Pixel 3 XL reveals innards festooned with glue and... Samsung? Teardown demon iFixit has pulled Google's shiny new flagship Pixel 3 phone to pieces, revealing more glue and glass than strictly necessary. The Pixel 3 and its oversized sibling, the 3 XL, made an appearance last week after so many leaks that its IP68 rating could have been put in jeopardy. iFixit chose the Pixel 3 XL as its …
"so the phone shuts down at 40%"
That is caused when the SoC draws more current then the battery can supply, as voltage drops as the battery depletes charge more current is needed to power the device. Apple have come up with an ingenious solution to that, they reduce the max all-core clock speed of the SoC to prevent it from drawing more current then the battery can supply, so users are able to use that last 40% of the battery at the cost of 10% reduced all-core performance (although the reduced performance is only for when there is low battery charge, at high charge the SoC is clocked normally).
It'll depend on the type of glue. It might actually be more recyclable if they can put it on a conveyor, warm it up and then jiggle it around a bit to have all the glue melt and leave the components loose and recoverable.
I remember reading about car manufacturers experimenting with plastics that deformed when heated so that it was easy to separate them from metal components for recycling.
But I'm not holding my breath...
An unsatisfying excuse when certainly it would be quicker to place pre-cut gaskets inside, than to wait for glue to cool or set. Gaskets would probably peel out and be re-useable after repairs, while also filling empty spaces to bear pressure.
Perhaps though, this glue dissolves easily in some special solvent so they can just soak the phones in a tumbler until they fall to pieces.
I remember reading about car manufacturers experimenting with plastics that deformed when heated so that it was easy to separate them from metal components for recycling.
ISTR hearing another approach for cars where they would point an ultrasonic "gun" at the car which would cause specially designed plastic bolts to fracture so all the plastic trim simply falls off. The idea failed when it was observed this could be done by anyone with the gun whether they owned the vehicle and were in a scrapyard or not.
"I remember reading about car manufacturers experimenting with plastics that deformed when heated so that it was easy to separate them from metal components for recycling."
An obvious dead-end; what we really need are clearly a myriad of 5G/WiFi-connected Smart Bolts, each running a tiny (but non-updatable) full-scale Linux stack inside, that can be commanded to let go by anyone in possession of the correct engineering keys and credentials who bothers to ping them. Just think of what that could do to IPv6 uptake rates...!
This post has been deleted by its author
Dictionaties exist for a reason. They prevent people wanting to appear clever from making mistakes.
The usage is wrong, as is simply shown by replacing the word with its definition:
"the 13.2Wh battery ... fully or abundantly provided or filled with a hidden ribbon cable".
I don't think so. "Replete" implies "containing" (the battery does not contain the cable), whereas "complete" includes external components too.
"I am replete" means "I've had enough". How does this apply to a battery and cable exactly?
Language is important and I expect professional wordsmiths to use it properly.
Still a piss-poor choice of words. Synonym or not, I have never seen "replete" used instead of "complete".
Given that one of the roots of replete is the Latin verb plēre, meaning "to fill," it isn't surprising that the word has synonyms such as "full" and "complete." "Replete," "full," and "complete" all indicate that something contains all that is wanted or needed or possible, but there are also subtle differences between the words. "Full" implies the presence or inclusion of everything that can be held, contained, or attained ("a full schedule"), while "complete" applies when all that is needed is present ("a complete picture of the situation"). "Replete" is the synonym of choice when fullness is accompanied by a sense of satiety."
In the context of IFIXIT's well known mission of establishing a procedure to repair these devices, the inclusion of 'booby trap' discovery and bypassing same, makes replete fit nicely with their discovery. It only takes one IED to kill you. So finding only one would be replete to me, it doesn't need twenty to be 'full' of them, when one suffices as well as many.
wait, 13Wh? what's that in mAh? How does that compare to, lets say the 3000mAh battery in my S7 that is coming to the end of its contract?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but at 5V, that would be a worse battery? but at say, 2.5V it would be a better one?
What voltage/s does the Pixel run on?
You cannot compare the mAh of different batteries at different voltages, mAh is useless for comparing batteries. Wh is the only valid measurement for stating the capacity of a battery.
The Pixel 3XL has a 13Wh battery and the iPhone XS Max and Samsung Glaxy S7 have a 12Wh battery.
A 13Wh battery can supply 13W for 1 hour or 1W for 13 hours. A 12Wh battery can supply 12W for 1 hour or 1W for 12 hours.
So with 1W of power draw the battery in the Pixel 3XL will last 13 hours compared to the iPhone XS Max battery which would last 12 hours.
While I'm sure a lot of people have managed to drop their phones and crack the back, my now rather aged S7 Edge has never been in a case or cover is still in one piece and yes, has even been dropped a few times (I blame the bevelled edge for making it harder to maintain a firm grip). In fact, this phone has survived a lot better than many of the cheaper plastic phones I had in the past which would fly apart or crack when dropped.
These things are both stronger than they appear to be and are just fine if looked after. I'm not saying glass is the most sensible choice, it's not but it does look good.
Finally! A person who says that glass is good-looking! Totally agree on this one.
But in actual fact, your experience is what's known as anecdotal evidence. You say that it never broke. I have a friend whose S7 Edge is a horrible mishmash of cracks, front and back, yet my dad's S6 Edge only cracked two screen protectors. Another piece of anecdotal evidence.
The solution? Stats.
"These things are both stronger than they appear to be and are just fine if looked after. I'm not saying glass is the most sensible choice, it's not but it does look good."
I'm sure it does look good, but the reality is people put their phones in bumpers so they never see the back. So they've gotten a phone with a case compromised by material and being thin for no reason.
Glass also tends to shatter when subjected to shock. Glass covers may have contain a layer of laminate to stop them flying apart but they still turn into crazy paving. Plastic absorbs shocks better and is more likely to just dent or have a localized crack.
The reason glass, or aluminium are used as build materials are to make the phone appear to be expensive, to justify the higher price point. Not for any practical benefit.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
