Jessica Dolcourt's witchcraft, February 10th 2012: >It's time to kiss that removable smartphone battery goodbye > There are more phones with batteries you can't remove than ever before. The trend brings with it many benefits, and a few uneasy "buts." Indeed [quite a few](https://en.everybodywiki.com/Benefits_of_user-replaceable_batteries). ^( ~~[Stick your planned obsolescence battery up your arse.](#spoiler)~~) But which benefits? >Do you really care that the Motorola Droid Razr Maxx (left) and Droid Razr have no removable batteries, so long as they keep on ticking? They will not be *ticking* as much, as soon as their batteries expire, [moron](#spoiler). > More than just looks. What's the advantage of a battery you can't take out? Aesthetics are one obvious reason to go that route, with designers opting for a fluid, unibody motif. You mentioned the same point twice. >Hart added that the unibody design made possible by the embedded battery makes the phone "seamless," "extremely rigid," and "free from split lines that disrupt the feel in hand and the visual purity of the design." > Slimness is absolutely part of the equation, since phones without the small grooves, nooks, and air pockets needed to make it so you can open a back cover and pull out a battery have the potential to be thinner. I smell [rotten Apple](https://en.EverybodyWiki.com/Apple_cult) marketing. And how come the same iSheep don't give a damn that the iPhones are now thicker than 8 millimetres?! **The hypocrisy is real.** Also, the Galaxy Alpha with user-replaceable battery is thinner than every iPhone ever, therefore [shut up](#spoiler). You, Jessica, will not be caring about *the absence of lines* (over which you likely put a case anyway) when your battery is low and you need to send a message immediately. [Moron](#spoiler).