Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Technologies

Pixel 10a: a budget phone where it's easier to replace the screen than the charging port

Teardown of Google Pixel 10a reveals mixed repairability picture: three out of five components can be replaced without hassle, but soldered USB-C turns a simple malfunction into costly repair.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 6, 2026 · 2 min read

Pixel 10a: a budget phone where it's easier to replace the screen than the charging port
Pixel 10a (Фото: Google)

Google Pixel 10a is positioned as an affordable smartphone with flagship aspirations — $499, seven years of updates, a 48 MP camera. But how easily it can be repaired reveals another side of this compromise.

What was discovered inside

To access the internals, the body needs to be heated — the back panel is held on with adhesive. The construction then turns out to be quite clean: no exotic fasteners or non-standard solutions. According to PBKreviews' assessment, the internal layout received maximum scores in three of five categories — parts availability, screen replacement, and battery replacement.

The battery can be removed without disassembling the front panel — this is a fundamental difference from most competitors in this price range. The EU Energy Label confirmed the repairability rating of "B" — the same level as the Pixel 9a.

One problem, but a significant one

The lowest score in the teardown went to the "replacement of other components" category. The specific reason — the USB-C port is soldered directly to the motherboard. This means: if the port becomes loose or stops charging — simple module replacement is not possible. Either soldering or replacement of the entire board is required.

The port is the most vulnerable point of any smartphone after the screen. A soldered connector turns a $20 repair into $150+.

iFixit, general repairability assessment methodology

For comparison: in the Pixel 10 (the older sibling), iFixit identified a modular USB port as a separate plus and gave an overall rating of 6/10. The Pixel 10a took a step back in this component — despite better battery accessibility.

Context: budget phone and the right to repair

The Pixel 10a paradox is that the cheaper device — the one people buy specifically to save money — carries the potential for a more expensive repair in case of one specific failure. The battery is easier to replace than in a flagship. But if the port breaks — the repair could cost a third of the phone's price.

  • Screen replacement: maximum score — modular design
  • Battery replacement: maximum score — no front panel disassembly
  • Parts availability: maximum score
  • Organization and repair time: good, but not ideal
  • Replacement of other components (USB-C): lowest score

An aluminum body with a plastic back cover, IP68, 5,100 mAh — technically the phone is designed for long-term use. But hardware durability and the ability to restore it are different things.

If Google is truly targeting an audience that cares about the cost of ownership, not just the purchase price, — the next generation of Pixel "a" series will show whether modular USB-C becomes standard even in the budget segment, or remains a privilege of flagships.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026