Why So Many Are So Wrong on the 'Google Phone'
Google on Saturday announced that its internal developers are using a new Android-powered phone that many Web sites have dubbed "Nexus One" from its Internet browser identification string, but which many reports say is a variant of HTC's HD2 phone.
The nearly hysterical frothing about the "Google Phone" overlooks a whole bunch of existing facts. The T-Mobile G1, after all, was a phone whose software was dictated by Google; it was a "Google Phone." Google has already sold two phones online, unlocked, to developers - the Android Dev Phone 1 (a G1 clone) and the Google Ion (also known as the T-Mobile MyTouch 3G.)
The Motorola Droid/Milestone had its software specced out by Google as well. You can buy that phone unlocked in Europe, as most phones are available without carrier locks in Europe.
Will Google sell an updated developer device that may be called the "Nexus One?" Sure, I can see that, but it wouldn't be a massive consumer play, and it wouldn't "disrupt" the wireless industry.
It's really about the iPhone and AT&T, isn't it?
The barbaric yawp of desire from Twitter for the "Google Phone" really comes down to another hot, trending Twitter topic last week - something called #attfail. The idea that gets everyone hot under the collar is that Google may sell a phone directly, magically compatible with all U.S. carriers, but somehow without the restrictions and bindings that U.S. carriers place on devices.
What this desire really comes from, of course, is Americans' desperate wish (and it is all about Americans; the rest of the world doesn't have this problem) to see the iPhone on a carrier other than AT&T.
Americans have for years felt that their wireless carriers are holding them back. They feel like they can't pick whatever device they want on the best possible network for them. That's true. That's the way our market works. That's unlikely to change before about 2013, even if then. It's frustrating that we can't seem to do anything about it.
Americans feel abandoned by supposedly customer-friendly Apple, who did so much to advance the state of handheld technology but just can't quit AT&T. So now they're looking to Google, whose motto is "don't be evil," to liberate them.
This is unlikely to happen. Let me explain why.
The U.S. uses two incompatible radio standards on three different spectrum bands. It's possible to build a GSM phone that supports T-Mobile and AT&T, sure. But folks who want Sprint and Verizon will still be out in the cold, because the network-based controls on those carriers can actually lock out unapproved phones. Never mind that while you can build a phone that supports 3G on three carriers, I've never seen a chipset that supports all four.
If Google releases an unlocked GSM phone in the U.S., it's unlikely to sell many units, because it will be seen as prohibitively expensive. Americans rely on carrier subsidies to make device prices look palatable. The iPhone actually costs $599, but what most people see is the $199 price after its carrier subsidy. Google could release a truly $199 phone, but they'd lose a huge amount of money on every sale.
I hate America's addiction to phone subsidies, but it's a very uphill battle to try to fight it.
Remember, unlocked smartphones have been available here for years. Nokia has been trying to push them on people for ages. Some of Nokia's phones, such as the N95 and E71, have been excellent. Almost nobody buys them, because they're seen as too expensive without the carrier subsidy.
An unsubsidized phone may have a chance if T-Mobile decides to make the new phone the flagship for its unsubsidized Even More Plus plans, as I speculated on Saturday. T-Mobile lets people pay for their unsubsidized phones through an installment plan, which could lower the perceived price of the device. But then you just have the latest T-Mobile Android phone, not some carrier-free liberator.
Google could put a massive marketing push behind an entirely carrier-free phone, but I'm having trouble seeing what they have to gain. An anti-carrier line would compromise their great success so far at getting Android phones into major carriers. Android is coming close to pushing Windows Mobile and some other options to the margins on major U.S. carriers; why rock that boat?
Another boat Google would be rocking is their Open Handset Alliance of various manufacturers who want to produce Android handsets. Google's goal is to get their software in front of as many eyeballs as possible. They're not Apple, who is looking for profitable hardware and not caring too much about market share; Google's advertising-based business model is all about market share. Portraying themselves as the only owners of the One True Android would actually lead to fewer Android phones, as appalled partners back out.
Google's not the messiah
So as I said Saturday, what's most likely here is that we have a new HTC Android phone which is the flagship for the newest version of Google's Android software, much the way the T-Mobile G1 and Motorola Droid have been. It might also be the flagship phone for the new unsubsidized T-Mobile plans.
Back in 2007, there was a lot of speculation behind how Apple would sell the iPhone. One exciting idea was that Apple would start its own wireless carrier, which would show the other carriers how to do customer service. Some other pundits hoped they'd release an unlocked phone instead. When Apple did neither of these, the anti-AT&T rage began.
It's clear that American consumers want some sort of messiah to save them from the structure of our wireless industry. But it's not going to be Apple, and it's probably not going to be Google, either. If you feel that strongly that you need to be freed from the carrier-controlled system, write to your Congressional representative - that's the only way things will change any time soon.
source
The nearly hysterical frothing about the "Google Phone" overlooks a whole bunch of existing facts. The T-Mobile G1, after all, was a phone whose software was dictated by Google; it was a "Google Phone." Google has already sold two phones online, unlocked, to developers - the Android Dev Phone 1 (a G1 clone) and the Google Ion (also known as the T-Mobile MyTouch 3G.)
The Motorola Droid/Milestone had its software specced out by Google as well. You can buy that phone unlocked in Europe, as most phones are available without carrier locks in Europe.
Will Google sell an updated developer device that may be called the "Nexus One?" Sure, I can see that, but it wouldn't be a massive consumer play, and it wouldn't "disrupt" the wireless industry.
It's really about the iPhone and AT&T, isn't it?
The barbaric yawp of desire from Twitter for the "Google Phone" really comes down to another hot, trending Twitter topic last week - something called #attfail. The idea that gets everyone hot under the collar is that Google may sell a phone directly, magically compatible with all U.S. carriers, but somehow without the restrictions and bindings that U.S. carriers place on devices.
What this desire really comes from, of course, is Americans' desperate wish (and it is all about Americans; the rest of the world doesn't have this problem) to see the iPhone on a carrier other than AT&T.
Americans have for years felt that their wireless carriers are holding them back. They feel like they can't pick whatever device they want on the best possible network for them. That's true. That's the way our market works. That's unlikely to change before about 2013, even if then. It's frustrating that we can't seem to do anything about it.
Americans feel abandoned by supposedly customer-friendly Apple, who did so much to advance the state of handheld technology but just can't quit AT&T. So now they're looking to Google, whose motto is "don't be evil," to liberate them.
This is unlikely to happen. Let me explain why.
The U.S. uses two incompatible radio standards on three different spectrum bands. It's possible to build a GSM phone that supports T-Mobile and AT&T, sure. But folks who want Sprint and Verizon will still be out in the cold, because the network-based controls on those carriers can actually lock out unapproved phones. Never mind that while you can build a phone that supports 3G on three carriers, I've never seen a chipset that supports all four.
If Google releases an unlocked GSM phone in the U.S., it's unlikely to sell many units, because it will be seen as prohibitively expensive. Americans rely on carrier subsidies to make device prices look palatable. The iPhone actually costs $599, but what most people see is the $199 price after its carrier subsidy. Google could release a truly $199 phone, but they'd lose a huge amount of money on every sale.
I hate America's addiction to phone subsidies, but it's a very uphill battle to try to fight it.
Remember, unlocked smartphones have been available here for years. Nokia has been trying to push them on people for ages. Some of Nokia's phones, such as the N95 and E71, have been excellent. Almost nobody buys them, because they're seen as too expensive without the carrier subsidy.
An unsubsidized phone may have a chance if T-Mobile decides to make the new phone the flagship for its unsubsidized Even More Plus plans, as I speculated on Saturday. T-Mobile lets people pay for their unsubsidized phones through an installment plan, which could lower the perceived price of the device. But then you just have the latest T-Mobile Android phone, not some carrier-free liberator.
Google could put a massive marketing push behind an entirely carrier-free phone, but I'm having trouble seeing what they have to gain. An anti-carrier line would compromise their great success so far at getting Android phones into major carriers. Android is coming close to pushing Windows Mobile and some other options to the margins on major U.S. carriers; why rock that boat?
Another boat Google would be rocking is their Open Handset Alliance of various manufacturers who want to produce Android handsets. Google's goal is to get their software in front of as many eyeballs as possible. They're not Apple, who is looking for profitable hardware and not caring too much about market share; Google's advertising-based business model is all about market share. Portraying themselves as the only owners of the One True Android would actually lead to fewer Android phones, as appalled partners back out.
Google's not the messiah
So as I said Saturday, what's most likely here is that we have a new HTC Android phone which is the flagship for the newest version of Google's Android software, much the way the T-Mobile G1 and Motorola Droid have been. It might also be the flagship phone for the new unsubsidized T-Mobile plans.
Back in 2007, there was a lot of speculation behind how Apple would sell the iPhone. One exciting idea was that Apple would start its own wireless carrier, which would show the other carriers how to do customer service. Some other pundits hoped they'd release an unlocked phone instead. When Apple did neither of these, the anti-AT&T rage began.
It's clear that American consumers want some sort of messiah to save them from the structure of our wireless industry. But it's not going to be Apple, and it's probably not going to be Google, either. If you feel that strongly that you need to be freed from the carrier-controlled system, write to your Congressional representative - that's the only way things will change any time soon.
source
Posts
No comments: