- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
Each ring will be contributing to the growing e-waste problem after a couple of years or so.
You must log in or register to comment.
The problem is the battery, and how they have a finite lifespan. Usually that’s about 400 recharge cycles, and after that the batteries are finished.
And if you can’t replace it, then it’s the end of the line for the gadget, and it’s tossed onto the e-waste pile.
It is so incredibly aggravating that it’s 2024 and unreplaceable batteries are still a thing. I guess Apple didn’t get enough shade when they did this in phones so it just became industry-standard. It’s both horrible for the environment and for the consumer.
I guarantee the engineers could easily make it replaceable for little to no added cost, they’re just specifically instructed by business leaders not to.
Well, sure! How are they going to sell you the $450 replacement ring in two years if you’re able to replace the dead battery by paying $30 to a stoned college kid working at a fix-it kiosk in your local mall? Consumers, they never know what’s good for them. /s
Making something this thin and small with a replaceable battery would be very difficult. What is needed for something like this is more reliable batteries that can last for 10-20 years and 10’s of thousands of cycles.
Something larger like a smart watch definitely should have replaceable batteries though.
Making something this thin and small with a replaceable battery would be very difficult.
Well, then don’t? Manufacturers should be responsible for repairs, spare parts and recycling after the product is sold, so they don’t intentionally produce products that thrown into waste after a few years.
What modern lithium ion battery is limited to 400 cycles under normal conditions? My 2017 tablet had 1,600 cycles on it and 82% SoH when I sold it this year.
deleted by creator
My Apple Watch 7 (two years old) and AirPod pro gen 1 (three years old) are both having hardware issues. I took them to Apple who said “we don’t, we replace and the cost of a watch SE and AirPod pros 2 cost the same as a replacement of your devices”. I now have $600 of e-waste sitting in my drawer.
The experience really turned me off Apple but no one else is better. The whole ecosystem is garbage. I think I’ll learn to live without the watch but there’s no other totally wireless headphones that suit my needs and I’ll end up replacing them.
The gold standard of personal devices has set the scene and consumers are left with no option but to buy devices that have limited lifespans. No such as buy it for life in 2024.
Well there is stuff like Fairphone, which do also other things like earbuds I think. Haven’t used it myself though but I am keeping an eye on these things for my next phone.
deleted by creator
$400? What’s the delivered cost on these things?
Including R&D?
This is a very good question from the comments of the ifixit article. It would have been smart, if that “cut here” feature would have been included into the concept. It would have underlined that this indeed is a smart device.
Another thing about rings in general: some injuries can cause your finger to inflame. Then the ring acts as a tourniquet, cutting off blood flow. If the EMT or doctor can’t cut off the ring, they have to amputate the finger. This came up a lot when people were making rings out of titanium or carbon fiber or other high-strength materials. Here you have a ring with a lithium battery and no “cut here” marks. Does anyone really want to risk an un-extinguishable fire in an ambulance with oxygen cylinder nearby? mikedesimone - 22 hours ago
Agreed. At least have lines on the ring, where one can cut without causing further issue. A Smart ring is going too far, in the tech world, because of it’s repairabillity status. Jri-creator - 12 hours ago
What would cutting a slit open do exactly? It’s still all covered in resin
Cutting the ring on a designated place would allow to remove the ring from a finger in case of an emergency. But you can’t cut the ring in a random place, because of the battery. It would be helpful when there is a marking where to cut the ring safely. The ring would be destroyed anyway. But a functioning finger is probably worth more than this gadget.
Imagine your ring needs to be cut off while you are in the hospital: without knowing where the battery is placed it is a guessing game for the doctors where to cut the ring. This is a risk, because when the battery gets cut it will react with the ambient oxygen in the air, causing a fire which is hard to put out, since it can’t be extinguished easily.
I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times: opensource after deprecation. The product isn’t supported, maintained, for any reason: open source the entire thing.
It should not be in a company’s interest to release products that just become bricks or junk without their input. It’s not in our interest either.
Not exactly relevant, but there is The European Citizens initiative to do that for games you can sign: https://www.stopkillinggames.com
Signed and shared with friends in the EU.
Here’s another one to sign https://publiccode.eu
Who would have thought 1984 got there by crowdfunding ingsoc right in our lives…
I like the tech though but isnt there a way to run/charge by body/ambient temperature?
