Budget smartphones, not the sexiest topic of discussion, but important none the less as we march towards the death of the feature phone and the rise of the number of people who have access to the internet. Right now you can buy an Android smartphone for between $100 and $150 that’s equivalent in specs to what Nokia used to sell for over $400 back in 2005/2006. That in it of itself is amazing, but Spreadtrum thinks the industry can do better. Today they’re announcing a pair of Android hardware platforms (one does GSM and WiFi, the other does only TD-SCDMA) that should enable handset makers to create Android devices that cost between $40 and $50. Details are scarce, but we know that the processor Spreadtrum decided to use is an ARM9 clocked at 600 MHz, Android 2.2 is supported, and the GPU can only handle a screen that does half VGA, better known as 480 x 320.
Like we said earlier, devices using Spreadtrum’s platforms aren’t going to be as sexy as the Samsung Galaxy S II, but they’ll enable a whole new economic strata to purchase smartphones. That’s a giant leap in the right direction. Just wait and see, they’ll be a day in the not too distant future where something like the Nexus One will cost less than $100. Yesterday we covered the ZTE V881, which on paper is even better than the Nexus One, yet it’s going to cost roughly $160 when it comes out. In two years that price is going to be cut in half.
Now a huge question is of course will Google focus on making Android scale down or will they continue on optimizing Android to take advantage of the incredible hardware that comes out seemingly every few months? According to a tweet from Eldar Murtazin, Editor in Chief of Mobile-Review, making Android run on cheap devices is now Google’s primary objective:
I like the way in which Google develop platform but I’m sure that in 2012 we will here a lot of critics about Android.Main goal- 100USD tier
Here’s hoping they can pull it off and make something that actually works well at that price tag, instead of something that’s of dubious quality.
[Image Credit: Screenshot from this YouTube video]