Sounds good. Let's take a look...

Note: This program is in the US (where Right To Repair is happening), so the example is in dollars.

The one part which is 100% guaranteed to die or degrade in your device is the battery.

You can buy a replacement battery for your Galaxy S20 via Samsung's self-repair program... for $206.99. Why so much? They adhere the battery to the screen assembly with industrial strength glue (which is completely unnecessary btw), and insist that it is would be too dangerous to remove. Therefore, when you replace the battery, you must also replace the the screen and housing - which, by the way, is the most expensive component.

See also this refurbished Galaxy S20 on Ebay for $198.00.

A battery by itself should really cost about $30.00 - $35.00.

Do you think this is a fair and honourable attempt to make the product user-repairable? Or is it a way to signal to the public and legislators that they care about sustainability, whilst simultaneously forcing consumers into buying a new device.

These programs are not intended to make it easier and more economical for the end user to fix their device, but rather an attempt to appease the Right To Repair movement. It's a lousy peace offering to their critics.

The Right to Repair bill, was bought in to "enhance consumer options in the repair markets by granting them greater access to the parts, tools and documents needed for repairs. Encouraging consumers to maximize the lifespan of their devices through repairs is a laudable goal to save money and reduce electronic waste."  This bill received overwhelming support and was signed into law in New York.

Then, governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, made a last minute amendment to the legislation, which enables OEMs to forego the sale of individual components, and instead provide parts assemblies if they deem it "unsafe" or "an injury risk".

A convenient loophole which makes the bill practically useless...

Hey, we'll provide the part you need to repair your device because we really do care about e-waste and product life cycles. But you're going to have to buy it in a frame, along with several other parts which you don't need, because we're so concerned with your safety. Oh by the way you could just buy a new device for like £30.00 more.

Why is this such a big deal? It demonstrates the giant corporations' ability to pull the wool over our eyes - who will happily continue taking your money whilst destroying the environment. This will spread across industries, to the point where we'll be throwing our computers, TVs and refrigerators into landfill every two years, because the manufacturer has intentionally made it uneconomical, difficult, impossible, or even illegal (yes, against the law) to repair something that's broken.

This is the trajectory that we are on.

Imagine this: You get a flat tyre. You take your car to the garage - who would love to buy and fit a quality new tyre from the manufacturer. Unfortunately, the manufacturer doesn't sell tyres, and they cannot use an aftermarket product, because the wheel is attached to the axle with a secure locking mechanism. The only option it to buy and fit a brand new drivetrain. Again, you cannot buy from an aftermarket manufacturer because the drivetrain is serialised via an encrypted chip, meaning the car will not start unless it detects the correct chip.

Congratulations, your flat tyre just set you back £4000.

They have complied with the law by allowing independent garages to purchase replacement parts, yet insist on replacing the entire assembly, with their parts, for your safety. 

Manufacturers should have no say in what you do with your product after sale. It creates an incentive to produces a poorly designed product, which discourages or prevents maintenance and incentivises replacement.

For cheap disposable products - sure, not a big deal. For large and/or expensive equipment - it's a total disaster.

"It's just a phone" ... Is it though?

20 years ago this statement would have been pretty bang on. We use our mobile phones primarily for making calls and sending texts when we're not at home or the office.

In the 20th century, a phone was really just a phone, and we made a clear distinction between a Mobile Phone and a Landline Phone.

Your landline was your "Phone", and everybody had one. Not everyone had a "Mobile Phone".

In recent years the Mobile Phone was promoted to "Phone", and the Landline Phone has been demoted to "Landline" or "Home Phone". Most people born after 2006 will probably never have had a home phone. You mean to tell me that you had to call a household rather than an individual?

The mobile phone surpassed the landline phone to became our primary means of voice calls in 2011. For the first time, Brits spent more time talking on their mobile phone than their landline phone.

Then came the rise of the smartphone, which outsold feature phones (basic phones) for the first time in 2013. Since then, we've seen rapid growth in the smartphone market, to the point where we have near-universal adoption worldwide - 86.4% of the world's population have a smartphone.

Eventually, we dropped the "Smart" prefix, which we will probably (hopefully) also do for smart fridges, watches, TVs, homes etc. We even have Smart Cities and Smart Motorways now... We have an irritating obsession with making everything Smart.

Referring to your Phone as a Smartphone was never very cool though was it.

Smart labels aside, the amount of innovation we've seen in this time is unparalleled. The mobile phone has become an extremely useful - even essential - daily item.

In fact, most people would probably class their smartphone as their most important material possession. See how many people you can find under the age of 65 that wouldn't have it in their top 3.

The smartphone is perhaps the only thing that you literally never forget to leave the house with, and that you wouldn't dream of travelling without.

Always in your pocket or your hand, it's a part of your identity. Being without it makes you feel naked. Having a stranger go through it would make you feel unsettled.

So is it really just a phone? Or should we call it something else?

We comprised our own list of common uses of smartphones, and ranked them (very roughly) based on what percentage of users utilise each function, and how frequently:

That's just a small part of a growing list.

So at what point is our device a clock rather than a phone?

"Phone" is shorthand for "Telephone", the definition of which is "a system for transmitting voices over a distance using wire or radio, by converting acoustic vibrations to electrical signals."

Sounds a bit archaic doesn't it.

With advancements in AI and other technologies, our pocket devices will surely, at some point, more closely resemble a mini robot than an actual telephone.

The smartphone in its current form is a really small computer. A battery connects to a circuit board which powers a processor. It sends and receives information via radio waves (internet). As opposed to a keyboard and mouse, the touch screen lends itself well to one-hand navigation and gestures. Most apps are just websites which have been optimised for the handheld interface - the small portrait screen. When we recognise the smartphone as a portable computer, it makes a lot of sense.

A "Computer" is defined as "an electronic device for storing and processing data, typically in binary form, according to instructions given to it in a variable program."

Seems a bit more appropriate. Although "Mobile Computer" doesn't quite roll of the tongue.

What about "Mobiles"..? Our phones are indeed "Mobile" - "able to move or be moved freely or easily." It encapsulates their portability without limiting its functions. Plus, we are already culturally familiar with that term. And it's a slick two syllables.

Even so, I can't see people taking too kindly to the Apple iMobile.

Language is a stubborn old thing. 26 letters arranged in various combinations which we use create a heavily compressed interpretation of the complex nature of reality.

But when you say "Phone", I know exactly what you mean. 

1 syllable; 5 letters - Phone - means so much more than a dictionary would or could suggest. So until we adopt integrated brain chips, perhaps it will do.

Though there's always a chance that a new trendy word or term will catch on.

What do you think we should call our portable digital assistants?

We hear about this every week...

Sellers ship their device out, only for the payment to be cancelled later.

Buyers find their new device blacklisted (reported lost or stolen) a few days after receiving it.

Or they just end up with a battered iPhone that looks nothing like the one in the photos. Sorry - no warranty, no returns. This account no longer exists.

The idea of a a diverse and competitive marketplace whereby everyone is honest and accountable is a lovely idea.

Unfortunately, a very small proportion of our society abuses the rules in the pursuit of self-interest. And this group are disproportionately active on Facebook Marketplace. 

Marketplace scamming is low cost, low effort stealing. The risk-reward ratio is much lower online, and people are less likely to feel guilty about screwing over someone they'll never met.

Online selling platforms like Depop, Ebay and Etsy are great. Who'd of thought 20 years ago that individuals could exchange goods and services cooperatively without the oversight of a corporation or governing body? Turns out, we can manage it really well. In fact, if you have a less-than 95% positive feedback score on Ebay, you've probably got something wrong with you, and you will be cast out from the system. Same goes for your Uber rating. You know people get banned from Airbnb?  

Facebook Marketplace does not have buyer and seller RATINGS or SUPPORT or PROTECTION like Ebay and PayPal, so it attracts scammers, who can hide behind an anonymous, legit-looking profile.

The vast majority of people buying and selling on Marketplace are decent people. This makes it a great place to buy and sell things locally, or promote your side business. (FYI: Do not arrange to meet with anyone you don't know in a dark alleyway)

It's not the place to get a great deal on a high value item. It's not the place to sell an iPhone and send it in the post. 

At worst, you'll get scammed. At the very least, you'll receive a ton of creepy messages begging you to knock £150 off the asking price.

Don't get caught out! Buy or sell to Talkback

The Galaxy S range is Samsung's flagship device. Most research and development is focused on improving this product. All the best tech is reserved for the premium smartphone - which every year, is one of the best smartphones released.

One of the most important components in a smartphone (or any computer) is the processor. This little chip receives and executes every command. The cameras, the music player, voice calls - everything - has to go through the processor, which is capable of performing billions of calculations per second!

The industry standard processor for Android phones is Snapdragon, which is manufactured by Qualcomm.

Samsung make their own processor, called Exynos.

Benchmark tests measure a processor's peak performance. Snapdragon scores higher than Exynos on these tests.

The most notable difference between the two is with respect to sustained performance. Exynos struggles when running back to back applications for long periods of time. This is due to temperature. As the chip continues to work, it heats up, and we see a disproportionately greater decrease in performance compared to Snapdragon.

Snapdragon is around 10% faster at peak performance, and 20% faster in sustained performance.

Here's how this translates in the real world - in a Samsung with a Snapdragon chip versus a Samsung with an Exynos chip:

Despite this, some users report better reliability or longevity with Exynos. It's not a clear case of one is better than the other - they each have their pros and cons. The consensus is that Snapdragon is best overall, but the gap has been shrinking with each generation.

Bottom line: Both of these chips are excellent, but if you're a keen gamer or photographer, you're going to want a Snapdragon for sure.

So surely Samsung put the better chip in all of their flagship phones, right? Afraid not.

Samsung release two versions of their flagship phones, including the S22, to cover different regional markets.

S22 with Snapdragon:

Why do this?

The Snapdragon chip is more expensive, so Samsung cut costs by splitting their product line in two.

You would think (hope) that the Exynos version handset would be cheaper, but sadly that's not the case. For reasons way beyond the scope of this post, Samsung choose to sell their phones at the same price worldwide.

Samsung phones are manufactured in South Korea and Vietnam. Imported goods are subject to import tax which varies across regions. To offset the greater import tax in Europe, Samsung could either increase the selling price or decrease the manufacturing cost. Increasing the price would make the product less competitive, so more consumers would buy other brands such as Apple, thus Samsung would lose market share. A slightly slower processor is not a deal breaker for most people - so that's the trade-off.   

Samsung signed a patent agreement deal with Qualcomm, which blocks them from selling Exynos devices in the US.

Having two processors to choose from can also pay off if one of the manufacturers experiences supply chain issues. Samsung make millions of phone, and having all their eggs in one basket could result in manufacturing grinding to a halt.

Can you use a US spec Samsung in the UK?

Yes, you can. But there are some downsides. Manufacturer warranty is regional. Samsung Pay will not work - though Google Pay will. You wouldn't receive certain region-specific updates. You only get 5G with some network providers.

But now there's no need to import. The wait is almost over...

The Galaxy S23 is set to be released in February, and reports have confirmed that it will be equipped with Snapdragon 8 Gen2, worldwide!    

Those that upgraded to the S22 might be kicking themselves right now. But let's wait and see how it performs. 

We do hope that this doesn't bring an end to Exynos. The fewer manufacturers in the space, the fewer options for consumers. More competition drives innovation, but also keeps prices down as companies strive to outdo one-another. Perhaps Samsung will reserve Exynos for the A-series, and continue to close the gap between their mid-range and high-end devices.