EU Exempts Apple Watch and AirPods from Battery Removal Requirements(mjtsai.com)
mjtsai.com
EU Exempts Apple Watch and AirPods from Battery Removal Requirements
https://mjtsai.com/blog/2026/07/17/eu-exempts-apple-watch-and-airpods-from-battery-removal-requirement/
13 comments
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
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.
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.
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.
You can asbolutely redesign the devices to fit the requirement.
It's absolutely a result of lobbying.
It's absolutely a result of lobbying.
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.
Now connect the dots. That is how things work in EU.
> 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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
I mean, it's not a toaster.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Uh, Fairphone does have compelling products?
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
https://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=13955&idPhone...
https://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=13955&idPhone...
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.
Comparable or not, the Fairphone 6 costs less than half of my iPhone. I don't think the price is an issue.
Most phones quietly lose their ip68 when battery or screen is replaced
> 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.
It costs less to make the inferior product, so even if you have to lower prices, you make it up in volume.
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
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).> 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?
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?
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...
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...
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).
I never had a need to replace phone battery myself (and I used to work on my laptops decade ago when it made sense).
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.
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.
Cowards. Force them to implement resealable waterproofing
Who is "them"? Everyone making wireless earbuds, because that's who it'd apply to.
Earbuds are fine to exclude. I mean phones
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.
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.
> 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.
You should read up on what the existing WEEE requirements are.
No.
Also, EU can't levy taxes, so it's a moot question.
Also, EU can't levy taxes, so it's a moot question.
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.
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.
Not at all surprising, though.
> 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.
I wonder what exactly that means. I hope the European Parliament won’t have to waste time voting on this.
I dont agree for environments sake it should be user replaceable batteries even in small electronic devices. Hearing aids has user replaceable batteries
anyone know how you can build a water-resistant phone with a removable battery?
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
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
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.
We've had devices like this forever.
A: add a gasket.
B: glueseal everything except for the battery, connected via exposed gold pads.
A: add a gasket.
B: glueseal everything except for the battery, connected via exposed gold pads.
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I.e. Samsung Galaxy S5 was IP67, Samsung Galaxy Xcover 6 Pro was IP68.
Really a check-mate move from Apple. Onerous limitations that apply to everyone except the mega-corps.
Non-megacorps can also build wrist devices and wireless headphones. The law doesn't explicitly list "AirPods" as exempt, you must understand that?
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.
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.
> 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.
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.
This is probably just your AirPods or the case getting dirty, doesn’t sound like a failing battery at all.
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.
I'll keep it in mind when these fail.
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.
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...
But argh, I have a feeling the AirPods turn themselves off while being charged...
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?
My old earpods were abandoned because the battery didnt even last a 40 minute run
My 6 year old Airpods Pro are barely chugging along at this point. I'm only getting a couple hours per charge.
You allude to another reason people stop using them, besides battery degradation and loss, what is it?
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
[0] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-adds-exempt...