Front facing cameras and the Lumia 635
I read this article. I'm not sure whether I agree or not in the necessity of a front facing camera. Sure, its inclusion would have made it a better device, but at that price point... is it really a problem?
When I look in the sub-$200 range I don't even find current Android phones with front facing cameras. Maybe one or two exist. If you're willing to go over the $200 mark, even just a little more and you'll start seeing a few devices with front facing cameras, but they don't really start in full force until the $300 mark and at that point you've long since exited the budget smartphone range.
And, to be clear, I'm purposely ignoring contract subsidized phone prices. To get sizeable subsidies means getting plans that cost double or even triple what a pay as you go or off contract phone would cost and that inflated monthly fee, in my opinion, drives you out of the budget market on its own. Not to mention, that on contract subsidies can even bring a $500-600 phone down to $0 which completely negates having any discussion on features or qualities of a sub-$200 phone.
If you're willing to buy older, refurbished or used models, the point is moot as well. Older model Lumia's with front facing cameras can be acquired unlocked dirt cheap just as easily as older Android phones (saw an unlocked Lumia 920 for $150 recently for example). So, for the sake of a fair argument, the only phones you should compare against are ones carriers are still actively selling. And that is how we land in a place where, for the same price or less, most people won't actually be able to find even an inferior Android phone with a front facing camera.
Now, if you consider $200 to be the ceiling for those making the purchase of a budget phone (I think that is a generous ceiling by the way) then a front facing camera simply isn't an option regardless of the phone you choose. Keeping that, and the rest of the review from the article in mind, a Lumia 635 is probably the best phone you can get in that price range.
But, as I said, I think even $200 is a generous ceiling for budget phones. People (in N.A.) who don't have money or don't want to spend money pretty much max out at the $100 ceiling which puts even the Lumia 635 out of reach. Most people willing to go above $100 are willing to buy either top of line phones outright or are willing to go on contract to get a phone cheaper. So, while I think there is nothing wrong with the phone given it is under $200, I think it has a limited market to begin with.
All of that being said, I think the article misses the point rather entirely. The budget end of the Lumia spectrum never really did well in North America or even in most developed markets. Where the lower end Lumia devices did well was in emerging markets like India and China. Judging by the past successes there, selfies aren't a prime motivator in the purchase of a phone in those regions since previous phones in the same line lacked the front facing camera as well.
They will sell the phone here, but it likely wasn't developed with this continent in mind. I don't agree that the lack of a front facing camera is a flaw in that price range... but it doesn't really matter. I don't think, even if it had one at the same price that it would move significantly more units. The $100-$200 price range of phones seems to hit a small market here to begin with, with most either needing/wanting one for less or being willing to fork out more or get tied into a contract for a better phone. In other countries the situation is different and this is a much more viable price point. And, aside from the subsidies, all of the other points above I made about the front facing camera would still apply in those places.
When I look in the sub-$200 range I don't even find current Android phones with front facing cameras. Maybe one or two exist. If you're willing to go over the $200 mark, even just a little more and you'll start seeing a few devices with front facing cameras, but they don't really start in full force until the $300 mark and at that point you've long since exited the budget smartphone range.
And, to be clear, I'm purposely ignoring contract subsidized phone prices. To get sizeable subsidies means getting plans that cost double or even triple what a pay as you go or off contract phone would cost and that inflated monthly fee, in my opinion, drives you out of the budget market on its own. Not to mention, that on contract subsidies can even bring a $500-600 phone down to $0 which completely negates having any discussion on features or qualities of a sub-$200 phone.
If you're willing to buy older, refurbished or used models, the point is moot as well. Older model Lumia's with front facing cameras can be acquired unlocked dirt cheap just as easily as older Android phones (saw an unlocked Lumia 920 for $150 recently for example). So, for the sake of a fair argument, the only phones you should compare against are ones carriers are still actively selling. And that is how we land in a place where, for the same price or less, most people won't actually be able to find even an inferior Android phone with a front facing camera.
Now, if you consider $200 to be the ceiling for those making the purchase of a budget phone (I think that is a generous ceiling by the way) then a front facing camera simply isn't an option regardless of the phone you choose. Keeping that, and the rest of the review from the article in mind, a Lumia 635 is probably the best phone you can get in that price range.
But, as I said, I think even $200 is a generous ceiling for budget phones. People (in N.A.) who don't have money or don't want to spend money pretty much max out at the $100 ceiling which puts even the Lumia 635 out of reach. Most people willing to go above $100 are willing to buy either top of line phones outright or are willing to go on contract to get a phone cheaper. So, while I think there is nothing wrong with the phone given it is under $200, I think it has a limited market to begin with.
All of that being said, I think the article misses the point rather entirely. The budget end of the Lumia spectrum never really did well in North America or even in most developed markets. Where the lower end Lumia devices did well was in emerging markets like India and China. Judging by the past successes there, selfies aren't a prime motivator in the purchase of a phone in those regions since previous phones in the same line lacked the front facing camera as well.
They will sell the phone here, but it likely wasn't developed with this continent in mind. I don't agree that the lack of a front facing camera is a flaw in that price range... but it doesn't really matter. I don't think, even if it had one at the same price that it would move significantly more units. The $100-$200 price range of phones seems to hit a small market here to begin with, with most either needing/wanting one for less or being willing to fork out more or get tied into a contract for a better phone. In other countries the situation is different and this is a much more viable price point. And, aside from the subsidies, all of the other points above I made about the front facing camera would still apply in those places.
Comments
Post a Comment