Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Motorola Looks at Dirt-Cheap Smartphones Again, Launches Moto C and Moto C Plus (motorola.com)

Posted by msmash on from the dirt-cheap-smartphones dept.

We have seen over hundreds of manufacturers launch over thousands of smartphone models in the past three years. One of the remarkable smartphones, aimed at those who aren't planning to break a bank for it, has been Motorola's Moto E. Priced at $129, unlocked, without a contract, the handset was immensely popular in the developing markets. It changed the smartphone ecosystem at places like Indonesia and India, pushing several other Android OEMs to step up their game -- and they did. Three years later, after a series of "overpriced" phones, Motorola is attempting to break the affordable smartphone market again. From a report on CNET: The most important thing to know about the Moto C and C Plus, it seems, is that the phones are cheap. Like, really cheap. Motorola's Moto C starts at 89 euros (which converts to $98), and the more advanced C Plus begins at 119 euros (that coverts to $131). As for the specs, the Moto C sports a 5-inch display (854x480 pixel-resolution), 5-megapixel rear camera, 2-megapixel front-facing camera with flash, 1.3GHz quad-core processor (unspecified model), 4G support, 2,350mAh removable battery, 8GB storage, 1GB RAM, and support for two-SIM cards. The handsets run Android 7.0.

55 comments

  1. Why so large? by Daetrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Even the super-cheap phones are 5" or larger these days? I know hoping for a premium phone that's smaller than that is probably unrealistic at this point, but you'd think a smaller phone would be a reasonable "sacrifice" that people looking to save money would be willing to make.

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:Why so large? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      $120 isn't really the "super-cheap" class. There's plenty of Android phones that cost less than $50, and that's been true for years now.

    2. Re:Why so large? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Walmart sells a sub-$10 Android phone.

    3. Re: Why so large? by corychristison · · Score: 1

      Basic supply and demand.

      The majority of people want bigger screens, so more bigger screens are manufactured. The manufacturing processes get as streamlined as possible, thud allowing the manufacturer to reduce the price further. When OEMs come looking for price lists at X volume, the screens that are manufactured at much higher volume comes in cheaper. Motorola sees that and builds their phone with that, as it can hit its desired price point and stil tout a 5+" screen just like the "Expensive" models.

    4. Re:Why so large? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because I've had a cheap 4" 800x480 one, which is mostly used for nothing at all (no SIM card in it) and an ancillary task I won't describe.
      Typing on the virtual keyboard is a bit too hard and covers just a bit too much area as well i.e. to log in on an automatic wifi proxy page, the keyboard hovers on top of most of the "submit" button.

      So, it stands to reason that a 5" 16/9 480p display ought to be easier to use, for the intended computer-like function which are the reason to buy such an expensive (89 euros!) phone in the first place.
      Because if you're poor or money conscious, you can't afford to buy something that almost works properly.

      In particular, many will be in situations (temporary or not) where this is the only thing they have to browse the web. I know the 4" phone was physically painful (and also gave me tinnitus)

    5. Re:Why so large? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sony has the compact series which has the same hardware as the premium version with a 4.6" screen.
      I own the Z5C, but cannot recommend it simply because the software Sony provides is crappy!! :-(

  2. "Priced at $129, unlocked" by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

    Sorry, try harder, my work phone cost 73gbp = $77 adjusted for vat (new phone no contract, no subsidy). It's 5.5 inch screen, quad core, 2gb ram and subjectively runs really fast, google maps is really snappy with it. The screen is very bright and the battery life is excellent.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:"Priced at $129, unlocked" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      £60 (inc postage from China), MT6735M chipset, four core, 4G, Android 5.1 when I bought it, now Android 6. Doogee X5 Pro.

    2. Re:"Priced at $129, unlocked" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moto E, Moto G are or were listed on the supported list for CyanogenMod. That's a very short list in fact!
      If this phone get software updates for a while, first party and/or third party, this would put it in a select category along a handful $700 / $800 phones and similar, like Galaxy S series, Nexus, Sony Experia Z etc., and a shorter handful of phones under $300 or $200.

      Because that's how good software support is on Android.
      If the security updates are timely enough, it will then reasonably safe to put a SIM card in that phone or to use the built-in Wifi.

    3. Re:"Priced at $129, unlocked" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't just post what you paid for it, we want to read the specification so we can judge if it is a fair comparison.

      I got myself a Xiomi Redmi 3S back when it was down in the $99-range.
      Seems to be a bit more expensive now for whatever reason. 5.0 inch screen, 3gb ram and 4.1Ah battery makes it pretty neat.
      Ideally I would have wanted a smaller phone and would gladly have traded some ram for it, but whatever. It still felt like I got a lot for the money.

  3. Alibaba by fluffernutter · · Score: 3, Informative

    How is this dirt cheap? Alibaba has Android phones for $60.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:Alibaba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      and Amazon has Tracphones with Android for $9. Of course you gotta get a $35 plan to use it, but still, it's damn cheap.

    2. Re:Alibaba by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Your local grocery store has Android phones for $20. $60 is the most I've ever paid for a smartphone.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    3. Re:Alibaba by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      From what I have seen you have to pay for the plan even to be able to buy it for that $9. Do they sell phones for that little that you can use for Android apps on wifi without a plan?

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:Alibaba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VERIZON, of all places, you can get a really super cheap cell phone for around $40-50 US.. *IN THE U.S.*, and without extending or re-upping your contract for two more, painful, years. it does have a smaller screen (a plus for many), stellar security track record compared to the more expensive competition, and kick-ass battery life - 1 to 2 weeks or more between charges depending on usage.

      it's called a FLIP PHONE. and THEY ARE AWESOME.

    5. Re: Alibaba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great story grandpa! Hey, remember when a bowl of soup cost a nickel?

    6. Re: Alibaba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is your grandpa and I don't remember a bowl of soup ever costing a nickel, but I do remember when your grandmother was trying to sell blowjobs for a nickel each and there were no takers.

    7. Re:Alibaba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is that Motorola's budget phones tend to have more functionality and quality than phones four times the price.

    8. Re:Alibaba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is that it isn't $20. It's a lot more than that but with the cost hidden in a mandatory plan.
      "It's completely free as long as you pay the monthly fee of $10!" isn't really free.

      Post a link or what the cost is without the plan. Otherwise it isn't really a fair comparison.
      You can get flagship phones for "free" as long as you sign up for a really crappy plan.

  4. Samsung J1 by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    Its $150 CDN https://www.freedommobile.ca/p... to buy out right and works like a charm. Before I realized how stupid I Was I'd spend 400+ on phones, after the Moto E and J1 I realized there's no fucking need to spend $$$'s on something that sits in my pocket.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  5. Confused...I got my daughter a G4 play for Xmas... by gosand · · Score: 1

    Display. 5.00-inch.
            Processor. 1.2GHz quad-core.
            Front Camera. 5-megapixel.
            Resolution. 720x1280 pixels.
            RAM. 2GB.
            OS. Android 6.0.1.
            Storage. 16GB.
            Rear Camera. 8-megapixel

    It was $99 on Amazon, because it sports their ads on the lock screen. The ad-free version was $50 more.
    I bought my BLU Life One X a year ago for $150. Moto's new phones may be cheap, but not news-worthy cheap.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  6. That's not cheap. by ubergeek65536 · · Score: 1

    I bought a brand new unlocked phone 6 months ago with Android 6, 5" 1080p screen, 8MP camera, 16GB flash, 1GB of RAM, dual sim, quad core phone for $89.

  7. That's not cheap at all! by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    I get a free hand-me-down smartphone every few years from my uncle!

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:That's not cheap at all! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn, my uncle only gives me hand jobs.

    2. Re:That's not cheap at all! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I pity you. Mine gives me blow jobs.

  8. I know the name of the next version by olsmeister · · Score: 2

    The Moto C Plus Plus!

  9. What about Android One by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    Will cheap Android One phones compete with this? You can already get decent Android phones for about $250. Not flagship, but some people are happy with them.

    Will these new Moto phones be significantly more durable than a smartphone?

    To repeat a joke I made up and told some days back:

    Some say you can throw a classic Nokia 3310 at a brick wall and it will be undamaged.
    But it's not true. There are known cases of damage where you can see chips or nicks in the brick wall.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    1. Re:What about Android One by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      I have a Moto G 2nd in a Ringke Slim case, and I have thrown it around and generally abused it and it's still working great. Motorola's hardware isn't as spectacular as it was way back in the way back, when you could bludgeon someone to death with a 2-way radio and then call for backup, but it's still significantly better than average.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. That's "cheap"? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

    The Blu R1 HD costs around $110 without subsidies ($60 with Amazon's subsidy) and has a 720P screen and 2G of RAM (probably beats it on the other specs too.) Alcatel has similar phones in the same price range. This Motorola has a 2007 era screen resolution and 1G of RAM?

    Sounds distinctly unimpressive to me. Plus Motorola does sell cheaper phones right now in the same ballpark pricewise. There has to be more to it than "This is what Motorola thinks a cheap phone should be".

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:That's "cheap"? by SpammersAreScum · · Score: 1

      Well, this one has dual-sim and Android 7. How much that's worth of course depends on the buyer.

  11. We're getting close to good enough by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    I've got a Blu HD R1 from Amazon. I put up with the ads so I got it for $60. The Bluetooth/WiFi suck though. But it's 4G is fine and the phone is fast enough for anything short of fancy 3D games.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  12. Your cheaper phone citations miss the point by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Motorola builds hardware which is not garbage. My problem with this device is the RAM. Android in 1GB is no. I'll pay another twenty bucks or so to get another GB in there.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Your cheaper phone citations miss the point by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      "Garbage" hardware will last most users more years than they plan to keep the phone.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    2. Re:Your cheaper phone citations miss the point by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "Garbage" hardware will last most users more years than they plan to keep the phone.

      Whether it keeps working eternally or not is of little concern to me. I just don't want to have problems with it while I'm actually using it. Then the device gets a second life doing some other job, which also depends on it not being a POS.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  13. I already hate myself for doing this by drew_kime · · Score: 1

    We have seen over hundreds of manufacturers launch over thousands of smartphone models ...

    "Over hundreds" ... is that thousands? And does "over thousands" mean millions?

    What did you think you were trying to say here?

    --
    Nope, no sig
  14. Smartphone prices are artificial by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    Smartphone prices are artificial anyway. No one can tell me that 64gb of Memory cost 250 Euros.

    I'm still waiting for the 5.5 " Stock Android Phone with a feasible 8 core CPU, 128gb of storage for 250 Euros. Perhaps in a Generation or two.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Smartphone prices are artificial by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1
      Xiaomi already has that price point sewn up, mostly hexa-core though.

      $115.99 Redmi 4X 4G
      $169.03 Redmi 4 4G
      $169.99 Redmi Note 4X 4G
      $203.47 Redmi Note 4 4G

      Although Lenovo's Moto G5/G5 Plus is one the best North American compatible devices I've seen in the $250 - $350 price range.

    2. Re:Smartphone prices are artificial by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for the 5.5 " Stock Android Phone with a feasible 8 core CPU, 128gb of storage for 250 Euros. Perhaps in a Generation or two.

      Also needs 8GB (or more) of RAM if you're going to make meaningful use out of all those cores. I'd very much like the same thing, though.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Smartphone prices are artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need a phone that prioritize flash storage, for that 64 GB will be faster and reliable, and for the phone not crapping itself a large RAM size such as 3GB and higher might be useful.

      Prioritize, so this is paired with a lowish end SoC. There exist such with a quad core A53 on 28nm that are recent, and TSMC's 22nm planar is a refinement that will allow even better such "low end" SoC that does what's needed.
      IPS display is what's needed to not make eyes bleed as I witness between two low end phones, one Android with TN and one Windows 8.1 with a much better panel. And so "low end" (but not really) is 1280x720 5". This both has a high pixel density and doesn't waste bandwith, battery use and GPU operations as much as higher pixeled ones.

      Then I wish for USB-on-the-go to be supported, I returned a Cyanogen phone because of that, without opening it. If a PC from 1999 can read a USB hard drive of two terabytes, I am sure a supposedly high tech product can.

      Then "Stock Android" isn't that good anyway. This is nothing less than 1990s Microsoft. Why do I want a Google search bar that can't be changed to something else? What is all that google ware? So don't forget to support something freer like Lignage and Sailfish, because I don't want to be treated like animals and criminals.

  15. Runs, really? by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1

    1GB RAM, and support for two-SIM cards. The handsets run Android 7.0

    Runs? More like crawls Android 7.0.

  16. Also by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1
    At this price Motorola totally sucks. Consider Xiaomi Redmi 4A (can be bought for $90):
    • RAM: 2GB
    • ROM: 16GB
    • Display: 5" HD (720x1280)
    • Battery: 3120 mAh
    • Rear camera: 13Mp

    I.e. better in every aspect.

    1. Re:Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are other phones in the price range with better specs.

      LG Harmony is supposed to be around $99 - it has 2GB of RAM, 720p screen, max 256 gb external SD card.

      There's also the Galaxy Express Prime which is similar (not on Android 7.0, though).

    2. Re:Also by zdzichu · · Score: 1

      > RAM: 2GB
      > ROM: 16GB

      I don't think you understand those acronyms.

      --
      :wq
    3. Re:Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you should shut the fuck up because the industry has been calling internal flash storage "ROM" for years and the person your replied to is correct. Don't be so smug about the things you haven't had the time to grasp.

    4. Re:Also by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      LG Harmony is supposed to be around $99 - it has 2GB of RAM, 720p screen, max 256 gb external SD card.

      Yes, but it's made by LG. Every time I buy something made by LG I regret it. It doesn't matter if it's consumer electronics like a TV or computer components like optical drives, it's always hot garbage. I haven't actually used anything from Xiaomi so I'm really not qualified to comment on whether their build quality rivals Motorola's, but I am damned sure that LG's doesn't.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. Won't get updates. Not buying moto again. by jensend · · Score: 2

    Sure, it's cheap. The thing is, they're counting on making you buy a new phone with every single Android update.

    I have a 2015 Moto G. I got it partially because I thought Motorola, having touted an 18-month support + update policy, would be better about updates than most of their competitors. But they refused to issue a Nougat update, even though Nougat was released less than 14 months later.

    The issue isn't hardware incompatibility or development time. The "Moto G Play" is practically a rebrand of the same hardware, re-released a year later; it got the Nougat update. The issue is that they want to entice people to ditch their still-new hardware to buy the new shiny.

    1. Re:Won't get updates. Not buying moto again. by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      Well there's the Moto X Force (aka Droid Turbo 2) for only $229 now, which can be manually flashed to Android 7.

      3GB RAM, 21MP/5MP cameras, micro-sd, 3760 mAh battery, and
      compatible with all North American cell providers.

      Also listed at GearBest for 279.99, or Amazon for $305.

    2. Re:Won't get updates. Not buying moto again. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have a 2015 Moto G. I got it partially because I thought Motorola, having touted an 18-month support + update policy, would be better about updates than most of their competitors. But they refused to issue a Nougat update, even though Nougat was released less than 14 months later.

      Yes, that is annoying. Luckily, the community has got your back. I am in the same boat, with the same solution (albeit for titan, not osprey.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Won't get updates. Not buying moto again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LimeageOS has good support for Motorola phones.

      I'm running the latst Android 7.1 Lineage ( AOSP) on a 3 year old Moto G2 (2014), and it works really well.

  18. Re:Confused...I got my daughter a G4 play for Xmas by almitydave · · Score: 1

    I got the same phone last fall for $124 (not from Amazon). It's definitely fast enough for anything I need (I don't play games). The "killer app" for this phone is that Motorola includes a built-in gesture that shrinks the whole screen down enough to be used with one hand. That was what sold me on it, but other noteworthy features include:
    -microSD card slot
    -user-replaceable battery
    -2 days of use per charge (average)
    -regular headphone jack

    It's the perfect phone for me.

    --
    my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
    I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
  19. Pro Tip by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 1

    You get what you pay for.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  20. nice infomercial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i can find better stuff cheaper right now and i dont even have to buy it online from some shady dealer in china, i can buy it locally on a real physical store

    the only advantage this thing has is it will probably had modding support, and thats IT

  21. Yawn... by sydbarrett74 · · Score: 1

    This might have been a decent prospect if they had offered it a year or two ago. Now, ZTE and Xiaomi have offerings that provide way more bang for the buck. Pass!

    --
    'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
  22. Re:Why so large? (and heavy) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bought Moto E [http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_moto_e-6376.php] as soon as it was released. First thing I did was disabling all internet connectivity - I just wanted phone, SMS and GPS. Not the newest and highest end smartphone that lasts one day on a charge. I can easily afford such a phone every half a year and throw away the old one into the garbage bin... but I did not and still do not want that. Today it has noticable shorter battery life, but for my daily use it is like 6 days instead of 8, or sth like that. I still can go for a whole day trip and use GPS with maps.me. Better camera would be nice, but otherwise I do not need new phone.
    Anyway, this headline about new Moto gave me some hope, that quickly went away when I compared the stats. Bigger, heavier... nah.
    What I want is the same, or smaller form factor, lighter, with longer battery life and maybe more internal memory. And better camera.
    Having said that... those like me are not the target audience for any smartphone making company :/