>>2937155
>How does the non removable battery dying have a different outcome?
Simple, it starts beeping at you and won't shut up for you to replace the whole unit before it's totally dead. Eliminates the frequent failure mode of people just yanking out the dying battery and thinking "I'll replace it later" and then never doing it. The only way to silence one of these things is to remove it from the ceiling, bust open the case, and cut the wires to the battery. The battery is meant to last the entire functional life of the unit, you never need to worry about it unless you're a building owner.
>Regulators are retards.
Sure, but not for the ten year thing, it makes a lot of sense in theory. The problem is that smoke detectors already are a market where the manufacturers coast on old, barely functional, horrible UX designs because they have no real incentives to make them not suck. All the competition except in the niche IoT connected bullshit luxury space is functionally on price.
So they ship 10 year units that suck and fail well before the ten year mark. People go through the rigamarole to disable these and replace them for more money. Everyone wins except the residents.
But it's still a great idea in theory, the problem isn't too much regulation of smoke detectors, it's not enough. There needs to be minimum standards for quality and UX. I (I'm also
>>2935506) would love to replace my grey market shit I have to maintain with something that Just Works for ten years.