Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Businesses The Internet Communications

Google Says "We're Not Doing a Mobile Phone" 105

Posted by kdawson from the just-no dept.
thefickler writes "A top Google executive has denied outright that the company is developing a mobile phone. Last week rumors were flying after a Google official speaking in Spain said that the company was looking into offering a mobile phone; and British phone analyst Richard Windsor claimed that during CeBIT Google staff confirmed that a Google mobile phone was being developed. However, Alan Eustace, senior vice president of engineering and research, has now said 'We're not doing a mobile phone, I'd like to find something that is broader, rather than do yet another mobile device.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Says "We're Not Doing a Mobile Phone" More

Google Says "We're Not Doing a Mobile Phone"

Comments Filter:

  • Not too interesting (Score:4, Informative)

    by 26199 ( 577806 ) * on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:31PM (#18479879) Homepage

    Although the article links to another about an Australian telco executive attacking the iPhone [blorge.com] that's quite entertaining.

    • TECH.BLORGE's source for their item was Telstra plays it cool on iPhone [smh.com.au] from the AAP. Without their incredible spin on it, Winn's comments weren't really that negative. For example:

      "I think people overreacted to it - there was not a lot of tremendously new stuff if you think about it," he said. "It was maybe kind of cool on the touchscreen technology but touchscreen technology is another domain, so it's only a matter of time before it went to the device."

      The author turns that into "Aussie telco Telstra slams Apple iPhone: 'people over reacted to it'". C'mon. I expect better reporting from Fox News.

      • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

        by Heembo ( 916647 )

        I expect better reporting from Fox News.
        What crack are you smoking? These guys are twisted liars to support the neo-conservative agenda. How can you expect "better" from these jack-offs?

  • First things first (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bogaboga ( 793279 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:39PM (#18479929)
    I wonder why folks at Google do not first help us with the Linux desktop. They could do so by enabling ODF document search, pushing open media formats (video and audio), and publicity. Right now, QT4 does not look bad or incapable at all.

    • Re:First things first (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MoonFog ( 586818 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @01:05PM (#18480099)
      Their motto is "Do no evil", not "Help open source". They're still a company in the business of making money and unless they see it as a source of revenue to help making Linux a viable desktop alternative, do you really think they will do it? Just to "be nice"?

      • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

        by thrillseeker ( 518224 )
        unless they see it as a source of revenue to help making Linux a viable desktop alternative, do you really think they will do it

        The less money that Microsoft earns, the more there is for everyone else.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by c_forq ( 924234 )
          Umm... what? I thought we moved past mercantilism over a century ago. Less abuse of monopoly status and illegal business practices is better for everyone else, but it is possible for multiple companies in the same industry to all grow and increase in size and profitability.
          • So that 44 billion dollars that people spend on Microsoft stuff last year (and every year growing) comes from nowhere in any non-mercantile point of view? I have to say, that's just about the most wondrous thing I've ever heard. Can you create 44 billion dollars for me too? Even, say, 4-5 would be fine, I guess, but I'd prefer the big enchilada.

            • Re:First things first (Score:5, Informative)

              by c_forq ( 924234 ) <forquerc+slash@gmail.com> on Sunday March 25, 2007 @02:12PM (#18480495)
              No, the billions don't come from nowhere. They come from companies and economies growing. Do you think that there has always been, and always will be, 6 trillion dollars circulating in the world? For the Great Britian's economy to grow does it require the U.S.A.'s economy to fall? Look into capitalism, and positive-sum games.
            • What's funny is that you both missed my point entirely. I personally think you're both guilty of broken window fallacies.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by c_forq ( 924234 )
                I reread your post a couple times, and either you did not include your point, you did not convey your point well, or I am blind to something. So what exactly is your point?
                • My point is not that there is a standard and continuous amount of money circulating. It's that the sudden accusations that anyone agreeing with the statement, "Microsoft eats more than its share," is a mercantilist and completely out of date are unwarranted and almost silly. I don't believe in a closed-pie system, but I do believe that the growth of said pie is not always instantaneous in relation to the size of each group consuming said pie. You're both attacking a straw man.

                  I also consider Microsoft

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by c_forq ( 924234 )
                    Put growth can be (near) instantaneous, due to the stock market and currency exchange. Look at how quickly Google's value shot up after their IPO, and the growth and investments they were able to make because of that sudden growth. Growth is not always instantaneous, but it can be. Microsoft making less money does not mean anyone benefits, it just means Microsoft benefits less. Just because Microsoft Office doesn't sell as many copies doesn't mean that Open Office will have more downloads or Word Perfec

        • Re:First things first (Score:4, Interesting)

          by porkThreeWays ( 895269 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @02:09PM (#18480479)
          Yeah I guess. But I think google is a little smarter than that. Their moves are more calculated. A mobile phone would need a platform and I doubt they'd use just another OS. It's the same way MS got into the server market. At the time the desktop was ripe for the taking. They took it. Once they controlled a sector they seeped into the server market because so many people were familiar with windows desktop. Once google controls the embedded market they could integrate it somehow with their web offerings. Once they control your phone and your browser, what's next? Taking on the Goliath in one swoop makes for great history, but you are more likely to be successful in winning important battles over the long term. Windows mobile sucks and is a piece of garbage and the others aren't a whole lot better. I think google could make a vastly superior product and take the market. Remember hotmail before gmail? Remember yahoo maps before google maps? They were awful products and google bitch slapped them and took their spoils.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by SpecTheIntro ( 951219 )

          The less money that Microsoft earns, the more there is for everyone else.

          Except economics is not, nor has it ever been, a zero-sum game.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by M8e ( 1008767 )
            My wallet says something else. If i don't buy vista i will have enough money to buy a G-phone.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by westlake ( 615356 )
          The less money that Microsoft earns, the more there is for everyone else.

          Fully half of Apple's revenues can be traced back to iTunes and the iPod. It ain't iTunes on the Mac with its 2% market share world-wide that's delivering those big bucks to Cupertino.

          OSX on the x86 platform runs on a sub-set of the hardware which evolved with the commodity PC running Windows. The Linux Geek - if he is honest - also knows that it was the mass-market PC running Windows which transformed the home user from the Geek w

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by DrDitto ( 962751 )
        The less money that Microsoft earns, the more there is for everyone else.

        Microsoft is a publicly traded company and their stock offers dividends. Go buy some MSFT if you would like some of their money.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by QuantumG ( 50515 )
        They make proprietary software.. they've already failed in that motto.

      • Their motto is "Do no evil", not "Help open source".

        Funny that they fund open source then. [google.com]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rm69990 ( 885744 )
        To be fair, most of Google's stuff that they've released is never going to make them a dime.

    • Re:First things first (Score:5, Funny)

      by Bogtha ( 906264 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @01:49PM (#18480351)

      I wonder why folks at Google do not first help us with the Linux desktop.

      Yeah. What they should do is pay people to work on high-profile open-source projects like KDE and GNOME. Of course, Google might be rich, but they aren't bottomless pits of money, so maybe they could get better value for money if they just paid students. Although, what with students having to, you know, study, it would only really be effective in the summer, but if it goes well, maybe they could do it every summer. They could even give it a funky name, I dunno, maybe something like Summer of Code.

      You're totally right. Google should get their priorities straight and start helping Linux!

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hxnwix ( 652290 )
        <Bill Gates>Helping students just isn't enough. Look at Microsoft: we are spending millions and pay a staff of 300 to document our network server protocols alone. We are investing heavily in open source: from Novell to Open XML - from client support to industry leading, first-time-ever standardization of open document formats - we are working diligently to leverage the open paradigm. Next to this, helping students for the greater good of our society & future is obviously a bunch
    • Well, last year they funded $3 million dollars into the Summer of Code program (over half were Linux desktop projects), launched Google Code (currently hosting countless Linux projects) and tons of other small perhaps insignificant things I can't remember at the moment. Your point on them not specifically contributing to the Linux desktop still stands, but as previous poster pointed out Google is a for profit business, of course they give highest priority to the operating system with largest market share.
    • The Gnome desktop has search for ODF built in, and mplayer probably has the largest range of format support of any multimedia player.

      Where exactly is Google supposed to help?

      Now, I think it would be nice if they ported Google Talk and Google Desktop Search, but I think the holdup there isn't their unwillingness, it's probably just that they are finding it tough to do and have other things to do.

  • That's true from the beginning (Score:5, Informative)

    by jmerelo ( 216716 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:41PM (#18479937) Homepage Journal
    What the Spanish official said, actually, is that somebody in Google, with the 20% time allotted to pet projects, was working on something or other related to cell phones.
    • Heh, It might have been google maps, or gmail for mobile, or google web translator, or google SMS, or google web search, or....

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by CandyMan ( 15493 )
      JJ:

      I wasn't there, but I don't think you were either. So we both have to go by what What Noticias.com printed [noticias.com]. This was (my translation):

      Aguilera remarked that "there has been research" in a mobile phone through which one can "access information", as well as on "the way to extend the information society to less developed economies."

      Translation is a bit stilted, but it is because I want to keep the boundaries of quotations in the original:

      Aguilera ha señalado que "se ha investigado" en un teléfono

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jmerelo ( 216716 )
        Actually, if you look a bit further up the page, in the previous paragraph, it says:

        Isabel Aguilera ha explicado a Noticias.com que si bien el 70% del tiempo de los ingenieros se dedica "a desarrollar nuestro núcleo de negocio, es decir, la búsqueda y la publicidad", y un 20% a desarrollar "productos que tengan bastante que ver con este núcleo", es cierto que un 10% de ese tiempo se centra en el desarrollo de productos "que en algún momento pudieran tener que ver con nuestro negocio".

        Den

  • So? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BibelBiber ( 557179 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @12:53PM (#18480011)
    And Apple is not doing a Video iPod. Companies have always been stating that they're not doing something which never really sopped them from doing what they want. So who cares? If they do a phone let them do it and if not why bother?
  • Left arm of corp doesnt know what the right arm is doing.. Welcome to the corporate world. Microsoft is even better at not knowing what it is doing.

  • Of course not... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by zappepcs ( 820751 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @01:06PM (#18480107) Journal
    After watching what happened to Apple, smart people should wait to see if wireless carriers are forced to become common carriers. Until they are common carrier status, its not worth trying to get into their game... sadly.
    • No doubt Apple and Cingular were both negotiating hard. I expect that Apple did it to Cingular as hard as they got it.

      The only real losers were the customers who can't put together the deals that they want. THis will cause some churn due to some people really wanting Apple.

      If some more hhighly branded phones (Google, Starbucks,...) came onto the scene then this could eventually force common carrier cellphones. However, to do that they will all need to use a common protocol.

    • "we are not doing a mobile phone" --Google "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" --Clinton Why did that comparison all of a sudden spring to me?
      • I'm not sure. Clearly the second statement turned out to be true provided that you don't follow the definition of "sexual relations" favored by a 13 year-old future republican kid who brags that he's not a virgin because he felt a girl up.

  • Nationwide Wi-Fi (Score:2, Insightful)

    by blindjim ( 78342 )
    Now that would be a bit broader, mightn't it?

  • ... I'd like to find something that is broader, rather than do yet another mobile device.

    Perhaps he's thinking of some sort of... immobile device? And broad. Perhaps they'll paint the entire planet with some touch-sensitive OLED display paint, and hook it all into the Google server network. Then, the internet will be everywhere, Google will be everywhere, and you can access your impossible-to-use spreadsheets from all over the world! And, they can claim to have the most up-to-date map anywhere -- full scale! Press release: world domination is not evil -- we're offering you a service!

  • Too bad (Looking for investors!) (Score:5, Funny)

    by crhylove ( 205956 ) <rhy@leperkhanz.com> on Sunday March 25, 2007 @01:09PM (#18480131) Homepage Journal
    Because there is plenty of room to make a cell phone that does what I want in the market, and for cheap, and yet nobody has done it.

    MyDreamPhone:

    x86 low power chip.
    1gb ram
    USB charging and connectivity to mouse/keyboard/monitor/speakers through charger/docking station.
    touchscreen covering whole phone.
    1280x1024 camera (with decent color!)
    geforce to go implementation
    5.1 sound when plugged to charger
    standard headphone jack (switching to stereo headphone mix automagically when headphones plugged in)
    decent basic joystick (via touch screen?)
    Firefox
    Zsnes
    Project64
    FOSS Video chat with speex/H.264
    FOSS winamp clone for mp3/ogg/wav/speex
    beryl when plugged to charger (when in "computer" mode)
    wine (when in "computer" mode)
    FOSS mp3/ogg/wav recorder (for voice notes, concert bootlegs).
    1-4 gb sdram, upgradeable via cheap sd chip
    NO DRM
    easy windows/linux/mac file sharing through wifi
    Simple Loud Alarm(s)
    Simple photo album, divx/xvid, online sync
    Simple VNC with address book/ip lookup (assignable to "full screen" when in "computer mode" and added as an additional desktop that beryl can spin to)
    Thunderbird
    MSN/AIM/yahoo/skype/googletalk/myspaceim (maybe via extended gaimlib)
    Urban Terror (when usb mouse available)
    gimp with CMYK support (when in "computer" mode)
    decent OCR via camera, and simple text file creation app
    instant on OS
    instant off OS
    long lasting lithium/ion battery that recharges quickly through the USB port
    Infrared/bluetooth
    Multitrack wav/mp3 recording via USB mixer attachment (with phantom power)
    Basic 640x480 xvid/h.264 recording video camera and easy YouTube upload
    GCC and other programming tools (when in "computer" mode)
    Basic SMS/GSM/standard cell phone features (address book with personalized icons/ (mp3/ogg) ringtones.)
    $50

    The sad thing is, 90% of this software exists NOW in the FOSS community. The final 10% would probably be a reasonably cheap programmer hire, maybe a year of dev time. This hardware is dirt cheap with economies of scale, so a $50 price tag IS possible. Then a serious kick ass FOSS standard would exist by which all phones and computers would have to interact with which could beat MS, Mac, Motorola, Sony, and Nokia to market.

    This is a project that would make billions, and cost maybe a million initially. But since there is no free market on the planet, it's not going to happen. Some corporation would whack you if you made and started selling this phone. Like DeLorean in the 80's, or Tucker in the 30's.

    Too bad, too, because with this phone, a lot of people would get a lot of great things done quickly. Including me.

    rhY

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by AuMatar ( 183847 )
      My dream phone:

      makes calls
      6 hours of active battery life

      Thats it. I wish phone companies would work on making it a better phone rather than adding useless extras.
      • Like the Motorola Motofone?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by alanwj ( 242317 )

        I wish phone companies would work on making it a better phone rather than adding useless extras.
        This is the same argument that people use against features in "bloated" software. The problem is, that while everybody agrees that there are a lot of "useless extras", no two people can agree on what is useless and what isn't. What is useless to you may be critical for someone else.

      • Re:Too bad (Looking for investors!) (Score:5, Insightful)

        by linhux ( 104645 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @03:43PM (#18481083) Homepage
        My dream is that people would stop making that exact comment every time phones are discussed on Slashdot. Seriously, it was almost an interesting topic five years ago. Now it's just boring.

      • Re:Too bad (Looking for investors!) (Score:4, Informative)

        by Mr_Silver ( 213637 ) on Sunday March 25, 2007 @05:11PM (#18481703)

        My dream phone:

        makes calls
        6 hours of active battery life

        Thats it.

        You want the O2 Jet [gsmarena.com] then. It has 540 hours standby and 9 hours 50 minutes talk time (so almost 4 hours more than your request).

        I wish phone companies would work on making it a better phone rather than adding useless extras.

        They do. The problem is that the majority of people on Slashdot who say "I wish I could get a phone that only does X and Y" haven't bothered to do five minutes of research.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
        My dream phone:

        makes calls
        6 hours of active battery life

        Motorola C115.

        That said don't think low of people who wants more from their phones but being good phones. We all have different needs I barely talk on my phone, but apps, GPS, camera... all the time).
      • If your phone has an internet connection, why would you want to talk to a person?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mgblst ( 80109 )
        Ok, so the real difference between his dream phone, and your dream phone is that yours exists, and there about 30 different models to choose from, and his doesn't exist.

        You might as well have said, my dream computer is one with x86, a keyboard, and a flat screen monitor.

        Maybe you misunderstand the concept of dream ....
      • well, my dream phone would be an ipaq hx4700 with gsm+umts and wm6.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ceeam ( 39911 )
        Then go and fucking buy one. They ARE out there. Or is your dream that _all_ phones should be like that? No, thanks.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by 26199 ( 577806 ) *

      Wow. You don't want much, do you?

      Actually my requirements are if anything higher. I'll get a phone when it can replace my desktop...

    • With all that, it's not really a phone anymore. It's a shrunk-down portable computer with built-in camera and the ability to make phone calls.
      And please explain how you'd get all the hardware required into the average phone size. 1GB of SDRAM, with a sufficiently fast processor AND a large enough storage volume would take up quite a bit of space on it's own. You might say that, in order to be able to interact with it effectively, you'd make it bigger - but then why not just carry a laptop around?

      In al

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by naasking ( 94116 )
      This hardware is dirt cheap with economies of scale, so a $50 price tag IS possible.

      Pure fantasy. Your "1-4 gb sdram" requirement alone costs $50 given current fabrication techniques.

    • Not "Funny". (Score:4, Funny)

      by crhylove ( 205956 ) <rhy@leperkhanz.com> on Sunday March 25, 2007 @04:47PM (#18481523) Homepage Journal
      I'm talking about an iPhone killer. Everyone wants an iPhone, but iPhone will actually be worse as it is also not:

      A. DRM free
      B. A completely portable desktop computer
      C. Cheap

      As to all the haters and their skepticism regarding hardware prices:

      Initially you could include a 1gb SD card REALLY CHEAP:
      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 2E16820211309 [newegg.com]

      You wouldn't need much more than a standard low power Pentium III clone to do all that stuff, and this:
      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 2E16819112206 [newegg.com]

      would be complete overkill and is $36 for a single one. I imagine you could get if for about half if you ordered a few million?

      1gb of integrated ram has GOT to be cheap at this point. If we made a few million, there's no QUESTION you could do this phone for less than $50. Hell, throw in the USB docking station complete with HDMI out and usb mouse/keyboard, and you could still come in way under $100. People can buy any monitor or projector they want separately, or offer them a package deal for $200. This would replace every computer and cell phone on the market, and replace windows and macs and linux for 90% of all consumer uses, and probably a huge percentage of business pcs and cell phones as well.

      The realm of the possible has been FUDed by corporations. Seriously, do the math, this phone is possible, I don't know how anyone could be so mentally limited as to moderate me "Funny". /. just proves that technological intellectualism doesn't preclude the sheep mentality of most primates.

      *sigh*. People make me sad. Kennedy was murdered by our government. Science > Religion. Steel buildings don't just fall down because of some jet fuel. The "accepted" facts of today are OFTEN the laughable misconceptions of yesterday (frequently after less than a decade!). Ask for the facts and think for yourself. The invisible men in the sky probably don't exist, and if they did, they certainly wouldn't have written all that horse shit that you and our politicians seem to want to base their lives on. I mean seriously, "chosen people"?!?! What kind of racist ignorance is that? I continually expect /. to corroborate human knowledge and reality rather than the typical group think and media FUDD that I can get on Fox "News", and am routinely disappointed. Even the nerds are fucking idiots who can't think for themselves, apparently.

      rhY

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Weezul ( 52464 )
        No it's not possible just now, but here are some corrections:

        x86? dead god why?

        1gb ram? phone's need 3 types of ram, why not use removable cards?

        Use USB only for high bandwidth stuff. Otherwise just use Bluetooth.

        I'm not sure full phone touchscrens are as far close as you imagine.

        Yes, Samba, VNC, etc. are wonderful ideas. Why don't you port one to a Linux or Simbian phone with wifi? I'll just take gimp, gcc, etc. as a joke.

        MSN, AIM, etc. are run by companies who make your life harder. I'd stick to Skyp
    • first indication you're in fantasy land.

      Why x86?

      If a low power x86 will do, so will a low power arm or coldfire or PPC or SPARC or whatever. We even have open source Java interpreters working on several non-x86.

    • The sad thing is, 90% of this stuff isn't software at all, but hardware.

      People from the software side of the world tend to have no clue what is involved in designing, validating, and manufacturing hardware. (as a simple example, "FCC approval" isn't on your wish list, but without it, none of the other items matter...)

      If you can even get so far as taping out a design for "maybe a million, initially", I'll eat my hat. And this is not a claim I make lightly -- my hat is particularly large and unappeti

  • "Something broader, rather than another mobile device". Perhaps Google's definition of 'phone' or 'mobile device' is something archaic, and that what they're creating is so different from what we have now, it begs a new name.
  • I'm using both their HTML and Java based email client on my phone(s). The Java based email client is as good as any I've used (Elm, MUTT, Eudora, Lee Mail, Netscape*, Yahoo Mail, etc.); in some ways it's faster then their GMAIL web client. Faster in terms of refresh and faster in terms of interface...

    Using their phone based email client as a starting point, it would seem that what they really "need" is to maximize their revenue. They get their revenue as we know when someone who is online sees their ads. Th

  • I'd like to find something that is broader, rather than do yet another mobile device.
    Translation: They're doing a mobile phone.
  • ...is when will they release the Google soda?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kypper ( 446750 )
      Don't hold your breath...
      The gPop invite-only beta hit a snag when they discovered hepatitis in the backwash.
  • Why should Google build a mobile device, then compete against every other mobile device? Want to watch everyone switch partners and go with Yahoo? They also have free webmail, maps, and (gasp) even search technology.

    It is much better for Google to "partner" with others and be the dominate set of mobile applications no matter what device or carrier you use.
  • Google don't sell PCs or servers but they have one of the most strongest technology brands in the world today. They make money from providing people with information and there is no reason why Google can't provide information to people on their mobile phones in the same way do on their PCs. Actually building a hardware device will be a far higher investment than simply adapting their existing applications for mobile devices. With the significant mindspace they already occupy when searching the internet from
  • as some people said.

    But it's a server. Stores your e-mail, your voice messages, your personal website, all of that. Maybe even routes your TV, but that's really for next year, when the current quantum wall gets pierced by some new advances. Google runs your backups, should your server go off-line.
  • Just like Apple Computer didn't have any intention of getting into the music business, and thus agreed not to do so with "Apple Records" (Apple Corps, associated /w the Beatles). However, as time passed, the emergence of P2P music technology and portable players led to the creation of the now-famous iPod and the related website iTunes. Of course, this led to more legal battles [wikipedia.org] between the two Apples, but it's probably safe to say that Apple Computer didn't see the merger of the computing and music markets c
  • Who doesn't need consolidation these days? I'd certainly value a phone that handles my email, Voice, docs and spreadsheets, photos, music, and search. I mean, in all honesty, that's all you really need on a phone and when it's from one source, mazal tov!

    Just my .02

Slashdot Top Deals

news: gotcha

Close