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

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.

Comments

Why so large?

[Daetrin]

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.

Re:Why so large?

[Anonymous Coward]

$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.

Re: Why so large?

[corychristison]

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.

"Priced at $129, unlocked"

[MrL0G1C]

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.

Alibaba

[fluffernutter]

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

Re:Alibaba

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Alibaba

[Gavagai80]

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

Re:Alibaba

[fluffernutter]

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?

Samsung J1

[future assassin]

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.

Confused...I got my daughter a G4 play for Xmas...

[gosand]

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.

That's not cheap.

[ubergeek65536]

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.

That's not cheap at all!

[DontBeAMoran]

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

I know the name of the next version

[olsmeister]

The Moto C Plus Plus!

What about Android One

[DickBreath]

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.

Re:What about Android One

[drinkypoo]

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.

That's "cheap"?

[squiggleslash]

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".

Re:That's "cheap"?

[SpammersAreScum]

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

We're getting close to good enough

[rsilvergun]

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.

Your cheaper phone citations miss the point

[drinkypoo]

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.

Re:Your cheaper phone citations miss the point

[Gavagai80]

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

Re:Your cheaper phone citations miss the point

[drinkypoo]

"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.

I already hate myself for doing this

[drew_kime]

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?

Smartphone prices are artificial

[Qbertino]

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.

Re:Smartphone prices are artificial

[CrashNBrn]

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.

Re:Smartphone prices are artificial

[drinkypoo]

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.

Runs, really?

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

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

Runs? More like crawls Android 7.0.

Also

[Artem S. Tashkinov]

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.

Re:Also

[zdzichu]

> RAM: 2GB
> ROM: 16GB

I don't think you understand those acronyms.

Re:Also

[drinkypoo]

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.

Won't get updates. Not buying moto again.

[jensend]

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.

Re:Won't get updates. Not buying moto again.

[CrashNBrn]

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.

Re:Won't get updates. Not buying moto again.

[drinkypoo]

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.)

Re:Confused...I got my daughter a G4 play for Xmas

[almitydave]

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.

Pro Tip

[slashdot_commentator]

You get what you pay for.

Yawn...

[sydbarrett74]

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!