Just like most Android devices will be commodity devices at the low end. I don't see why Nokia is being singled out here. What percentage of Android users walked into the phone retailer and specifically asked for an Android device? 10%? From speaking to phone retailers, most people want an iPhone but can't afford it. Android is the alternative that phone retailers push consumers onto.
You're right of course, but the difference is Android is free (or almost so), as is Symbian, whereas MS charges a per-unit license, so at lower price points that would eat into their margin too much. That's the only reason I don't see WP7 going into cheaper phones tbh, not its minimum specs (the way microprocessors are going we're going to have SoCs as fast as a Snapdragon in £50 dumbphones in a couple of years).
My wife a few months ago moved from an S60 device to a Motorola Defy, technically both will have counted as smartphone sales, but the S60 phone was purely a text and call device where as of her own volition she's sought out apps to do all kinds of things with the android phone. Also it's not about wanting an iPhone and not being able to afford it, she didn't see the value in the iPhone in comparison to an Android device, I'd wager far more people get them for that reason than because they can't actually afford an iPhone.
I totally agree, though bear in mind that a phone's function mostly comes as much out of how you design the phone and UI as out of anything else. Symbian was a capable enough OS for most things, and these days even the CPUs on cheaper phones are capable of most simple computing tasks. But in S40/S60 phones the whole UI was designed around the core phone functions cause that's what those phones were aimed at. You could put Android and a Tegra 2 in one of those, won't be very good for web browsing or office work if all you've got is a phone keypad and a 2" screen, will it?
Coversely, my Desire Z doesn't even have hardware buttons for answering and ending calls (which takes some getting used to, let me tell you), so while it can do so much more it's actually LESS easy to use for making calls!
Theoretically, with the computing power available for very low cost these days, combined with Nokia's experience at optimising a phone's form factor and UI for the intended use its target users will want it for, there's nothing to stop them from sticking any phone OS to any phone at any price point - the limiting factor is lisencing fees: you can't sell $20 phones to Kenyans and pay $59 per unit to Microsoft. With SYmbian, Meego (and even Android), that's something they wouldn't need to worry about. And while it's true that they're not making much money selling low-price dumbphones to the developing world, brand loyalty is Nokia's biggest trump card right now: it would be awesome for them if, when demand for smartphones really blows up in those places in a few years, the first phone people look at is a Nokia cause that's the brand they've known and trusted all their lives! That's the main reason they're keeping Symbian going really, cause if they give that up to the Shenzen manufacturers, they'd be giving up a massive market advantage!
Believe me, if they had any brains they'd know that being last place in the US market means NOTHING! Pretty soon there'll be twice as many £400 smartphones being sold in India as are sold in the US, and although other brands are also known,, Nokia has a massive lead over there already.
