Devices? Yes. Expensive? Only if you fail in picking them. Buy an iPhone or something. I'm in Android camp, but I only buy flagships (after some bad experiences with cheap end of the phone spectrum) specifically because I can rely on them to work for 3+ years, getting updates over that period, and importantly, still being performant enough relative to contemporary software as to not be annoying to use.

I agree with GP here. In the current security-obsessed zeitgeist, 2 years of security updates is criminally low, pretty much designed to generate e-waste.

There is a middle ground. I spent $94 total after taxes/fees getting a Pixel 6A in August 2023. Its security updates end-of-life is July 2027. That's 4 years of security updates for only $23 more (assuming the £59 is taxes and fees included) and my pixel 6a specs blow this thing out of the water.

It seems like a valid metric to pick on. Premium devices are refreshed early/short cycle their lifespans because they are purchased by customers with disposable income. Budget devices should be sold to last as that's what's important to the customers buying them.

As a counter though, I would say with 2gb of ram this device just won't be fast enough for most of its users in 3 years anyway; so although I find this a valid argument to make, a new issue pops up immediately (for me at least).