority.
Not saying that’s necessarily the case here, (and of course in this instance you could make a strong argument that the environmental benefits outweigh the usability costs), but just because a law is marketed as a “consumer law” doesn’t mean it’s actually good for consumers.
Very good article from AppleInsider on this topic: https://appleinsider.com/articles/26/07/10/no-eu-iphones-wont-have-a-removable-battery-door-in-2027
The exemption itself ("has to retain 80% after 1000 cycles") was there from the start when the law came into effect in 2023.
This article from 2024 makes a lot more sense now.
Apple Increases iPhone 15's Advertised Battery Lifespan
Apple today announced that it retested the batteries in all iPhone 15 models and determined that they are able to meet a higher bar. In a support document updated today, Apple says the batteries in the iPhone 15, iPhone 15 Plus, iPhone 15 Pro, and iPhone 15 Pro Max are designed to retain 80% of...
www.macrumors.com
That is a fair point... but.. the Airpods are exempt, the Apple Watch exempt, so in this instance it is a fantastic law.. look at the Neo, you unscrew the back then unscrew the battery! Easy, no pull tabs no connecting a 9 volt battery. It is a win for the consumer if you can replace your laptop battery yourself. Using AirPods is an extreme example, I don't think many think the battery should be replaceable in them. iPads though as a good example should not be exempt, they are not water resistant, unless Apple makes them so to bypass this legislation, but are very expensive and the battery does fade away needing replacement. At present they are not easy to replace at all.
CarlJ
Contributor
The ones you cite have quite a bit larger profile outside the ears.
The current AirPod design is small enough (with its little "stick" containing the battery, microphones, and sensors) that trying to make the shell easy to open and with a separate user-replaceable battery inside, with clips or spring terminals or whatever to hold the battery, would necessarily cut the battery capacity significantly - it's just physics - space devoted to doors and latching mechanisms and battery clips and gaskets must be subtracted form the space available for actual battery.
That's not something Apple's designers can work around by being talented, unless you believe them to be capable of bending the laws of physics. Replaceable batteries will make the part outside of your ear substantially bigger no matter who designs it (unless you're happy with up-to-30 minute battery life).
Last edited:
CarlJ
Contributor
