zlacker

>>skille+(OP)
I feel like the elephant in the room is that there's no phone battery that's going to stay useful in anywhere close to that time frame, and replacing phone batteries is usually a losing proposition. I've tried, several times. Fake, low-quality batteries are rampant (usually degrading within weeks), and genuine ones are prohibitively expensive -- usually a significant fraction of the cost of a new phone.

>>wheels+B7
I don't know what Pixel replacement batteries cost, but Apple typically charges a flat $89 to replace an out of warranty battery, less than 10% of the cost of a new phone, which is a totally reasonable proposition if you think you can get at least another year out of your phone. Unless Pixels are dramatically more expensive, then this doesn't check out at all.

>>willse+Ox
I think the point of the OP is that after ~5 years (when you have to change your battery), your iPhone is not worth $890 dollars anymore, but more like $200-$300, out of which $89 is a significant portion.

>>Kolmog+8y
Not sure why you would consider the suspected re-sale value of the phone here?

From a users perspective the question would seem to be whether they want to spend $89 for a battery or $890 (maybe minus that re-sale value of 200-300, so still around $600) on a new phone.

>>phaer+mz
> whether they want to spend $89 for a battery or $890

No, they can pay less than $120 on a new phone in the budget tier which will be at least comparable in capabilities to a 5 year old phone in any tier and also have about 2 years of life.

>>fatfin+HF
If they are price sensitive, they would have gone for something like the $399 2016 iPhone SE, which is currently in it's seventh year of support, having gotten another security update last month.

That works out to around fifty bucks per supported year, and you aren't creating a mountain of e-waste by throwing away a perfectly good phone every other year.

>>GeekyB+rO
Buying something like the Samsung A14 every 4 years would cost about the same and seems a lot more realistic than aspirational.

I think its great that phones are being supported for 7 years but in a way it is a marketing chip based on consumer's using unrealistic linear depreciation.

Some consumers can pass down, repurpose, or only need very basic things, but most consumers need much of the relative performance they first bought, break screens, can't handle embedded battery replacement logistics, etc, so most probably have replaced something like the iPhone SE before 4 years is up and are paying more than they would have expected.

>>fatfin+BI1
> most consumers need much of the relative performance

The single core performance of the current Samsung A14 is about a third of the currently sold iPhone SE.

If you're going to keep the same device many years, don't buy something with slow performance right out of the gate.