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

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.'"

Not too interesting

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

First things first

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

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:First things first

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.

Re:First things first

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:First things first

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!

That's true from the beginning

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.

So?

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?

This just in...

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...

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.

Nationwide Wi-Fi

Now that would be a bit broader, mightn't it?

Immobile Device?

... 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!)

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:Too bad (Looking for investors!)

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!)

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.

Not "Funny".

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

definition of phone

"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.

Software?

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. The question is how to do that on a phone?

Here are four approaches they might be looking into, one I don't like and three that are worthy talking about:

#1
One way would be to build a phone that using the ad revenue to in part subsidize the phone usage... NetZero if you will, for a phone. I DOUB'T this is what they are thinking. I would guess they have concluded that market isn't' right for that NOW and might NEVER be ready... It would also require them to get into the cell phone business which is highly competitive.

#2
They could do on phones what they have done on the web broswers...

A) Introduce useful low cost productivity tools (Search, Email, Etc.)
B) Find ways to build ad content into those tools

#3
If they were really thinking outside the box, they could build a "new" OS or operating layer for phones. They would also build lots of mobile productivity apps for that OS... nothing crazy just some Unix/Linux and Java. Rob Pike and Vint Cerf did used to work for other famous phone companies.

A) Today a cell phone company has to build or license an OS
B) Google could provide that OS for no fee (lowering costs); and support it
C) Google could then provide a model which allowed the phone company, the phone network and Google to share the ad revenue.
D) Since phone companies are good at getting people to pay for things like applications and ring tones, they might even be able to get people to pay to use the Google Apps; like the $10 a month I pay Sprint to use the Garmin GPS system.

#4
Another approach would be more in the area of phones but not mobile phones per se. "We are not working on a mobile phone..." Imagine that they are:
A) Building phones for office or home office use
B) The phones work with a "wire" (or with Wi-Fi of they chose to)
C) They tie into the Google Docs suite of productivity tools
D) And if you happen to have two offices in two locations you can call from one "extension to the other" even if Alice is in Atlanta and Bob is Biloxi, routing the call over a VPN.
E) Thus your "office" phone becomes an extension of your desktop and all your contacts, documents, etc. are with you as you go from meeting to meeting and office to office.
F) IF you wanted to look down the road and be a bit "Scary" using Speech to Text and the same targeting software they use for ads, based on your phone conversation they could pop-up contact names, documents, and even Google Searches.

Translation

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

Translation: They're doing a mobile phone.

But what we really want to know

...is when will they release the Google soda?

Make Sense to Me...

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.

The Google phone doesn't add up

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 your PC or laptop you'd it won't matter that Vodafone and Orange have their brands plastered all over their phones, it never made any difference when they established themselves as the dominant search engine provider or changed the webmail market overnight.

landphone

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.

They're not doing a mobile phone... right now

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 coming.

So, like Apple, it might be true that Google has no interest in pursuing the mobile-phone industry, but who knows about the future

I think a google phone would be tops

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

Re:Interesting

Ah, but that leaves just one possibility for their secret project: it must be a stationary device.

Perhaps it's a clever tie-in to their *real* next product - a stationery device! Except with google, it would of course be net-orientated electronic stationery... ladies, gentlemen and others, I give you the google tablet - the "Goblet".

Remember, you heard it here first :-)

Simon.

Re:iPhone

Perhaps the iPhone is NOT certain to be the most popular up and coming device? Out of all the people I know, noone wants an iPhone. It's just too expensive - pretty much not worth the price tag

Re:Did anybody thought otherwise?

I'm half-Spanish and I'm deeply ashamed by this. I hope that Google has fired that incompetent attention-wh0re.