On 09/06/2021 11:47, Chris Green wrote:
newshound wrote:
On 09/06/2021 09:06, Chris Green wrote:
newshound wrote:

I've had several Moto G phones of various models over the past few years
(currently on an 8). One had a "hard" microphone failure, two others
started showing short battery life but associated with the phone, not
the battery. In each case after something like 18 months to two years of
use. As relatively low cost phones given their performance I just
replaced them. I did divert to Huawei for a while but that was
unreliable downloading BBC Sounds files. Touch screens seem a little
flakey with either cold or wet hands. I've actually never lost or broken
a phone, but I tend to regard £100 or so as a throw away sum, whereas
I'd be reluctant to risk £500 plus on one. YMMV.

Mobile phones seem to live in a wierd "value for money" world of their
own. If I spent £100 plus on a piece of technology I would expect it
to work pretty well and I certainly wouldn't regard it as "throw
away".

My phone hardware costs me typically £50 a year. Considering how
transformative it is, I regard that as amazing value for money.

Yes, but it doesn't appear to work particularly well! :-)

My current mobile cost £29 and has lasted me some years already. It
is pretty good at sending and receiving phone calls and sending and
receiving texts which is all I need it to do.



I use mine as a satnav and it presents Landranger maps showing your
location that are very useable on the ground, you can even download
sections where there is no mobile coverage. A lot of web sites now have
decent mobile versions too. I don't use it much as a camera but
occasionally it is useful, e.g. to photograph a VIN plate when you are
hunting for vehicle spares. But I didn't go to smart phones until they
dropped to near enough £100.