You're attempting to construct a notion of need separate from the empirical experience of people's concrete choices, but that isn't possible if you want to be scientific. If a person spends $400 on a phone instead of 32gb of ram, they need the phone more than the ram. If a company spends $400 on ram instead of on some other production good, they need the ram more than the other production good - they expect it to generate more revenue.

These two exchanges are not disconnected either: phone prices are affected by revenues of companies which use ram for production. And those revenues are determined by purchases of phones. The person demonstrates through their choice that the use of ram for an indirect purpose of making phones (however indirectly that might effect it) is more valuable to them than the direct use in their computer. The person is not excluded from "having" the ram in the most general sense: they have it indirectly because they benefit from its use in production whose products they value more than the direct use of ram. The person, along with all other consumers, participates in organizing production in the manner that best benefits them, according to their needs, which may not necessarily involve them directly owning the thing.