Google CEO Says Next Wave Of Affordable Smartphones Should Cost $30 (phandroid.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Google started the Android One program to get affordable smartphones into all corners of the globe. Those devices cost around $100, which is very good for an up-to-date device. However, Google CEO Sundar Pichai doesn't think $100 is good enough. Even $50 is too much. His goal is $30. "The right price point for smartphones in India is $30, and pursuing high-quality smartphones at the price point will unlock it even more." ndia currently has the largest base of Android users, and most of those users have phones that cost less than $150. Pichai went on to say that cheaper devices are only part of the solution. They also need services that can run reliably on "flaky" networks. He says Google is working on making more services adapt to slow internet.

Comments

Follow the leader...

[Hydrian]

This coming from the company that taking away their affordable mid-ranged phones and has only released an expensive high end phone. Google needs to lead... not order.

Easily done

[BarbaraHudson]

He says Google is working on making more services adapt to slow internet.

Ad-free solves 90%+ of the bandwidth problem for many uses. And killing off the financial viability of youtube and facebook is a great idea. I'd be happy to pay $10 a month for 1 gig of ad-free, graphics-free, css and javascript free internet.

Re:Easily done

[BarbaraHudson]

The original web was just fine with no javascript, no css, and no "let's try to make html into a page layout language and let's turn the web browser from an html document viewer into an application platform."

Javascript is a mistake, same as CSS. Just look around, you'll see how bad things have gotten if you take off the rose-colored glasses.

Text messages have no problem with usability, even though they're limited to plain text and the occasional image. Sure a heck of a lot better than twitter.

Forums such as slashdot could easily be replaced by bringing back usenet. Threading discussions were around long before the web. So were text-only BBSes that were actually more secure than anything you'll see nowadays on the web. 99% of the web today is shit - and that's if you're being optimistic.

Re:OK

[Anonymous Coward]

There are 2 problems:

#1 Too many players are involved in approving updates for Android. Google first releases updates, then the manufacturer has to approve and push the updates, then the service provider has to approve and push the updates. Usually the manufacturer or service provider don't do this, would rather you purchase a new phone then to get the latest bell ans whistles from a phone you already paid for.

#2 The profit for most Android smartphones is so razer thin due to competition, that releasing updates eats in to whatever small profit margin they make on those devices. Remember you cannot just release the patch that google releases, you need to test it to see if works with all your pre-installed crapware and your loader , your hardware. And if it does not you need to pay somebody to re-write the software and test all over again. By the time you are done, there is an even more recent version that is out and the process starts all over again.

It doesn't matter if it's $30 or $300

[OrangeTide]

I should be able to get software updates for a phone for at least 10 years before I have to replace it. That it costs $300 is not so big of a deal if I'm not buying a replacement every 2 years.