Slashdot Mirror
Why Cheap Smartphones Are Going To Upset the Industry
An anonymous reader writes "Just when people got used to good smartphones costing $200 with a 2-year contract, they also started to realize that those 2-year contracts were bad news. Still, it's often more palatable than fronting $600 for good, new hardware. But that's starting to change. Cell phone internals are getting cheap enough that prices for capable devices have been creeping downward below $200 without a contract. We ran into something similar with the PC industry some years back — previous-gen chips had no trouble running next-gen software (excluding games with bleeding-edge graphics), and so the impetus to keep getting the latest-and-greatest hardware disappeared for a lot of people. That revolution is underway now for smartphones, and it's going to shake things up for everybody, including Apple and Samsung. But the biggest effects will be felt in the developing world: '[F]or a vast number of people in a vast number of countries, the cheap handset will be the first screen, and the only screen. Their primary interface with the world. A way of connecting to the Internet where there are no telephone lines or coaxial cables or even electricity. In nations without subsidized cell phone contracts or access to consumer credit, the $50-and-you-own-it handset is going to be transformative.'"
I would not be surprised in the least to find voice over internet protocol (VOIP) completely taking over once everyone has access to this technology.
Who needs a cellphone carrier if they have access to the internet?
The providers as we know them now may go back to selling buggy-whips for all I know...
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
Where people are still dumb enough to buy phones on contract. Every other country, civilized or not, the people pay for the phone and buy the service they need
A way of connecting to the Internet where there are no telephone lines or coaxial cables or even electricity.
What the hell is going to power the phones then? I think someone may be getting a little carried away with themselves
Watch those corners
Except in places where data is limited to a fault, ie anywhere that isn't urban america and/or some other afluent cities (like London). Same reason why SDCards aren't going to die for android, as much as google might want you to stream your music it just isn't possible and a sub 2gig plan. Even then it's still stupid. So long as there are stupid caps to the level of data that companies will give people nothing like this will take off. Take my plan for example. I live in Australia and all the plans from every comapny around $30AUS a month have about 200-400 MB worht of data. to get anything worth while you have to go up to $60 a month which for a lot of people isn't something they can do. It's similarly shitty in a lot of other countries too
While I can't comment on the third world in general, I saw a lot of solar cell setups for charging cell phones in South Sudan - people even ran solar charging as a business; a solar panel, some car batteries, a black box of electronics and 3 to 5 South Sudanese pound for a full charge.
Also saw plenty of cell towers with solar panels and battery banks, with diesel generators for backup. Not as clean or tidy as plugging into the grid, granted... but it works. Was a life line for me for a year spent down there, and twice so for the people who lives their whole life there.
Just because you can't plug something into a national grid, don't mean you can't get power... often cheaper and more reliable than the grid too - at least in Juba.
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.
Clue up google. Dont be daft dick heads.
Unless you give me a 64g nexus phone thats $299, give me a mobile with 3 microSD slots.
1 for video
1 for photo
1 for apps/data.
Your 100% wireless internet is still 15 years off.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
What else, precisely, were you expecting?
That we all continue to pay for the latest-and-greatest no matter what for ever and ever? Smartphones are plateauing, like any other technology. They are now so ubiquitous that there's little point spending a fortune for something that can do the same, but "slightly faster" or with more megapixels, or whatever.
Sure, there are evolutions, and merges of technology, and lots of new developments still to come but if the phones don't have something new, then they are all just the same as each other, give or take a few statistics here or there.
Smartphones beat out ordinary mobile phones, that's for sure, but it was a long while coming. Tablets are in the same place at the moment - they are powerful enough to run almost anything and so there's little to distinguish them except for company name and some random technical specifications.
Welcome to the era of ubiquitous computing, where my mobile phone can plot a course across Europe, suck down traffic data and tell people on Facebook when I'm going to arrive quicker than I could do it myself on a full PC. While also handling all my calls, monitoring my car engine, checking my Exchange accounts, etc.
The problem we have now is not pricing - the cost of something going down is rarely a problem for the consumers or the manufacturers and their suppliers. The problem we have now is what comes next? We all have Turing-capable machines that run at stupendous speeds, and most of us actually have several. The question is how do you design your services to take account of this - TV streaming, etc. is still in its infancy and pretty much in denial at the moment.
... it is just that the phone networks don't want you to have them.
I have a 5", quad core, 2GB RAM, 32GB Flash smart phone from Chinavasion. It is much like a Samsung S4, and cost US$250. Unlocked as a standard feature, and with dual SIM, Took five days to from order to doorstep. Plugged in my work SIM and my own SIM and gave back a my work's S3.
A cheap 4" can be had for under $70.
In the US anyway, Google/Motorola has been raising the bar on what's possible with inexpensive smartphones. I have a Moto G targeted to the Boost no-contract plan for which I paid $80, out the door. It has a decent (if non-removable) battery, excellent screen of a decent size, runs KitKat/Dual-Core/1GB RAM, and is even waterproof (plenty of YouTube videos showing the phone functioning in a bowl of water.) The next version (coming out soon) will add a much-needed MicroSD slot and LTE. The only significant con is the camera, which is pretty mediocre (but what do you expect for that price?)
The CDMA one I bought was easily flashed over to PagePlus/Verizon (Boost inexplicably did not request Moto permanently lock the bootloader; you can obtain a bootloader unlock code for free from Moto.) The GSM version is sold unlocked directly by Google for all of $180; the 4G will be $220.
And they just announced the Moto E; a slightly lower-spec phone for only a puny $130.
There's rampant speculation if Lenovo will continue this trend of well-spec'd cheap phones. The consensus seems to be no, given how Lenovo actually wants to make money on the purchase, and nobody thinks Google has any kind of usable margin on these superb value-priced phones.
WIth a cellphone you can find out how to (profitably) make "pure water" (Google is your friend). West Africa is extremely capitalist: you have to do it yourself. The starving millions are starving through lack of cellphones - they are an essential business tool: people with cellphones are not starving.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
Except they really were not $200. It's just that people are too stupid to figure out the true cost.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Transformative? Every time some semi alcoholic blogging 'communications major' from Vassar or some such place wanders into the mall and discovers that last year's models can be had, from a third party kiosk for near-free they immediately whip out their own brand new iPhone to proclaim a Golden Age is Upon Us.
Cheap smartphones have been around for years and years you retard. The problem is the NETWORK.
Can I go on record as giving not one single fuck if the "industry" is "upset"?
You want upset? Talk to my wife when she finds out I plan to spend my afternoon watching the Blackhawks, napping on the couch and playing Dark Souls II.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I read it as "FCC or foreign counterparts". I'd like to see concrete examples of relevant differences in radio communication regulations between the United States and the subsaharan countries in question.
Map makers have messed up the world for years. Most maps distort the actual size of the continents. All anyone would have to remember is the old "Asia, AFRICA, North America, South America, Antarctica, Europe, Australia. Africa ranks behind Asia for a reason...but years of kids looking at maps, they most of the time show North America larger than Africa. that photo you posted, puts it in realistic perspective.
Map makers have messed up the world for years...but years of kids looking at maps, ...
I am extremely skeptical of the explanation that "map makers" cause geographical ignorance. I think it is far more likely that people who can't find their own country on the map, simply don't study maps at all, and have no interest in doing so.
I work in the industry. If the industry is upset, there is a good chance of me being upset :)
You have been able to get"free" or $59 or $99 smartphones for the past 5 years.
There is nothing at all new about this, they were last year models or strip down models. EXACTLY what they are proposing.
Next up on Slashdot we discuss something from 5 years ago as if it is going to happen soon!
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I'm looking at these seriously. No contract- $50 a month for "unlimited"* calls, text, data.
The data is slowed after some amount.
That's $50 a month savings for me. So $500 a year (taking out the cost of replacing the phone every 2 years). $5000 per 10 years. That's a couple nice vacations or a fourth of a new car.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
There's also a good chance of you finding a better job with a new company that doesn't have a monopsony over hiring.
Or it could cause your company to have to develop new innovative products, which could be very good for you.
See, the thing is, if you're going to buy into the notion of a consumer-based, "free market" economy, you've got to see this kind of "creative destruction" as a positive. Personally, I see it all as a big dodge designed to redistribute wealth upwards, but that's a different discussion.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Map makers have messed up the world for years. Most maps distort the actual size of the continents.
Use a globe.
I used to be one of those people who had to have the latest flagship phone on a 2 year plan. Then I wised up, realized I could buy a $200 phone with a quad core cpu and plenty of storage via removable SD card, and pay $50 a month for service. My current moto android running kit kat is every bit as good as the latest iOS device and Samsung flagship, and I paid half the price. I think we are about to see a huge drop in price as more people come to the realization that many of the features on flagship phones these days are gimmicks that only 1% of users with actually take advantage of.
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -Carl Sagan
It's only once the "$50 w/o contract" smartphone appears in first-world countries things start getting interesting.
That because they use a projection where you can draw straight lines on the map and use it for navigation. Yes this distorts sizes but lets be honest here the reason for the popularity of the Mercator projection is that maps are mostly used for navigation.
If you want to get a real feel for what the world looks like get a globe. I hear they are popular presents for children.
The Mechanical Universe: http://www.learner.org/resourc...
The World of Chemistry : http://www.learner.org/resourc...
Not sure how they look on a cell phone screen, but they were both informative on regular TV and laptop screens. I watched both for fun twenty years ago (post college), and also the one on chemistry with my kid a few years back (the physics one was not as engaging though). I liked being able to rewind them to review some complex issue several times. They are not the same as doing hands-on lab exercises though.
There is also the Khan Academy now, which also has a supportive community and online problem sets in some areas. So, I'd say good things are possible. Of course, so much of schooling is boring if it is not what you want to be doing at the time. That's part of why I prefer learned-directed education as much as possible, including via homeschooling/unschooling.
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
...or some other cryptocurrency. As these low-cost screens come on in the developing world, those users will want access to the modern, internationally-capable fee-free (very nearly) monetary system represented by cryptocurrencies. This may make 1st-world debate about the good or evil of bitcoin (and its ilk) largely irrelevant.
In President Clinton's case, the (D) may have stood for DINOSAUR: Democrat in name only, sorry-ass undercover Republican.
It's a sweet phone that a Macophile friend of mine said "It's a little slower than my 4S, but it seems easier to use..."
Maybe it's now "rehash for nerds"?
Lots of the articles submitted to Slashdot are linking to blog posts or other news outlets that are themselves linking to the "real" article already. So this is nothing new.
Lets get real. A $200 phone in a contract is a ripoff. By the time you have finished the contact, in reality you might have paid for your phone between $1000 to $2000. Better buy a new one without a fixed contract and use it with a cheap operator/plan.
http://www.amazon.com/ZTE-Vale...
Android 4.1.1 (yea! heartbleed vulnerable!). $50. Verizon network.
With Tracfone offering Android phones you know the time of cheap smartphones has come. They also have BYOP now.