Google Mobile Phones Debut in Feb?

SpinelessJelly writes "It appears that Google's Android, criticised by Microsoft as vaporware, has sprung to life. Prototype devices are circulating, software developers are experimenting with the SDK and PC-based Android emulator, and there are rumours of a show-stopping debut at February's Mobile World Congress event in Barcelona. Numerous examples of the Android GUI are also starting to leak out."

Comments

Google Mobile Phones Debut in Feb?

[sm62704]

How should I know, do I look like I have crystal balls? In Soviet Russia, slashdot asks YOU!

Re:Google Mobile Phones Debut in Feb?

[sm62704]

As a matter of course, if you make the first post you will be autoimatically modded "troll", "flamebait", or more usually "offtopic". Some people have no sense of humor! You want troll? I'll give you troll, here in Springfield we do our trolling offline! And of course this would be flamebait. As to "offtopic" well, this comment is offtopic. Or not!

So it seems that the oft-rumored handset from Google has taken that final leap into the "confirmed" column, though it may not be quite the be-all, end-all device we were expecting. Isabel Aguilera, Google's chief executive in Spain and Portugal, has admitted that the searchmeisters have some mobile goodness in the works but appeared to play down the project, noting that the phone is just one of 18 R&D initiatives the company currently has underway. Furthermore, she mentioned that Google's mobile skunkworks were designed to make their way into developing countries, suggesting that this may not be the Samsung sourced, iPhone-killing monster we'd been getting an earful about as of late. But hey, if Apple intends to turn the iPhone into a multi-device franchise, Google's entitled to do the same, is it not?

-mcgrew

making mods' heads assplode since 1998

Re:Google Mobile Phones Debut in Feb?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Earthling,

Hello! I am a creature from a galaxy far away, visiting your planet. I have transformed myself into this text file. As you are reading it, I am having sex with your eyeballs. I know you like it because you are smiling. Please pass me on to someone else because I'm really horny.

Re:Google Mobile Phones Debut in Feb?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Alien Creature,
You are not the first (nor are you likely to be the last) life-form to experience disappointment when visiting /. in search of something beyond auto-eroticism.
Sorry-about-your-horniness-ly-yours,
Anonymous C. Oward

Comparisons

[AKAImBatman]

While open source provides the heart of Android, its brain is a surprisingly modest ARM 9-series processor running at 200MHz.

This ignores the fact that most handset manufacturers will probably include a 3D accelerator to improve graphical performance. Google claims that Android has a "highly optimized 3D software rasterizer", but it remains to be seen if a mere 200MHz processor is capable of sustaining the necessary graphical power to provide a smooth experience.

In any case, it's likely that a 3D Accelerator could save on battery power. Application specific chips tend to be able to do more work with fewer cycles and less silicon. Which means that a phone manufacturer can make the choice of a faster CPU + lower battery life, or a slower CPU + 3D accelerator + higher battery life.

Re:Comparisons

[Archangel Michael]

"Which means that a phone manufacturer can make the choice of a faster CPU + lower battery life, or a slower CPU + 3D accelerator + higher battery life."

But what if I want a faster CPU, 3D Accelerator AND lower battery life, HUH???

Re:Comparisons

[Anonymous Coward]

200Mhz ARM is more than enough; I've recently benchmarked EP9301 (167MHz) with Nbench, and integer performance rating was 1.8 of Pentium-90. Now remember Doom-I running on a 33 MHz i386-SX...

Re:Comparisons

[Wiseazz]

I'm sure someone at Microsoft is working on it.

Re:Comparisons

[GamerCowboy]

The Nintendo DS uses an ARM 9 paired with an ARM 7 and it can make some pretty games run at a good clip. I'm not sure how processor-intensive mobile phone software can get but games are normally considered to be intensive applications.

Re:Comparisons

[AKAImBatman]

I've recently benchmarked EP9301 (167MHz) with Nbench, and integer performance rating was 1.8 of Pentium-90.

OpenGL ES supports floating point or fixed point math. Using floating point is going to severely reduce your performance if you don't have a Floating Point Co-Processor. And fixed point math is incredibly inaccurate, leading to a lot of graphical glitches in pre-accelerator games. (And is *still* slower than pure integer computations.)

Now remember Doom-I running on a 33 MHz i386-SX.

Doom was a 2.5D raycaster, not a true 3D engine. Quake is a better comparison. Quake did run on a 90MHz processor, but it also ran in 256 color mode with rather small textures. Model meshes consisted of a handful of polygons wrapped with a single (low-res) texture. Visibility and lighting were pre-calculated using a modified BSP Tree structure that took HOURS to generate.

Android phones lack such a luxury. Graphics will be produced real-time using high-color, high-resolution textures. Scaling, rotation, and lighting are expected to be smooth and responsive. Graphical output should be crisp with little to no blurring. (Poor rendering quality is VERY bad for on-screen text.) In these situations, a 200MHz processor becomes barely adequate. In fact, it still remains to be seen if it will be able to handle the load.

It's possible that the phone manufactures who use the 200MHz chip with no 3D accelerator will keep the graphical effects to a minimum. (Obviously, a non-rotated 2D image with GL_ORTHO is going to be WAY faster to render than a full-3D scene with rotation matrices.) But that would tend to put the phone at a disadvantage in the market. The hardware is powerful enough to demand a higher price, but doesn't appear to be a good value when stacked against other smart phones.

Re:Comparisons

[AKAImBatman]

The Nintendo DS has two ARM cores paired with one 2D/3D accelerator core and one 2D accelerator core. This gives it two separate rendering pipelines with a maximum output of 120,000 triangles per second on the top screen and a touch-sensitive 2D framebuffer on the other. That's not really comparable with a single 200MHz ARM trying to perform OpenGL ES computations.

Re:Comparisons

[ischorr]

They will refuse to do it which is further PROOF that Google is becoming evil.

Re:Comparisons

[ZiggyStardust1984]

Ok, but, does it runs Call of Duty 4?

Re:Comparisons

[i.of.the.storm]

Yeah, and then there's the fact that the ARM7 is 33mhz and the ARM9 is 67mhz, a third of the 200mhz in these phones which will probably be low end anyway. Also, the ARM7 mostly does sound processing stuff. Of course, the DS does have dedicated graphics hardware too.

Re:Comparisons

[cheater512]

Wont save power at all, in a phone anyway.

We are talking about lower resolution than Quake with slightly more features.
A 200mhz processor is overkill for that. 486's can do that easily.
The overhead required to power a separate chip and the interface between the two isnt worth it.

Damn Windows users thinking you need a dual core 3ghz processor to type up a document.
A 200mhz processor is freaking fast for most things including low res 3d.

Re:Comparisons

[Traa]

By februari I expect there to be available 200 MHz based ARM 11 processors with a seperate (though integrated) 3D accelerator that is OpenGL ES 1.1 compatible. 3D demos have been shown last year on prototypes with these chips running 5000 triangle scenes at 35 fps. That is, 150,000 triangles per second sustained (not just max). Graphical features include dual texturing with lightmap and bumpmapping based lighting effects, character and camera animation, particle effects and other (basic) 3D features.

Re:Comparisons

[Goaway]

Texture size does not affect rendering speed on a low-cache architecture like the old Pentiums, or the mobile ARMs. Modern games still use pre-calculated visibility with BSP trees and the like, and pre-calculated lighting (which does not use the BSP tree). Those are totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand, too.

A phone is not going to be doing complex 3D for anything but games. At the most, it will use 2D scaling and rotation, and some alpha blends. Depending on display bit depths and resolutions, that may be entirely doable on a 200 MHz processor with properly optimized code, like they apparently claim to have.

Re:Comparisons

[wed128]

Not to mention a 200Mhz ARM core is faster then an x86 running at the same clock...

Re:Comparisons

[ohmpossum]

No Problem! Then you get to pay more for the extra hardware and larger battery... same idea as "you can have it sooner, better, or cheaper... pick any two"

Exchange integration?

[saleenS281]

Don't get me wrong, the phone and concept look cool, but if it wants to play in the business sector, exchange integration is a must. So... is there any exchange integration currently, or planned?

Re:Exchange integration?

[AKAImBatman]

is there any exchange integration currently, or planned?

Google is offering prizes to application developers who come up with cool new Android apps. Sounds like you may have stumbled upon a good candidate for submission. Give Android the best Exchange/Phone integration to date and I bet you'll make a pretty penny off of it. ;-)

Re:Exchange integration?

[CheeseTroll]

Motorola is usually cited as one of the supporters of Android, and they now own Good Technology (which makes Blackberry-like software that hooks up with Exchange). I haven't seen any announcements that they're porting the Good client over to Android, but hopefully they see the potential in doing so!

Re:Exchange integration?

[njhunter]

I'm hoping the connection is a Internet standard like IMAP or POP, something that I can come to grips with should there be an issue. Dealing with Verizon and Motorola phones is a real joy, not. I'm looking forward to a proliferation of iPhones and IMAP. I'm sure Apple will have European data roaming figured out soon enough.

Re:Exchange integration?

[guisar]

How about exchange has to develop a way to work with the phone? I'm sick and tired of pandering to Microsoft's shifting "standards" being a prerequisite to do anything software related. Just why would google, which offers an open, standards based email system for companies of it's own be motivated to do this? How would such connectivity benefit google in any way shape or form? Google seems dedicated to keeping information accessible to all, not locking it in some secret proprietary format. I'm not saying Google is looking out for the consumer in every respect but this sort of requirement is nonsense.

Re:Exchange integration?

[bahwi]

Windows Mobile does IMAP as well, even on Verizon. That's what I'm using.

Re:Exchange integration?

[guruevi]

I think it will do IMAP quite well. Oh, you mean that closed IMAP-over-RPC rip-off that doesn't even work well across a firewall? Does any of you even expose that mess to the internet?

Re:Exchange integration?

[DustoneGT]

The reason you think it needs exchange integration to 'play in the business sector' is that there are countless computer consulting firms spending ridiculous money to have M$ certifications and partnerships.

I used to work for a company that implemented microsoft servers, exchange, and even IIS regardless of the customer's actual needs. It's 'industry standard' to not let hardware control DHCP to these guys! You should see what happens when a server goes down after it's been set up the Microsoft way in a business network. Everything dies, including everybody's connection to the internet.

I think it's time to let Redmond know that we are not going to bend over and take it up the tailpipe on this one. I'd much rather see good integration with Google Aps before people waste time tinkering with Exchange integration.

Re:Exchange integration?

[rbanffy]

One thing most slashpeople tend to forget is that Exchange is much more than an e-mail server - its calendar server integration with Outlook is very complete and functional and is a core asset for many companies that rely on it for planning everything from meetings to training sessions to tracking resources such as projectors and flip-charts. Its workflow and forms functionality is less used but, still, companies that went with it now pretty much depend on it and will never migrate from it without a fight. Exchange is a very important tool for Microsoft to keep their vendor lock-in.

And, of course, Microsoft will never even consider making it easy for anyone to migrate away from their tools.

Re:Exchange integration?

[kc2keo]

I'd much rather see good integration with Google Aps before people waste time tinkering with Exchange integration.

Here here! I agree.

Re:Exchange integration?

[mattwarden]

1997 called; it wants its irrelevant rant back. I am a linux geek, and I resist Windows as much as possible. But my job is not to find ways to get my email, contacts, calendar, etc. to sync with my PDA with some insane workaround. My PDA is a productivity item. If it doesn't "just work", it's wasting my time; why would I use it?

Don't want me to use Exchange? Tell that to my company; tell that to its clients; tell that to its clients' clients.

Sending that "Don't send me Word docs" message is fine if you're making a brochureware site for Uncle Joe's Llama Farm, but won't fly for anyone much bigger than that.

You say I should explain to my clients the benefits of OSS and the reasons to avoid MS lock-in? I would have no problem with that, if that was what they were paying me for or even expressed any interest at all in hearing something like that. Coming out with that unsolicited would not be wise.

Re:Exchange integration?

[JohnBailey]

One thing most slashpeople tend to forget is that Exchange is much more than an e-mail server - its calendar server integration with Outlook is very complete and functional and is a core asset for many companies that rely on it for planning everything from meetings to training sessions to tracking resources such as projectors and flip-charts. Its workflow and forms functionality is less used but, still, companies that went with it now pretty much depend on it and will never migrate from it without a fight. Exchange is a very important tool for Microsoft to keep their vendor lock-in.

And, of course, Microsoft will never even consider making it easy for anyone to migrate away from their tools. And one thing you might be forgetting is that the 80s have been and gone, and mobile phones are no longer the preserve of corporate customers.
Make this something that appeals to kids and teenagers, and you have a market that not only buys quite a few phones, but changes their handsets way more often. Exchange compatibility importance=zero. Facebook or whatever the current must have social networking site is compatibility=vital.

And is there any good reason why these phones can't dock with software that translates to exchange compatible formats on a Windows PC? Neatly getting around any GPL3 problems, and offering the customer what they want.

Re:Exchange integration?

[Simon Brooke]

1997 called; it wants its irrelevant rant back. I am a linux geek, and I resist Windows as much as possible. But my job is not to find ways to get my email, contacts, calendar, etc. to sync with my PDA with some insane workaround. My PDA is a productivity item. If it doesn't "just work", it's wasting my time; why would I use it?

I, too, am an old UN*X geek working these days in a Windows environment, so I do understand where you're coming from. But the one thing I cannot do with Outlook/Exchange is make it produce competently formatted, RFC compliant email. As long as I use Outlook as my mail client, my email looks like the product of an incompetent; when communicating with my peers in other organisations I feel humiliated, I feel that I am not presenting myself well. It may be possible to force Outlook to produce properly formatted email, but, as you say, it's supposed to be a productivity application. If it doesn't "just work", it's wasting my time... The consequence is that if I need to communicate with people of my own level in other organisations, I phone them - I do not want them to see my email.

This is a crazy situation, which really gets me down. It doesn't matter how good the calendar add-on to Microsoft's email system is, if the email system cannot do its core job.

Re:Exchange integration?

[rbanffy]

"Make this something that appeals to kids and teenagers"

I know that, but this thread was about corporate acceptance and, AFAIK, most companies that employ child labor won't give them a corporate smartphone ;-). In my job I don't use Exchange at all so, I am good to go with Google-calendar syncing and IMAP e-mail. Unfortunately, there are far too many companies that can't get free of the Exchange shackles without a major struggle.

Screenshot != not vapor

[techpawn]

Yes there are more solid rumors and some screen shots... But how many screen shots of DNF have we seen. I'll believe Google is in the mobile market when I have an android in my hands for the first time.

It may not be vapor but I think the February release may be rumor and marketing, maybe it's for Android(Beta)

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[bdbolton]

Google would NOT offer a "Best designed android application" contest if it was vaporware.

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[babbling]

Try the development kit.

It comes with an Android emulator, and a few of the Google applications. Included is an address book, a dummy dialling application, a working Google Maps application, a working browser... and any other applications that Android developers decide to write for it.

The only thing that is missing is the phone hardware, but we've seen pictures and videos of phone hardware running this. I'm surprised the release is so far away considering the resources available and how complete everything seems to be.

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll believe Google is in the mobile market when I have an android in my hands for the first time. I think we can all agree that most Slashdotters would like an android to hold.

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[Daver297]

Yeah, I totally agree with this, noone has seen it, and so many things in this area are Vapor and spoken of, even shown in demos and never come to be

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[enjo13]

I'm not at all... they've thus far done the easy part.

Now the individual OEM's/ODP's have to A) integrate telephony (and work out the large number of issues with integrating the Android stuff with that), B) Create the mechnicals, C) Test and certify the phones for a number of different groups (OMA, FCC, etc..), D) Negotiate distribution and availability with carriers, etc... etc... etc...

Building a phone is non-trivial and involves a LOT of 3rd parties. They're on step 1a right now. I'll be duly impressed if they get a phone out before November of 2008.

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[i.of.the.storm]

Hahah, this comment==win.

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[rbanffy]

Actually, it's not such a huge endeavor. It's more like grabbing the hardware that's in production now running Windows Mobile and flash Android over it. Not much hardware certification, as the hardware is the same as other versions and I assume software changes do not require such steps. Most probably there must be a fast-track process for these modifications (or one would never be able to download a firmware update and flash it on their phones themselves - just imagine re-certifying everything for every bug-fix).

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[Anonymous Coward]

There are a handful of phones that are completely open, such as the Neo 1973 or the Trolltech Greenphone. Anyone can invent and implement a proof-of-concept "phone" architecture that runs on a desktop PC in an emulator. I've done it myself for a research project. If Android is anything more than that, why doesn't it run on actual phone hardware?

Re:Screenshot != not vapor

[smilindog2000]

Well said. The February rumor probably got the article listed on /., but while the phone is far from vapor-ware, February is. The phone still needs a lot of work. On the positive side, we hackers are busy figuring out what to do with these phones before they're ever released. I want one bad.

Android vs. Openmoko

[Jack Malmostoso]

I held back in buying a new phone for a few months, now, hoping that my Christmas present would have been a new & shiny Neo from the Openmoko project. Unfortunately things took longer than expected and now Android seems to have put the last nail in the coffin.
I thought about getting a Nokia N810, but of all the neat things it does, it's not a phone!
So I guess now the question is: wait for Openmoko to put their act together, or jump on the Google bandwagon? I'd prefer Openmoko for the major openness of the whole project and for the undoubted underdog charme, but money is money, and a neat phone like the Neo won't be cheap.
Any advice/insight/alternative to these two players for a phone, possibly with touchscreen but definitely with Wifi and GPS, based on linux?

Re:Android vs. Openmoko

[ninevoltz]

Show me the schematics of the "Open"Moko and only then will I agree that the project is truly "open". The wireless component market is a dirty and evil mafia. This is why you will not find schematics of the "Open"Moko, because the components are all under NDA. Total bullshit. Someone needs to come up with an open wireless chipset that doesn't infringe on some stupid ass WiFi patent.

Google has good GUI's

[Barryke]

Among a lot of conflicting feelings i experience right now,
it is good to hear Google develops a portable device GUI.

They do know their GUI stuff.

Re:Google has good GUI's

[Barryke]

Let me come back at this;

Design is a function of the GUI.

I do not like the design (and its GUI) picture from the article at all..
My HTC phone is better: bigger touch screen, less buttons.

Re:Google has good GUI's

[geekoid]

I've never seen them deal with anything as complex as a smartphone. I completely different game from web interfaces;however, the do seem to get the 'simple and clean is better' aspect of gui's, so hopefully it will be a great product.

Re:Google has good GUI's

[Anomolous Cowturd]

Meh. Smartphones are only complex because there was no google around to make them simple.

Re:Google has good GUI's

[Fastolfe]

You seem to be confused about what Android is. Google is not designing cell phones.

no-one will buy them when they come out

[petes_PoV]

in case the price drops $200 a couple of months later.

Designs

[jav1231]

I think the first pic they show there has poor design, though. Not that that's Google's fault but Apple has shown that the screen is star and therefore should dominate the landscape. The new Touch and even the Palm Centro does this too and many are following. For me, any phone where the keyboard and other buttons make up more than say 20% of the face simply look bad.

Re:Designs

[blake1]

Android is a platform, not a device.

Re:Designs

[protobion]

RTFA. Its a prototype. HTC put it together. Take a look at other phones by HTC (people who manufacture the O2 XDA phones). They currently come with Windows Mobile on them. It will be great to have Android on them.

Re:Designs

[sk8dork]

you must not have even watched one of the earliest and best android videos yet, much less actually read about it... in the video they explain how the platform will be able to span a range of hardware devices from relatively low end and inexpensive, like the one you're complaining about, to higher end and more expensive with touch screens that span the whole face of the device... check the video out here.

Re:Designs

[jav1231]

All good points, I should have RTFA. OTOH, why even showcase it running on such an ugly device?

Re:Designs

[AlterTick]

OTOH, why even showcase it running on such an ugly device? Because they're showcasing the software? Because they're not hardware manufacturers? Because this isn't going to be a piece of locked down, locked out, single provider hardwae like the iPhone, but an open platform available on all sorts of devices by a myriad of developers? Seriously, are you that dense?

Re:Designs

[jav1231]

No I'm not that dense. I understand fully. I'm bringing up a perception issue. This isn't Linux. No one is going to save money by buying up old Motorola i90c's and loading Google's Android on them the Linux extends the life of say a PII-500Mhz.

Re:Designs

[jez9999]

For me, any phone where the keyboard and other buttons make up more than say 20% of the face simply look bad.

As Maddox might say, 'so you want your screen to turn into a smudgy piece of shit after a few minutes of use?'

I hink he has a point. I don't want smudgy fingerprints all over the screen, touchscreens aren't a good idea.

Re:Designs

[lymond01]

Being an iPhone owner I can say that fingerprints are a non-issue. If I hold the phone at a 75+ degree angle in a certain light, I can see my most recent fingerprints if my fingertips were particularly moist. Wipe it on your pants or the microfiber they provide and the non-issue is non-existent.

I'm not a fan of apple, Linux, or windows...I use them all for the app they fit best. Because I use google calendar and not outlook, I can consider the iPhone the best phone on market for usability and efficiency. If you want rdp or ssh on your phone look elsewhere.

Vaporware?

[jcr]

I'm rather amused at the idea of Microsoft knocking any other company for vaporware.

-jcr

Re:Vaporware?

[BeanThere]

Indeed, I think they probably forgot for a moment that Google != Microsoft and are not like them.

Re:Vaporware?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not really surprising, they know that game well.

Every time they try to enter a new market they announce their product ages ago and hope potential customers don't buy the already established products.

This time it's the other way round. They already have Windows CE and fear Google using their own business practices, so they call it vaporware because they really know what that means.

Re:Vaporware?

[Anonymous Coward]

i guess it looks like that when you're just a blind fanboi...

oh, that's right. microsoft doesn't rat out journalists. sorry. my bad.

Re:Vaporware?

[geekoid]

I'm not a fan of Microsoft, but I can't think of any vapour ware from them, ever. Lots of suckage, but always a product.

Re:Vaporware?

[king-manic]

I'm not a fan of Microsoft, but I can't think of any vapour ware from them, ever. Lots of suckage, but always a product. Microsoft Bob...

Re:Vaporware?

[Tony Hoyle]

Cairo, WinFS.. and that's just two things that I can think of off the top of my head right now.

Microsoft have been using Vapor as a marketing tactic for years.. it goes like this:

1. Competitor announces product
2. Announce your product coming 'real soon' that is same as competitor

Re:Vaporware?

[Sancho]

Microsoft Bob was released. Did you forget the definition of Vaporware?

Re:Vaporware?

[jcr]

I can't think of any vapour ware from them, ever

How about the bulk of the features promised for Longhorn?

-jcr

Re:Vaporware?

[ckaminski]

Cairo. If DNF has longevity, Cairo should certainly knock it from the top vaporware slot of the decade. Promised since 1996, we still don't have it... And Microsoft products are still bollocks to operate.

So is every other product... WTF ever happened to computers being simple to use?

Hmmm.

[WindBourne]

have been hearing about this 1.5 years from the press. How long do you think that it takes to create this? My guess is that google introduced just before companies were going live with it. IOW, we will probably see something within 4 months.

Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Cleon]

Microsoft can't be happy about this; they're already pissed off that Windows CE doesn't dominate the cell phone market the way Windows does for desktops.

But Apple is going to be the ones crapping their pants; they've bet the farm on the iPhone, and major competition coming from Google won't be making them happy.

If Apple's smart, they'll make the next generation iPhone fully able to run and support Google Phone applications--that'll really make some folks in Redmond change their underwear.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[shagoth]

Unless you expect snazzy features like push email and Exchange support from Apple. That's not happened so far and no word that it will. Of course, that could all change in 2 weeks at iPodCaseWorld or whatever Apple's show in SF is called today.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, because they couldn't implement the same support?

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Sancho]

Apple really has little to fear from Google. Google has a long history of making good products--even products superior to what's out there--but failing to grab the marketshare. The only place where they're absolutely on top is with search.

Android looks like a really neat platform, but it's a geek platform. It won't have the enterprisey features that business people want (primarily Exchange integration) and from the looks of things, it doesn't have the sleek design that has captured the hip market (like the iPhone has.) It will almost certainly be priced comparably to other smart phones, with nothing to set it apart for the average customer.

I really hope that I'll be proven wrong, but so far, I just don't see anything that makes Android pop.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, how cool would it be to have steve jobs on stage... oh, one more thing, you've wanted a way to build your own applications on the iphone platform; well, you have already seen it; we have partnered with google to make the iphone the first consumer-ready release of the android.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[pauljlucas]

Unless you expect snazzy features like push email ... support from Apple. That's not happened so far ...

So this (3rd paragraph on left), this (under "If You Don't Have an Email Account"), and this are all wrong?

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[rbanffy]

Apple does not need to care much. People who buy iPhones do not buy them for the functionality or openness - they buy iPhones because they are cool gadgets. iPods are not more functional than generic music players - they are just simple enough most people would be able to use them without worrying too much. I would not buy an iPod touch because it's holds more music or allows me to download software - I would buy it because it's cool.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple better get an API out, and snappy. As far as I'm concerned, Apple isn't even in the smartphone market yet, they've barely gotten their feet wet. A niche sized chunk of the US market and little else doesn't make them a player in the phone world. If one of the actual big players like DoCoMo picks up on Android, it will be game over.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Grishnakh]

Android looks like a really neat platform, but it's a geek platform. It won't have the enterprisey features that business people want (primarily Exchange integration) and from the looks of things, it doesn't have the sleek design that has captured the hip market (like the iPhone has.) It will almost certainly be priced comparably to other smart phones, with nothing to set it apart for the average customer.

I really hope that I'll be proven wrong, but so far, I just don't see anything that makes Android pop.

The thing that'll make Android "pop" is if they come up with a way to separate their phones from the carriers, so that we Americans can be like everyone else in the world, where they buy a phone, and THEN they worry about finding a carrier for it, and all phones work with all carriers.

This is the fatal flaw with Apple's iPhone. It looked really cool, but when people found out they were required to only use AT&T, and had no choice in the carrier, many lost interest. A lot of people are sick of the cellular carriers, and how they get locked into one carrier for a long contract with a crappy phone, and changing to a new carrier means buying a new phone.

We're starting to see this situation unravel already with the announcement by Verizon that they're going to abandon CDMA and move to a GSM network, which will only leave Sprint in the CDMA camp.

If Google can engineer this situation to make the consumers happy, they may very well outdo Apple.

As for the "enterprisey" features, WTF cares? Even though the iPhone isn't exactly a slam-dunk, it's still doing well in the market without catering to the Crackberry addicts. Let RIM have that market. Most people don't want a phone with enterprise features; they want a phone for all their personal needs, and have no desire to be connected to their work email 24/7. The ones who like that lifestyle are already served by RIM, and aren't that large a market anyway, mostly corporate executives, high-up government employees, etc. Your typical cellphone customer wants a device, much like the iPhone, which acts like a phone, and gives them internet connectivity for surfing, Google maps, use of their Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail email, etc.

And the sleek design is something we don't know about yet. Engineering mules typically don't have "sleek design", as they're meant for developing software.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Sancho]

Apple isn't really trying for the smartphone market, though. They're trying for the slightly-more-intelligent-than-basic-phone market.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Sancho]

The thing that'll make Android "pop" is if they come up with a way to separate their phones from the carriers, so that we Americans can be like everyone else in the world, where they buy a phone, and THEN they worry about finding a carrier for it, and all phones work with all carriers. You can already do this. The phones just cost a whole lot more. I don't see why the cost of the phones would change suddenly because of Android.

This is the fatal flaw with Apple's iPhone. It looked really cool, but when people found out they were required to only use AT&T, and had no choice in the carrier, many lost interest. A lot of people are sick of the cellular carriers, and how they get locked into one carrier for a long contract with a crappy phone, and changing to a new carrier means buying a new phone. Most carriers have a free model that you can buy with a new contract. Getting a new phone may not be fun for everyone (having to transfer numbers, and such) but I can't believe that many people consider it that much of a hassle.

People may well be tired of carriers, but they're pretty deeply entrenched in this way of life. Until they can get cheap, unlocked phones, and until these phones are heavily advertised, they're just going to go to the carrier store to buy their next phone.

We're starting to see this situation unravel already with the announcement by Verizon that they're going to abandon CDMA and move to a GSM network, which will only leave Sprint in the CDMA camp. I don't really understand the relevance here. Can you explain? Does it have to do with Sprint throwing in with Google on Android?

As for the "enterprisey" features, WTF cares? Even though the iPhone isn't exactly a slam-dunk, it's still doing well in the market without catering to the Crackberry addicts. Let RIM have that market. Most people don't want a phone with enterprise features; they want a phone for all their personal needs, and have no desire to be connected to their work email 24/7. Well, the iPhone is an anomaly here, but it integrates nicely with other Apple products, and it's a sleek, sexy device, and it's gotten marketing up the wazoo, so yeah, it's been successful. But it's not particularly successful in the corporate sector. There's plenty of speculation as to why, but lack of integration with corporate e-mail may be one factor.

Android, being an OS, will be on lots of phones. Few companies will likely market their phones in such a way as to gain significant marketshare. They need some sort of hook, or else it's just going to be another phone OS. There's nothing particularly wrong with it being just another phone OS, but that's certainly not 'popping.'

It's going to be really hard to shake up the cell phone industry. I just can't see Android doing it.

Re:Microsoft, Schmicrosoft...

[Grishnakh]

We're starting to see this situation unravel already with the announcement by Verizon that they're going to abandon CDMA and move to a GSM network, which will only leave Sprint in the CDMA camp.
I don't really understand the relevance here. Can you explain? Does it have to do with Sprint throwing in with Google on Android?

It's the reason many people are locked into their cellular carriers here in the USA. You mentioned that people can already buy unlocked phones for a whole lot more, but that's not very useful if you can still only use the phone with one (maybe two) carrier(s). In Europe or Asia, you can buy a GSM phone, and then you can use that phone with ALL the carriers there.

Also, unless things have changed since I last looked, cellular carriers treat "data" different from "voice" (even though it's all data), and charge a LOT more for data transfer, so if you want to use your phone for surfing the web a lot, it'll cost you a small fortune, whereas for voice it's pretty much flat-rate up to a certain (large) number of minutes per month, regardless of destination.

I'm pumped!

[Nerdposeur]

This article doesn't say much of anything new - it mostly uses screen shots and explanations that the folks at Google put in their original announcement videos.

That said, I'm personally very pumped about getting an Android phone. I hear people dissing Google here a lot, but everything that I've used that is made by Google works great - Gmail, Picassa, Google Earth, Google Maps, and the search engine itself. If these guys make something, I pretty much believe it will be cool.

Up till now, I've had very little interest in a "smart phone" - the ones I've had my hands on are clunky, and that includes Blackberries. But if I can get a phone with Android next time my contract is up, I just might do it. If nothing else, the possibility of having features that aren't controlled by the carrier is awesome. And announcements like Android seem to be pressuring carriers to go in that direction, even though Android doesn't specifically prohibit lockdown.

Down with carrier control! Up with open access! :)

Re:What's the bigger flop?

[sm62704]

That's like asking "what was the biggest flop of the 1980s, the VCR or the CD?"

Great idea

[geekoid]

Now I'll just get the API's from MS and I'll be home free!

oh, crap.

That said, If I worked at MS I would certianly take that idea and a business case way up the chain to see if I can't leverage it's success into a VP position.

Yes, I would skip several layer of management if I had to. I've done it before, with some success.

Re:Great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

You wrote: "leverage it's success" when you should have written "leverage its success."

Improving your grammar would probably also help you in your meteoric rise to the top.

Re:Great idea

[AvitarX]

I bet that MS is strongly trying to make sure Android succeeds. They have a lot to gain if it does.

More seriously I would bet they work on it, but keep it under wraps unless the platform takes off. That way if it does take off they are there with good integration, but if lack of this must have sinks the android MS has more potential in the mobile market.

Re:Great idea

[jonbryce]

Evolution manages exchange integration fine using WebDAV.

In any case, MS already have what you are looking for. Windows Mobile 5 and 6 have pretty good exchange integration.

Re:Great idea

[Unoti]

Now I'll just get the API's from MS and I'll be home free! oh, crap.

This comes with Visual Studio 2005 and up.

GPS

[Reverse Gear]

I quick search on the word GPS in the article didn't come up with anything. So I guess either this will be a hardware add on or it will have rely on this technique with trying to find you position depending on your position ... but this only works with telephone companies that gives the data needed to Google. For example Google maps doesn't isn't able to locate itself on any net-providers here in Denmark with my Nokia E61i.

Unless Google has some kind of intelligent solution to this problem I doubt I am interested when this hits the market.

Re:GPS

[Layth]

From what I hear google seeks to triangulate your position based upon cell phone towers, rather than utilizing a GPS system.

Re:GPS

[Tony Hoyle]

Alas this is doomed to failure, as it would require them to have a database containing the locations of all towers in the world.

They don't have this, and neither do any of the other companies that claim to do this kind of thing.. I've *never* seen such applications actually work even right in the middle of major cities.

Re:GPS

[bahwi]

Android is a platform, not a device. So some may come with GPS others may not. You can buy a bluetooth add-on for GPS and Google Maps works with it(or attempts to triangulate, but is not very accurate, as they already tell you).

Re:GPS

[Anonymous Coward]

It finds your position based on your position, huh? Amazing what they can do these days.

All in All

[Ev!LOnE]

Well, I feel that the plus point of Android is that it is open source. So that should allow future developments like GPS, motion sensing API, etc. All it needs is a bunch of enthusiastic developers(which is actually the case since Google is floating the thing). I dont think that 200Mhz processor will be a deterrent, Android should sooner or later support better processors as well. Only better hardware needs to be thrown into it. Now what we need to know is how it affects the rest of market, Or if it can compete and make users believe that it is better than symbian or windows mobile. Whatever happens, we end users will hopefully get better products.

Easy to develop ...

[lakshmanok]

I tried Android out -- we banged out a personalized weather application (even without a GPS chip, Android is capable of triangulating satellites to get within 300m of the user's position, which is sufficient for weather applications). The whole process took under an hour and was easy as pie.. So, no it's not vaporware. The hardware may be still be a few months away, but the software is enough to create real-world, practical applications.

Re:Easy to develop ...

[rukidding]

This is all good news for us developers. The sooner Android is available on an actual piece of hardware the sooner developers can get a better feel for how this new platform will interact outside of the current emulator.

At Shook Labs our new Android App's will rely heavily on how the platform behaves in a truly mobile setting.

lakshmanok, Good luck with you App!

Re:Easy to develop ...

[Anonymous Coward]

(even without a GPS chip, Android is capable of triangulating satellites to get within 300m of the user's position, which is sufficient for weather applications

Satellites? I think you mean land based cell phone towers.

Re:Easy to develop ...

[KZigurs]

uhm, ehm, ahm... triangulating w/o gps chip? Maybe you meant triangulating based on GSM base stations?

Re:Easy to develop ...

[lakshmanok]

oops ... i should have simply written "triangulating". I don't know what it is based on. Probably it's based on strength of signal from nearby cell-phone towers. In any case, the toolkit lets you get the user location to 300m (compared to about 3m using GPS).

Re:Easy to develop ...

[jez9999]

How long until MS enter the phone market? With Google and Apple coming out with their versions, it's hard to see MS not coming along a few months later with an inferior knockoff.

Re:Easy to develop ...

[ceedee99uk]

c.300m accuracy is good enough for me, almost all the time.
However GMaps on my S60 mobile routinely either finds me "unavailable" or well over a mile out.

If they've got the triangulating algorythms working more accurately, why not release it on GMaps?
(And yes, that was a rhetorical question...)
;-)

Re:Easy to develop ...

[jonbryce]

MS entered the phone market ages ago, certainly they were in the market in 2002, and probably earlier than that. I have one sitting on my desk.

Sigh...

[rodrigoandrade]

And here was I holding my breath, hoping that almighty Google and its wads of cash would be brave enough to try and one up the Iphone's superb UI... oh well.

2007 over. Insert coin(s) to continue.

So,

[Fengpost]

I sure hope Google is licensing the OS for free to keep the phone cost down and make money off the advertising just like their other services.

Re:Designs - RTFA

[slashbaby]

The FA has pictures of hardware that is cobbled together so the engineers have something to work on. It is by no means what it will look like in the end. From the FA:

And yes, this big drab-looking device is dog ugly - but this isn't a slick made-for-media concept phone, it's merely a functional prototype on which the developers and engineers can tinker (and we all know that as rule, they're not big on elegant design).

RTFA!!

Android on Existing phones

[Inakizombie]

Does anyone know if it'll be possible to install Android on existing smartphones? I really like the hardware of my HTC Tilt, but am less than impressed with Windows Mobile 6. I went with this model over the iPhone because of a few added features I find useful, particularly on the hardware side.

Re:Android on Existing phones

[vhogemann]

That depends,

If HTC re-use some of its existing hardware to deploy some Android phones, maybe... I've seem some threads at xda-developers and MoDaCo with people talking about flashing their phones with alternative WinMo versions.

My guess is: it probably will be possible... but HTC won't support it. Another possibility is that Android might appear as an paid upgrade, but it's very unlikely.

Mind you that you DON'T need to wipe Windows Mobile to try Linux on your smartphone, there are some bootloaders out there that can boot Linux straight from the expansion card... so we might be able to try Android before flashing it definitely into the phone.

I have a HTC s710 BTW, HTC make some cool phones indeed.

Graphics chip?

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember your history? The first 3D games were playable with PI-90's and no accelerator. An ARM9-200 has power to spare for such a task, especially considering that the screen factor is likely low enough resolution to be a postage stamp on most full screen monitors.

Re:Graphics chip?

[AKAImBatman]

Remember your history?

I do. Do you?

Re:What's the bigger flop?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's like asking "what was the biggest flop of the 1980s, the VCR or the CD?"

More like asking in 1995, "what's the bigger flop, Teh Lunix or Betamax?"

OLPC is a flop already: it's inferior to the Intel Classmate, which is selling at the exact same price. And the Google Phone is reportedly a buggy schizophrenic mess, just like everything Google tries to make money with except advertising.

Neo1973/OpenMoko and Android

[jag7720]

Why doesn't Google team up with OpenMoKo and Qtopia and really get something done.

Google's phone sounds awesome, but this is the kind of thing that hinders the "open phone" market. Too many splinters.

Re:Neo1973/OpenMoko and Android

[vhogemann]

AFAIK both OpenMoko and QTopia use C/C++ for development, and so these platforms have one great disadvantage:

Most cellphone development is already done using Java.

Also, Java offers a great feature, isolation from the underlying OS. That means that one ill behaved application won't bring the entire phone down, and reduces the opportunities for security failures. IMHO C/C++ is just too dangerous to be allowed for general development on a phone, try to imagine the kind of mess viruses and trojans could do if they had access to billions of cellphones worldwide?

Can't they afford a designer?

[ceeam]

http://apcmag.com/system/files/images/androidlive.article-width.JPG

I'm sorry, but it looks really fugly. Even with my dislike of thumb qwerty-keyboards aside.

Re:Slashdot: The place to be Gay

[maryjanecapri]

how absolutely ignorant of you.

i'll have to find out if all of my gay friends hang out at slashdot.

Android on an MDA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone already posted about putting android on an existing phone:

Does anyone know if it'll be possible to install Android on existing smartphones? I really like the hardware of my HTC Tilt, but am less than impressed with Windows Mobile 6. I went with this model over the iPhone because of a few added features I find useful, particularly on the hardware side. It is mentioned that android is being designed for ARM-9 @ 200mhz which is exactly the CPU in my T-Mobile MDA. Does anyone know if there are any Android beta ROMS already in the wild?

And to this clown quoted above: look for today screen modification software and apps to make it do what you want, at least you have the CPU muscle to run WM6 properly (tilt=400mhz), where as I only have half that to run WM5 loaded down with apps in my MDA, if I had a tilt I'd already know how to make it do everything I needed it to (and I'd already have most of the software needed to do it)! *Translation = Don't b!tch about the phone I want you jerk!

Re:Vaporware? (moderate parent funny)

[Anonymous Coward]

Err... I'm not a fan of Britney, but she has always delivered quality intellectual music. Very challenging, but always a deep insight into modern musical theory...

C'mon. Microsoft is second only to Duke Nukem Forever. Their immediate response to any competition is to announce that their next product will do more. Linux has a database like filesystem (Reiserfs); announce that the next version of Windows will be databased too (WinFS), whether it's a good idea or not. Firefox is winning standards wars. Announce that IE 8 can be built compliant to the ACID tests. etc. etc. etc.

The only reason I answer you is that some people honestly begin to believe that Microsoft does something other than buy up little companies.

linux kernel + netbsd libc + g-java = ???

[Anonymous Coward]

Why exactly is this Android platform news?

Linux Kernel based - Oooo.
NetBSD derived LibC - Huh??
Yet another Java implementation - Huh??
10 million dollar app, TBD - ?

Ooo, Java apps on a Linux phone.
I mean Java apps on a Linux kernel + BSD libc phone.
I mean Google-Java appls on Linux kernel + BSD libc phone.
?

Why team up with people who can't...

[Anonymous Coward]

...get shit done? They had their chance, and didn't deliver. You don't give away 2/3 of the project to people like that.

Betaware

[Ghaan]

Utter nonsense! No vaporware, it's betaware.
Android will emerge soon - and few years later it won't be beta anymore...

Re:Vaporware? (moderate parent funny)

[Goaway]

Linux has a database like filesystem (Reiserfs) No, it has no such thing. Reiserfs is not database-like in any way, and it is nothing like WinFS was supposed to be.

I hope they put in GPS!

[LWATCDR]

I have GPS on my phone and I love it. It is great.
I hope that Google doesn't make the same mistakes that Palm did with the Centro.
1. Voice dialing. Really this is just too usful to live without.
2. Full Bluetooth support. My current phone seems to support just about every bluetooth profile around.
3. GPS. Again it is just too useful once you have it.
4. Support for large MicroSD cards. I have a 6 GB card in my phone.
5. A good media player. Apple has shown that it makes a big difference.
6. And this is the big one. It really needs to be a good phone!

I just got a Sanyo Katana DLX. It really is a great phone, good GPS, and an okay Media player.
I would consider it a perfect phone if it has just a few additions.
1. Use a standard MicroUSB connector for charging and data.
2. A better camera, Yes I do use it as a camera.

I would love a good smart phone but none of them have wooed me yet.