Google Nexus Rumored To Cost $530 Or $180 w/Plan

wkurzius writes "The new Google phone, the Nexus One, is rumored to cost $530 unlocked and will work on any GSM network. A subsidized version is also available for $180 and will get you a T-Mobile Even More Individual 500 Plan for 2-years with a $350 termination fee. Access to the phone is supposed to be invite only at first, with January 5th being the supposed release date."

Comments

Invite only?

[MBGMorden]

Seriously? Since when the hell is the ability to buy a phone "invite only"? I swear the social aspect of phone ownership is getting ridiculous.

Re:Invite only?

[CyberLord Seven]

Consider yourself fortunate that you are not on the invite list. Remember the dorks who bought the iPhone when it first came out? Remember those same dorks just a few months later when Apple dropped the price? :)

I suspect this invite only thing is just to drum up interest in the phone. Soon, everyone and his brother will be able to buy one just like Gmail.

Re:Invite only?

[alecto]

Just a marketing gimmick to make people feel elite. Invites will be about as scarce as Gmail invites.

Re:Invite only?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

And/or a marketing gimmick to map who knows who...

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's google's favourite little marketing ploy, to get everyone worked up and make their latest product(wave, voice, gmail, etc) seem elite and super-cool, each person who buys one is likely going to end up with a dozen invites of their own to send around, or sell on ebay... Fingers crossed they'll have the word "Beta" incribed on the facia of the phone, that'd make it super awesome.

Re:Invite only?

[BitZtream]

There isn't a 'social aspect' to the phone other than using it to call other people.

Even most kids to who the 'social' aspect would be important don't give a shit beyond the basics.

People care more about the social aspect of their forks than they do about their phones.

Re:Invite only?

[FreshlyShornBalls]

Seriously? Since when the hell is the ability to buy a phone "invite only"? I swear the social aspect of phone ownership is getting ridiculous.

That's not how I read the post. The *launch / announcement party* is invite only. That doesn't mean purchasing the phone is invite only.

Re:Invite only?

[Sockatume]

It's probably to restrict a limited initial stock of the device to the customers who will give the greatest return. Who ever thought that a ubiquitous item, and one that performs communications at that, might have a social aspect though, eh?

Re:Invite only?

[nurb432]

For some, ( not me ) the fact you get to be first in line for the latest shiny object is worth the extra cost to them.

Re:Invite only?

[PieSquared]

Google starts many of their services as invite-only. Consider it a beta test where the testers have to pay for the privilege, and are strictly limited in number. As opposed to all the other recent smartphones where the beta testers had to pay for the privilege but weren't limited in number.

Re:Invite only?

[negRo_slim]

For some, ( not me ) the fact you get to be first in line for the latest shiny object is worth the extra cost to them.

But what if said product could Change Your Life!

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

But this is a total game-changer! An iPhone killer!

Isn't it?

Re:Invite only?

[rawr_one]

Do you not remember how scarce Gmail invites were back when it launched? You picked a poor example.

Re:Invite only?

[xch13fx]

umm, the razr was a status symbol, as soon as the price dropped and att stopped having exclusivity people began to hate theirs. Blackberrys, and treos then became the phones to have. The iphone is now the phone people want to be seen talking on and I imagine those who like that aspect best are getting tired of seeing other people with iphones. I guess your right that the mere fact that you had a cell in the 90s was a big deal, but now the type of phone you have is indeed a status symbol.

Re:Invite only?

[MBGMorden]

You clearly haven't been hanging out with the same people I have. It seems that every person between 14 and 30 is caught up in phones - what theirs can do, what yours can't, and new/shiny. Hell from what I've seen in the last 3 years or so teenage and early 20's girls get as geeky over their phones as geeks do over their computers.

A friend of my sisters was out with us a while back - overall a pretty superficial girl. Not bright about most things, and works in one of those trendy shops where they sell bath oils and the like. Somebody said something about their phone and my God she took off. Whipping out her phone showing what it could do - and not just "OMG it can do interwebs!" talk. Discussing various input methods, which phones did what better and how, connectivity, the works. It would be what you would expect if some clueless noob said something in passing about the GPL around a Linux geek - just about phones. She has been the most extreme of this I found, but certainly not the only one. The nation as a whole (well, the younger crowd anyways) is in love with the smartphone right now.

Re:Invite only?

[FurrBear]

Isn't "Invite Only" the way Google handles all of their public Betas?

Re:Invite only?

[MBGMorden]

Bingo. You responded almost exactly as I was going to.

Its like cars. In the late 1800's/early 1900's having a car by itself was a status symbol. Then everybody got them. HOWEVER, 100 years later with millions of cars on the road rich guys still like to flaunt their Porsche's, Maserati's and Aston Martin's, and you'd be crazy to think that those cars aren't status symbols, even if they ARE quite a bit more capable than your average Kia.

Today, everyone has a phone, but individual models certainly are status symbols.

Re:Invite only?

[fucket]

Aston Martin's

Actually, I think the correct pluralization is Aston's Martin.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG, you're on forkbook?
Woot!

Re:Invite only?

[babyrat]

Since when the hell is the ability to buy a phone "invite only"?

Sounds much better than the 'wait in line for hours outside the Apple store only to find out they are sold out' method.

Re:Invite only?

[thePsychologist]

The _buying_ of the phone is not invite only. That's just the special event to unveil it. It's in the article.

Re:Invite only?

[Undead Waffle]

I'm guessing it's this much more than to generate interest. Google entering the phone market is a big enough deal that it will get plenty of attention on its own. But they need some testing and it's generally not a good idea to start off by mass producing something like this where expectations are high. By limiting the stock early they can make some tweaks before the general public has access to them with minimal side effects. Hopefully this means less chance of an "updated" version 6 months later.

Re:Invite only?

[Red Flayer]

That's a very interesting point I hadn't considered until now.

The invite system may be yet another way that Google collects information useful to them in selling advertising, etc... they can identify "power brokers" in tech marketing, which would be valuable information to advertisers (and to their internal marketing).

Yech.

Re:Invite only?

[poetmatt]

the phone will be nice and cheap, I agree. Also, tmobile lets you change your plan even if you signed up with a different one (no charge/no renewal of contract).

So even if you sign up with their wacky $79 plan, you can shift it to a normal plan within a couple days and get it prorated. thus, plan really doesn't matter.

Re:Invite only?

[y0_diggity]

For some, ( not me ) the fact you get to be first in line for the latest shiny object is worth the extra cost to them.

Guilty. Shiny objects are rad.

Re:Invite only?

[rainmaestro]

I think I'm the only 20-something techie who refuses to get a smartphone. Of course, I've run the numbers and I average about 17 minutes a day on the phone, so I'm a bit of an oddity all around.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

Before the RAZR, it was the Motorola Star-TAC. When the RAZR was popular, what I saw people wanting were Blackberries and WM devices, which cost about $400-$600 even with a contract.

Essentially, the iPhone levelled the marketplace. More expensive phones can be found, but there isn't this feeling that an iPhone is "just good enough for the basics until I buy a 'real' phone". What people tend to want isn't another phone, it's the next generation of iPhone.

Re:Invite only?

[Fred_A]

Consider yourself fortunate that you are not on the invite list. Remember the dorks who bought the iPhone when it first came out? Remember those same dorks just a few months later when Apple dropped the price? :)

That's where Google will be more innovative than Apple : the phone will remain invite only indefinitely, the price will not change and only 5000 will be made.

That way the happy few will get to remain exclusive dorks indefinitely.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

worthless with out links to pics of said "girl".

Re:Invite only?

[AvitarX]

Have you used wave?

It's really really awkward interface (voice has some issues too IMO, but is much further along).

I would not want everyone to be feeling the frustrations of wave, were I google. It would be stillborn. Let it slowly grow with people somewhat interested, allowing the infrastructure to scale with use too.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey! not all of us love it. hell i just want to go back to my first nokia brick. at least it wasn't riddled with bugs.

Re:Invite only?

[mdwh2]

More expensive phones can be found, but there isn't this feeling that an iPhone is "just good enough for the basics until I buy a 'real' phone". What people tend to want isn't another phone, it's the next generation of iPhone.

Eh? Given that the Iphone is one of the most expensive on the market, of course people buying it aren't buying it as a "barely good enough"! And this is nothing new with the Iphone - it's always been the case that if you buy the most expensive phone, it's going to be one of the best until next generation phones come along.

Anyway, whether people buy high or low end phones, people have always kept their phones until the next generation came along. Why would you buy a phone, only to throw it away straight away and buy another phone? I don't understand what your distinction between "real" phones and other phones are.

And I'd like to see a citation that people are more likely to stick with Iphones, compared with other makes of phone (and even if it was true, I'm not sure that says anything special about the Iphone - it just means there are a load of loyal Apple fans, which isn't really news).

So in short, your post is yet another "let's make up some mystical significance about the Iphone", when no such significance exists.

Re:Invite only?

[mdwh2]

All new phones these days are status symbols. E.g., today people see you with a touch screen, but it's not like they can get close and see whether it's a £50 touch screen phone, or a £600 overpriced Jesus phone.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

Call it the "game console" syndrome. Purchasing a phone (like a game console, for part of their target demographic) is often an exclusive affair forcing one to pick from a multitude of possible options. By making this choice, the purchaser is cutting themselves off from the other possibilities (you are not going to buy another phone, generally at least until your contract expires; and most people don't buy more than one console).

The result is that people become attached to the device they chose. They know all of the features (since they had to make the decision of which to get) and their is an intrinsic need to reaffirm their initial purchasing decision in the face of all the possibilities they cut themselves off from. So they end up being fans of what they purchased.

The more arbitrary, binding, expensive, and limiting the decision was, the more of a fan (fanboy even) they are likely to become.

Re:Invite only?

[dangitman]

but it's not like they can get close and see whether it's a £50 touch screen phone, or a £600 overpriced Jesus phone.

Say what? In normal social situations, people can and do get close enough to tell. Unless you never interact with anybody, that is.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

The event is invite only, the phone isn't.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, i've yet to be invited, well, that and the fact that i simply don't care about or understand the point of the thing.

Re:Invite only?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

That was always my presumption as to why they left Gmail invite only(but with absurd numbers of invites available) for as long as they did.

Invite only can be a capacity issues/test scaling thing, and it is certainly better to be seen as "exclusive" than "massively overloaded and flaky"; but once it got to the 50 invites per account, each invited account gets 50 of its own stage and stayed there for a while, capacity could hardly have been the reason.

With phones, you would almost certainly get a much smaller social graph; but potentially a higher value one. "people who want free email accounts" are probably worth something, in batches of 1000; but "people with a demonstrated enthusiasm for cutting edge tech toys, and did we mention that(since credit cards were involved) we have verified names and addresses for them all?" are probably of interest as individuals.

Re:Invite only?

[JYD]

Just to point out, all initial Google products are marked Beta and are almost guaranteed to be invite only, examples being Gmail, Wave, Voice, etc. However, I doubt Google would mark their phone "Nexus One Beta", even though the "Beta" moniker reflects the phone perfectly. Of course, with this Google Beta product, I don't think you can get your friend to send you an invite.

Re:Invite only?

[mjwx]

Remember the dorks who bought the iPhone

Why must you insult dorks like that?

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

For some reason, you see people wanting status symbols. But that doesn't make it true. How can you possibly know just how prevalent such behavior is without proper testing to rule out your own cognitive bias? This kind of reasoning is how people end up believing in pseudo-science. Yet, if you're already in the science camp (as most Slashdoters probably are), it seems like this claptrap is allowed to pass as insightful.

Re:Invite only?

[elrous0]

I just got the Droid Eris for free at Best Buy (with ubiquitous contact clause of course). People who bought them for Christmas payed $100 for them. If you see a model you want, odds are it will drop down to an affordable price (or even no price at all) if you'll just wait a while. If you buy one when it's first out and uber-popular, you're going to pay a premium.

Re:Invite only?

[Whorhay]

I'm not far from my twenties, turned 31 this year. I've been interested in Smart Phones and such since I saw my first PalmPilot in 1998. The trouble always was that the price was too high for a gadget I'd have to make up uses for. I've never been in a work or home environment where owning one of these devices was worth it. I've always had better more cost effective options available.

So far as phones go I think I probably average under 17 minutes a month on my personal cell phone. In fact I can't even bring it into the building I work in, so my wife carries and uses it.

Re:Invite only?

[u38cg]

While the information is no doubt analysed in that sense, I think it has simpler purposes...one, to limit the number of users during early stage development, and two, to market the exclusivity of the product. How would you compare a job application from a gmail address as opposed to a hotmail address?

Re:Invite only?

[KnownIssues]

You were just born ten years too late. If you had been a twenty-something ten years ago like I was, you would have bought every new smartphone that came out bragging about all the cool features it had that you would never use. We called them pocket PCs back in the day and they didn't even have the ability to make calls!

It's just now that the cool people are all doing it it's no longer the nerdy thing to do.

Re:Invite only?

[rainmaestro]

I had a few devices growing up that were essentially pocket PCs. I might be mixing up the model numbers, but I think they were the Zaurus ZR-5800 and the Sharp PC-E500. Never did find much for them, honestly. I think I programmed a few BASIC games on the Sharp, but they really were quite useless for me.

My eyes are taking enough of a pounding from working with PCs all day, the last thing they need is to spend all night staring at a 4-inch display on a phone.

Re:Invite only?

[Anonymous Coward]

Soon, everyone and his brother will be able to buy one just like Gmail.

Woah, you pay for Gmail? I get that for free!

Re:Invite only?

[alecto]

I do remember, but they're common as dirt now, so the example is just fine--you are erring comparing the future to the past. And they were never really all that scarce for people that had more than one or two friends who were in the circle of enthusiasts.

So

[jimbobborg]

Who got invited? Whoopi Goldberg? Or one of the celebs on the T-Mobile Android ads?

And $530 for an unlocked phone that will last about three years? Really?

Re:So

[linzeal]

That is about 15 bucks a month, not too bad. As long as they have an unlimited data plan for about 50 bucks I would do it.

Re:So

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, the actual cost of an iPhone to a retailer is over $900 (in Canada, so it may be less in the states). At $530 with the specs this phone has, Google is already heavily subsidizing the phone out of their own pockets, hence the five per account limit which is still generous. Stop your fucking whining - if you want the phone to last, treat it well.

Re:So

[Sockatume]

The contract handset won't last any longer than the no-obligation one, and might work out cheaper. I dunno about the US, but if I go to a UK phone company and don't ask for a handset I save a third on the monthly rate and leave at a month's notice, putting the equivalent of about $400 in my pocket.

Re:So

[bberens]

I've ranted about this plenty of times on slashdot. There is no such program in the US. You can buy a "pay as you go" phone but the cost/minute is generally higher than the contract plans. Bringing your own phone to the deal only grants you the freedom to not sign a contract for a *normal* monthly plan. There is no discount whatsoever.

Re:So

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no such program?? Except the one T-mobile offers where you get ~ $10 discount per month is you bring your own phone or buy it a retail price?

Re:So

[b0bby]

Actually, it seems T-mobile is doing just that now - "Even More" is their standard subsidized phones + 2 year contract deal, "Even More Plus" is the same plans but no "free" phones or contracts & $10/month less. Maybe the other carriers will follow if T-mobile starts getting people to switch because of this.

OTOH, if you want T-mobile & a Google phone, it makes more sense to pay the extra $10/month to get the subsidized phone, because the amount of subsidy (($530-$180)/24) is almost $15/month.

Re:So

[pmontra]

Even with an higher cost per minute if you don't call much you'll end up paying less than the monthly cost of the contract plan.

Re:So

[sneakyimp]

Unlimited data on t-mobile is $30/month. you get unlimited voice and data for like $80/mo no contract.

Re:So

[thetoadwarrior]

That's about standard for an unlocked new phone. What were you expecting?

Re:So

[xaxa]

Can you buy a phone from WalMart yet?

Asda (owned by WalMart) sell phones, and when I looked had the cheapest basic pay-as-you-go plan (4p text, 8p/min call).

Aside from that, I wish the operators would stick to simple pricing, it makes it difficult to compare costs. 4p/text is easy to work out, but variations on "10p/text, but 300 free texts every time you top up by £10, but the free texts must be used within one month, and free texts while you're at home and to your best friend" from 10 different operators is annoying.

Re:So

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out T-Mobiles Even More Plus vs Even More plans. Even More plan requires a contract and grants a subsidy on the phone, but the monthly charge is $20 more a month than the non-contract Even More Plus which is a bring your own device affair.

Re:So

[Undead Waffle]

Last I heard all of the US carriers were requiring the data plan if you had a smart phone. Any word on whether the "Even More Plus" plan does this? Again, last time I looked into it AT&T would detect the smart phone on their network regardless of whether it was bought separately and add the $30/month data plan to your bill for you. Any carrier that lets me bring my own smart phone without requiring me to pay $30 for an internet connection I'll barely ever use has a good chance of getting my business next time my contract expires.

Re:So

[rhvarona]

That is no longer correct. On T-Mobile:

Even More Plan (requires a contract): Unlimited Talk - $59.99

Even More Plus Plan (no contract): Unlimited Talk - $49.99

Re:So

[mlts]

There is a third option: If you have an account in good standing with T-Mobile, they will finance a chunk of the phone for you over some months. And there is no contract, although you are responsible for the balance for the phone.

Re:So

[timeOday]

Aside from that, I wish the operators would stick to simple pricing, it makes it difficult to compare costs.

I've realized complexity (a.k.a. "choice") is one of the main ways large businesses leverage their size advantage against individual consumers. Airline tickets, credit cards, hotels, cellphones, insurance, and your friendly local car dealer - all of them intentionally obscure their offerings so only a specialist can really understand them. The more they can hide the bottom line and make you focus on details, the less control you have.

You can fight this to some degree by preferring companies who don't play so many games. I like Southwest Airlines for this reason, and stick with a Visa from my Credit Union (somewhat higher interest rate but fewer tricks and lower fees). I stick with a straight life insurance plan, fixed-rate mortgage, low-load index funds for retirement, and finance cars through the Credit Union instead of the dealer.

But when it comes to cellphones, telephones, and internet, there isn't very much choice. I get by with a tracfone.

Re:So

[AvitarX]

My data is a separate plan, like texts with T-Mobile.

Android unlimited data and 400 messages is $25 + your voice plan.

Re:So

[Wonko the Sane]

Last I heard all of the US carriers were requiring the data plan if you had a smart phone. Any word on whether the "Even More Plus" plan does this?

No, you are not required to purchase a data plan. Plans start at $30 for 500 voice minutes and go up to $80 for unlimited data, texts and voice minutes.

Re:So

[Wonko the Sane]

$30 - 500 voice minutes
$40 - 500 voice minutes and unlimited texts OR 1000 voice minutes
$50 - Unlimited voice minutes OR 1000 voice minutes and unlimited texts
$60 - Unlimited voice minutes and texts OR 500 voice minutes and unlimited texts and data
$70 - 1000 voice minutes and unlimited texts and data
$80 - Unlimited everything.

Re:So

[Tintivilus]

Again, last time I looked into it AT&T would detect the smart phone on their network regardless of whether it was bought separately and add the $30/month data plan to your bill for you.

I've had various unlocked smartphones on AT&T's $20 featurephone data plan for three years now. Smartphone "detection" is a myth.

Re:So

[tkrotchko]

"You can buy a "pay as you go" phone but the cost/minute is generally higher than the contract plans. "

Only when you reach certain thresholds like about 400-600 minutes a month. However, for most people who fall into that category, it would be more cost-effective to get a landline, or a VoIP alternative at home and avoid burning up expensive cell phone minutes.

Re:So

[boskone]

Actually, Scott Adams (of Dilbert) refers to this as a "Confuseopoly". He wrote about it in the Dilbert Future I believe. YOu have to assume there is some truth to this based on how complicated the pricing plans for many consumer products/services are today.

Edit: ah yes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusopoly

Re:So

[Slisochies]

$530 US is about the standard price for unlocked smartphones worldwide. It's about the same price as an unlocked iPhone.

Re:So

[Dare nMc]

you might look into a MVNO instead of directly from a provider from: http://www.prepaidreviews.com/bestrated.html was the first listing I found with links to some options. I am considering pagepluscellular many of their plans are much cheaper than any of the verizon/sprint plans for me, but they don't offer many discounted phones (only used it appears), so you would need to buy any new gadgets outright.
Also Verizon will not sell the droid phones without a data plan ( I mostly have wifi access everywhere I go, and can use my companies broadband card with a Wifi access point to share in other places.) So I would buy it outright from google for around $300, but probably not the $500+ to get the cheaper plans.

Re:So

[tftp]

for most people who fall into that category, it would be more cost-effective to get a landline, or a VoIP alternative at home and avoid burning up expensive cell phone minutes

A large number of business people use their cell phones in this manner. They have desk phones too, but they travel a lot, and they must be always available. I know marketing people who are more on the road than at their desk. That's because their job is to talk to customers, not to their coworkers back at the office.

Re:So

[herksc]

Actually, looks like its still better to pay the $530 up front. As far as I can tell, you can get t-mobile 500 plus unlimited text and web for $60 on the Even More Plus (no contract). To get the same on Even More (contract) is $40, plus $10 for unlimited text, plus $30 for unlimited web, equaling $80 total. That's a difference of $20 per month x 24 to $480 total.

A little more competition is a good thing

[DJRumpy]

I can only hope this brings down the cost of these phones. The prices are already greater than the cost of netbooks and bargain laptops/desktops. I realize that miniaturization is a factor, but we really need more strong competitors in this area. I would much prefer a non-subsidized phone except the price is a little daunting all in one lump sum.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[pclminion]

The lump sum does suck. I've been using T-Mobile for about 10 years, and haven't really had anything to complain about, but I still hate the contract. I was poking around their online phone store and saw that they are now offering financing for the newer touchscreens with NO CONTRACT, which is pretty nice. It works out to about $20 a month, and it's 0% APR. I was going to take the plunge, but then I saw that the Nexus was coming out any day now. So maybe I'll wait and see if they offer a similar financing deal for the Nexus.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[nurb432]

There plenty of inexpensive unlocked 'smart phones' out there now, if you want to look across the ocean to china. Sure, you have to be careful in what you choose, and you may not want to support the country ( clue: most phones are made there anyway... ) but they are available if you want..

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[Seor Jojoba]

Just buy it with a credit card. And pay the debt off at $20/month or whatever is convenient. You'll be better off in the long run, because we'll get the carriers to start competing as big dumb pipes. The emphasis will be on coverage/speed for the buck, instead of some wacky chase after the latest "It" phone. We should all stop being scared off by upfront costs and letting phone carriers handle our financing through subsidies.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[DJRumpy]

I think these smart phones have gone far beyond being an 'It' phone. This isn't some hot item that one quickly loses interest in within a few weeks. I bought my first smart phone (an iPhone) a few years ago. I still use it heavily. Having the internet in your pocket is a huge convenience for all sorts of circumstances. The apps are just icing. I use mine 5 times a week at the gym, I look up prices, I check release dates for movies, music, and media, all while I'm out and about. These have real purpose far beyond just being an accessory to one's clothes.

They are essentially a mini-pc in your pocket, and I hardly need to extol the benefits of a PC to this crowd ;)

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[mdwh2]

Note there are smartphones in the low end too (e.g., the Nokia 5800 I got without contract at £180).

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[maxume]

I wonder when they are going to see saturation for the market of people who are willing to pay $20-$30 a month for 'unlimited' data?

I'm sure I would get some use out of having the internet in my pocket, but my interest isn't such that I can justify putting it in my budget.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[yog]

They are essentially a mini-pc in your pocket, and I hardly need to extol the benefits of a PC to this crowd ;)

Precisely, and it goes beyond that. I travel a lot these days, and I anticipate that my upcoming (probably Android) smartphone will replace the following devices I either own or need to get:

- a phone (my Nokia folding phone works great, admittedly, but not as fun to use)
- 5 MP camera with flash (saves me $100 on the low end point-and-shoot that I need)
- GPS with Google step-by-step voice directions (save me $100 on a much needed GPS)
- PDA (replaces my Palm T3, which works but needs a new battery, and it's one less device in my pockets, and finally I can centralize my contact database)
- Laptop/Netbook replacement (I travel a lot and would love to leave my laptop at home, and saves me $300 on a netbook)
- Digital compass - I haven't even begun to think about the potential uses of this!
- tether it to my laptop while traveling (I've heard it works with rooted Android devices)
- MP3/movie player (doesn't really replace my 80GB iPod until inexpensive 64GB cards are available)
- my livelihood (I'm learning Android programming)

Probably, there are people who would disagree with this list and have their own priorities. That's fine; it's a versatile platform, like the iPhone and other smart handhelds, and that's the beauty of it.

Regarding the cost, the big question is whether we will be able to circumvent the cell phone service completely and make pure VOIP calls in wi-fi hotspots using services like Google Voice and Skype. If so, then a minimal minutes and data plan would be sufficient for those of us who spend most of our time bathed in wifi. Why pay $60-80/month for a service you use only 20% of the time? Anyway, with free VOIP it does make more sense to buy an unlocked phone with no subscription, and just pay as you go or get the cheapest possible (usually unadvertised) plan from your GSM provider.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[Synn]

- tether it to my laptop while traveling (I've heard it works with rooted Android devices)

Don't even need to root the phone if you're willing to buy a $29 dollar app: http://www.junefabrics.com/android/index.php

Works pretty well, but it's windows/mac only.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[vosester]

Ok mate apples and oranges, embedded devices have higher cost for many reasons.
Making mobile’s is expensive. Putting then together and developing them cost a lot more as people expect a level of service above that of a netbook.

If you call was drop because your Anti-Virus was updating you would irritated to no end.

Plus operating system need to be design for mobile needs even Linux.
This is not “Slap Windows on it and sell it” kind of market.

Also production cost are not on the same level as common P.C/Laptop parts how many 3.5 screens are made V.S 8.9 - 13 laptop screens.

Not to mention the thousand other reasons, I think the Google phone price is really low for what you get.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[kchrist]

Just buy it with a credit card. And pay the debt off at $20/month or whatever is convenient.

... and find that your phone actually cost you well over $600 by the time you've finished paying off the interest your credit card company charges. Sorry, but that's a terrible idea. If $530 is too much up front, do it the old fashioned way: Save for it, then buy.

Jesus, no wonder people are in so much debt.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

If you get a plan with them, T-Mobile lets you pay for the cost of a phone in installments, interest-free.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[Eil]

Most of the phones themselves are actually priced about right. They're not exactly cheap to produce. Take a standard desktop computer from 6-7 years ago, shrink it down to the size of a candy bar, add a few gizmos here and there (bluetooth, GPS, touchscreen display), ensure it can run for a full day without a recharge, get it certified by multiple agencies around the world, and then, finally, spend millions developing software for it.

Honestly, I'm surprised there are any under $500. What we really need now is some kind of wireless broadband Internet access that is not owned by an existing cellco. It should be affordable (in line with DSL and cable prices), not require a plan, contract, or special device, and there should be no caps or penalties for using the device. Cell phone companies would be obsolete because the smart phones that they already sell are more than capable of VoIP and you could choose from any VoIP carrier on the planet.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

So they should finance it through their mobile contract instead at about a thousand bucks for a phone worth half that?

His point is that CC direct purchase high interest payments is actually CHEAPER over 2 years than the ripoff phone plans subsidies!

Its really sad because pretty much every joe blow buys into them. Most US carriers don't even have an actual unsubsidized plan with savings, ironically t-mobile is probably the only big one that does.

You also realize you're saying 'go years without a mobile phone beyond a dumb dialer' on slashdot right?

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[mspohr]

I think that most phones are overpriced. You can buy an iPhone clone from China for $100 (or less) which has all of the hardware of the iPhone (touch screen, GSM radio, WiFi, camera, memory and processor plus various sensors, GPS. etc.). Granted that these are all cheapest quality and the software is terrible but I doubt that buying first quality parts in large quantities would be much more expensive... certainly not enough to justify a $600 or more price. When you consider that the software is free (Android) or amortized over millions of units, there shouldn't be much software or development cost per unit. (These clone phones have to amortize development costs over relatively small numbers of units so they have a disadvantage there.) I do think that smartphones are overpriced.

Re:A little more competition is a good thing

[Whorhay]

The thing is that clearly you have a valid need for a good smart phone. I would argue that the vast majority of people that buy these things though don't have any need for them. Not that there is anything wrong with buying a status symbol. I just think it's funny that so many people will spend so much on something they get so little real use out of.

No thanks

[TubeSteak]

Those wanting to buy the handset subsidized will pay $180 and have to sign up for a two year contract. There appears to be only one plan available for these customers, and that is the T-Mobile Even More Individual 500 Plan, which gives you 500 minutes, free weekend and in-network calls and unlimited SMS, MMS and data. That bring the total cost over two years to $2,100.

The unsubsidized price + a data plan is vastly cheaper

Re:No thanks

[Shadow of Eternity]

My whole family gets unlimited messages, data, and 700 minutes with myfaves (two blackberries and a generic nokia) for a little less than twice that.

Then again they are targeting the young male "I have less sense than money" demographic.

Re:No thanks

[spuke4000]

A little bit OT, but in the states if you buy an unlocked phone can you get a plan that does not include a subsidy for another phone? That is, if I buy an iPhone I'm going to pay $90/month or so, but some of that includes the price of the phone. If I have my own iPhone, or after my initial two year contract (after I've paid off the phone) is it possible to get a cheaper plan? My understanding is no, but please correct me if I'm wrong. So, if I buy a nexus one unlocked can I get a cheaper plan than if I bought the $180 one?

Re:No thanks

[BrokenHalo]

Then again they are targeting the young male "I have less sense than money" demographic.

Why male? Most of the candidates I've seen in this category are female.

Re:No thanks

[Bigjeff5]

Remember that you have to buy the more expensive smartphone data plans for this phone - usually $30 per month for just the data portion.

The subsidised plan is $80 a month when you take away the price of the phone, so the unsub plan would need to be less than $65 per month to make it cheaper. That's a tough one to get where I live, but it is possible. It's not "vastly cheaper" though. To look at it another way, you need to save at least $15 on the monthly bill to do better with the unsubbed phone. If you're saving $20-25 per month, then you're getting into the "vastly cheaper" area. If you can get a deal like that, I'm extremely jealous regardless of the phone.

Re:No thanks

[DrEldarion]

I pay $55/mo for my smartphone data plan + voice on T-Mobile. I do have the most basic voice plan available, but it's definitely there for well cheaper than $80/mo.

Re:No thanks

[jedrek]

I would have absolutely no use for 200 more minutes or two extra accounts.

Then again, I'm not one of those people who thinks that everything isn't specifically targeted at them to be stupid.

Re:No thanks

[Nephilium]

Actually... with T-Mobile, at least when I was recently pricing out Voice and Data plans, the no contract plan was $20 cheaper then the contract plan.

Nephilium

Re:No thanks

[Sockatume]

You're going to be paying for a service plan on the unsubsidised handset, though. You'll make a saving depending on how much you actually need, but the total cost of ownership of the unsubsidised handset over the same two year period is probably closer to $1500.

Re:No thanks

[nurb432]

And its yours out of the gate. But its all still a big ripoff.

Re:No thanks

[ifwm]

"Remember that you have to buy the more expensive smartphone data plans for this phone - usually $30 per month for just the data portion." No, you don't, actually.

Re:No thanks

[SBrach]

If you don't already know this I am sorry. T-mobile sucks now. They jacked up their prices and nothing you have is available anymore. My faves is gone. Unlimited text for ten bucks is now 20. 700 minutes isn't offered on family plans. You are grandfathered in until you decide you need more minutes or want to upgrade a line with a phone that requires a NEW talk + text + web activation (any smartphone). I am currently paying ~$110 a month for 4 lines, 1000 minutes, unlimited text, and one BB plan because I am grandfathered in. The same plan with T-Mobile now that they have their "half the cost of Verizon and ATT" plans is ~$150 with a 2 year contract or $130 a month with no contract but you pay retail for the phones, so for the BB, Highlight, Gravity, and generic Nokia I have now I would have to put up over $1000 to buy the phones and then pay $20 more a month. Sprint has the best deal for a family plan that I have seen recently.

Re:No thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup. In fact, I have a Verizon sub'd Motorola Droid. I also have Google Voice. The outbound number that Google Voice uses to establish calls is on my "Friends and Family" (or whatever Verizon calls it) list, which means I use exactly zero billable minutes every month. Inbound? Yeah, their VoIP. No minutes incurred.

Re:No thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

As the other poster points out, T-Mobile is the only US carrier that currently offers this, and they've only just rolled this pricing scheme out in the past...3 months? 5 months? This past year, basically.

Everyone else will gladly charge you the full (service + subsidized phone) price when you bring your own phone. About the only thing you can do there is pick a phone, get someone to unlock it, and try to sell it as an unlocked phone on eBay or the like.

Re:No thanks

[rwa2]

If it's like their other Android phones, it will likely support wifi as well, so that should take care of your occasional data sync needs... hopefully most of the apps are smart enough to still work while you're offline.

On T-Mobile, you can also get the $10/mo. wap/T-Zones/Web2Go browsing plan, which will basically give you full http / https web access through their proxy. Admittedly this isn't full internet, so apps that won't work through their proxy (such as gmail, gmm, etc.) will fail, but it's still quite useful for the price (well, it used to be better when it only cost $3/mo.) . But a little secret is that if you tether it up with a PDA or Laptop, you can get full internet access through their $10/mo. data plan for some reason. Not terribly convenient compared to an always-on smartphone, but it's served me well plenty of times.

Re:No thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

The subsidised plan is $80 a month when you take away the price of the phone, so the unsub plan would need to be less than $65 per month to make it cheaper.

If you go look at the T-Mobile website, you can get the unsubsidized 500min+text+web for $59.99, or unlimited+text+web for $79.99. The subsidized price is $79.99 for that 500min plan, so that's 20 bucks a month saved right there. If I can get my employer's 10% discount on top of that $59.99 plan, things are looking pretty decent all around (~$65 after taxes), albeit with a ~$600 initial outlay.

Subsidy lock?

[alecto]

If someone buys the phone with the subsidy then subsequently leaves T-mo and pays the ETF, will T-mo unlock the phone? Also, is the ETF prorated? In any case, it seems that the combination of a cheap phone for voice and a netbook/laptop + WiFi or if ubiquitous access is necessary a data stick are a better deal for the money.

Re:Subsidy lock?

[alen]

i think its unlocked out of the box contract or not. it's the crazy ETF you have to pay which is OK since everyone knows people will try to resell this baby on ebay for some quick cash

Re:Subsidy lock?

[rickb928]

If this phone only supports T-Mobile's 3G bands, there is little point to locking it in the first place.

Moving to AT&T gets you a 2G phone on EDGE, which is a very undesireable phone, especially if you want those data features that mean lots of data.

And taking it overseas is unlikely and risks the same problem - 2G in a 3G world.

In fact, only CDMA phones have significant competition that could inspire a user to take a phone to another carrier, and I wonder how incompatible Sprint's 3G network is with Verizon's.

The locking is less and less useful because of these incompatible, unique data network protocols.

Oh, and the point about an UNsubsidized rate plan? Brilliant! We b gettin screwed after our plan is completed, and no carrier dares actually put a price on the subsidy.

Re:Subsidy lock?

[pesho]

T-mo are actually very helpful when you need to unlock the phone. I have unlocked 2 phones with them in the past couple of years. One was an old set that got replaced after contract renewal. The other one is still under contract. I asked them for the unlock code so I can switch the SIM when traveling abroad and avoid the roaming charges. They were very prompt sending me e-mail with the code and detailed instructions how to unlock the phone. Their customer service is the major reason I am still with them.

Re:Subsidy lock?

[Anonymous Bullard]

I've no comment on US carriers (other than oligopolies tend to suck, esp. if they are regional monopolies), but generally speaking if one doesn't need higher speeds of 3G, HSDPA etc. access and the maps one might require can be preloaded, then EDGE or GPRS data connections can still be quite practical. I've found that VoIP works fine over EDGE and on most if not all current handsets EDGE uses far less power than the higher speed 3G chipsets. I carry spare batteries for my kits (no iphones here) but I still value battery life. For higher data speeds I can usually locate a WIFI AP.

I'm hoping a newer generation of mobile radio chipsets would solve the current power consumption issues.

Re:Subsidy lock?

[rickb928]

If you're using Google Maps (expected on Google phone, mandatory almost on Android) then the maps can't be preloaded.

VOIP is not available with stock Android, but many custom ROMs will permit it if you can find an app.

Europe and the U.K. are very different from the U.S. market - nonsubsidized phones, unlocks, compatible networks.

More expensive phones, but less expensive service, usually, so they say.

Re:Subsidy lock?

[Miamicanes]

> In fact, only CDMA phones have significant competition that could inspire a user to take
> a phone to another carrier, and I wonder how incompatible Sprint's 3G network is with Verizon's.

In purely technical terms, pretty much any phone available from both Sprint and Verizon that doesn't go out of its way to prevent you from reflashing it with the other carrier's firmware works fine. In reality, it's a one-way trip from Sprint to Verizon (or maybe one of the few remaining regional CDMA carriers), because Sprint won't activate any phone whose ESN isn't in their official database. Hell, even when they OWNED Telus (Canada), you couldn't activate a Telus phone on Sprint or vice-versa, even though roaming between them was absolutely seamless, and the two networks used pretty much identical hardware & software.

In theory, Verizon won't stop you from using any unlocked CDMA phone... but as a practical matter, it's unlikely to reliably support anything besides voice. Even voicemail is iffy (read: the indicator probably won't work, and you'll have to dial a normal phone number to access it instead of pressing and holding the '1' key). Text messages ~140 characters might work, but longer ones will either be truncated or blackholed. 1xRTT data will probably work, but I wouldn't bet the farm on EV-DO. Unless you work for Verizon or have access to inside information not available to normal users, it's very unlikely you'll ever get an "alien" CDMA phone to work perfectly and seamlessly on Verizon.

Put another way, if Sprint and Verizon both properly supported R-UIM cards, and had a page on their respective websites listing the raw info you might need if you REALLY wanted to customize the firmware of an "alien" phone to make it work seamlessly, any unlocked phone that worked on one would work just fine on the other. The bare-metal hardware is identical. The only differences are in the customized firmware... and most of THOSE differences are the first thing people who build their own Windows Mobile & Android ROMs rip out. ;-)

That said, Verizon won't likely be compatible with Sprint "forever". Officially, Verizon's future is LTE, and Sprint's future is WiMax. Unofficially, it's anybody's guess whether one or both will actually follow through with those plans, or change their minds along the way.

Re:Subsidy lock?

[rufus t firefly]

SIP for Android No custom ROM required, AFAIK.

Re:Subsidy lock?

[rickb928]

It's still in the Market, and just needs a SIP acct. Workable.

Did they 'fix' WiFi? That's not really too big an issue for me, my data plan will let me crank it.

Invite only?

[nitelord]

Great, an INVITE ONLY phone? That's a first.

This is just FUD

[walruz]

I've seen this post on many other sites, all referencing to the gizmodo link, which is a mockup of the page which is supposed to be the actual page offering the phone. No confirmation, no real data, no journalism.. just plain old FUD.

Re:This is just FUD

[signingis]

"just plain old FUD."

You keep saying that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re:This is just FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

I fail to see the addition of the following elements:

Fear (no scare tactics, says the release is Jan 5)
Uncertainty (It is listing specific dates, no speak of the boogieman)
Doubt (again, very specific)

While it may be speculative, it certainly isn't FUD. Keep using the term like that, and it will cease to mean anything at all.

Re:This is just FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

A princess bride quote with no replies? Inconceivable!

Re:This is just FUD

[shutdown -p now]

While it may be speculative, it certainly isn't FUD. Keep using the term like that, and it will cease to mean anything at all.

From my observation of its use, it ceased to mean anything specific a long time ago already.

whining about prices

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

Like all the other smartphones in recent memory, they cost a fortune if you're an early adopter. If you don't want to get mugged then just wait a couple of months for the hoopla to die down. Your old phone won't stop working in the interim if you don't have the latest whizbang handset the day after its release.

Re:whining about prices

[deathguppie]

Sheesh! The value of a fortune sure has come down since I started dreaming of one. Perhaps I need to start upgrading my dreams to keep up with inflation.

Re:whining about prices

[sacrilicious]

just wait a couple of months ... Your old phone won't stop working in the interim

WAY too general a statement when we're talking about cellphones.

Re:whining about prices

[j_kenpo]

"You said whizbang."

Chairs, Lamps, Globe, and Laurence Fishburne: "AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!"

Re:whining about prices

[cstacy]

Your old phone won't stop working in the interim if you don't have the latest whizbang handset the day after its release.

Actually, your old phone might stop working at any point. My Blackberry Storm didn't work when I got it from Verizon, then I downloaded a bootleg/leaked OS release from RIM and it worked well for a while. Then more recently Verizon downloaded their latest OS release onto my phone. The result is that web search no longer works (that is, they disabled the ability to use WP or Google, having signed an exclusive M$ contract to allow only Bing); and also they broke VZ Navigator (all of the functionality of remembering locations such as Home or favorites is totally broken and non-functional now).

CDMA?

[bcong]

Why is it that CDMA is always left by the wayside? It seems as though all new, cool phones always end up GSM...and never go CDMA. Is it really in the minority so much that vendors pass it by? ....or is it that I need to change my provider?

Re:CDMA?

[pclminion]

Why do people draw this comparison? GSM is a network standard, CDMA is a modulation. The appropriate comparison would be TDMA vs CDMA, since TDMA is the modulation used by GSM. Yeah, yeah, it's marketing but it bugs me. It's like trying to compare a PC brand with a CPU brand. It's apples and oranges.

Re:CDMA?

[iron-kurton]

The business answer to your question is: GSM is used by the rest of the world, CDMA only by America. CDMA = limiting your potential market.

Re:CDMA?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Worldwide marketshare, or lack thereof.

Also, at least until very recently, Verizon, the CMDA carrier of real note, was notorious for their enthusiasm for crippling phones and "standardizing" interfaces with heavy applications of the ugly stick.

There is a market there, so the phones do eventually get made; but it isn't exactly a thrilling zone of innovative freedom.

Re:CDMA?

[gibbsjoh]

Outside the US (and Japan?), it's GSM - something like 3 billion handsets according to the GSM Association. Not saying one is better than the other, just that GSM has a far higher market share worldwide.

Re:CDMA?

[Spectre]

Pick up an HTC Hero ... CDMA, same phone internals, you'll have to wait a few months to get Android V2.0, but it will be out in early 2009.

Re:CDMA?

[bcong]

CDMA is shorthand for CDMA2000 of course...so the comparison still stands

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

CDMA is being switched off in many of the very few countries that use it. CDMA is definitely a minority.

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

It actually might be a 'world phone' with both GSM and CDMA capability. http://www.dancewithshadows.com/tech/google-nexus-one-phone-set-for-january-2010-launch/

Re:CDMA?

[sznupi]

Around 3.7 billion at this point probably - there are 4.6 billion mobile phones now, with supposedly 80% of that being "GSM".

At that market share, I would say it is very much better; assuming the tech itself is irrelevant in practice, the mere ability to use your mobile phone throughout most of the inhabited world is big (of course it helps that you can actually move the phone to local carrier by simply inserting their SIM card)

Re:CDMA?

[sznupi]

That might have something to do with the thing that early versions of current "CDMA" networks had..."CDMA" prominently in their name. It stuck around.

Re:CDMA?

[phobos512]

Sorry, but no, it is not the same phone hardware, internally or externally. It is widely understood that the Nexus One is a variant of the HTC Passion/Bravo which is a Qualcomm Snapdragon-based phone. The HERO is the tired MSM7xxx architecture as the Droid Eris and other prior generation HTC phones.

Re:CDMA?

[nedlohs]

If you have to wait a few months for something that will be out in early 2009, you are doing something wrong.

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

CDMA - eww!
Same phone internals? Where's the snapdragon?
Early 2009 huh?

Re:CDMA?

[dbcad7]

There is just too much in your post to address..

Re:CDMA?

[Buelldozer]

Your rational is ignoring the reality that there are 14 bands for GSM ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSM_frequency_bands ). GSM is not a monolithic technolgy. Since they're going to have to fiddle about with the onboard radio anyway why not have a model with a CDMA radio instead of a GSM one?

Re:CDMA?

[ducomputergeek]

Most people don't care. It's simpliar to explain that Verizon and AT&T use different cell technologies. It's like how Mac's and PC's used to use different formatted floppies. Sure they were both 3.5" disks, but one wouldn't work with the other.

Re:CDMA?

[Daniel_E]

I'm not sure, but I think you managed to get every single "fact" wrong.

2G:
D-AMPS = US
GSM = rest of the world

3G:
CDMA2000 = US
WCDMA = rest of the world

4G:
LTE = everywhere

Re:CDMA?

[caladine]

Like another poster says in reply to this, there's a lot you've gotten wrong here. You seem to have your technologies confused.

• AMPS (the original analog cell) is first gen.
• Next came GSM, a 2G technology
• CDMA rolled around first in the IS-95 standard, also 2G.
• GSM folks upgraded with GPRS (and later EDGE) making 2.5G networks
• CDMA2000 is a family of 3-3.5G technologies (1x, 1xEVDO/revA/revB)
• GSM people realized that CDMA > TDMA when they got together to make WCDMA (also called UMTS). From a simple view, UMTS is CDMA, but using a 5 MHz frequency band, rather than the ~1.25 MHz band that CMDA uses. There's more to it, of course.
• 3.5G networks use UMTS + HSPA/HSPA+. Not that there are really many networks that use anything more than the 3.6Mbps HSPA. (which, incidentally isn't much faster than EVDOrA @ 3.1 Mbps)
• 4G is LTE and WiMax (sort of).

The only reason that smartphones make more sense at the moment on GSM/UMTS networks has nothing to do with the technology involved, but the economics. There are a lot more people on GSM/UMTS networks than CDMA, mostly due to the fact that CDMA was a late comer to the cell phone game. My guess is that the CDMA follow-on will come later in the year.

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is like the old BETA vs VHS discussions. I personnally don't care either way as I have not found enough use of a smart phone to pay the stupid rates cell phone companies want.

Re:CDMA?

[babyrat]

Wasn't 'Droid' one of the new cool phones not too long ago? I know it's been a whole month or two...

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Alphabet soup! Can we break this down to a few simple metrics:

data rate = how fast I can surf the web, if I'm close to a tower. Or... is this hopelessly carrier-dependent? If it is carrier-dependent, then I guess I don't care about the underlying technology, unless I care about...

interop = is there a SIM card, and can I put it into any phone I want? In this regard, CDMA is "pre interop." (Silly, really, given that the industry has been around for a few decades.) Of course, interop is related to...

bands = the frequencies used to communicate. This is needlessly complex, too, especially in the US.

It would be nice if all phones had a list of possible carrier/country combos w/ data speeds, e.g.,

This phone works with:
- GSM worldwide (except US); x Kbps
- GSM US T-Mobile; x Kbps
- GSM US AT x Kbps
- CDMA - US Verizon; x Kbps
- Analog - US; no internet access

I think that's nearly 8 frequencies... probably too many for a single phone today.

Re:CDMA?

[MemoryDragon]

CDMA mostly started as a US thing, while the rest of the world settled for GSM and then EDGE HDSPA and UTMS for their connectivity.
CDMA mostly is a failed attempt to try to get into a (by back then) future market or at least to seal off the US market to other phone companies.
There are not too many countries outside of the US where CDMA is even present!

Re:CDMA?

[mlts]

IIRC, China and other places also uses CDMA technology. China also uses R-UIM cards, which allow one to switch devices without having to place a call to an operator to change out the IMEI numbers.

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Forgot about D-AMPS which was a 2G technology rolled out in the US before GSM.

Re:CDMA?

[rec9140]

BZZZT!

GSM was a ANTI US REACTION to CDMA.

The at the time PTT's of Europe were hell bent on using ANY TECH OTHER THAN US BASED CDMA.

There was not selection based on merits of the the tech of the time.

Well that didn't work so well as they ended up using CDMA any way when they went to UMTS aka W-CDMA.

Had Europe not been so short sighted to see better tech for the anti US fervor there wouldn't be the issues today of CDMA v. junk GSM. Every one would be on CDMA and better off!

Now we will have to wait till LTE, and maybe finally one standard will take over. Although at the rate the Voice side of the LTE group is moving it may never happen. And most of the US carriers are not going to trash their existing CDMA infrastructure. Most voice will probably remain on CMDA till LTE is well entrenched on the data side. So were likely to see CMDA voice and LTE data phones and then a slow migration to pure LTE as infrastructure and networks are upgraded.

Re:CDMA?

[mlts]

4G is split up here in the US between Sprint/Clear's WiMax endeavor and LTE (which is going to be pushed out by T-Mobile, VZW, and AT&T).

My hope is that LTE frequencies are all standardized so I can use an unlocked device on any of the three networks. Part of the LTE spec is a standardized SIM card, so I have some hopes for this.

Re:CDMA?

[MemoryDragon]

Not sure which tech is really better, but face it, it was all about money, GSM and CDMA were developed pretty much parallely, and basically GSM was not europe only other continents were involved as well, in the end it came down to who could cash in on the involved patents, and the US with their CDMA solution did not have to foodhold to get ground to a combined European / Asian development. Heck the companies having done CDMA only even could get one carrier in the USA alone.
So even if CDMA was better back then, this is a Betamax / VHS reloaded thing, and in the end the USA respectively Verizon pretty much will be alone on the world in the forseeable future being a source of CDMA.

Re:CDMA?

[MemoryDragon]

Btw. I would not rate the experience you get from the overloaded AT&T GSM/UMTS in the united states to be the same experience all over the world. This stuff works really well if the carrier knows what he does, in europe a shitload of people have data plans, but things like you face in the US are not heard of here heck in some countries UMTS flatrates even have replaced car radio to some degree.
So shit is somewhere else but definitely not in the technology ;-)

Re:CDMA?

[MemoryDragon]

Not the same, the Hero has less ram, and a slower processor. I have one of those, while it can be pretty fast with a custom hacked kernel it is definitely not in the same speed range as the Droid or even remotely in the same one as the Nexus One!

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm - where is my IBM acronym lookup when I need it.

http://idle.slashdot.org/story/09/12/30/166220/USPTO-Awards-LOL-Patent-To-IBM?art_pos=2

Re:CDMA?

[dbcad7]

History.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gsm (read history section).. then read.. http://globalccf.org/cdma_resources/history.html .. forgetting proposals and studies in both (GSM was waaay earlier).. lets just focus on implementation.. GSM was implemented as a working standard 1991 and CDMA in 1992 ... your anti-American thing is just wrong.. where do you get it ? .. I also don't think GSM is junk, I think it is kind of cool to have the sim swapping capability.. As AT&T has shown you on their commercials, you can also use the GSM and 3G network simultaneously, which is apparently not possible with the CDMA carriers.. I really could care less for that feature, but it kind of takes some of the "superiority" out of CDMA. I use GSM (not AT&T), and I have used all the CDMA carriers.. for call quality I have no horror stories that are not phone model based, that would lead me to believe either was superior.. For me it was the sim capability, and travel uses that influenced my choices in favor of GSM.

Re:CDMA?

[iron-kurton]

True, but from my understanding there are only four bands that cover the majority of the world. So, if the phones are quad-band GSM phones (which is the most likely scenario), you will still have greater potential market than just with a CDMA phone. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quad-band). This also means you don't have to fiddle with the onboard radio either.

Re:CDMA?

[iron-kurton]

By the way, I'm not sure why you got modded off-topic. I think your question *is* relevant to this story...

Re:CDMA?

[DrDitto]

There are not too many countries outside of the US where CDMA is even present!

I guess China doesn't count.

Re:CDMA?

[DrDitto]

GSM has a maximum cell size of 45km or size. CDMA cell sizes can grow much larger. A big deal when trying to cover the sparsely populated, vast geographic regions of the U.S. (especially when the number of cellular subscribers in the early 90s was a small fraction of what it is today).

There are good reasons why some U.S. carriers bypassed GSM and went with CDMA IS-95.

And lets not forgot that 3G GSM (UMTS) uses CDMA signaling because it is superior and is more spectrum efficient. The 2G CDMA folks were just ahead of the game.

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do people draw this comparison? GSM is a network standard, CDMA is a modulation. The appropriate comparison would be TDMA vs CDMA, since TDMA is the modulation used by GSM. Yeah, yeah, it's marketing but it bugs me. It's like trying to compare a PC brand with a CPU brand. It's apples and oranges.

Technically CDMA and TMDA are not modulation schemes. PSK, QAM, FM, and AM are types of modulation schemes. CDMA and TDMA are multiple user access schemes. Hence, TDMA = Time Domain Multiple Access and CDMA = Code Division Multiple Access. For example, a phone may use TDMA to schedule a time to talk to a basestation. The modulation scheme used to communicate with the base station in the time slot allotted to a device may be PSK (Phase Shift Keying).

Re:CDMA?

[Dun Malg]

Your rationale ignores the reality that tuning a radio is nothing compared to changing modulation methods. It's not as big a deal to have a single GSM module that can be tuned to whichever frequencies are necessary, as the demodulation and processing further down the pipe is identical. Working with CDMA2000 or whatever requires completely different handling beyond the receiver--- basically, you can't do it without shoehorning in a different radio, and monkeying with the OS to get it to work with a different system.

Re:CDMA?

[Anonymous Coward]

There will be no CDMA (CDMA2000) follow-on. Qualcomm was preparing a standard known as UMB (Ultra Mobile Broadband) but when the last CDMA strongholds (Verizon in the US, au/KDDI in Japan and Korean carriers) signalled that they were going to migrate to LTE, Qualcomm decided to get out of the business.

In addition, China has also chosen LTE to succeed its national 3G standard (TD-SCDMA or whatever it's called).

What this means is that when LTE arrives, we'll finally have a single worldwide standard. Of course, frequency bands will still be different in some countries but I suspect multiband LTE phones will be available from day one.

Re:CDMA?

[MemoryDragon]

Thanks for the clarification thats pretty much what I remembered from the timeline, afair GSM already was drafted when the US suddenly announced CDMA, thankfully it never took seriously off and now we mostly have a global standard everyone can follow.

As for the parallel GSM UMTS operation possibilities, yes it works and does work pretty well, the fun starts when you do usb tethering and someone calls you in between.

As for Sim swapping, that as well works, I am not too familiar with CDMA I thought that is pretty normal and works on all phone systems one way or the other, guess, that is what you get if you have had GSM for the last 15 years ;-)

Re:CDMA?

[caladine]

True. Not sure why it slipped my mind. D-AMPS was first implemented in 1990, while GSM didn't make it's debut until 1991. I don't think there are any carriers still using it. Last carrier in the US using it was US Cellular, and I think they switched to CDMA2000 at the beginning of this year (2009).

Re:CDMA?

[caladine]

Hopelessly carrier dependent. If you think the standards themselves are alphabet soup, you should see the individual releases for each. What speeds you can get are very dependent upon what each carrier actually has rolled out (which is often not uniform). Phone hardware definitely ahead of what the carriers have rolled out in many cases.

I really do think cdmaOne(IS95) would have had wider adoption in the end if they'd employed a SIM mechanism. I'm not sure of the reason why they weren't included, but my unsubstantiated opinion is that it was carrier pressure back when CDMA was first being developed. The "If you include 'insert feature here' we won't buy." kind of thing.

Band space is a real freaking mess. It makes world/multi-mode phones needlessly more expensive due to complex antennae and RF hardware required to handle the large numbers of bands.

Re:CDMA?

[caladine]

While it's true than UMB died a horrible death, CDMA isn't going to die out any time soon. There are quite a few incremental upgrades in the future for CDMA 1x. The 3GPP2 standards body approved the 1x Advanced standard (4x improvement in voice calls in the same amount of used spectrum) and SVDO which will finally allow concurrent 1x Voice and 1xEVDO data calls. It's a fairly strong evolutionary path since it'll use much of the existing CDMA infrastructure making it a cheaper alternative to LTE or UMTS for current CDMA carriers. Many carriers will begin to roll out LTE at the end of 2010, but I really can't see wide scale adoption for several more years after that (Verizon thinks it'll have it all rolled out ~2013). So, for low end CDMA carriers, it's a lifeline. For others, it's a bridge to LTE while 3GPP works on the LTE voice call problem. AFAIK, there still isn't a standard for dealing with voice over LTE networks in the standard. One would think it would be some kind of VOIP (as LTE is an all IP network), but that's hard on carriers with all their "legacy" call handling equipment. It'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

Re:CDMA?

[Buelldozer]

Maybe the original poster was arguing for just the CDMA version but I'm not. I'm saying that the cost of having a CDMA model, in addtion to the GSM models, is not back breaking.

prices?

[Lord Ender]

Finally, an unlocked smartphone! But what is the cheapest voice+data plan you could use it with? Will it be possible to use it with a pre-pay carrier, like Virgin Mobile?

I don't talk much, and I'm rarely far from a real computer, but I would love to have the ability to get on the web from a smartphone available to me.

Re:prices?

[Wonko the Sane]

If you go pure VOIP then you can get data-only plans for $40 per month.

Re:prices?

[jabbathewocket]

There are unlocked smartphones all over the place? this is not new.. but you cannot use virgin mobile or any of the other sprint wannabe phone companies in the states for it.. as they dont offer data.. You will basically have to goto tmobile, and buy a data only plan on flexpay (no contract prepaid, essentially you can pick any plan t-mobile offers and have it where you pay first, then use minutes versus the more standard postpay market in the states) You can also buy any phone tmobile offers on this unsubsidized plan TODAY if you want (and if your credit is good they will even finance the hardware for you)

Re:prices?

[Sockatume]

No reason why it shouldn't work on pre-pay. A SIM is a SIM is a SIM as far as the handset's concerned.

Re:prices?

[Seor Jojoba]

The funny thing is that T-Mobile offers a pretty decent plan with 3G data for $50/month which would be my first choice. But if you buy the subsidized phone, you get the spendy $80/month plan which doesn't really have good value to warrant the extra cost, IMO. Difference seems to be just more minutes and unlimited SMSs. So I could see buying the unsubsidized phone, and just getting the cheaper T-Mobile data plan separately.

Also, T-Mobile is one of the major carriers that refused to turn over customer information to US officials without a warrant. And they got KZJ, who is much sexier than the "Can You Hear Me Now" guy.

Re:prices?

[pdscomp]

T-Mobile's new 'Even More Plus' plans are no-contract, you can get 500 min + unlimited text/data for $59.99 a month, no contract involved. This would also work on T-Mo or AT&T prepaid.

Re:prices?

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally, an unlocked smartphone!

Huh what? Is there locked smartphones other than the iPhone?

I just walked to the stored and bought, an amazing smartphone called HTC Hero, which quite frankly kicks shit out of iPhone and makes it look so.. so..2007. And ah the lack of *useful* applications due Apple's restrictions.

399e, no contract. ktnxbye. Oh, right, and yes I live in EU...

Smart move

[copponex]

Good move from a marketing standpoint. They pick out users who are more likely to be technologically savvy, and those users won't flood the internet with complaints like "TEH PHONE DOSNT WORK W/ITUNES... WOULD NOT BY AGAIN"

By the time it launches widely, there will be some very interesting projects they can show off. I'm waiting to see what if there will be an SDK and what kind of access users will have to the phone. Hopefully it will be wide open.

Re:Smart move

[beeverteeth]

Yeah, there will be an SDK... Android SDK :rolleyes:

Re:Smart move

[thetoadwarrior]

I'm waiting to see what if there will be an SDK and what kind of access users will have to the phone. Hopefully it will be wide open.

You started off well but then you went here and jumped on the fail boat.

It will be the Android OS/SDK and already has loads of apps out as Android has been out awhile.

Re:Smart move

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this flamebait? He makes a valid point.

Re:Smart move

[Ihmhi]

Only in America can you get people to pay you to beta test your product.

GSM = Bad in San Diego

[Anonymous Coward]

The CDMA carriers are much better in San Diego, especially in the valleys and downtown.

They didn't think this through

[Anonymous Coward]

How to you get your Nexus invite without a Nexus?

Re:They didn't think this through

[Nexzus]

I can hook you up. /Not really.

Gizmo5 integration on Jan 5th too?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was hoping the voip service of gizmo5 would be integrated in to google voice in time for the nexus one so they could sell it with a data plan only option. Also, the $350 ETF makes sense, it just converts the upfront $180 price to unlocked $530 price.

Compare to "Mac vs. Intel" before 2006

[tepples]

It's like trying to compare a PC brand with a CPU brand.

In other words, it'd be like comparing "Macintosh" computers to "Intel based" computers back in 2005: not inappropriate given that Macs were still on PowerPC back then. In the States, "CDMA" means CDMA2000, as bcon pointed out.

Very disappointing

[ekool]

There are a lot of disappointed people over @ nexusoneforum.net with regards to the pricing. It sounds to me like Google lost alot of good will with such a high unsubsidized price.
 
Discussion here: Nexus One Pricing Discussion

Re:Very disappointing

[iamhassi]

"It sounds to me like Google lost alot of good will with such a high unsubsidized price."

They lost me. After many, many stories about free google cell phones supported by ads how can anyone not be disappointed by the $500 price?

I really don't see how Google thinks they'll sell any. $500+ is a huge bite, and $180 puts it in competition with $199 iPhone 3GS, so if you're deciding between the iPhone and Nexus price really isn't a factor. Couple that with 126,000+ iPhone apps vs 20,000 Android apps and the fact many Android apps don't run on lower-end Android phones doesn't inspire someone to purchase a Android phone.

Google seems to be shooting themselves in the foot, it would take a phone with lots of developer support to topple the iPhone. Only way to get developers is to show them the $$$$ like the iPhone does. Google needs to get the developers paid and make them millionaires like the iPhone does

Re:Very disappointing

[shutdown -p now]

I do not understand. You're complaining that Google doesn't have some magic fairy dust to sprinkle over the phone so that it costs half as much all of a sudden?

From what I can see, the prices are competitive, and match the established level for smartphones of this caliber. What else do you want?

Re:Very disappointing

[mrlpz]

I can see the commercials with Luke Wilson now.... iPhone Luke is eating lunch while using his iPhone to tweet. "nexus" Luke tries to steal a french fry from iPhone Luke. And iPhone Luke bats his hand away saying, "Hey, why don't you buy some for yourself !". Then "nexus" Luke (sad-faced) says, "But I spent all my money on this....android....phone".

Re:Very disappointing

[MemoryDragon]

Who cares wait a bunch of months until the next (probably Tegra based) Android phones hit the market and then you will get the phone for half the price or even less.
This is simply the (Stupid/Early) Adopters Fee...

I am too dissapointed by the price but given the fact that Google wants to keep all other phone makers happy
they probably cannot give it away cheaper!
Since everyone rolls out currently a new generation of phones every 3-6 months, the Nexus One will be replaced by faster/better specced phones around summer, latest!
I assume by the end of the year we will see the first phones which can do a full hd output on a connected monitor, the technology is there, it just has to be pushed into the next generation of phones!

Re:Very disappointing

[FatAlb3rt]

Raw number of apps? Seriously? What do you think are the first apps that are created for Android, the crappy ones that no one wants?

many Android apps don't run on lower-end Android phones Again, not relevant, as this isn't a lower-end Android phone. This phone could have a leg up on other Android phones as it might get the support for new OS releases prior to the others...?

Re:Very disappointing

[L3370]

I think what iamhassi is trying to get at is the price isn't good in comparison to what your getting..

Yes the price for the device itself is competitive but you are also paying for access...Access to applications. For the same price you get access to 5x more apps on Apple. Android apps are smaller in quantity and often are designed for the phone with the lowest capabilities. And those that buy the nexus now will probably be disappointed because there are few apps that take full advantage of what their phone can do.

Re:Very disappointing

[Anonymous Coward]

"many Android apps don't run on lower-end Android phones Again, not relevant, as this isn't a lower-end Android phone."

Very relevant. Sure the Nexus is fast today, but what about tomorrow? This is like gaming consoles vs PCs. Consoles you don't have to worry about your ram or CPU or GPU or anything being fast enough, any game you buy for that console will run the way the developers intended. The iPhone is much like that thanks to the App Store approval process. Sure the camera resolution gets better and newer iPhones have GPS, but all apps run on all iPhones.

With PCs you're constantly upgrading to keep pace with the latest game. Sounds like Android works the same way. You could buy a phone today, and 6 months from now a new model come out with a faster CPU or GPU or whatever and suddenly the new apps don't work on your phone or worse, you buy them thinking they will and they don't. This happened a lot with Pocket PC and Windows Mobile smartphones. Motorola Q didn't have a touchscreen so many applications simply didn't work and many developers didn't label their software as touchscreen only so it was very common to download the software only to find out it didn't work or the CPU wasn't really fast enough to run it.

I had a Motorola Q and HTC Touch and didn't enjoy having to search for software compatible with my phones. Even the Blackberry was like this, with older java software designed for older Blackberries not working with the Curve's rollerball.

I'm not a Apple fan by any means but they sure seem like they have their stuff together when it comes to offering secure, capable cellphones with the largest number of applications. If Google, Microsoft or Palm want to compete they either need to offer more apps or much cheaper prices than the iPhone.

It's ironic that now Apple offers the device with lots of cheap software that is easy to find and Microsoft and Google offer devices with very few apps that are more difficult to find.

Re:Very disappointing

[mlts]

The problem with the Motorola Q and PocketPC devices is that they were running different editions of Windows Mobile.

Windows Mobile has two editions. One is for non touchscreen devices (Windows Mobile Standard), so even though it looks similar, the method of getting around in it is quite different than the Windows Mobile Professional which is based around a touchscreen UI. Apps for Windows Mobile Standard are far fewer than for Professional, so this is something which hurt the Q in a number of ways.

The good thing about Android is that it isn't split into two completely different UI methods (although the fact that Android devices run different versions of the OS is a hair puller.)

This is where Apple excels: There are three models of the iPhone, and apps can run on all three unless they take advantage of a specific feature (GPS, 3G, or compass.) Android has to avoid this trap of fragmenting, where a customer has to know that the app they are about to buy works on their version of the OS, and their model phone. If Android does fragment where one app has to be written for different versions to work, it might weaken the OS to the point where people just go back to Apple/AT&T where stuff "just works".

I'm just hoping that Motorola, Samsung, and HTC understand this, and hopefully keep their Android devices updated. It may seem counterproductive because they want to keep selling new models, but if a customer leaves the platform algother after the average two year commitment, it means no new devices purchases down the line.

Re:Very disappointing

[Daetrin]

"There are a lot of disappointed people over @ nexusoneforum.net with regards to the pricing. It sounds to me like Google lost alot of good will with such a high unsubsidized price."

So in the total absence of any confirmation from Google, a bunch of people fantasized that Google would somehow manage to release a brand new high tech phone for a fraction of the price of slightly less advanced phones already out on the market? And when the next rumor seems to indicate the Google won't be doing this it disappointed said people who then blame it all on Google?

I suppose anyone has the right to be disappointed with anything they want, but getting upset that Google didn't follow through on something Google never said and then saying that lost Google a lot of good will seems to indicate being slightly out of touch with reality to me.

Re:Very disappointing

[shutdown -p now]

Access to applications. For the same price you get access to 5x more apps on Apple

How many of those are actually "IAmRich" lookalikes? It has been pointed out many times that iPhone application count is grossly overstated because of things like RSS reader applications dedicated to reading one particular feed (with hardcoded URL), each reader counting as a separate app...

Re:Very disappointing

[dangitman]

They lost me. After many [slashdot.org], many [gizmodo.com] stories [slashdot.org] about free google cell phones supported by ads how can anyone not be disappointed by the $500 price?

Wait, isn't it a good thing that you're not getting advertising on your phone? I really don't understand the mentality of people wanting more advertising in their lives.

Re:Very disappointing

[Anonymous Coward]

I am confused, how is $500 so expensive? Anyone with a real job can certainly buy it if they want. Also, the iPhone 3GS is *NOT* $199. If you are comparing the cost of the phones, you have to use the *unsubsidized* cost of the iPhone too.

No keyboard = do not want

[snarfies]

For $530, I expect, nay, demand, to have actual physical buttons to dial with.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[Bigjeff5]

Why? The touchscreen buttons are so much easier.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[Anonymous Coward]

Not everyone is like you.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[AP31R0N]

And reach around.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[tverbeek]

For that price, I want a dial to dial with. And when it rings, I want it to ring, not warble some digital music.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[fermion]

There was a time when solid state was a selling point. Mechanical switches break. Solid State may burn out, but will not crack from the cheap plastic used. Every says how wonderful mechanical keyboards are, but those keyboards were expensive. I certainly want a good keyboard, but would not be willing to pay $200 for it.

Everything is a trade off. Design, build, and warranty against the defects in a keyboard, or use that money to build something innovate. With bluetooth connection, there is nothing to break on the modern solid state phone. The only thing I every see break on a modern smart phone is the slide keyboard.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[b0bby]

Screw that, for $530 I demand a rotary dial!

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[krelvin]

Don't need a physical keyboard. Got to play with a live Moto Droid for a 4 days... the only time I used the slide out keyboard was when I first setup the phone (it made me use it). After than, I never used it. It added weight and complexity that were unnecessary. Didn't buy the Droid for 2 reasons. Physical keyboard and weight I didn't need, and no real voice command via BT for making calls.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[Buelldozer]

It's really hard to blind dial with a virtual keypad.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[Nadaka]

hell yes, and I want a hand crank and one of those cups on a wire to put up to my ear. I don't think I understand, can I get a horse and buggy analogy?

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[natehoy]

Dial? What is this dial of which you speak?

Oh, you mean "dial" as in "push buttons". How quaint.

I use a bluetooth headset, and just press the button and read off the numbers I want to call (assuming it's for someone not in my phone book).

I get three benefits out of this:

1. Everyone around me sees what an Important Person I am, and thinks, "wow, someone that technologically forward and yet tastelessly rude must be important." Many of the females obviously think "and I must mate with him immediately!" but sadly I live in a prudish area, so they just look at me with longing, pass into a slight faint where their eyes roll back in their head, then glare because they are angry they can't have sex with me right away.

2. I get to announce to everyone in earshot what number I am trying to call. I just know everyone wants to know that. It's important.

3. When the phone misunderstands the number I meant to dial, complete strangers have the pleasure of speaking to me, albeit briefly. Most of them understand the value of my time and, once they realize it's me, they remind me that I have important things to do and end the call.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[Anonymous Coward]

For $530, I expect, nay, demand, to have actual physical buttons to dial with.

YAWN. Nobody cares about what you want. but your post gets rated up anyway because its idealizes the good old times, a guaranteed mod point winner

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[L3370]

blind dial, I'll agree with you.
I, however, almost never find myself in a situation where I have to do so. Most of the time I only call people on my contacts.

I have seen MUCH more time savings from a screen keyboard on text messaging and email writing. no physical buttons means I don't have to wait for the button to give me a physical response, like the button pushing back to its normal position. I definitely feel speed and accuracy are not an issue after a bit of practice.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[mlts]

This is a matter of preference. For me, I prefer a slider such as the Droid, Cliq, or Moment because I'm used to typing on physical keys as opposed to making sure I got the right key pressed on a touchscreen. Even worse, some touchscreen phones I've used are not calibrated and do not register the contact on the screen at the right point. You hit a "p", and get an "o". Of course, you can't go any further right to get the "p" to register, and the phone does not have any method to recalibrate the screen to fix this.

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[mdwh2]

Will a touch screen dial do? Possible on the Nokia 5800: http://nokia5800.net/nokia-app-rotary-dialer-touch/

And you can always warble a digital sound that sounds identical to a ring (which is what my Nokia 5800 does)...

Re:No keyboard = do not want

[Anonymous Coward]

"Dial? What is this dial of which you speak?

Oh, you mean "dial" as in "push buttons". How quaint"

I'm pressing the big round button with holes around the rim, but nothing is happening.

Unlocked? Not until I get a monthly discount!

[Ossifer]

I'd gladly buy an unlocked phone and switch to the best US carrier for me, just give me an equivalent monthly discount on my service... AT&T ?? ... Verizon ?? ... T-Mobile ?? ... Sprint ?? ... Bueller?? ... Anyone ??

Expected price

[irp]

In Denmark, an unlocked HTC Hero costs ~620 USD. (including the Danish 25% VAT).

Most people I know (myself included) buy phones unlocked (because my (current/prefered) phone company don't sell phones - but I like their simple "~10 USD/month for up to 1GB" data plan).

Using the "US to Danish price" conversion (multiply by 1.25, add some) it will cost around 670-700 USD in Denmark (of course payed in DKK).

The price does not surprise me. I am planning to replace my phone ½ year from now (then my current phone will have survived 2+ years). It will probably be an Android based, in that price range.

For comparison, in Denmark, an iPhone (unlocked 3GS/32GB) costs ~1100 USD.

Re:Expected price

[mjwx]

In Denmark, an unlocked HTC Hero costs ~620 USD. (including the Danish 25% VAT). Most people I know (myself included) buy phones unlocked (because my (current/prefered) phone company don't sell phones - but I like their simple "~10 USD/month for up to 1GB" data plan).

Using the "US to Danish price" conversion (multiply by 1.25, add some) it will cost around 670-700 USD in Denmark (of course payed in DKK).

The price does not surprise me. I am planning to replace my phone ½ year from now (then my current phone will have survived 2+ years). It will probably be an Android based, in that price range.

For comparison, in Denmark, an iPhone (unlocked 3GS/32GB) costs ~1100 USD.

Same story here in Australia, except jack those prices up another 20%.

USian's don't buy unlocked phones, the carriers there have a stranglehold on the market. Also its not easy to buy unlocked phones as the carriers do not use a common frequency (T-mobile is GSM 2100 and 1700, AT&T is GSM 1900 and Verizon uses CDMA, IIRC) so USian's need to pick a carrier before they can pick a phone. Also the carriers have no real need to compete, the US$79 plan they speak of in the article would be an A$50 plan here in AU with either a 500 MB or 1 GB data allowance.

Compare that to AU or EU where carriers share a common frequency (usually 2100 Mhz) and there is a large unlocked phone market.

Re:Hello

[Anonymous Coward]

Spill your coffee in your lap, and yell out "SON OF A BITCH!"

GSM + Google

[ground.zero.612]

Sweet! A decrypted protocol with an OS by a company that doesn't care about your privacy... Where do I sign up???

Re:GSM + Google

[RebootKid]

Oh for mod points. Cracked me up

An ode to Southpark

[Stick32]

They are clearly applying the "you can't come here" approach to marketing.

but will it

[WormholeFiend]

...run Linux?

Re:but will it

[mrlpz]

blend. Will it blend !?! Sheesh.....you forgot to ask the REAL IMPORTANT question.

Only if it has Google Voice

[nikMIT21]

If Google gives a downloadable Google Voice app, I think a lot of people like me are going to rush to buy this phone. $530 + $50/month for 5GB worth of voice, sms, and web browsing is $1730 over two years. An iPhone is something like $200 + $120/month = $2400 for the same thing.

If they don't have the app, I'll continue my silent protest and stick with my crappy free phone and 2-year verizon contract. :(

Re:Only if it has Google Voice

[DragonTHC]

there's already a google voice app in the market. I think you're asking if it will use google voice over IP.

If it allows GV via voip, w/ 3g we might all jump at the chance.

Re:Only if it has Google Voice

[mdm-adph]

Or you could keep your 2-year verizon contract, but upgrade to a Droid Eris. I believe there's a subsidy even for existing Verizon customers.

Re:Only if it has Google Voice

[caladine]

Eris is cheap with a contract right now too. Saw it for $49 after a rebate at Best Buy recently.

Personally, I'll be waiting for whatever Verizon is going to call the HTC PassionC (Nexus is the HTC Passion, C for CDMA). That's assuming it actually gets there sometime in the near future.

Re:Only if it has Google Voice

[mrjohnson]

You could try fring + skype... But currently GV depends on a phone line.

Re:Unlocked? Not until I get a monthly discount!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd gladly buy an unlocked phone and switch to the best US carrier for me, just give me an equivalent monthly discount on my service... AT&T ?? ... Verizon ?? ... T-Mobile ?? ... Sprint ?? ... Bueller?? ... Anyone ??

T-Mobile recently changed their rate plans to do just that...I think it's about $10 a month less for no contract and no discount on phones.

Imagine...

[Anonymous Coward]

...a Beowulf cluster of these

Disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

This phone is called "Nexus One" and no one on /. has asked for the Nexus Six? You guys are really off today.

gimme an invite

[sneakyimp]

Give me an invite. I'll buy this the day it comes out. I've currently got a motorola v188 that came with my t-mobile account. i've had it for 5 years and is suffering from some kind of corrupt code. I need a new phone and $530 for an unlocked 3G/GSM phone with android 2.1, wifi, compass, 5MP camera, accelerometer, snapdragon processor, etc. is quite reasonable.

Nokia N900

[kurt555gs]

You can buy an N900 for $569.00. As long as you are going to drop that kind of change, why would you limit yourself to an Android fone?

Re:Nokia N900

[InlawBiker]

The N900 is $469 at Buy.com right now with a rebate. I think the N900 is a superior device to just about everything out there right now, but the key deciding factor will be which OS has more support. For the plain old consumer market Android is going to appeal to more people.

Re:Nokia N900

[Anonymous Coward]

Just wondering since Android runs on Linux and the N900 runs Linux, if there is any possibility of Android being ported to run on top of Maemo in essence giving you the openess and flexibility of Maemo and the ability to run Android apps as well.

Slashdot. News for Yuppies

[CranberryKing]

Another story about a phone. Maybe it's cooler than the iPhone! I will look cool on it when I'm not spinning records at my club. Snoorree..

Re:Unlocked? Not until I get a monthly discount!

[SBrach]

It was easy for them to do that since they raised their prices $20 a month across the board first.

awww

[daft_one]

So all this time, that was the Internet in your pocket? Here I thought you were just happy to see me.

Cat got your tongue?

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw some demos on youtube. What is the retarted point to make it looking exactly like iPhone?! Why???? No creativity!? No brains, just copy paste? Shame...

Financing

[BlueBoxSW.com]

The old way of doing things where they give you the phone at a discounted price and lock you into a contract is stupid.

Essentially they were financing the phone without telling you the interest rate.

This way, you could buy it and finance it however you want.

Pay outright, put it on a credit card, use equity from your home. Borrow money from your dog.

Whatever.

It's a much better way of doing things, and I appreciate Google pushing the point, even if the sticker price is shocking.

Re:Financing

[mrlpz]

That would be true, if the service we adjusted downward when bringing an UN-subsidized phone to the party. Since we all know that to NOT be true, then there is NO win here. C'mon, use some common sense logic, that the purpose of subsidized phones is to ensure that there is a revenue stream that no only covers the initial cost of the phone ( and there's NO way you're going to tell me that any carrier pays anywhere NEAR the supposed retail price of a phone, and then can charge you an early termination fee of the sort that they charge....PUH-LEEZE. No one's THAT dumb to believe it. ) plus actual service costs, with some room for scaled profit throughout the lifetime of the person's contract with the carrier. So please stop squawking as though Google's doing someone some public service here. They aren't. PERIOD. Or as the commercial goes......The man said, "Ta-da !"

Re:Financing

[BlueBoxSW.com]

I agree it has been a sweet ride for the wireless companies.

And if the mob were to design the wireless world, it would look a lot like it does today.

But I do think Google is doing something good here by opening the door here.

What they TOLD congress, is they need the length of a contract to make back the subsidy.

Now let's see if that's true.

HTC Magic

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure the Nexus will work with 3G on AT&T since it requires 850 MHz UMTS. I found a Rogers HTC Magic unlocked for $462 shipped which supports AT&T 3G. The specs are a bit less on the RAM and camera, but there's not a lot of Android choices for AT&T if you want 3G data. I rooted and installed Amon Ra’s Clean Donut (Magic, 32A). Google navigation is totally cool, Hero keyboard rocks!

* Nexus specs http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/23/exclusive-nexus-one-full-specs-detailed-invite-only-retail-sal
* Root how to http://theunlockr.com/2009/08/29/how-to-root-the-htc-magic-in-one-click
* ROMs how to http://theunlockr.com/2009/08/29/how-to-load-a-custom-rom-on-your-htc-magic
* ROMs http://theunlockr.com/downloads/android-downloads/android-roms

Phone

[Anonymous Coward]

How is as a ``phone``, who know to talk to other people with?

I remember well

[SuperKendall]

Remember the dorks who bought the iPhone when it first came out? Remember those same dorks just a few months later when Apple dropped the price? :)

I was one of the "dorks".

You forget that we had earlier use of an advanced phone than we might have otherwise. And there was also a rebate that happened too which meant it wasn't even that much more expensive in the end...

But you are dreaming the you think the Nexus price is coming down much - remember those high-priced iPhones were WITH PLAN pricing. The Nexus price (the high one anyway) is without any plan - and to buy an iPhone today without a plan costs about the same.

Go buy an N900

[BESTouff]

Finally, an unlocked smartphone!

Buy a Nokia N900. It's the same price, it's unlocked, and it's a true Linux computer. Hey, you can just apt-get install whatever you want on it !

T-mobile? Seriously?

[Eosha]

Have they learned nothing from AT&T's coverage woes? T-mobile doesn't have ANY data service in my area. Or my parents' home, 3 hrs. away. Or my grandmother's home. Or my work. And I'm in a town of 370,000.

Re:T-mobile? Seriously?

[yincrash]

AT&T's woes are from being overused in the big cities. T-Mobile doesn't have these problems in the big cities. Data service in the suburbs and rural areas is a different problem entirely.

Re:T-mobile? Seriously?

[Leebert]

AT&T's woes are from being overused in the big cities.

Sorry, but that's only part of it. It's also a complete lack of reasonable coverage outside of cities. There's a map for that...

Re:T-mobile? Seriously?

[mjwx]

Have they learned nothing from AT&T's coverage woes? T-mobile doesn't have ANY data service in my area.

Try thinking globally.

Google is an international company. HTC is based in Taiwan. Google and HTC intend on selling the Nexus globally (HTC will be releasing the same hardware under a different name later this year with their own "Sense" UI installed, Nexus is the "Google Experience" version). The most popular GSM frequency in the world is 2100 Mhz, you can go to almost any nation with a 3G network and get a 2100 Mhz signal so HTC (who designed the HW) decided on using 2100 Mhz transmitters (900 Mhz as well, but I'm not sure on this one). The US is nearly alone in using CDMA.

Now in the US this means only one carrier is available due to the balkanisation and lack of effective regulation in the US mobile service provision market. The US is a small market which is tyrannically controlled, HTC and Google are thinking about all the other markets, Europe and Asia are bigger markets then the US as well as smaller markets like Australia and the rest of the Americas.

I could buy the Nexus outright and use it on any carrier in Australia, at US$530 it's a bargain compared to most Android phones which are about A$700+ to buy when they are released.

No it's not

[SuperKendall]

It's really hard to blind dial with a virtual keypad.

Actually it's much easier because the buttons are huge.

You only think that because you imagine the need to feel the keys. But if you pay attention to what you are actually doing when blind dialing, your fingers know where the keys are. If you know where the keys are well enough to blind dial you can also dial easily without physical keys.

Re:No it's not

[Buelldozer]

If you can blind dial on a virtual dialpad with consistent accuracy I am impressed. I cannot.

In what way is an Android phone more limiting?

[SuperKendall]

You can buy an N900 for $569.00. As long as you are going to drop that kind of change, why would you limit yourself to an Android fone?

I would turn that around and ask why on earth you would buy anything with a dead-end OS, when you could buy a fully programmable Android device that you can buy a lot more applications for.

The Nokia is nice to use but that's as far as it goes, overall it is not nearly as useful just based on application availability alone.

Re:In what way is an Android phone more limiting?

[Microlith]

anything with a dead-end OS

So a Linux-based device using X that supports both Qt and GTK2 toolkits is somehow a dead-end OS?

a fully programmable Android device

If and only if you root the thing. I would be surprised, seeing as how it is (optionally) subsidized by T-Mobile, if the Nexus One did not also require being rooted.

buy a lot more applications

All the applications I really need are available under the GPL already, and can be ported to the N900 with far less effort than it would take to port them to the iPhone or Android. Unless you are suggesting that only software you have to pay for is worthwhile.

Re:In what way is an Android phone more limiting?

[bfree]

I would turn that around and ask why on earth you would buy anything with a dead-end OS, when you could buy a fully programmable Windows device that you can buy a lot more applications for.

Linux is nice to use but that's as far as it goes, overall it is not nearly as useful just based on application availability alone.

Re:In what way is an Android phone more limiting?

[SuperKendall]

So a Linux-based device using X that supports both Qt and GTK2 toolkits is somehow a dead-end OS?

Nokia's variant, yes. It's a dead-end branch. Linux itself will of course survive but in the future you'll be the one porting any improvements.

If and only if you root the thing.

That's only IF you want to do a handful of things that require rooting. There are a great number of applications you can write that do not require doing so.

All the applications I really need are available under the GPL already, and can be ported to the N900 with far less effort than it would take to port them to the iPhone or Android.

I can BUY the applications today on Android. And I can assure you as a full-time mobile developer that migrating applications written for the desktop is not nearly so easy as you make it seem.

The N900 is really well built and designed. It's just they are not with the future as far as where mobile OS's are going. Nokia will be switching to Android soon as well (not news, but a prediction). I'd say about a year as the market share shrinks dramatically.

Re:In what way is an Android phone more limiting?

[mlts]

I wouldn't say the N900 is running dead end OS, but I also wouldn't say that root is required to do everything on an Android device either.

The main three reasons I'd root an Android phone are to either upgrade the underlying Android version, to disable vendor specific stuff (such as the spinning cube on the Behold II which doesn't do much UI-wise, but takes up space and CPU time), and being able to run apps from the SD card via unionfs or other means.

If someone knows what they are doing, (or at least the ramifications of the # prompt), rooting isn't an issue. However, some Android phones do not yet have a complete flash image out there to recover back to, so if someone trashes stuff outside the user modifiable data directories (the stuff that is normally mounted read only), a hard reset may not be able to clear up a bootloop [1]. So, unless there is a way to drop into a recovery mode to re-flash (and have a default non-rooted Flash image handy), I'd be *VERY* careful about rooting. I like cautioning people against rooting unless they have a good reason for it because Android phones are not like iPhones. Unlike Apple's product, you don't need to go through a store to install all apps you want. Instead, you can install what you like via adb on Android. And of course, it is only a matter of time before some maliciously written apps make it to Androids store which can detect a rooted phone with no su protection and start wreaking mayhem [2].

[1]: Technically, this isn't bricking a phone if you can get to a recovery mode, but in reality, if you can't hop to a recovery mode and re-flash, it essentially is a brick until someone puts out a .shx file or similar with a usable image.

[2]: Most rooting processes have a defense against this, using a superuser.apx app, where it prompts the user to allow the app to have root. However, my fear is that users who don't realize that VERY few apps need root would just click "allow", and all hell breaks loose... which makes it look bad for the whole modding scene, and makes devices makers redouble their efforts to make their phones root-proof, or hostile to flashing custom firmware.

Re:In what way is an Android phone more limiting?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nokia's Linux variant is not dead-end. They'll be switching all their high-end phones to Maemo in the next few years, it is quite unlikely they'll turn around and drop it. Maemo also has an active community supporting it, so you'll at least get some community support of older devices that Nokia won't be updating Maemo for. And Maemo itself is just a variant of Debian on ARM. So in all I don't see how it is any more of a dead-end OS than what is on any other phone.

Work on any GSM? Not with 3G.

[drseamus]

It won't work with AT&T 3G because it lacks the proper antenna. That leaves edge only on AT&T or even worse, T mobile.

When they make one?

[SuperKendall]

I would turn that around and ask why on earth you would buy anything with a dead-end OS, when you could buy a fully programmable Windows device that you can buy a lot more applications for.

There are already a lot more Android applications than there are Windows Mobile applications.

Never mind the iPhone...

And talk about dead-end! Even IF WindowsMobile manages an update that keeps Microsoft in the game (unlikely), it will be (by necessity) so different that you will essentially starting the app count from zero.

Re:Unlocked? Not until I get a monthly discount!

[halltk1983]

Odd, my bill recently went down, with the same minutes and stuff on my plan. Of course, that could have something to do with the fact that I'm able to read the plans in front of me.

Does it come with Google Voice?

[Herger]

I think this will change the market if it integrates with Google Voice and allows VoIP calls. The unlocked Google phone plus data plan would be totally worth it if I could use it on Wi-Fi at home or my office and only use data on the road.

530 USD?

[MathiasRav]

Sweet, that's like, 370 euro!

No, wait, I forgot, that's not how you convert currency in this business.

I'm only speculating here, it's not really even an educated guess, but I'm scarred from seeing the US dollar depreciating like that and European as well as American prices in the Apple stores staying constant.

If apostrophe's were status symbol's ...

[A nonymous Coward]

rich guys still like to flaunt their Porsche's, Maserati's and Aston Martin's

... you'd be flaunting your's like there's no tomorrow.

If it follows the pattern...

[CAIMLAS]

If this phone follows the pattern of most "new" type tech items released in the last couple years, that $530 will turn into $670, and the $180 will turn into $295 - or something like that.

I swear, I'm getting sick of this false advertising. Everyone's doing it, and it's gotten to the point of being predictable: see something "coming soon for around x" and you can typically tack on $100 or 20%, whichever is greater, and be closer to the actual price than the one they provided.

Google can do a lot to bring people to their side of the fence by being honest about this kind of thing. Here's not holding my breath.

Even still, $180 (if they hit it) is a lot, considering you can get a Touch Pro 2 for, essentially, no more than shipping via special deals on T-mobile.

Clarfify, S'il vous plait

[Mana Mana]

GSM people realized that CDMA > TDMA when they [GSM people?] got together to make WCDMA (also called UMTS). From a simple view, UMTS is CDMA, but using a 5 MHz frequency band, rather than the ~1.25 MHz band that CMDA uses.

It's all good but can you clarify this point, please.

Re:Clarfify, S'il vous plait

[caladine]

Sure thing. I was referring to ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) who has managed the GSM standard since they were transferred responsibility for the standard in 1989 (Phase 1 of the standard was published in 1990). They (along with many others) formed the 3GPP group that released the first UMTS standard in 1999 (commonly referred to as release '99).

There's a bunch of funny stories involved with the development of the UMTS standard. Most of which revolve around the fact that virtually no one outside of Qualcomm in the early 90s believed that CDMA could even work. Once it became apparent that TDMA systems were not technology of choice moving forward, ETSI had a problem. Qualcomm owns most of the IP for the air interface, and no one is fond of paying royalties. Comparing the CDMA to UMTS air interface standards will yield slight differences in many places for no other reason but to attempt to reduce the royalty rates. The one that comes to mind is reverse-link power control (the cell site telling the cell phone itself to transmit stronger or weaker). The only material difference is the reversal of the meaning of the power control bits.

Re:CDMA? MOD PARENT DOWN

[DrDitto]

You don't know what you are talking about. Variants of IS-95 CDMA (the original 2G CDMA) are widely used in China, Korea, and elsewhere. In China, CDMA phones even have SIM cards. All 3G technologies (EV-DO, UMTS, HSPDA, etc.) use CDMA signaling technology because it is more spectrum efficient.

Even More Plus

[dfries]

Actually T-Mobile has two types of plans.
Even More with a 2 year contract and subsidized phone, which which is the historic US cell plan.
Even More Plus is the month to month no contract plan but you buy or bring your own cell phone and it's $10 cheaper per month than the Even More plan. Sounds like the plan to get if you buy an unlocked cell phone. I just wonder with the Nokia N900 going to backorder every other day it seems T-Mobile has had a run on SIM Cards, because right now it's grayed out.

Don't forget me!

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd just like to get an android upgrade on my HTC Hero. You know, the one that's been promised since release?

I'm a curmudgeon...

[Anonymous Coward]

I buy 3 year old, good, used cheap phones from my independent retailer. Please support my habit. The market needs more good, used phones. Thank you.

offtopic

[Ginger Unicorn]

have you heard about this. what with tron sequel coming out next year it's going to be awesome

WOOT?

[PingPongBoy]

Great Goulessarian!

To WOOT or not to WOOT?

Vootie.

Mod's on crack.

[mjwx]

NT.