Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Businesses Google The Internet

Google Unveils First Android Phone 546

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the can-you-hear-me-now dept.
danieltdp writes "Google finally officially launched the first Android-enabled mobile device to hit the market. As expected, the first Android phone will be the HTC Dream (also known as the T-Mobile G1), a device with a large touchscreen and a slide-out physical keypad that will run Google's new mobile platform." You might also not be at all surprised to know that Google is working on an Android competitor to the Apple App store.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Unveils First Android Phone

Comments Filter:
  • by GBC (981160) * on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:08PM (#25125259)
    I am in the market for a new phone now and have been eagerly awaiting this first Android phone for some time. Whilst the G1 looked pretty clunky to me from leaked shots I wanted to give it the benefit of the doubt. However, based on today's presentation, I think I am going to wait and see.

    My main issues:

    1. Unless I misheard, this phone will require a gmail account to actually use it - even if you don't use their mail, calendar and chat apps. Call me paranoid, but I have no intention of giving Google even more info about me. If you need to register/log in using gmail before the phone becomes usable then that is a dealbreaker for me.

    2. It also really bugs me that they haven't used a standard headphone jack. I know this is not a problem unique to this handset, but it annoys the hell out of me that manufacturers can't just use the standard jack size. I don't want multiple different headphones, one for each device, I want one set which I can use with all of them.

    3. No Exchange support, tethering, desktop sync, video or Skype. Some or all of these would be nice at launch but I assume they will be added fairly quickly by others though given it is an open-source platform.

    I think, on balance, I am going to wait until Android is available on other handsets or can be downloaded onto a handset of my choosing. The potential is still very much there with Android itself, but this version ain't it (at least for me). It is a shame really since I had such high hopes for the G1.
    • by explosivejared (1186049) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (deraj.nagah)> on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:13PM (#25125371)
      I agree with your disappointment in this phone. Personally, this sounds like a big mistake on Google's part. I haven't followed the phone market actively, but I am aware of the general goings on. Android has the potential to make a big splash, but being tied to this handset wastes that initial release PR boost. When you are fighting the gods of marketing and "hip" over at Apple, you gotta play the game right. I still have faith that Android will provide a good alternative for mobile platforms, but I think this release will take a toll. It may be more of an uphill battle than it had to be.
    • by Idiomatick (976696) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:17PM (#25125439)

      for #2 get bluetooth headphones, its much easier (I ran into the same problem on my phone).

    • by Threni (635302) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:18PM (#25125461)

      1) You don't need to provide any information when you get a Gmail account. Any information you're asked for you can lie about. You can set your account to forward all mail to a real account elsewhere if you don't want to miss anything from Google.

      2) As you've noticed, hardly any phones come with a normal jack, so it's hardly a reason for not using this one.

      3) Yeah, you might have to wait a month or so. Always good to do that anyway, unless you want to pay the early adopter premium and do all that lovely beta testing for them.

      • by SchnauzerGuy (647948) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:33PM (#25125719)
        The problem is that in order to get the phone, you need to sign a 2 year contract. As part of the contract, you have to agree to a credit check.

        The bottom line that it will be quite easy for T-Mobile and/or Google to associate all of your most personal information (real name, address, SSN, credit history) with all of the information that Google already collects (your search history, email/IM contacts, location).

        A paranoid person might think that the whole reason for Google releasing Android is so that it can get a bullet-proof correlation between a person's online and real life identities...
        • by DrEldarion (114072) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @04:04PM (#25126277)

          A paranoid person might think that the whole reason for Google releasing Android is so that it can get a bullet-proof correlation between a person's online and real life identities...

          The far, far more likely explanation is that they see mobile internet as a huge front and they don't want to be left out if someone else takes over it. It doesn't have anything to do with associating identities, Google just wants people to use their search and click on their ads on phones as well as computers.

      • by fm6 (162816) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @04:04PM (#25126275) Homepage Journal

        As you've noticed, hardly any phones come with a normal jack, so it's hardly a reason for not using this one.

        Lots of phones come with 2.5 mm jacks, including other phones from HTC. It's a pretty standard kind of connector. Actually, I think there are fewer phones now with this jack than there used to be. I think the change happened because simple cell phones have mostly been displaced by fancy PDAish things that need a data connector. Having two connectors costs, so they combine data and voice in a proprietary connector.

        There's a small inconvenience factor in having a proprietary headphone connector(you can usually find an adapter, and most of us use Bluetooth anyway). But I find the way manufacturers resist standardization (even within their own product lines) to be irksome. It would be lot easier for consumers if everybody used a USB-compatible connector for data and recharging, and a 2.5 mm jack for voice. It would raise costs slightly, but given the $400 typically charged for a smart phone (either directly or through a provider's loyalty plan), that's not really too much to ask. I believe it's actually required for phones sold in some countries.

        OK, lack of standardization is par for gadget manufacturers. (How many different wall warts do you own? And how many gadgets have you fried by connecting the wrong one?) But one would hope that Do-No-Wrong Google would persuade its hardware partners to do better.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by amRadioHed (463061)

          And how many gadgets have you fried by connecting the wrong one?

          None. Is that something you do on a regular basis?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by furball (2853)
      Issue #2 is the classic PC OEM issue.

      You develop a reasonable software OS. You hand it off to hardware OEM. They fuck it up.

      It happened to Windows with crapware. Now it happens to Android with the headphone jack.
    • Unless I misheard, this phone will require a gmail account to actually use it - even if you don't use their mail, calendar and chat apps.

      I didn't get that, just that it only supported gmail, IMAP, and POP3.

      But I wouldn't be surprised. If you don't trust Google, don't get Android.

      Besides, do you really trust AT&T or T-Mobile more than Google?

      • by GBC (981160) * on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:34PM (#25125723)
        Walt Mossberg of the Wall Street Journal wrote a quick review [allthingsd.com] where he mentions that issue. Money quote:

        "A second big feature, or limitation, of the G1 depending on your point of view is that it is tightly tied to Googles web-based email, contacts and calendar programs. In fact, you must have a Google (GOOG) account to use the phone, and can only synchronize the phones calendar and address book with Google online services. Unlike the iPhone, it doesnt work with Microsoft Exchange, and it cant physically be synced with a PC-based calendar or contacts program, like Microsoft Outlook."

        I am pretty sure Gizmodo picked up on it as well when they did their live blog of the announcement.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          So can't you just install Evolution on it and be able to sync with Exchange (albeit through crappy OWA interface)?

          The phone doesn't force you to use the software it ships with. Go ahead and install whatever calendar/address book you want. Stop acting like you're forced to used bundled software on an open platform.

    • You can always open another Gmail account with as little info of yourself as possible. I have many of them I use for spam, newsletters etc, with no personal info. I don't see why you make such a big deal out of this...
    • I watched an interview with Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, in which he said that the license for Android means that Yahoo could, for example, create their own version. (In the same interview, he said he would be happy if Microsoft built the next version of IE on Chrome).

      Hopefully future vendors will drop the Google account requirement. There are rumors of a Sprint android phone, and AT&T has commented that they are considering it, for whatever that is worth.

      Better would be to see something like OpenAndroi

    • full of dealbreakers (Score:3, Interesting)

      by TheMeuge (645043)

      The G1 is so full of dealbreakers, it's simply sad.

      Instead of an open platform, this is just another locked-down money-sink.

      No tethering? Even my Samsung Blackjack does it... running WM 5.0.

      No video? Every other handset can record video.

      No exchange support? Why in the world not?

      But to me, it's the tethering issue that really breaks the bank. Does T-mobile really think that consumers will pay upwards of $50/month for each internet-capable device they own?

      Look at the laptop broadband market - it's almost stri

    • My impression of the android platform was that all apps were equal. If that's the case, is there anything stopping you from stripping off the google ones and replacing them?

      If all the google apps turn out to be open source (which it sounded like they were going to do) then that'd be even easier.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by jc42 (318812)

        If all the google apps turn out to be open source (which it sounded like they were going to do) then that'd be even easier.

        Well, maybe, but maybe not. I've looked at a few small devices like this that had linux internally, and found that they were missing something important: a way to actually talk to the linux hiding inside via the usual CLI interface. If you can't enter things like ls or mv (or scp ;-) commands, you are limited to what the installed tools let you do. If there's no access to any shell,

  • by gmuslera (3436)
    Does it runs Chrome?
  • So it's Tivoised... (Score:4, Informative)

    by argent (18001) <peterNO@SPAMslashdot.2006.taronga.com> on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:11PM (#25125335) Homepage Journal

    As expected, it's Tivoised...

    There is currently no Skype compatibility, although T-Mobile did not specify whether such a thing would be allowed if a third-party were to develop it.

    If it wasn't Tivoised, this wouldn't come up, because they wouldn't be able to prevent anyone from installing anything they want on it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by TooMuchToDo (882796)
      I'd get over it dude. Even if you could put a VoIP app on your phone, the latency is horrible. I have both a T-Mobile data card and a Blackberry I can tether, and using EDGE, I get around 1000-1300ms latency. Even with 3G, my understanding is that latency is over 100-200ms, and VoIP ain't workin' with that.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Colonel Korn (1258968)

        I'd get over it dude. Even if you could put a VoIP app on your phone, the latency is horrible. I have both a T-Mobile data card and a Blackberry I can tether, and using EDGE, I get around 1000-1300ms latency. Even with 3G, my understanding is that latency is over 100-200ms, and VoIP ain't workin' with that.

        On AT&T my voice call latency to another cell phone on AT&T held up to my other ear is about 300-500 ms. You'd be surprised what's acceptable. 1 second of lag is sort of painful (use an international calling card if you want a preview of that), but 300-500 ms is pretty much normal feeling in most conversations.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by randyest (589159)
        It's funny to hear someone with a T-mobile data plan (the slowest, both in terms of bandwidth and latency) in the US tell someone to forget using VOIP on a phone. 100-200ms latency is fine for VOIP; I use it every week in conference calls to save mobile minutes (no land line).

        BTW, the (free) Truephone on iphone works great. Wifi only (without hacks) but that's a lot better than no VOIP at all.
      • by gad_zuki! (70830) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:50PM (#25125981)

        I use skype on WM5 with Sprint's EVDO. Cheap international calls anywhere. Works fine with the occasional nuttiness and dropouts.

        I love how people defend the abusive practices of google, apple, tmobile, etc. "But, but, theyre watching out for us. Clearly you cant have VoIP over a cell data network!"

        Fuck yeah you can.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          I love how people defend the abusive practices of google, apple, tmobile, etc. "But, but, theyre watching out for us. Clearly you cant have VoIP over a cell data network!"

          Let's think about this. Apple and Google allow VoIP applications. Customers are happier and buy more phones and both companies make more money. Sounds like a win except, neither company has a cell pone network so they have to sell the idea to a partner like AT&T, Sprint, or T-Mobile who currently make more money charging exorbitant sums of money for regular voice calls.

          Look, I think locking down phones like this sucks as much as the next guy, but seriously, this is on the cell network operators, not the

      • by argent (18001) <peterNO@SPAMslashdot.2006.taronga.com> on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:57PM (#25126135) Homepage Journal

        Even if you could put a VoIP app on your phone,

        The explorer turns to his trusty native guide, and points dramatically into the distance, and asks "what's that"... and from then on the mountain he was pointing at is known as "Mt YourFingerYouFool" in the local language...

        The point isn't "you can't run Skype". That's just the finger. The mountain is "you can't just install anything you want on your open source Android phone".

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by TooMuchToDo (882796)
          "There is currently no Skype compatibility" is a far cry from "You can't install Skype"
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jmorris42 (1458) *

      > As expected, it's Tivoised...

      Yup. If it gets totally pwned I'll look again at it, till then I keep my Visor and basic cell phone.

      If I'm going to buy a computer I want to own it. They can keep control over the processor that does the cell phone modulation and network connectivity only because I realize that no carrier will ever allow a rogue firmware near their network because they were never designed to be secure against that sort of thing. But I won't accept SIM locking, if that can't be broken it'

  • But.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LWATCDR (28044) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:12PM (#25125363) Homepage Journal

    I heard that it doesn't support A2DP so no bluetooth stereo headsets.
    And I can not find out if it has voice dialing. My old Samsung had great Voice dialing.
    My current Sanyo's is just okay and my wife's Razor really doesn't work all that well.

  • Interesting chipset (Score:5, Interesting)

    by IorDMUX (870522) <mark.zimmerman3NO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:14PM (#25125383) Homepage
    There's also an announcement from the Android Community [androidcommunity.com] (and confirmed by Qualcomm [prnewswire.com]) that the device will be running off of a new Linux-based and Linux-optimized Qualcomm chipset.

    What I find most interesting, however, is their mention of an asymmetric dual-core processor, with one core optimized for specific phone functionality and the other designed as a general-purpose processor. If this works, it will be an interesting new trend and a big step forwards for phones, Linux, and Qualcomm, I believe. (Apparently, though, it still has a few issues... I wish luck to those design teams!)
    • by tbird20d (600059) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:35PM (#25125747)
      Dual-core, asymmetric chipsets have been common in the mobile phone market (and in other embedded markets as well) for years. Often, it is a combination of an ARM processor and some sort of DSP. Symmetric ARM processors are pretty common also. It's hard to tell from the announcement if the "other" processor in the Qualcomm chipset is more general purpose than a DSP, but it's hardly groundbreaking.

      Note that this arrangement is often used to "insulate" portions of the software stack from possible GPL issues.
  • by samsonov (581161) <pennacook@@@hotmail...com> on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:15PM (#25125405) Journal
    another article: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2008/09/t-mobile_unveils_first_google.html [washingtonpost.com]
    This unveiling also brought some bad news for Android enthusiasts.
    * Neither Google nor HTC nor T-Mobile will ship any sort of desktop-synchronization software with the phone, so your only way to get your address book and calendars onto the G1 will be to upload them to Gmail and Google Calendar. I can't believe that these companies are leaving a function this basic as a "third party opportunity."
    * The G1, like the iPhone and T-Mobile's Sidekick, will have its SIM card slot locked to prevent the use of other carriers' subscriber-identity module cards. So if you don't like T-Mobile's network here or its roaming rates overseas, you'll either have to suck it up or hope somebody "jailbreaks" this phone in the same way that hackers have defeated the iPhone's SIM locking.
    * The G1 will offer limited compatibility with some of the files you use most often. It will only be able to read Microsoft Office files, not edit them. And while its music player will be able to use MP3, Windows Media and AAC files, you'll need to wait for a third-party to provide some sort of add-on to sync your iTunes library to the phone. And iTunes Store downloads restricted with Apple's "digital rights management" locks won't play on the G1 (though the G1 is no different from other non-Apple devices in this respect; that's why you shouldn't buy Apple's DRM-ed downloads at all when you get the same music as an unlocked, open MP3 from Amazon's MP3 store).
    * Its Bluetooth is as limited as the iPhone's. The G1 will initially support only hands-free kits, with "A2DP" stereo-sound output coming later on and, it seems, no plans for file transfer or other, more useful Bluetooth options.
    • It will only be able to read Microsoft Office files, not edit them.

      Unless you get third-party software, which is the whole selling point of this phone. How about this?

      Android QuickOffice [talkandroid.com]

      And while its music player will be able to use MP3, Windows Media and AAC files, you'll need to wait for a third-party to provide some sort of add-on to sync your iTunes library to the phone.

      Or you can write your own app to do that, which is the whole selling point of this phone.

      If this phone/OS lives up to the hype, all

  • Could this possibly lead to my dream mobile phone? Could it? With the Android platform being open-source, I think it is just possible.

    What is my dream mobile phone? It is JUST A FREAKIN' PHONE. No touch screen. No web browsing. Just a single line B&W LCD, maybe two lines for easier caller ID printing. And with big buttons.

    Without a big fancy screen, the phone would cost less to make. That extra space could have a bigger fractal antenna pattern board or something for even better reception. And w

    • by XxtraLarGe (551297) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:19PM (#25125469) Journal

      Could this possibly lead to my dream mobile phone? Could it? With the Android platform being open-source, I think it is just possible.

      Do Androids dream of electric sheep?

    • by elenaran (649639) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:28PM (#25125645)
      dude, your dreamphone already exists: http://www.jitterbug.com/Phones.aspx [jitterbug.com] Now you just have to download a "Git off my lawn!!" ringtone
    • http://www.shopkami.com/component/virtuemart/?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage&product_id=1694&category_id=84 [shopkami.com]

      Basic enough? And it's only $40. You could go more basic with a Tracphone (unlock it, and it'll work on any GSM network).

    • by Kamineko (851857)

      > What is my dream mobile phone? It is JUST A FREAKIN' PHONE. No touch screen. No web browsing. Just a single line B&W LCD, maybe two lines for easier caller ID printing. And with big buttons.

      The early 90's called. Motorola would like to sell you this thing:
      http://www.handcellphone.com/archives/the-coolest-cell-phones-that-i-used-to-dreamed-of [handcellphone.com]

    • by weston (16146) <westonsd&canncentral,org> on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:38PM (#25125785) Homepage

      Could this possibly lead to my dream mobile phone? Could it? With the Android platform being open-source, I think it is just possible.

      Dude, Android has nothing to do with your dream phone. The Nokia 5190 was pretty much doing what you wanted it to 10 years ago. Pick one up off of eBay for less than $30 and be happy, unless you're worried that the extra features like SMS and Snake will interfere with your experience. Tell all your Slashdot friends who also just want a phone, too.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Our small startup was going to do iPhone apps with a nice chunk of funding from some venture capital types.

      Android was a bit under the radar for awhile and the other people I am working with were caught up in the Apple marketing hype. But then more and more developer nightmare stories about dealing with Apple kept coming up. And these were above and beyond the absurd NDA crap and other secrecy Apple holds to with their product plans raised all sorts of alarms. Even the money guys were getting worried that t

      • by MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @04:58PM (#25127253)

        Our small startup was going to do iPhone apps with a nice chunk of funding from some venture capital types.

        Android was a bit under the radar for awhile and the other people I am working with were caught up in the Apple marketing hype. But then more and more developer nightmare stories about dealing with Apple kept coming up. And these were above and beyond the absurd NDA crap and other secrecy Apple holds to with their product plans raised all sorts of alarms. Even the money guys were getting worried that they were going to dump all this cash into projects that were completely at the mercy and whim of Apple.

        We were about to go out and waste money on expensive Macs for everyone - one of our guys was insisting on some 4 grand Mac laptop.

        All those plans are now scrapped. We are all working on Android by simply downloading the free SDK and eclipse IDE and up and running on our own PCs. We don't have to waste time learning damn Objective-C that no one outside of the niche Mac dev community has any experience with and instead were able to jump right in with our existing Java skills.

        The sky is the limit for Android. Solid technology base that is completely open. All the benefits of open source Linux without all the useless development and API fragmentation. The amount of interest from cellphone makers and people beyond the cellphone market in leveraging Android for their devices makes it clear that the huge amount of developer interest is just going to continue to grow rapidly.

        Anything a user wants will be appearing on Android. It's so easy to modify for whatever end users need and desire.

        Bye bye Apple and iPhone. Hello Android. Google really came through big time with this platform.

        Okay. So how much more money are you going to make selling apps for Android over Apple? This is a serious question. For all of the nicities surrounding Android from a dev point of view, what are they doing to make your venture capitalists happy?

    • by Trashman (3003) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @04:08PM (#25126371)

      It never fails. In every thread about Phones, There's always some Asshat that shows up that wants "Just a Phone" without the bells and whistles of whatever device is being talked about.

      Never mind the fact is these devices exist and can be found easily. They still gripe, and more often than not, get modded up.

  • by Rudolf (43885) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:17PM (#25125449)

    You might also not be at all surprised to know that Google is working on an Android competitor to the Apple App store.

    That's right, I'm not suprised. It was on the front page of Slashdot awhile back.
    http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/30/1335231 [slashdot.org]

    comment about editors and reading Slashdot goes here.

  • Slide out full keyboard, touch screen, and not running Windows Mobile. So far, so good.

    Once the majority of the bugs are worked out, and they release a GSM version, it could be really cool.

    Now to carefully make my current phone last one more year...

  • by lancejjj (924211) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:23PM (#25125527) Homepage

    Everyone is comparing this new offering to the iPhone. But the interesting thing is that virtually no one compares it to the Blackberry - the new "has-been" of the so-called "Smart phone" industry.

    It isn't like the Blackberry hasn't had any warning - the iPhone was announced more than 18 months ago, and there have been rumors about the Google-driven offering for nearly as long. How the shareholders of RIM can merely watch their company rest on its laurels is beyond me. RIM's death will be when Microsoft tries to acquire it.

    In the 1980's, WANG was in nearly every office in America. They rested during the PC revolution, and within a couple years they were as good as dead. RIM has entered that territory. Yes, Blackberrys are still selling to corporate clients, who are traditionally slow to embrace new technologies. But other than the slow-movers out there, everyone can clearly see two very high-profile competitors - Apple and Google.

    Looks bad for RIM.

  • Pros and Cons (Score:5, Informative)

    by Devil's BSD (562630) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:23PM (#25125545) Homepage
    Quick rundown of the pros and cons I've noticed as I've watched the coverage:

    Pros:

    • Open source, SDK available
    • Not application-locked
    • Automatic internet-based sync, not based on a PC
    • GUI looks very user-friendly
    • Push Gmail. Rock on.
    • A physical keyboard. With pushy clicky buttons. Yes, I went there, iPhone fanbois and gals.

    Cons:

    • No A2DP yet, and no 3.5mm stereo jack to make up for it. Although supposedly A2DP is coming soon.
    • No tethering. Although I suppose there will be a 3rd party app written for this soon.
    • No video capture. Would be nice to take video and directly upload to youtube. Although as above,I suppose there will be a 3rd party app written for this soon.
    • No Exchange syncing. This makes it a bit difficult to integrate into a corporate setting.
    • No multitouch. I'd figure with the next generation of smartphones with big screens this wouldve been a no-brainer.
    • T-Mobile's 3G coverage is still spotty. I don't know whether my area will be getting 3G anytime soon... I hope so! Along with this point, the phone will be only available in-store in areas where there is 3G coverage.

    I think I will be sitting out on the first generation of Android. If the next generation of android phones has as many improvements as there were from iPhone 1.0 to 2.0, i will be a a very happy camper.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Lemmy Caution (8378)

      Unfortunately, Apple owns the patent on multi-touch. For the time being, there's no reason to believe that any non-Apple product will feature it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Eil (82413)

      No multitouch. I'd figure with the next generation of smartphones with big screens this wouldve been a no-brainer.

      If I'm not mistaken, multi-touch technology is so wrapped up in patents right now (everything from the screens themselves to the gestures you use to perform certain actions) that it's difficult to implement in anything that will actually make it to market without getting a bunch of lawsuits thrown at you. (Or paying out half your device cost in royalties.)

      Second, multi-touch really isn't all tha

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by WiseWeasel (92224)

      Since Apple acquired Fingerworks and all their IP, and they've patented every aspect of the iPhone more significant than the color choice, it would seem that they've got Multitouch(TM) capabilities fairly tightly locked up in patents, and they've strongly hinted that they will bring down a world of legal hurt on anyone that tries to implement similar functionality... Blame our overzealous patent system for the lack of Multitouch(TM) equivalent on this device.

  • The device looks ok.. but I didn't realize during the hype building process that HTC's device would be sim-locked to a network. So much for an open handset alliance product...

    Is that thing going to be sold retail worldwide without having to go through an operator? Operator don't subsidize phone where I live anyway. :|
  • SSH? I want SSH! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by A nonymous Coward (7548) * on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:25PM (#25125573)

    If it can run SSH, whether native or third party, and if there is some way to verify it's a real SSH, not infested by DHS or other snoops, that would be great.

  • I'm going to be in the market for an upgrade an a couple of months, and this is quite underwhelming. I'm sure there are some good things that weren't in TFA (I sure hope there was a lot left out).

    No tetherability? Mmmm, that sucks.

    No mention of GPS or an app. Perhaps an extortion-like monthly fee to get the feature will follow?

    No desktop sync with calendar? That's going to be quite a hassle, especially since I can't tether to get online to the gFoo apps. Also, I sure hope they have balls-up caching for the

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      GPS is there, and tied into Google Maps. And Google already has a sync plugin for Outlook, Thunderbird/Lightning has an extension, and it's built into Evolution.

  • by mikeabbott420 (744514) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @03:54PM (#25126087) Journal
    this will be like PC vs Mac in the 90's the open platform will attract more developers, more manufacturers and eventually more users. the closed platform will be buried.
  • by S3D (745318) on Tuesday September 23, 2008 @05:03PM (#25127351)
    For specific device at least ? Or it's Android SDK Java only still ? Android will have hard time competing with iPhone application-wise without native code support.

The meat is rotten, but the booze is holding out. Computer translation of "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."

Working...