>some products, such as medical devices and so-called “wet appliances” (for example, electric toothbrushes or water flossers), are already exempt from this requirement, mainly for safety reasons. In these cases, batteries only need to be removable and replaceable by independent professionals.
Note: this is exemption from user replacing battery themselves, not a blanket exemption on the product not being serviceable for battery
As people will be wearing wearable products when it is raining these categories of clothes products have been classified as wet products
IMO they entire law should have been target at "replaceable by independent professionals", it is reasonable to require industry standard professional equipment for opening and working on a phone
ryandrake 22 hours ago [-]
What makes that reasonable? I can open and repair pretty much any other electronic device in my house if I need to. What makes a phone special?
make3 22 hours ago [-]
are the other devices waterproof
ryandrake 21 hours ago [-]
Some of them are.
GuestFAUniverse 22 hours ago [-]
Electric toothbrushes are exempt? Why?
We have several for our kids, with removable batteries from Oral-B. All are years old and still waterproof.
And with that amount of voltage, where can there _ever_ be a "safety issue"?
That is quackery!
Sounds more like somebody lobbied successfully.
Ciantic 22 hours ago [-]
That is what I also wonder, who added that tootbrush statement there? Given that Oral-B has done replacable batteries for years, and they have dominant position, I'm thinkin that statement didn't come from lobbies. Maybe someone who are making the law is reasoning with itself or small group and didn't know that replacable batteries in toothbrushes are already a thing.
siim_osur 22 hours ago [-]
You can asbolutely redesign the devices to fit the requirement.
It's absolutely a result of lobbying.
bluecalm 22 hours ago [-]
Oral-B is an American company.
Phillips is an European company. Phillips toothbrushes don't have removable batteries (at least none of many I owned had them).
Now connect the dots. That is how things work in EU.
hvb2 21 hours ago [-]
> Now connect the dots. That is how things work in EU.
Uh sure. If you've been paying attention the last year and a half it's the US putting up trade barriers to every other country. Like how the EU is under investigation for forced labor, that outcome might be used in the coming months to justify more tariffs.
Just to address this one specific case. If they're exempt, and you can sell more of them, why would you go beyond the regulation? This is why regulation like this shouldn't have exemptions.
marysol5 20 hours ago [-]
Because they're specifically engineered to be safe?
I can see someone taking open a toothbrush, slapping a generic cell in there and then it going into water and having a fun time
GuestFAUniverse 14 hours ago [-]
There are 2 AAs (1,2V * 2500mA, rechargeable) inside.
Where is the danger? Even if I would put the wrong ones inside, from an RC race car (3,7V). I wouldn't even come close to dangerous wattage.
And since when does every device need to be idiot safe?
I have a drill, a vacuum cleaner, a saw, a kitchen aid, bottles of isopropanol ... a lot of things are more dangerous.
And the vacuum cleaner the most surprisingly dangerous one, if one of your child decides to vacuum liquids from his rooms floor -- been there: vacuum destroyed, child survived.
So, does that mean we only ever are allowed to buy models that can cope with wet and dry?
Oh, please. There's always an opportunity to be more paranoid I guess.
fragmede 20 hours ago [-]
I mean, it's not a toaster.
bko 22 hours ago [-]
Why would a company choose to produce an inferior product?
My guess is there is a trade of that's worth it on the product side. That's why you can't buy a compelling phone w a replaceable battery anywhere. Its an incredibly competitive market. If there was a design that worked and tradeoffs made sense it works certainly exist and do well since who wouldn't like it.
I just believe that the fact it doesn't exist tells you that the trade offs aren't worth it. I didn't buy conspiracy theories how dozens of independent manufacturer and hundreds of hardware manufacturers that are on the side line so collude to keep this design choice at bay.
tsimionescu 22 hours ago [-]
There is another option here - the company may refuse to offer a replaceable battery because it would eat into the market itself by increasing the lifetime of the products. And different companies may have agreed, in secret or just tacitly, to perpetuate this. Especially as replaceable batteries are not THAT high on the list of features consumers actually look for - it's not like Samsung could eat Apple's lunch by including a releasable battery in their next flagship. So, better for everyone if they just don't include one.
bko 21 hours ago [-]
Why wouldn't one of the hundreds and probably thousands of companies that can make phones at scale not jump in? These are all pretty much off the shelf parts.
Why did Google even attempt Project Ara? Why did Fairphone or Teracube never produce a compelling product?
If anyone could make replaceable batteries work, even at a premium, it would be a big hit. I remember replaceable batteries and they were incredible. The batteries were slim, can barely feel them in your pocket. I popped 2 or 3 for my camping trip and never had to worry about charging.
The idea that there's collusion in one of the most competitive marketplaces in the world (consumer electronics) is an extraordinary claim. Companies don't just nuke their products and survive long term.
tsimionescu 17 hours ago [-]
What thousands of companies? The market for flagship smartphones has fewer and fewer players every year - it's mostly Apple, Samsung, Google, OnePlus, and Xiaomi now, I think. Even Sony has been drastically dropping in popularity.
kalaksi 18 hours ago [-]
Uh, Fairphone does have compelling products?
bko 18 hours ago [-]
The Fairphone 6 is about double the price of a comparable phone like Motorola Edge 60 Fusion. All these branded "fair" or "open" products are just not competitive and 99% of people aren't willing to pay such a big premium for what's essentially a concept
For many people it's still compelling and not "a concept".
If you're looking for the cheapest phone with most performant CPU, RAM etc. (relative to price), then you're probably not target audience.
andor 17 hours ago [-]
Comparable or not, the Fairphone 6 costs less than half of my iPhone. I don't think the price is an issue.
verall 18 hours ago [-]
Most phones quietly lose their ip68 when battery or screen is replaced
marysol5 20 hours ago [-]
At least with phone batteries, to make them removable, means removing some capacity. Lots of phones squeeze as much cell into every nook and cranny as they can
tancop 18 hours ago [-]
[dead]
fragmede 22 hours ago [-]
> Why would a company choose to produce an inferior product?
It costs less to make the inferior product, so even if you have to lower prices, you make it up in volume.
bko 21 hours ago [-]
Right, and people don't want to pay a high enough premium to justify the cost and design tradeoffs. That's how markets work. Mandating a more expensive product w features consumers aren't willing to pay for normally makes everyone worse off
u1hcw9nx 22 hours ago [-]
[dead]
maratc 22 hours ago [-]
Title a bit misleading: EU exempts all smartwatches (not just Apple Watch) and probably all wireless headphones (not just AirPods) as well:
> The Commission is now adding six new product categories to the existing list of exemptions. This includes wearable devices such as smartwatches and fitness trackers, electric toys, and products within the scope of the ATEX Directive (equipment used in explosive atmospheres such as explosion-proof motors, sensors, pumps or forklift trucks).
sajithdilshan 22 hours ago [-]
> The iPhone was already exempt from the removability rule under the original regulation, thanks to its battery cycle life and water resistance rating.
I can understand for super compact devices like AirPods, you cannot provide replaceable batteries without making the device larger. But why on earth would they exempt iPhones? Like is it rocket science to build a water proof battery replaceable phone in 2026?
hvb2 21 hours ago [-]
I've always been a bit suspicious of the waterproof claims and their use.
My phone is IP68 rated, meaning prolonged submersion (at least 30 minutes) in water of up to 3 meters deep.
Why? What's the practical use here. It surely will make maintaining that level of waterproofing hard if you need to open it up...
dzhiurgis 20 hours ago [-]
My kids dropped my phone in pool plenty of times. Works perfectly.
I never had a need to replace phone battery myself (and I used to work on my laptops decade ago when it made sense).
theshrike79 21 hours ago [-]
The goal of the law wasn't explicitly user-replaceability, it was device longevity.
iPhone batteries are over the required minimum cycle limit + water resistant -> no need to be user-replaceable.
Also people still have the notion that "user-replaceable" means that you can just clip off the battery while queueing in the store and snap on a fresh one from your belt holster. That's not what the law states, it just can't require specialist tooling. Screws and glue strips are fine.
samrus 22 hours ago [-]
Cowards. Force them to implement resealable waterproofing
theshrike79 21 hours ago [-]
Who is "them"? Everyone making wireless earbuds, because that's who it'd apply to.
beej71 17 hours ago [-]
It's amazing how easy it is for big companies to get these carve-outs compared to common citizens trying to keep the government from monitoring their activity.
Not at all surprising, though.
mg 22 hours ago [-]
Wouldn't a "toxic waste tax" be better than all these individual regulations?
Have a sales tax on each product that corresponds to the toxicity of its components.
Exempt recycled materials from the tax so companies have an incentive to collect old parts and recycle them, preventing them from going to a landfill.
pjc50 22 hours ago [-]
> companies have an incentive to collect old parts and recycle them, preventing them from going to a landfill
You should read up on what the existing WEEE requirements are.
izacus 22 hours ago [-]
No.
Also, EU can't levy taxes, so it's a moot question.
BrenBarn 22 hours ago [-]
I'd rather just have a tax based on the size of the company. Little Larry's Amazing Electric Toothbrush Inc. can pay $5 and Apple can pay $500 billion.
acd 21 hours ago [-]
I dont agree for environments sake it should be user replaceable batteries even in small electronic devices. Hearing aids has user replaceable batteries
ivandenysov 23 hours ago [-]
> it must still undergo scrutiny by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU.
I wonder what exactly that means. I hope the European Parliament won’t have to waste time voting on this.
dyl000 23 hours ago [-]
anyone know how you can build a water-resistant phone with a removable battery?
fsuts 23 hours ago [-]
Water resistant is a lower threshold than waterproof, the latter being harder.
Many phones are water resistant with manufacturers guidance as to time and depth of water it can survive, eg iPhones https://support.apple.com/en-us/108039
As far as I’m aware, after you go to Apple or Samsung for a official battery replacement, there is no advisory issued to say the repair affected the previous level of water resistance
andor 16 hours ago [-]
In practice, repairs affect the water resistance, and Apple Store employees will confirm that to you. They just don't want to say so in the product description as it would raise doubts.
chickenimprint 23 hours ago [-]
We've had devices like this forever.
A: add a gasket.
B: glueseal everything except for the battery, connected via exposed gold pads.
redat00 23 hours ago [-]
The current issue with battery replacement is mainly the fact that they're glued to the phone. Which make them very dangerous to replace, as newbie might try to pry off the battery with metal tools (and you don't want to know what happens when a lithium battery is pierced.)
The only thing that will change as far as I know is that battery won't be glued anymore. You'll still have to open the phone with screw like you did before.
tsimionescu 22 hours ago [-]
> The only thing that will change as far as I know is that battery won't be glued anymore.
Nothing like that will change, not with this regulation, which already exempts any waterproof device like a waterproof phone. Per the article:
> The iPhone was already exempt from the removability rule under the original regulation, thanks to its battery cycle life and water resistance rating.
theshrike79 21 hours ago [-]
It's not even glued, it's like those 3M hooks you can slap on to a wall.
The issue is people thinking they need to use maximum power to RIP it out, damaging everything in the process.
You need a constant slow pull on the adhesive, which heats it a bit, causing it to release cleanly.
imtringued 23 hours ago [-]
They can still glue the battery in, they just have to do it in a removable way.
If you've ever swapped a battery in a phone you would know that there are special battery adhesive foils for DIY battery swaps that have a tab that lets you pull on the adhesive foil and thereby remove the the battery much more easily.
Leonard_of_Q 22 hours ago [-]
Yes, many manufacturers know. I have a number of Motorola Defy phones from 2010/2011 with replaceable batteries, all waterproof. My daughter left hers in her back pocket when she put her trousers in the washing, the thing went through a whole washing + spin cycle and still worked.
hurfdurf 22 hours ago [-]
I.e. Samsung Galaxy S5 was IP67, Samsung Galaxy Xcover 6 Pro was IP68.
testhest 23 hours ago [-]
So the dummies just gave Apple a competitive advantage?
pjc50 22 hours ago [-]
It will be all such devices, not specifying a manufacturer by name.
plantain 22 hours ago [-]
Really a check-mate move from Apple. Onerous limitations that apply to everyone except the mega-corps.
theshrike79 21 hours ago [-]
Non-megacorps can also build wrist devices and wireless headphones. The law doesn't explicitly list "AirPods" as exempt, you must understand that?
illliillll 23 hours ago [-]
This seems kind of obvious. How many Apple Watches and AirPods have ever become obsolete due to their batteries not being replaceable?
I’d guess the number is pretty close to zero, these devices aren’t used for long enough for this to become a problem.
If the goal was to sell more AirPods, not implementing “Find My” for them would’ve been a much better strategy.
SomeUserName432 23 hours ago [-]
> How many Apple Watches and AirPods have ever become obsolete due to their batteries not being replaceable?
Every single pair of AirPods I've had has died due to one of them not charging anymore. I assume it's the battery.
No idea where/how/who looks into this though, so I've just bought new ones.
illliillll 22 hours ago [-]
This is probably just your AirPods or the case getting dirty, doesn’t sound like a failing battery at all.
frereubu 22 hours ago [-]
Yeah, I've taken both my iPhone and Airpods into an Apple Store a couple of times and they cleaned the lightning / internal charging ports for free when the charging started getting a bit shaky, and haven't had any issues since. I'm slightly bemused that people don't think of this - a colleague was talking about getting a whole new iPhone because the lightning charging was getting a bit unreliable, but taking it in to get the port cleaned entirely restored it.
SomeUserName432 22 hours ago [-]
I'll keep it in mind when these fail.
kalleboo 22 hours ago [-]
My first gen AirPods became e-waste in 18 months due to the battery no longer lasting through a meeting. My AirPods Pro 2 have lasted a lot longer but I'm sure then they do die it will be due to the batteries.
netsharc 22 hours ago [-]
Product idea: charging cables: snake the cable up to your AirPods while they're in your ears, use magnets to attach to the battery terminals and deliver juice.
But argh, I have a feeling the AirPods turn themselves off while being charged...
jimnotgym 20 hours ago [-]
I have a product idea. The headphones could be passive and a wire run from them to the device that wants to make noise through them?
javier2 23 hours ago [-]
My old earpods were abandoned because the battery didnt even last a 40 minute run
elil17 22 hours ago [-]
My 6 year old Airpods Pro are barely chugging along at this point. I'm only getting a couple hours per charge.
chickenimprint 22 hours ago [-]
You allude to another reason people stop using them, besides battery degradation and loss, what is it?
dep_b 22 hours ago [-]
Loss or breakage.
I had the original AirPods and vowed to never buy them again because replacing the battery was so expensive.
Just ridiculous to throw away expensive audio equipment because battery replacement is as expensive as 50% of a new pair.
While good headphones from the 70s are still good, maybe with some foam replacements.
jimnotgym 20 hours ago [-]
I love it when you see people with a tether on their airpods to prevent loss. My headphones have a special tether which means they will never need a battery replacement, or indeed a battery
illliillll 22 hours ago [-]
Loss obviously being the #1.
Dropping, and then stepping on them seems like a common failure mode.
Dirt can stop the charging, most people will just replace instead of cleaning.
Even replacing the rubber tips is probably too much to expect from most people.
Rendered at 07:06:18 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
As people will be wearing wearable products when it is raining these categories of clothes products have been classified as wet products
[0] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-adds-exempt...
We have several for our kids, with removable batteries from Oral-B. All are years old and still waterproof. And with that amount of voltage, where can there _ever_ be a "safety issue"? That is quackery!
Sounds more like somebody lobbied successfully.
It's absolutely a result of lobbying.
Now connect the dots. That is how things work in EU.
Uh sure. If you've been paying attention the last year and a half it's the US putting up trade barriers to every other country. Like how the EU is under investigation for forced labor, that outcome might be used in the coming months to justify more tariffs.
Just to address this one specific case. If they're exempt, and you can sell more of them, why would you go beyond the regulation? This is why regulation like this shouldn't have exemptions.
I can see someone taking open a toothbrush, slapping a generic cell in there and then it going into water and having a fun time
Where is the danger? Even if I would put the wrong ones inside, from an RC race car (3,7V). I wouldn't even come close to dangerous wattage.
And since when does every device need to be idiot safe? I have a drill, a vacuum cleaner, a saw, a kitchen aid, bottles of isopropanol ... a lot of things are more dangerous.
And the vacuum cleaner the most surprisingly dangerous one, if one of your child decides to vacuum liquids from his rooms floor -- been there: vacuum destroyed, child survived. So, does that mean we only ever are allowed to buy models that can cope with wet and dry?
Oh, please. There's always an opportunity to be more paranoid I guess.
My guess is there is a trade of that's worth it on the product side. That's why you can't buy a compelling phone w a replaceable battery anywhere. Its an incredibly competitive market. If there was a design that worked and tradeoffs made sense it works certainly exist and do well since who wouldn't like it.
I just believe that the fact it doesn't exist tells you that the trade offs aren't worth it. I didn't buy conspiracy theories how dozens of independent manufacturer and hundreds of hardware manufacturers that are on the side line so collude to keep this design choice at bay.
Why did Google even attempt Project Ara? Why did Fairphone or Teracube never produce a compelling product?
If anyone could make replaceable batteries work, even at a premium, it would be a big hit. I remember replaceable batteries and they were incredible. The batteries were slim, can barely feel them in your pocket. I popped 2 or 3 for my camping trip and never had to worry about charging.
The idea that there's collusion in one of the most competitive marketplaces in the world (consumer electronics) is an extraordinary claim. Companies don't just nuke their products and survive long term.
https://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=13955&idPhone...
It costs less to make the inferior product, so even if you have to lower prices, you make it up in volume.
I can understand for super compact devices like AirPods, you cannot provide replaceable batteries without making the device larger. But why on earth would they exempt iPhones? Like is it rocket science to build a water proof battery replaceable phone in 2026?
My phone is IP68 rated, meaning prolonged submersion (at least 30 minutes) in water of up to 3 meters deep.
Why? What's the practical use here. It surely will make maintaining that level of waterproofing hard if you need to open it up...
I never had a need to replace phone battery myself (and I used to work on my laptops decade ago when it made sense).
iPhone batteries are over the required minimum cycle limit + water resistant -> no need to be user-replaceable.
Also people still have the notion that "user-replaceable" means that you can just clip off the battery while queueing in the store and snap on a fresh one from your belt holster. That's not what the law states, it just can't require specialist tooling. Screws and glue strips are fine.
Not at all surprising, though.
Have a sales tax on each product that corresponds to the toxicity of its components.
Exempt recycled materials from the tax so companies have an incentive to collect old parts and recycle them, preventing them from going to a landfill.
You should read up on what the existing WEEE requirements are.
Also, EU can't levy taxes, so it's a moot question.
I wonder what exactly that means. I hope the European Parliament won’t have to waste time voting on this.
Many phones are water resistant with manufacturers guidance as to time and depth of water it can survive, eg iPhones https://support.apple.com/en-us/108039
As far as I’m aware, after you go to Apple or Samsung for a official battery replacement, there is no advisory issued to say the repair affected the previous level of water resistance
A: add a gasket.
B: glueseal everything except for the battery, connected via exposed gold pads.
The only thing that will change as far as I know is that battery won't be glued anymore. You'll still have to open the phone with screw like you did before.
Nothing like that will change, not with this regulation, which already exempts any waterproof device like a waterproof phone. Per the article:
> The iPhone was already exempt from the removability rule under the original regulation, thanks to its battery cycle life and water resistance rating.
The issue is people thinking they need to use maximum power to RIP it out, damaging everything in the process.
You need a constant slow pull on the adhesive, which heats it a bit, causing it to release cleanly.
If you've ever swapped a battery in a phone you would know that there are special battery adhesive foils for DIY battery swaps that have a tab that lets you pull on the adhesive foil and thereby remove the the battery much more easily.
I’d guess the number is pretty close to zero, these devices aren’t used for long enough for this to become a problem.
If the goal was to sell more AirPods, not implementing “Find My” for them would’ve been a much better strategy.
Every single pair of AirPods I've had has died due to one of them not charging anymore. I assume it's the battery.
No idea where/how/who looks into this though, so I've just bought new ones.
But argh, I have a feeling the AirPods turn themselves off while being charged...
I had the original AirPods and vowed to never buy them again because replacing the battery was so expensive.
Just ridiculous to throw away expensive audio equipment because battery replacement is as expensive as 50% of a new pair.
While good headphones from the 70s are still good, maybe with some foam replacements.
Dropping, and then stepping on them seems like a common failure mode.
Dirt can stop the charging, most people will just replace instead of cleaning.
Even replacing the rubber tips is probably too much to expect from most people.