[heroiccocoa]

But phones are manufactured regardless, so why not let the people who are currently in the market for a new device get something current? The yearly release cycle isn't meant to be kept up with every year, in fact I think that that notion is so hilariously out of touch basically everywhere except the US (and a small international wealthy elite elsewhere) that it would be ridiculed. Remember, the global median per-capita household income is only $2,920 per year. That's not "the poor", that's the median. 99% of the world would never have even considered buying an iPhone 15 or similar after having an iPhone 14, let alone feel pressured to do so.

[jowea]

There's new cars each year, but hardly anyone is switching yearly, right?

[benknight87]

This is a great point, further evidenced by the fact that past years models remain on sale. Apple still sells iPhone 13 and Google still sells Pixel 6a.

[11mariom]

Is it? New generations are not released every year. It takes 5-8 years to show something new. In the middle of it there is facelifting (sometimes smaller, sometimes bigger). But I wouldn't say that one, particular model of car have new version each year.

There is no reason to release flagship phones each year.

[mattmaroon]

I love it when people say "there's no reason to do x" where x is a thing that the world's biggest companies spend billions of dollars doing. There are lots of reasons, you just don't like them.

The car release cycle is pretty much exactly what flagship phones do too. They get a major redesign every few years with incremental improvements in between.

The biggest reason is obvious: if you didn't your competitors would and they'd eat your lunch. Modern mobile devices are only 15 yrs old, they're where PCs were in 1995. I'm already seeing people who used to upgrade every two years switch to 3, and before you know it that will climb to 4, 5, etc. as the tech matures. In 1997 your PC was obsolete after two years, now they're fine a decade later, and phones will get there too.

[Gigachad]

Because if someone is looking to buy a new phone and they see the pixel is 3 years old while the Samsung is 3 months old and 5% faster, you’re going to buy the Samsung.

So every maker has to have the best they have on sale at all times.

[kimbernator]

And with cars, pretty much all parts/accessories will work for any "model" in that 5-8 year window. Phones are not like this.

[stickfigure]

I've been consistently upgrading every 3 years since the Nexus days and I really don't think I'm missing anything. With trade-in, it ends up being something like $50/yr (I always go for the budget versions). Unless you're already sitting on FU money, I don't understand why anyone would spend more.

[ccooffee]

> Unless you're already sitting on FU money, I don't understand why anyone would spend more [than $50/yr on phone upgrades].

Among the people I know, there's more people living paycheck to paycheck and getting annual phone upgrades than people with FU money doing upgrades. That said, the percentage of FU money upgraders is higher than the percentage of paycheck-to-paycheck upgraders.

Google/Samsung/Apple/etc may be making more total money from the not-well-off than the well-off, at least thinking about people I know.

[tyre]

There's a point at which something like a new smartphone isn't a status symbol anymore. Among wealthier people, having an iPhone 11 isn't less of a signal than a day one iPhone 15.

[devoutsalsa]

I like to get a nice laptop and phone because I spend so much time on them. An iPhone is worth it for me, as I like a predictably good camera. Before I went iPhone, I had a Pixel 3a, and it took perfectly fine pictures. I just like the iPhone cameras more, although I’m starting to get a little jealous of the better zoom capabilities on some Samsung phone cameras I’ve seen recently. Lately I’ve been upgrading every two years, but every three would also be fine.