To gPhone, or not to gPhone

Posted by Zealot on Nov 18, 2009

closeThis post was published 2 months 24 days ago which may make its actuality or expire date not be valid anymore. This site is not responsible for any misunderstanding.

g1-google-phone Michael Arrington at TechCrunch is stirring the pot again. In a recent post, he states that the long theorized Googlephone is about to be released based on rumours from unnamed sources. A phone designed from the ground up by Google to be the perfect Android device, Arrington has this to say about it…

There won’t be any negotiation or compromise over the phone’s design of features – Google is dictating every last piece of it. No splintering of the Android OS that makes some applications unusable. Like the iPhone for Apple, this phone will be Google’s pure vision of what a phone should be.

He has no other details of the device but says that it will be created by a third party; maybe HTC, maybe LG, maybe Samsung, and will be released at the beginning of 2010.

I, however, am dubious….

Imagine if you will that a full year ago, Apple released the “Apple Phone” OS to third party manufacturers as open source. Over this year, the OS went through several versions and was embraced by all major vendors, most of whom had partnership deals with Apple. In fact several of those partners made Apple Phones their primary mobile focus, or the centerpiece of their smartphone line up.

Then, Apple releases the iPhone. Their “perfect” Apple Phone.

Things would get ugly, lawsuits would be filed, consumer confusion would set it…it would be a PR and business disaster for all involved.

Much the same thing would happen now from Google gut shooting such companies as HTC and LG and Motorola and Samsung, not to mention carriers such as Verizon by issuing a homegrown competitor to their own products.

Remember also that Google is no Apple. Apple was in the unique position of being both a hardware and a software company with decades of experience designing and producing devices completely in house. Google is a software company….not even that, they began as a search engine. Google is a services company that became wildly successful selling those services to third party customers. Successful enough to hire the staff to create their own browser, OS and Business applications to leverage their income producing elements like search and ads. Without industry customers to buy their adspace, search placement and services, Google becomes OpenOffice practically overnight.

Why would they suddenly produce a hardware device, their FIRST hardware device, that would be viewed as a direct attack on those customers that they have spent the last year selling on Android, and will soon need to support Chrome OS?

I am no fan of Google, but Brin and Schmidt are very very smart businessmen…a Googlephone would be very very stupid business.

I don’t think it is going to happen, despite what Arrington’s sources say.

Zealot (495 Posts) - Website | Twitter | Facebook


By day a department manager and writer for a major network device vendor...by night Zealot stalks the mean magnetic streets, striking fear into the hearts of bandwidth abusers and theme park mascots. Zealot has been involved with mobile devices for more than a decade now, starting off with dumb phones, moving to PDAs and then to smartphones, notebooks and netbooks with the odd PMP thrown in. Most of his mobile time currently is spent on a Treo Pro, Zune HD, Thinkpad T61, Gigabyte M912M or a Hackintoshed Compaq Mini 704. He proudly groks the Geek community and considers himself a Neo Maxi Zune Dweebie (thanks Will Wheaton!).

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Why would [Google] suddenly produce a hardware device, their FIRST hardware device[...?]

    I agree that it would probably be a bad idea, much like Microsoft producing a WM Phone. However, it wouldn't be Google's first hardware device -- they have the Google Search Appliance and Google Mini. ;)

    Steve
  • On your example of the Apple Phone, how is that very different from what Microsoft did with the Zune? There were no messy lawsuits, however. Android is open source, so the manufacturers must know that anybody - including Google - can build a competing device. And I thought that it was no open secret that Google engineers worked closely and exclusively with HTC on the G1 and with Motorola on the Droid? They seem to be favoring some devices and manufacturers over others already.

    But, I'm with you. I can't believe that Google wants the hassle of contracting hardware manufacturing like this. And my guess is that they are also pretty pleased with where Android has come in a single year.

    Second comment: I'll tend to believe Arrington more when he ships that CrunchPad that will ship in July, um August, um November, um sometime for $200, um $300, um $400-$500, um some price.
  • The difference is that the Zune software was not licensed to SanDisk and iRiver and Cowon for them to make "Zune Players" of their own a year before the Zune was released. The Zune software is still all in house at Microsoft. When it is folded into WinMo 7, it will be part of a Windows OS, not standalone. However, even if they do license it as standalone software now, the Microsoft device has already been released, so let them try and top it.

    In this case, it would feel like Google let other companies take the risks and hard knocks getting early Android devices out, and then swooped in on their backs with a more polished device, born of their experiences. Could they do it? Sure, it is open source...but it would be one more heavy weight around the neck of that whole "Do No Evil" thing.

    Yes, Google is clearly favoring certain companies with certain versions (word is HTC already has the next version for the next "flagship") but they are getting some flak for it at least....and it is different then them actually making one for themselves.
  • Promise, my last comment on this, back and forth on this means nothing, but Microsoft did license "plays for sure" technology to partners and then undercut them with their own offering when they introduced the Zune (and subsequently closed their "plays for sure" msn music store.) Everybody inferred that Microsoft had made a choice (by putting out their own hardware and ending the msn music store) that Zune was more important to them than their existing technology, which they had licensed to partners. There may have been valid reasons, but it still happened. So, when I said "what Microsoft did with the Zune," I was saying what they did to existing "plays for sure" customers - they put out a competing device which directly competed with existing partners, basically screwing them, such as Google would do if they came out with a branded Google Phone (which, again, I highly doubt they will do), or Microsoft would now do if they developed a Microsoft branded Windows Phone (which I also doubt they will do though, obviously, their own history is cloudy on this point.)
  • I always thought Plays For Sure was just WMA with a shared DRM. Was I missing something?

    Steve
blog comments powered by Disqus

Subscription

You can subscribe by e-mail to receive news updates and breaking stories.

Polls

Would you use Bing on an iPhone?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Categories

About Mobilitysite

Mobilitysite.com is a site covering Mobility News, Reviews, and Discussion. Our coverage focuses on Smartphones and PDAs, but extends on past that as well. Tablet PC, UMPC, and Personal Media Players like the Zune and iPod are covered as well. To learn more about Mobilitysite, read here. Also take time to register in our forums too. There is a wealth of information to be found inside. Mobilitysite has 8803 RSS Subscribers.

Links

YouTube Twitter RSS Feed