PDQ Mobile wrote: ... A busted mirror costs ?
A busted camera costs?
A mirror, unless physically broken, will last a very long time.
A camera and all its attendant paraphernalia?
I think this type of question is a central issue in the debate about "advances" in technology. Just because something is new and possible, it's not necessarily better. It's horses for courses. I'm in the midst of an ongoing problem at Thirdcrank Towers and part of this has involved repeated surveys of several underground rainwater drains. A camera can now achieve what would one have meant digging for a look. OTOH, if you can see something directly with your eyes, then a camera just adds complications.
Re the mirrors -vs- cameras debate, I'm not judging either way but a couple of extra points are that wing mirrors don't help fuel economy and when they are large - eg on some HGV's and buses, they can cause serious injury to pedestrians. It's a while since I ploughed through the descriptions of motorway accidents but people on the hard shoulder on the offside of their vehicle are particularly vulnerable to being hit by the mirrors of passing trucks. Not long after I had retired, I chanced upon the scene of a fatal crash in which a pedestrian was killed by the head-height mirror on a slowly-moving bus. That or similar crashes may be why around here at least, all bus mirrors have a flo-yellow case and mounting.