I've had my bike 10 years. How can the hardware fail on a bike? Throwing it off a cliff? Meanwhile, the laundry list of hardware issues I could list on my phone probably affects every component in the stack over my decade of owning various smartphones. Each dying due to some faulty hardware issue, such as the radio giving out and dropping calls or the jacks getting loose or various other issues.
My phone doesn't sit out in the sun/rain/snow at a bike rack and doesn't have any substantial moving parts.
I think I didn't articulate my point well. It's that complexity isn't a 1 to 1 mapping to reliability. There is plenty of complex equipment that fits your criteria. My pool pump is full of electronics, has moving parts, sits in inclement weather, and lasts for years. There is equipment that can sit near the combustion chamber of a rocket experiencing extreme g forces, pressure, and heat and survive. It can be engineered.
Phones tend to get pretty nice treatment compared to bikes. Bikes are constantly stepped on and rubbed against pavement.
Because if something goes wrong with your phone you probably won't be able to fix it. Compared to a bike where most anything can be repaired.
It's a single unit, you just replace it, like you would a broken gear. You can't fix a broken gear unless you weld it.
Idk, if you tried to use your phone as a bike I bet it would fail pretty quickly.
I don't get your argument. What I'm saying is that complexity isn't necessarily directly correlated to reliability.
Sure, but a hammer is both simpler and much more reliable than a phone. My point is that it is meaningless to compare items with completely different functions (I would say apples and oranges, but it is more like apples and rocks).