Google Phone Appears to be an Unlocked GSM Device

Google's rumored phone appears to be an unlocked GSM device, to be sold under its own brand name, and built by HTC, TechCrunch reports.


What seems clear enough is that Google employees are testing something. Google says it is testing something it calls a "mobile lab," said to be "a device that combines innovative hardware from a partner with software that runs on Android to experiment with new mobile features and capabilities, and we shared this device with Google employees across the globe."

"Unfortunately, because dogfooding is a process exclusively for Google employees, we cannot share specific product details. We hope to share more after our dogfood diet," Google says.

Google-Branded Phone Coming in January?

Rumors about a Google-designed and Google-branded smartphone have circulated over the past several years, though the company consistently had denied the reports. But the rumors are building again. TechCrunch seems to think the umors are more credible this time.

To be sure, Google repeatedly has said it is not in  the phone-making business.  “We're not making hardware,” Andy Rubin, who heads up Google Android development. “We're enabling other people to build hardware.”

Of course, some might parse the words and say that Google doesn't have to build its own phone: it simply has to commission a company that does build phones, to build one, with tightly-integrated Google control over the software load. There are many nuances to such an approach.

The device could be tightly integrated, but not Google branded. It could be Google branded but not exclusive. It could operate as an unlocked data-only device on a single air interface or several.

A Google-branded and controlled device might fly in the face of the open source nature of the operating system, which so far has featured a loosely-coupled approach.

It also might open a new and unwanted level of channel conflict with the firms that are counting on Android to power their own devices and create a robust applications business. On the other hand, such a move could be viewed as an effort to demonstrate what is possible using Android, more than anything else.

The current rumors say the device is built by HTC, is quite thin, does not have a keyboard, and uses voice recognition for virtually all apps.

Cynics might argue "leaking" rumors of a game-changing device are a time-tested way of "freezing" sales of competitive devices. And there is at least some anecdotal evidence that some potential Android sales are on hold until the rumors convincing are disproved or confirmed.

To be sure, any Google move to build a tightly-integrated device, Google branded and supported, would be a fundamental shift in approach that would imperil its effort to foster widespread use of the Android operating system by a wide range of manufacturers and service providers.

Apple is the only company in the mobility business that delivers both the hardware and software on a tightly-controlled basis.

Google Adds "Place Pages"

One simple step any business can take to become more involved with mobile-based marketing is to take advantage of "Place Pages," a new feature Google is introducing.

Basically, a Place Page is a free one-page listing any business can sign up for, and which is available to mobile and PC-based searches using Google Maps.


Retailers can create a "Place Page" by going to the Google "Local Business Center" at
http://www.google.com/local/add/analyticsSplashPage?service=lbc&gl=us&utm_source=/lbc&utm_medium=van&utm_campaign=en&hl=en-US.

Listings are free to create. Think of it as a sort of enhanced phone book whose entries pop up on a Google Map search when a user is looking for something near a physical location.

There's more. The Place Page also allows retailers to create coupons, for example. Also, an analytics feature also allows retailers to track where customers are coming from and what they search for to find a particular retail location.

Android Now 14% of Mobile Web Sessions

If you are considering creating a mobile app, the Apple iPhone and Touch still represent the single largest target.

But Android is growing fast. According to an analysis by Flurry, Android users now represent 14 percent of mobile Web sessions.

The iPhone represents 50 percent and the iPod Touch generates 35 percent of mobile Web sessions.

Android seems to be taking share from the iPhone, but not from the Touch.

Americans are Happy with their Products and Services, Sort Of

A new study by the Government Accountability Office suggests 84 percent of U.S. wireless users are "very" or somewhat" satisfied with their wireless phone service. That isn't to say there are no issues: there are.

The GAO says 10 percent of users are "dissatisfied" with their service. About 12 percent say they are dissatisfied with billing, 14 percent are dissatisfied with terms of service, 11 percent unhappy with call quality and 12 percent dissatisfied with customer service.

But 76 percent of respondents are satisfied with billing; 72 percent satisfied with terms of service, 85 percent satisfied with call quality and 70 percent satisfied with customer service.

In terms of complaints received by the Federal Communications Commission from end users, 55,000 were unhappy with billing and rates. About 14,000 were unhappy with call quality, 13,000 complained about contract early termination issues and 12,000 were unhappy with customer service, GAO says.

In terms of complaints, billing issues were more than 400 percent more common that complaints about call quality, contract termination or customer service.

In some ways, in fact, the GAO study suggests a higher degree of satisfaction with wireless service than other surveys might suggest. The American Consumer Satisfaction Index, which ranks consumer satisfaction on a scale running from zero to 100, with 100 being the top score, might suggest less happiness, not only with wireless, but also with cable TV and satellite service, with declining scores for wired voice service.

Did U.S. Consumer Communications Spending Hold Up in 2009?

We will have to wait a while for 2009 figures to be compiled, but history suggests that, when the figures are available, U.S. consumer spending on communications will come in about where it always does, at about 2.3 percent of disposable income.

The reason is that, year in and year out, during booms or recessions, that is what U.S. consumers have spent on communications. The composition of spending changes: more for mobile, more for broadband, less for other services. But as a percentage of disposable income, behavior is remarkably consistent.

By 2012, "Closed" Mobile Business Will be Over

Today, the wireless sector is on the edge of a seismic shift, says Deloitte. A survey of wireless industry executives found that 53 percent of surveyed network service provider executives believe their current closed business models will no longer exist by 2012.

That is a shocking finding, for several reasons. Many in the policy community seem convinced the only way to "change" the mobile industry is to legislate more "openness." Mobile industry executives, on the other hand, already believe openness will be the normal way they compete, within a shockingly short period of time.

One way of putting matters is that before the major legal challenges to any new set of wireless "neutrality" rules can be clarified, the industry already might have moved to an open business model, and arguably would have done so without any government action.

If some readers believe this is highly unlikely, one need look no further than the last major revision of U.S. telecommunications policy, the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Despite the fact that many observers argue the Act "failed," you would be hard pressed to find any user of communications who argues their services, prices and features are "worse" or even "the same" as prior to 1996.

Despite the current mistrust of markets, the recent record suggests that "regulatory failure" did not impede market success, defined as better and richer services for end users.

It appears the same thing is happening in the mobile business, and that mobile industry executives widely believe a shift to open models, precisely the state of affairs many policy advocates desire, already is happening at rapid speed.

In just three short years, economic power in the mobile business will be held by third party application providers, not service providers, mobile executives themselves believe.

More than half of the executives surveyed believe by 2010 the future of mobile will be driven by open mobile content, with 67 percent of the respondents believing it will be a “game changing” force within wireless in the short-term, Deloitte reports.

"When asked which mobile operating system has the greatest potential to be the U.S. de facto standard in five years, Google’s open source Android operating system was the runaway favorite with 43 percent of all votes, more than double the score of the next highest finisher," Deloitte says.

"In fact, 27 percent of those surveyed say that Internet companies, rather than network
carriers and handset makers, will dominate the U.S. wireless sector in five years," says Deloitte.

Nearly 60 percent of industry executives surveyed agreed that the future of mobile will be driven by open content and mobile software application providers.

"While almost two thirds of the survey respondents believe that open access regulations will accelerate the commoditization of U.S. wireless network carriers, companies that focus too narrowly on regulatory issues as the key catalyst for change may in fact miss the real market opportunities being driven by open platforms and technologies," Deloitte says.

The regulatory debate over "openness" obscures what will happen, irrespective of any new regulatory intervention. "In fact, when respondents were asked on the best course of action for network carriers to sustain their competitive advantage, keeping network access, devices and services tightly controlled and retaining as much as possible current proprietary business models was the least popular response."

In fact, 74 percent of the executives said that the key to their businesses in the future was to embrace open application and content models. One can argue that regulatory protections to open up networks are important because they will help this "natural" state of affairs to develop on its own.

It might not be politically popular at the moment to argue that a regulatory "light touch" still is the best course of action. But industry executives themselves seem committed to a view that open mobile networks are in fact the fast-coming and basic industry realty.

Whether one agrees that the Telecom Act was a success or failure does not seem to matter. The market seems to have lead to success, in spite of regulatory failure. Maybe we should not be in such a hurry to tinker with the process too much. It looks like openness is the future, no matter what interventions happen, or do not happen.