I wish Google would force manufacturers to stop using the 320x240 resolution. The browsing experience is very poor on such a resolution, unless you're using Opera Mini perhaps, and I imagine it's hard for developers to refit their apps for such a small resolution, too, as even menu text will take a lot of space on that resolution.

I also wish they mandated everyone has at least 512 MB of RAM in their phones, and at least 2 GB for the OS and 2 GB of app space. That way upgrades can be ensured for years, and people, especially regular people, can actually install more than 5 apps without running out of space (and no, App2SD doesn't count, and it's almost useless). And while they are at it, they should also stop supporting the ARMv6 architecture, now that the ARMv7 Cortex A5 and next year Cortex A7 are going to be used.

If Google wants to bring down the hammer on manufacturers, it should be for stuff like this, that ensures users of Android devices, even at the very low-end, get a pretty good experience, otherwise they'll always think Android devices are crap, after their first cheap Android smartphone. They don't want that kind of perception to affect the Android brand in the long term.

I kind of doubt that users of low-end phones know what Android is or know what they're missing. It's not like they're downgrading from an iPhone, they're probably upgrading from a feature phone. And even the worst Android phone is much nicer than that.

Eventually they will upgrade to a nice Android phone, and will enjoy the enhanced user experience. But cost does matter to some people, and although browsing at 320x240 is hardly ideal, it's probably better than not being able to buy food for a week.

(I personally use very few apps aside from the default Google apps. I mostly want to receive text messages, make phone calls, and browse the web. Apps, to me, don't add much value when the app-maker already has a perfectly fine website.)

I'm a hacker news user, and I have a cheap phone with a 320x240 single-touch screen and keyboard. I don't see what's so bad about browsing the web on it, I can certainly access HN fine enough.

The same could be said about browsing the web with IE6, that doesn't mean that the latest Chrome/Firefox won't provide a much better and smoother experience.

Really? I'm not convinced. Double-tap to change column width works pretty well.

> they're probably upgrading from a feature phone. And even the worst Android phone is much nicer than that.

I would disagree - I've heard quite a few non-technical people say they are never getting another android because they are so frustrated by their gingerbread/froyo handsets. They envy the iPhone simply because they never hear people swearing at them (whereas their phones prompt a tirade of profanity)

>Eventually they will upgrade to a nice Android phone

Anecdotally I know people who had cheap Android phones and then upgraded to an iPhone because their experience with Android was terrible.

That being said I don't really think it's Google's job to protect Samsung's future profits from being eaten into by people's poor experience with a crappy LG phone. It's just one more case where Apple's total control model is beneficial to them.

This may be. However its not good for the android app ecosystem today.

Wouldn't high end mandates just lead to the low end being dominated by forks?

Wouldn't that be worse for (1) customers, (2) android's reputation and (3) Google?

Exactly. The free-with-contract market is real, and wants smartphone features. If "Google Android" doesn't want that market (which isn't insane, iOS doesn't want it) then something else will fill the niche, and "AOSP Android" is the most likely candidate.

The grandparent's desire is isomorphic to wanting Google to force users to spend more on their phones so she has to spend less on her software. That's not a good business tactic.

"AOSP Android"

Warning massive derail... One thing the tech commentariat has slacked off on is better labels for different Android flavors. I'd suggest:

AOSP = "Opendroid" (forkdroid?)

stock Android (Opendroid + Google services/ecosystem) = "stockdroid"

Android + Touchwiz/Sense = "Samdroid"/"Sensedroid"

Opendroid + Amazon services/ecosystem = "Amazdroid"

What I've suggested in the past is that Google introduce a new brand like "Android Platinum" for the high end. For manufacturers to be allowed to use the brand, they'd have to meet requirements on minimum specs and commit to timely OS updates for some period.

At the moment, there are no new android phones with 320x240.

I don't think that's true. Here are two recent/upcoming Android 4 devices with 320x240:

Samsung Galaxy Chat B5330 http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_chat_b5330-4866.php

ZTE Style Q http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_style_q-4602.php

A couple of more devices which are reportedly coming soon: http://goo.gl/F411K

These are cheap phones, though I imagine you'd get a much better deal if you spent the same amount of money on a used Android phone.

I don't think screen size is a big problem for Android. Yes it makes good design harder but not impossible. I think the bigger problem is the inconsistent implementation of low level APIs, broken functionality on specific phones etc. They all require special care which makes developing a high quality Android app very hard. My thoughts on the issue in detail: http://birbit.com/the-real-problem-with-android-fragmentatio...

I don’t know about screen size fragmentation, but here’s a chart of Android OS versions currently in use: http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html. Android 2.3 Gingerbread is the most common version right now.

This was done some months ago http://opensignalmaps.com/reports/fragmentation.php

Maybe something like this? http://opensignalmaps.com/reports/fragmentation.php