You must be from the valley if you think that a 1000 phone is economical. That is laughable.
This is kinda the case with phones too, you can buy a $450 phone with 2 years of updates, or a $700 with 5 years.
Which one is more economical over time?
Six years ago I paid $170 for an equivalent phone (older version of android than current, slower, less ram, space, etc). On sale. And used it for almost a year and a half. So the low-end has really gone down in price.
I'm talking mainly about phone support not whether it continues to function on a basic level or not.
The previous phone I think it was most of the time I owned it, but I didn't get any major OS upgrades (nor did I expect to), just minor updates.
It got slower over time but it never bricked, unlike my fancy new Nexus 5X, which completely bricked after I owned it for a year and a few months. Who cares about security updates and software patches when your phone completely breaks in less than the average upgrade cycle (obviously I don't mean all of these phones do, but apparently it was a common problem with Nexus 5X, I found out after the fact. I have a coworker on his 3rd one in two years).
> Which one is more economical over time?
My sub-100USD android apparently. What the heck kind of math do you have going on for "economical?"
$450 / 2 = $225/y of support.
$700 / 5 = $140/y of support.