Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Phone Rumors Solidifying

Posted by kdawson on from the and-a-pony dept.

MrCrassic alerts us to an Ars Technica roundup of various reports about Google's rumored gPhone, from CrunchGear, Engadget, and others. Business Week attempts to read into the silence of software developers (who are all, presumably, under NDA) to triangulate Google's plans. Both outlets agree that Google is probably developing its own Linux-based OS for the gPhone, and that it will be open to outside developers.

28 of 90 comments (clear)

  1. 411 by mfh · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Hello 411? How come I get more than a million listings for that number? And how come the first 10 listings all go to telemarketers?"

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  2. even better by User+956 · · Score: 2, Funny

    roundup of various reports about Google's rumored gPhone

    Psshhh.. Who needs a G-phone, when you can have an O.G. Phone?

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  3. hey, great... by cosmocain · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...not only all my private email is stored, my office documents analyzed, my photos categorized, now i can have all my sms and phone calls archived. let me celebrate this with a little dance of celebration: tippididibclapdip.

  4. Competition for the iPhone? by Klaidas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess the gPhone will probably use 3G, be available worldwide and open for developers... Quite a competition for the iPhone, if you ask me. Maybe apple will then listen more to what customers want on their iPhones?

    1. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by mangu · · Score: 4, Insightful
      How about this phone? It has everything a developer could want, right? Or how about this one? Or all of these?


      I think being open for development isn't enough, you also need to spend a couple $100 million or so in marketing...

    2. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by aliquis · · Score: 2, Informative

      Trolltech one is cool but waaaay to expensive.

      In other news both my phones where 250 and 350 sek each.

    3. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by Klaidas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      True, but google has already spent waaaay more in marketing, so they can safely skip this step.
      Just like apple - most phones were bought just because they have their logo (I'm not saying that the phone itself is not cool - I'd like to get one myself!, but if it was some unknown company the phone probably wouldn't be as popular as it is.)
      Besides, google is even better known than apple is. For example, ask a first grade student what's google, and they'll know. Ask about apple, and they'll probably tell you that it's a fruit and nothing more :)

    4. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Informative

      The last link about the Linux devices... Some of these arn't open source. For example the Motorola phones, although they use Linux are locked down via DRM.

      I found out about this after I bought a Motorola A1200 advertised as using Linux then found out that although you can get a code of the Linux code they use it's completely useless because your can't compile and use your own kernel for the phone.

    5. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by timeOday · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think being open for development isn't enough, you also need to spend a couple $100 million or so in marketing...
      If only... if only google had a bunch of money lying around, or access to some sort of communications medium that could present advertising to a wide audience?
    6. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, because the unwashed masses LOVE linux. And know what it is.

      The fun number of "people who want to run 3rd party apps on their iPhones" is 2%. Two percent. Most people don't care. They couldn't run 3rd party apps on their old phones and they can't do it yet with their iPhone.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    7. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by sc0ob5 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's all well and good to list off a few phones but the fact is that I have tried to get a few of those phones (at least some in the linux devices list) and I have to say they aren't easy to come by here in Australia and I didn't get replies from a few vendors, one would have thought they'd actually be happy to sell their hardware. Many of the phones will not work on our networks, and the ones that do are in chinese or korean or japanese. Also none of those phones are 3G capable and none have HSDPA. Not exactly cutting edge. When I spend ridiculous amounts of money on a phone I want it to at least be upto date with all the other phones out there that use closed source OSes. Perhaps google can do all of these things, 3G network capable, HSDPA, english, open, available. I'm not really big on the whole advertising thing though, I'd gladly pay for a phone with all of the above without the advertising.

    8. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by Gazzonyx · · Score: 3, Funny

      I think being open for development isn't enough, you also need to spend a couple $100 million or so in marketing...
      If only... if only google had a bunch of money lying around, or access to some sort of communications medium that could present advertising to a wide audience? Perhaps some day, my friend, perhaps some day. Until then, we'll just have to be fanboys and spread the news ourselves. I'm going to start by buying some adwords from... oh, nevermind ;).
      --

      If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

    9. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by Echnin · · Score: 4, Insightful
      About that number though - from the way it's phrased it seems to refer to 2% of iPhone owners; maybe people who wanted to run 3rd party apps didn't buy iPhones? I really, really wanted to buy an iPhone for the form factor, multi-touch, and other goodies, but I really, really need to run a certain app, which, the developers say, *would* have been ported to the iPhone if Apple would have allowed it. In the end, I bought a Windows Mobile phone (HTC Blue Angel) and I hate it in every possible way (the crashing, the slowness, rough UI) except for the fact that it allows me to use this program, which saves my life every single day.

      Apparently, Apple didn't make the iPhone for people like me, but damn I wish they did. Oh, and it would be nice if I could get it some other way than buying it cracked from a shady dealer in Zhongguancun for 6000 yuan. Buying a phone that won't let me substitute the SIM card for a local one when travelling is not an option anyway... In the end, it's Apple's decision what product they want to release, and since they apparently make heaps of money this way through their profit-sharing deal with AT&T, more power to them. Still, though, I wish someone would make a phone for me.

      --
      Lalala
    10. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by p0tat03 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not just marketing. Here in Toronto the subway walls have been plastered with massive, blaring ads for Moto's RAZR 2. But none of my friends and colleagues want the phone. Omnipresent and expensive marketing can help a product sell, but it won't sell a product all by itself.

      What DOES sell a phone? New shininess, and a slick UI that blows people away. Even just showing people my iPhone's keypad blows them away - the thing is intelligent enough to format your phone numbers into country code, area code, etc etc, as opposed to almost all other phones out there that simply display your number as a string of digits. Small elegances and conveniences go a long way into making your product more polished and wanted.

      People are sick a tired of half-assed phone UIs, and while it works reasonably well that most people won't change, when presented with a cheaper alternative (which isn't the iPhone at the moment) they will jump ship in droves. I would hope for Nokia, Motorola, and Sony's sake that they've got better UIs in the labs right now.

    11. Re:Competition for the iPhone? by saigon_from_europe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree that Google will have to fight an uphill battle. Apple has a lot of people well experienced in design of the consumer electronics. But Google has some very good designers as well. I think that UI of GMail is really good; this was the first web mail I really wanted to use. Also, GTalk seem like "oh, dear, finally some simple messenger", or even better "look, it works from browser now". Google's home page, which seems normal now to us, was 100% opposite to what we were learned to see before (we used monster pages like Yahoo!, MSN).

      Also, there is one big reason why I think that in long term Google will do better (although I believe they take more risky approach). They have more open-minded business model. In mentioned GMail, they gave me everything I wanted. For free. I used their system as my spam filter. No revenue for them. But in the long term, that payed off (I use their web interface regularly now). They are not greedy in that short-sighted manner like Apple is. They seem feature friendly to the user.

      Apple is old business done right. Google is new business (note that I did not say that this is necessarily "done right").

      --
      No sig today.
  5. Manna for the AI by Sub+Zero+992 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Text, video and image data were only the start. Making voip traffic available for analysis will significantly increase the range and amount of data available for nurturing a nascent AI.

    --
    They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security - Ben Franklin
  6. Count me in! by 4D6963 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The iPhone occupies a mobile market that is far separate from what Google will be targeting with its series of lower-end, consumer-level devices.

    If they include a built-in flashlight, count me in!

    --
    You just got troll'd!
    1. Re:Count me in! by StarfishOne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Nokia 1100 and 1101 also have a built-in flashlight. At first I thought it'd be useless, but it's actually a very handy feature. (Looking for keys/keyhole in the dark, etc.). It's not a huge amount of light, but it won't drain the phone's battery in a few minutes either.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_1100

  7. Post references outdated/old articles by acaeti · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What is with this story referencing two very old (August for Ars, September for BizWeek) articles? Perhaps this article would be a bit more relevant: Google 'ready to take on Apple iPhone next year' Sheesh.

  8. Come on guys, stop and think by Nomen+Publicus · · Score: 5, Insightful
    What does Google do? Web apps. What single hardware component would Google want everybody to have?

    A simple, cheap, thin web client that works anywhere where you can get a wireless signal.

    Any voice app would just be a bolt-on goody to the basic device (thanks to skype?)

    Google is in the business of delivering data, they really don't want to share any profit with a middleman such as the phone company. Apple had to do a deal with the devil, but Google as enough money to deal direct with the lost souls.

    1. Re:Come on guys, stop and think by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A 700mhz-wireless 4.25"x5.5" tablet running some form of embedded Linux, starts up with a browser connected to a GoogleApps homepage? Let's see - email (gmail), mapping (maps.google.com + gps), phone (skype), word processing, home finance, contact manager (gmail), MP3 & Mpeg playback, online storage (gmail)...

      They could put one in every student's and businessman's hands and still have market left over...

  9. consumer-level? by m2943 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The iPhone occupies a mobile market that is far separate from what Google will be targeting with its series of lower-end, consumer-level devices

    This statement suggests that the iPhone is somehow not a consumer-level device. In fact, both the Google phone and the iPhone look like they are going to be "consumer-level devices". The iPhone is "high end" in terms of its price. In terms of features, if the Google phone provides Google's applications (mail, docs, YouTube, maps, reader, talk, maybe more) and MP3 player functionality, the Google phone would actually be "higher end" as far as I'm concerned. The iPhone becomes even more expensive and complicated if you consider that the Google phone can just operate over the air, while the iPhone uses desktop syncing.

    I think this could be a serious problem for Apple because the one thing Apple traditionally has going for them over other companies is that other companies make their products too complex. But Google keeps things simple and cheap. Furthermore, on-line services without desktops is clearly where the industry is going: Nokia is coming up with OTA tie-ins, and Microsoft and Yahoo are also busy exposing their web sites through phone software and phone integration.

    1. Re:consumer-level? by GPL+Apostate · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It will be amusing on a certain level if Google, which has been termed a potential 'Microsoft killer,' instead kills Apple.

      --
      Microsoft says legacy (serial/parallel) ports are bad. They don't obfuscate the hardware enough.
    2. Re:consumer-level? by m2943 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I am not sure where you are coming up with the distinction that the iPhone is more tethered to the docking station than a gPhone would be.

      You even use iTunes on your "Mac or PC" to activate the iPhone! The phone is designed with desktop syncing in mind; the fact that you can use some mobile web sites to get by without syncing doesn't change that.

      For the Google phone, you'll likely just unpack it, turn it on, and you're good to go. Syncing and all that will probably be OTA, the way a modern phone should be.

      since it would be through a web page on the gPhone

      I see no reason to assume that. In fact, Google has already created mobile applications for mail, calendaring, and maps, and they recommend against using the web based ones on phones that give you a choice.

    3. Re:consumer-level? by m2943 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      and there is a little problem with keeping a data connection open all the time. It drains the battery fast.

      That's a problem with your Palm, your chat software, and/or your cellular provider. Persistent data connections are widely used on cell phones and don't drain batteries if implemented correctly.

    4. Re:consumer-level? by fermion · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In a way you are right. What Apple does is leverage technology so it is not so complicated. I remember how easy it was on an apple ][ to burn an EEPROM, basically what we later called plug and play. The Apple /// was the beginning of a real memory footprint and the multiple OS personal computer, running Apple DOS, Pro DOS, and CP/M. The Lisa, and Mac, of course, introduced the WIMP interface to the average user, slashing the learning curve and simplifying many tasks(but not all, I still do many things using 25 year old technology).

      What happens is that the technology that Apple uses and it's customers are willing to pay for soon becomes cheap enough for commodity manufacturers to make and commodity computer makers to use. For most computer manufacturers, they will till any features it their computer that is cheap, rather than trying to design a useful machine. This is why so many computer have 4 in 1 readers but no firewire port. In any case, Apple does not say ahead of this curve, for instance they didn't seem to anticipate that every computer would have a high performance dedicated graphics processor, one Apple greatest advantages for a long time.

      They seemed to have learned the lesson with iPod, and are updating it often to stay ahead of cheap imitators. So while MS will come out with gratuitous wireless, Apple pushes the hard disk capacity. Hopefully the same will happen with iPhone. The phone people are coming out with competitive phones, and the google software, with no license requirements, and ad support, might allow the phones to be significantly cheaper than iPhone. but likely will not have the full features of iPhone. In any case, the fact that a google phone is inherently intrusive will mean that the market will likely be limited to those that would not get an iPhone as they would not afford it, which is why they choose the ad supported option.

      Really, if the iPhone faces a risk from google, it is because Apple made a decision not to be consumer friendly on this product. All the consumer hostile press that Apple has taken may convince some users that risk posed by the google phone is not significantly greater than the risk posed by apple.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  10. Better not call it... by maroberts · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...the gSpot, otherwise
    a) noone will believe it exists
    b) if they do, no one will be able to find it.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

  11. Commoditization of the telecom industry by rukidding · · Score: 2, Informative

    When you look at this from a value chain perspective, new players are entering at the device and the content points of the value chain. There are no new entrants coming in to compete with the telecoms. The value added for any new offering is coming from the user interface of the device and the ability to get new content. The wireless infrastructure connecting the content with the devices seems to be less and less of a factor for many consumers and there doesn't seem to be a lot of incentives in this area to attract new players to compete with the AT&Ts and Verizons of the world. Soon I see wireless plans being more of a commodity. The wireless protocol or company will matter very little to the consumer. Price will become the main factor in determining the wireless company a consumer uses. The devices and the content you can get to on it will be the main attractions to most consumers. It seems to me Apple and Google understand this very well.

    --
    ...