I'm not discussing it being useful, I merely said that it doesn't feel _really_ needed by me.
If I had to choose between interchangeable batteries and waterproof I would choose the first one hands down.
> Is waterproof even a real needed feature?
That comes across as though you're trying to dismiss it as unimportant; it doesn't come across as though you're actually asking the question and willing to listen to the answer. And then, responding to people who answer you with further dismissals of their reasons continues to seem like you're trying to dismiss it as unimportant because you don't use it.
In response to someone saying they don't want to lose an $800 phone to water damage, what value does it add to say "I never buy over $300 phones, and anyway it never happened to me"? Other people do buy expensive phones, and also, whether expensive or cheap, other people do want to not lose them to water damage, and for that matter, other people do want to use them in environments where they're likely to get wet (e.g. pools/showers/baths).
It comes across as though you're trying to say "but you're wrong to want that", which results in the response you are getting.
I’m probably just clumsy, but I’ve dropped my phone into bodies of water twice in 10 years. I also know of 2 people that have dropped their phones in toilets.
The Venm diagram of expensive phones and clumsy people is large enough to make this a useful feature for some.
I wouldn’t mind if the regulation was that a phone company must offer at least one model with detachable battery, but I’d be sad if the amazing advances in waterproof phones were compromised.
And yes, for hiking etc., there are $5 waterproof bags available?
But what am i surprised being on a website for grown-up tech toddlers needing their pacifiers everywhere, even for obtaining food and checking in contactless i.e. scared of people.
Yes.