Cheap phone vs expensive phone

[harvey_43]

In my experience I used expensive phone like iphone 6s and cheap one Redmi note 5 and its really tough to say that cheap one is not good because i am still able to do all my daily task and as i mention the cheap one is easy to replace because you don't have to pay much for it and even if its got stolen you can easily buy new one and for a people who don't have high paid jobs or for student i think its best option to go for cheap mobile.Yes, i know lot of you guys disagree with me in term of feature and build quality but i want to say that at the end its result what matters if you can do your daily task on cheap mobile there is no point to go for expensive one.

But i would like to here from you guys that what you guys think?

 

[lxskllr]

My favorite phone purchase was my $40 Boost Kyocera. Everything about it sucks, but everything works well enough. It's amazing for $40. You couldn't get a walkman for that money back in the day.

I recently got a Galaxy J7 Perx, and I love the phone. Camera's a little meh, but fully competent, and the relatively low resolution display was a bit off putting at first, but after a few days, I hardly notice. Battery life's phenomenal. I suspect much of that is due to it not having to push ridiculous pixel density. It also has a removable battery, and expandable storage. All for ~$200

When you drop $500+ on a phone, little niggles can get under your skin; A dead pixel, less than perfect fit/finish, a few blurry pixels from the camera... Nothing that matters, but you spent real money, so imperfections are more bothersome. Contrast that to my $40 special. Everything works, and it's amazing that it does. It takes crappy pics with the potato cam, the monkey plastic screen gets scratches, and the mapping lags with gps, but everything works. I can tell what I took a picture of, a few scratches are no big deal, and the map gets me where I want to go. When I get there, I can screw around on the internet. All for $40! It's easy to overlook imperfections.

 

[shortylickens]

Nokia 2.
Its reasonably priced and very good. You dont always have to compromise.

 

[ankit3302]

I would also prefer cheap phones like redmi note 4 or 5 to iphones. These phones are quite user friendly and have all the features that are needed in a phone. Instead, iphones have certain restrictions. Also, there is no tension if phone is got stolen.

 

[Red Storm]

My smartphone is my primary computing device, so I prefer it be something high quality and fast performing. A top notch camera is very important to me, and that is the thing that almost always means expensive.

 

[dwayne mike]

It's not about price! its all about Features , Thier few phones which are giving more features then expensive phones as well as quality so go with quality not with price tag!

 

[Commodus]

I see value in both sides.

For me, my smartphone is important: it's my connection to work when I'm away, my main camera, my music player, a key part of my fitness routine, my navigation tool... darn straight I'm going to spend money to make it the best it can be.

At the same time, I'm keenly aware that there are many mid-range phones (and a few low-end phones) that will be more than enough for most people. The new Moto G6? Probably fine for most of the things people do. But, just as people don't buy the cheapest car that meets their basic needs, you shouldn't feel guilty about buying a phone that's more powerful than this.

 

[Rifter]

After replacing my S7 edge, due to shattered screen, with a Xiaomi Redmi Note 5 Pro i can say that the cheaper phones(paid $315 Canadian for it) are more than useable.

Ive noticed no slowdowns or lag on it, its got a great camera, comparable to my S7e. Screen is alright, not Samsung quality but more than usable. Only thing i really miss is wireless charging.

I dont see myself going back to $1000+ flagship phones anytime soon.

 

[PuppettMaster001]

Replaced my S7 Edge last week due to a shattered camera with a Huawei Mate SE and was surprised with the performance of this $220 phone. No slowdowns whatsoever, decent camera, and good build quality. The only thing that is missing is are some of my carrier specific features such as Wifi Calling. It will be really hard spending money on a high end phone again.

 

[sweenish]

I think that if you plan on keeping a phone for awhile (2+ years), an expensive phone has an edge for me. More important than price, as mentioned, are features. And a feature I rely on for long term ownership is the ability to keep my phone up to date with custom ROMs. For my wife, it's build quality, and you just don't get that long-term amazing build quality in cheaper phones. Our N5's are a testament to that.

OnePlus does a pretty good job these days of walking the line between all worlds in this debate. There's still something I don't quite like about them. Maybe the bad taste from their early days hasn't completely washed out yet, or the fact that I know their camera will never measure up to a Pixel or other high-end phones (I know the cameras are good, but never top three good). A top tier camera is important for me (I need all the help I can get, and Google's algorithms are fantastic helpers).

 

[mohit9206]

Cheap phones have been great since like 2013 if you don't need a great camera. The OG Moto G showed that you can have a great experience in a $200 phone and its even more true now. Now you get SD636 in $200 phones,what more do you need? Cameras still don't compare to flagships but if you need a great camera and flagship specs you still have some great cheap options like Honor 10.

 

[Raduque]

Cheap phones are good for burners or not caring about the phone.

I don't need burners and I take good care of my pocket computers, so I buy flagships. I buy them for performance and features.

 

[kpkp]

In this day and age there is a solid case to be made that the mid-rangers offer a better user experience for a significant number of customers as shown in this video.

The mid-rangers are more durable:

• simpler designs, bigger bezels, more durable materials (Alu, plastic vs. glass and highly exposed curved glass)
• bigger battery extends device life before needing to repair or replace
• while not being as pleasant to the eyes LCD displays offer better longevity over OLED without degradation
• cheaper replacement components and simpler repairs

The mid-rangers aren't form over function (while slightly bigger/thicker, they offer):

• bigger batteries
• mr. Jack
• ir balsters
• avoid controversial notches

The price:

• Costing from as little as 20% of the current flagships, offer a more worry free day to day handeling

While the Chinese are starting to figure out cameras, they still remain the main differentiation point between this categories.

 

[lehtv]

Expensive phones, if paid by employer .

Cheap phones, if paid by me. Although 32GB internal storage is minimum. 16GB doesn't cut it and using an SD card is a PITA.

 

[Belkov]

When you drop $500+ on a phone, little niggles can get under your skin; A dead pixel, less than perfect fit/finish, a few blurry pixels from the camera... Nothing that matters, but you spent real money, so imperfections are more bothersome.

^This.

and

I used htc one m7, replaced by m8 (still is being used by my dad), then m9. My m9 last too long, but its screen became unresponsive in some places, so i decided to replace it at last. But the flagships are too expensive these days and high-end mid-rangers are actually almost in the flagship territory. I was a Nokia fan back in the symbian times, so one smartphone popped up - Nokia 7 plus. It has everything you need on daily bases and even more - big battery and android one. And costs me 350$ compared with, lets say, 769$ for Samsung Galaxy S9. I am agree that S9 has pros over n7+, but do they worth the double price?

N7+ is just one example, but there are a lot of cheap phones with great specs out there.

 

[Raduque]

Nokia 7 plus. It has everything you need on daily bases and even more - big battery and android one.

Not a bad device. uSD card slot, 64gb storage, 4gb ram, big screen (though low resolution which means a low pixel density, might not look crisp), 3800mAh battery and an OK SoC. Only issue I see with it is the limited bleh OS (Couldn't pay me to use Android One). It'd have to be $60-80 cheaper for me to compromise from my Note 8 though.

I agree with you that 90% of people would be just fine with it though!

Edit: It looks like you can only get it on Amazon, and it doesn't offer 100% compatibility with even all the US GSM carriers. If I could get it at Best Buy for $300, with full support for T-Mobile and AT&T, I'd probably buy it tomorrow.

 

[Belkov]

Only issue I see with it is the limited bleh OS (Couldn't pay me to use Android One). It'd have to be $60-80 cheaper for me to compromise from my Note 8 though.

There is an option just for you - a version with Nokia's OS and this version even comes with 6gb of RAM...

But enough with this phone. I had enough flagships to understand that i actually don't need so high end devices. And what lxskllr said - all of the flagship devices i had used had some imperfections. Those imperfections had made me crazy - literally.

Now i really don't care so much. I'm using a reasonobly cheaper device and i am pleased.

 

[Zaap]

Like others have said, price doesn't matter to me so much as the features I want.

Highest possible camera quality, large storage, wacom pen features, excellent screen etc is much more important to me than a questionably small amount of money for a cheaper device with lackluster features.

Keep in mind many get higher end devices at a discount (my Note 8 minus $425 trade in) and probably will sell the for a few hundred more when the time comes.

A 'cheaper' device with all that factored in just wouldn't suit me personally.

It's great to me that there are cheaper devices, but personally using most of them wouldn't suit me. Camera alone would be a dealbreaker for most. Add in all the other things I'd miss and the (actually smaller than you'd think) difference in cost isn't anywhere near worth it just to basically torture myself!

 

[Raduque]

There is an option just for you - a version with Nokia's OS and this version even comes with 6gb of RAM...

Hah, well, it's not just Android One keeping me off that device - I use Secure Folder, Samsung Pay (MST!) and the S-Pen daily. I can probably live without the S-Pen, but not the other two! Plus Samsung OLED displays are a joy to look at.

 

[pcgeek11]

Got a cheap $120 unlocked pure Android MOTO G4 and it is great for me. I'm not paying hundreds of dollars for something that does the same thing.

 

[dark zero]

Nokia 7 Plus or Redmi Note 5 Pro Taiwan Version. Near all perfect on both devices.

 

[spdfreak]

I struggled with this myself but I think the best of both worlds is a 1yr old used flagship phone. I was going to buy a moto G new for about 225.00 but ended up buying a 6 mo old LG G6 for 225.00 that still had some warranty left. I was replacing a Nokia Icon and really needed a great camera. Took a while searching ebay and CL but this phone has been great. You just have to be patient...

 

[rchunter]

I don't buy cheap phones. I upgrade about every other year. Right now i'm running S9+. Probably won't buy another one till S11 or something similar.

 

[Euro_Bucks]

Got a cheap $120 phone from Redmi Note 4X from Xiaomi. 3gb ram 32gb rom. That's all I ever need.

 

[Belkov]

Hah, well, it's not just Android One keeping me off that device - I use Secure Folder, Samsung Pay (MST!) and the S-Pen daily. I can probably live without the S-Pen, but not the other two! Plus Samsung OLED displays are a joy to look at.

I was kidding.

Well, i would buy a flagship if it will give me a lot more for the extra cash, but it is not reasonable for me - the only thing i miss in my current phone is stereo speakers and, actually, it would be nice to have water and dust resistance, but it is a not deal breaker for its price.