Google Announces "Open Phone" Coalition, No gPhone [Updated] 225
Ponca City, We Love You writes "USA Today has an advance story on Google's plans to announce a new operating system, geared specifically for cellphones with partners that include Sprint, Motorola, Samsung and Japanese wireless giant NTT DoCoMo. Although details won't be released until later today the new G-system will be based on Linux overlaid with Java and Google hopes to have a branded device ready for worldwide shipment by spring. Mobile Web browsing is notoriously slow and Google plans to change that by providing easy access to the Internet at PC-type speeds. Google plans to basically give away the software developer tools, used by programmers to write new applications. "If you're a developer, you'll be able to develop (applications) for the new Google Phone very quickly," said Morgan Gillis of the LiMo Foundation. AT&T and Verizon Wireless are noticeably absent from the coalition not wanting to support a device that favors Google over other providers. Sprint, the No. 3 carrier, supports the coalition, but it hasn't formally agreed to make the Google Phone available to its 54 million subscribers." Update 1727 GMT by SM: It's official, Google is releasing the mobile "Android" OS in place of the Google branded mobile phone that many expected.
AT&T? (Score:1, Interesting)
What version of Java? (Score:3, Interesting)
Really.... how? (Score:4, Interesting)
Also...
How open is open? (Score:3, Interesting)
But my question is; what if I want to use other services, will that be possible/difficult?
We already have fifty! Finish one! (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh I get it. This open platform would be closed from the public to tinker with and actually only be available to the mobile phone providers? Is that the idea?
Re:What version of Java? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
In metro areas where the phone network is fine grained, the positioning is quite accurate.
What I want to know is (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:AT&T? (Score:2, Interesting)
My plan (Score:2, Interesting)
1. Get a small (and I mean 'small', because it'll basically be the footprint of your phone-to-be), well-documented ARM development board, a small keyboard and a display.
2. Get one of them dirt-cheap GSM bugs (an online store recently mentioned on
3. Find out if it also supports a speaker-output, if and how programmable it is (some GSM bugs have an USB or serial interface on which you can send AT commands).
4. Hook it up to your board and test it.
5. Rig the OS for the board.
6. ???
7. Have Phun.
No brand tie-ins, undocumented hardware, binary blobs in the kernel, outdated development toolchains, whatever. Just dial and answer calls, damnit!
Re:What version of Java? (Score:3, Interesting)
(oops) oh, so you want to browse teh intarwebs to? (Score:2, Interesting)
If you want data too, skip the GSM bugs (well, maybe some have GPRS feature hidden in their firmware somewhere
These guys sell one [gsm-modem.de] (not affiliated with them, just an example). It's got all you could ask for. Just add an antenna and a battery to your board and you're set.
Add everything up and you will end up half the price of an iPhone. Best of all, it will run _Your Stuff_, and _Your Stuff_ Only. (_Your_ as in: only the stuff that you decide to put on, no crapola, undocumented "features" or government mandated remotely 'provisioned' (i.e. push-downloaded onto your set while you're not looking) snoop vectors).
Sprint = WiMax (Score:3, Interesting)
This could really put competitive pressure on telcos, especially if applications development leads to truly useful products. (Instead of silly little widgets.) Who wants a phone that can do less but costs more?
Why will this fail? Partners! (Score:5, Interesting)
Why?
Because partners have their own agenda as to why they're partnering with Google.
Most carriers have long, and somewhat decent working relationships with their platform vendors. Apple comes out, and whacks all those relationships with a stick by producing a device that's arguably far superior to any US phone.
What are the other carriers to do? The phone OS's functionality is basically specified by the carrier, who picks and chooses various features depending on the phone's price point, how the phone will fit into the carrier's current phone mix, and the competition (not necessarily in that order). Google comes out with something that's "open" , and while it may be interesting, from a carrier point of view, that interest doesn't necessarily mean that it's going anywhere. Given how big Google is, the carriers may be on board just to sink the gPhone ship (welcome to corporate america).
Only time will tell. Will the gPhone be substantially better than Symbian etc?
Re:We already have fifty! Finish one! (Score:1, Interesting)
Then you have nothing to fear: OpenMoko development is being paid for. It just happens to be open-source.
HOWEVER, one of the big issues I observed was the inability to really create new ideas. The window managers seemed to always be a hybrid between Windows and OS X.
That seems backwards to me. Linux desktop developers often don't care about marketshare or backwards-compatibility. OTOH, what has Windows done recently that's innovative?
I think a big reason for that is that innovation of that kind is really hard to do. It's hard because you have to come up with new ideas, and then you have to convince a bunch of people working on the same project that your idea makes sense. In large group projects, unless there is a clear leader, I think often the design ends up being a compromise between people. Which can make for robust interfaces, but not new. In large group projects, unless there is a clear leader, I think often the design ends up being a compromise between people. Which can make for robust interfaces, but not new.
Exactly -- and OpenMoko has far fewer developers than Microsoft, or even Google (as you point out yourself). And apart from a few apps (google.com, gmail, gmaps), Google's are not that well-known. With the number of developers they have, and the number of big-name user-facing apps, they've got to have 98% of their workforce either doing server-side architecture stuff, or making user apps that never ship.
I'm not afraid of OpenMoko sucking. In fact, I'm sure they're going to (inadvertantly) pull a Google-Youtube here: they're going to spend a bunch of time trying to make a kick-ass UI for this, and then somebody else is going to make one that actually *is* kick-ass, and then they're going to throw away what they had and use that instead. They just need to ship the damn thing (release was delayed from last month to next month).
Re:Privacy (Score:2, Interesting)
That I just don't get. Cell phone usage is very expensive and rarely actually necessary. There's not typically a need for people to be constantly accessible, it's just convenient.
Anybody in their twenties spending large amounts on things like cell phone bills is strangling their older self. When they are reaching retirement that compounded money will likely be rather important to future-old-guy. And he'll be wishing he hadn't made so many stupid phone calls.
I know it doesn't seem like it, but the future does eventually arrive, and one day you will actually be old and less capable of earning new money. You owe it to that version of you to take care of him now.
$100 a month spent as a 25 year-old steals (conservatively) $50,000 from the 65 year-old. Is it worth $50k to make those phone calls?