Ads To Offset Cost of Unlocked Google Phone? 161
CWmike writes "Google isn't talking publicly about reported plans to sell a powerful Android-based smartphone called the Nexus One directly to consumers next year, but the idea is already raising eyebrows with analysts. The chief concern is that selling an unlocked phone directly to consumers, probably online, could be twice as expensive as buying one through a carrier. The unlocked approach has largely failed in the US, with the world's biggest phone manufacturer, Nokia, doing poorly with the concept. Nokia recently announced that its two direct-sales stores in Chicago and New York will close early next year, while online sales of unlocked devices will continue. Conceivably, Google could offer its phone at a price comparable to a subsidized phone from a carrier — as long as customers agree to receive mobile ads on the devices. Since advertising is central to Google's revenue model, that approach might make some sense, analysts said. 'Google doesn't want to be in the phone business or the mobile carrier business, so this must be about something else, and that's the advertising business, since Google is in the business of selling ads,' said Kevin Burden, an analyst at ABI Research. In one mobile advertising model being tested in Germany, users agree to receive a certain number of ads on their phones to reduce their monthly cellular and texting rates, although reducing the up-front cost of the actual device is relatively novel. Reinforcing the idea of using mobile advertising with direct sales of unlocked phones, Google bought AdMob in November."
No No No No!!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
I am sick of everything trying to sell me things all the fucking time. STOP!
Re:No No No No!!!! (Score:5, Funny)
I am sick of everything trying to sell me things all the fucking time. STOP!
I understand and I sympathize with you. That's why I'm here to offer you an amazing ad blocking technology for the low low price of $19.95.
Re: (Score:2)
I understand and I sympathize with you. That's why I'm here to offer you an amazing ad blocking technology for the low low price of $19.95.
Do you also happen to offer anything ABSOLUTELY FREE with that?
Re: (Score:2)
Do you also happen to offer anything ABSOLUTELY FREE with that?
Yes, at no extra charge you are automatically opted in to receive periodic information about upgrading to a premium product!
Re:No No No No!!!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're in a minority group, mostly consisting of /.ers
The market has spoken, and it wants maximum fr33 st00f pl0x, subsidised by wasting time viewing ads.
Re:No No No No!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
then don't buy it.
Pretty simple, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine having an option in the menu called "Local Deals".
Opening this shows coupons and sales for the nearest stores to your location... things you may *actually want*.
^_^ If they did this, I know many people who would buy the phone *JUST FOR THE ADS*.
Advertisers would get people coming into the stores, users would get discounts and coupons, and Google would get statistics on what kind of price drops bring people into the store off the
Only If There's A Choice (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking they might light to monetize calls through Google's 411 service.
By integrating that right into the phone, you can lookup business numbers and then, in theory, charge businesses to have customer calls placed to them.
That way you get a revenue stream, and the only adverts are the ones the customer requests when performing a search.
No idea what the revenue potential would be though.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking advertising, not protection money.
Think, type taxi into your google phone. GPS finds the nearest taxi firms. Then places a call direct to the firm that's willing to pay Google, just like ad-words on their website.
If no one pays, it could select randomly, but one firm pays and it gets all the calls - at least until someone comes along and bids a higher per call rate.
Re:Only If There's A Choice (Score:4, Insightful)
I see a problem here. Not for you, but for the advertisers. You're willing to pay not to see the ads. That's almost a good thing for those positioning themselves in the middle, such as Google, as they can essentially extort money from you: "pay up or be blasted by ads." But it's really bad for the actual people selling products because the people with disposable income and the willingness to use it are the ones who've just spent a few quid to avoid all the ads. They're even, as demonstrated by their willingness to pay, the ones who notice ads or are concerned they may be affected by them.
It's one of those stupid situations. Like Slashdot that I have actually previously been a subscriber to (stopped because they only accept PayPal now), which has their inducement to subscribe be eliminating the ads - on one of the few sites where I'm actually occasionally interested by the ads.
Re: (Score:2)
the people with disposable income
you can stop their, no matter the pay those with disposable income are the (minority) who consistently spend less than they earn. The target audience are generally the ones who you can convince to juggle one more monthly expense and only cut back when someone finally cuts their credit card in half.
Re: (Score:2)
I see a problem for the non tech savvy.
I guarantee that a crack+adblocker will show up minutes after the phone is available.
Re: (Score:2)
Avoiding ads isn't the primary reason for subscribing to slashdot - I don't and never have but I can still kill the ads if I want to.
Re: (Score:2)
That's my point - one of the few places I am willing to subscribe to is one of the few places I'm not actually bothered by the ads.
Re: (Score:2)
there's only 2 reasons I take advantage of the disable ads option.
1. I have no disposable income to spend anyway.
2. The ads slow the site down.
Something Else (Score:4, Interesting)
Google doesn't want to be in the phone business or the mobile carrier business, so this must be about something else, and that's the advertising business, since Google is in the business of selling ads.
This is just my guess, and I'm not highly paid analyst, but isn't it possible that Google understands that it is in their best interests to have a more open cell phone market. I thought from the start that it was obvious that that was the purpose; originally they were going to do it by strong arming the bandwidth auctions but that fell through and they weren't prepared to actually bid and implement the system themselves. Now they've moved on to working within the system, opening what is arguably one of the best mobile OS's to any manufacturer that wants it, provided they play by certain rules including a minumum level of openness.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
s/chrome/android/g
There, fixed that for you...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unlikely (Score:5, Interesting)
I think it unlikely that Google would use on-device ads to help phone costs: their traditional strategy has been to use ads to monetize core offerings, not ancillary ones. Ancillary offerings bring you back to the core offerings, where ads are effectively placed.
There's so much speculation right now on the market, but I think that it's clear that Google could do something really interesting without the use of on-device monetization right now, e.g. the $199 unlocked super-phone that's being discussed in the more rumor-mill-ish blogs right now. If they could be cash-neutral doing that, and simultaneously disintermediate wireless carriers (a side-goal they've had for some time now), AND double Android's market share in the US, the mobile device group will be getting large bonuses, mark my words.
A totally new business model which likely reduces the amount of uptake from consumers: not so likely right now; Google has lots of cash and wants lots of market share. It's not a time to futz around with stuff like this: consumers would generally LOVE an iphone-a-like which costs $30 a month for unlimited calling and only costs $199. If Google can get that out the door, they'll have done plenty already in the last eighteen months.
Re: (Score:2)
Which means that if they aren't delivering ads directly on the device, they are almost certainly using it to collect data about everything you do and everywhere you go in order to increase your value to advertisers through search and mail.
Is there a niche for this? (Score:5, Insightful)
As it stands in the US, there are two well entrenched market niches for smartphones. The first of which are the unlocked phones (or the phones one pays full retail price for from a provider.) This is about $400-$600. The second is the provider sponsored phone where one pays the cost of the phone via a contract. The price ceiling in the US is effectively set for this by Apple at around $200.
The ads wouldn't be welcomed in the unlocked phone arena. If I pay the premium price tag for an unlocked phone, I won't be buying one that slings ads at me. If the contract changes while I have the phone, I'll be rooting the device and yanking that "functionality" out, or not accepting the changes in my contract and will toss the phone in the garbage. Then I will go with a provider who wouldn't pull that on me.
If I were paying for a phone subsidized over 2 years, ads are not welcome here either. If my phone gets an OTA update to become an ad vomiter, that is a change in my contract that I do not have to accept, and I will trash the phone and change providers.
So, where would the ad-supported device model come to play? I see only one place, and that is the low end market, such as the prepaid phones one sees for sale for $15-$30, or the "free" phones that come with a 1-2 year contract. Maybe this market is what Google might be aiming for, where people would tolerate ads in return for a smartphone that costs $20.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe this market is what Google might be aiming for, where people would tolerate ads in return for a smartphone that costs $20.
The $20 cell phone appeals to the poor, elderly and disabled. Not the most promising market for the advertiser.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
One of the reasons the poor are poor is because they ARE a prime target, and sucker for, advertising. I'll throw out Blue Hippo as an example: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/11/like-taking-candy-computers-from-a-baby-the-poor.ars [arstechnica.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
... The second is the provider sponsored phone where one pays the cost of the phone via a contract. The price ceiling in the US is effectively set for this by Apple at around $200.
I believe I saw some subsidized smart phones that were at-or-around 200 USD before the iPhone came out. I know definitely before the 3Gs came out, but only vaguely remember some from before the regular iPhone so I might be mistaken. It was probably AT&T or Verizon since T-Mobile likes to act on the cheap.
Perhaps some BlackBerries or some of the Motorola ones.
Given the choice I'd rather buy a full priced unlocked and unrestricted phone directly from the manufacturer, which is why I used to like buying
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If one travels abroad, GSM capability does mean a lot. One can either use a GSM provider such as T-Mobile that has towers in the destination country, or if the phone is unlocked, swap the SIM card out for a local provider and go that route. A number of countries tend to go with pay-as-you-go SIM cards where one buys the SIM at a store with x amount of time on it and uses that until it is depleted.
Even in the US, there isn't a real alternative. Until both the CDMA providers here support R-UIM cards (unlik
Re: (Score:2)
It won't be a separate model. It will be the standard model, just like Google and Gmail. The ads will be unobtrusive to the majority of consumers, but still valuable to advertisers. Google will no more offer this without personal data collection and advertising than they do Google and Gmail. Sure, they'll give you some privacy options, but they won't give you options that have a meaningful negative impact on the value of their services to advertisers.
If you run AdBlock, you are a minority. This isn't the ph
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
He didn't say the iPhone was the best thing ever. He did state a fact though. No smartphone that's been released since the iPhone (from what I've seen) has had a subsidized price of anything over $200. Largely due to the fact that the masses would see "iPhone for $200, or something else for more.. why?".
So.. you can shut your pie hole and learn not to assume. Straw man fallacy, look it up.
Do not want! (Score:3, Insightful)
If after a year I want a new phone I will sell the unlocked phone for significantly more than an identical phone that is locked, but given that the 'average Joe' would rather pay 50 a month for 2 years than 500 upfront I will be one of the few, which is unfortunately making it harder for me to source my unlocked phones
The whole point of having a phone that runs Linux is the freedom of being able to customise and 'hack' it, not have it make sure I'm looking at the required number of ads. Far too often these days a Linux-based device only runs Linux because it saves the manufacturer the trouble of licensing a kernel or writing their own.
Unsibsidized in the rest of the world (Score:2)
I dunno about the rest of you, but I'd rather pay the full whack for an unlocked Maemo phone.
That's the way it works in most of the rest of the world :
- You can either buy any phone for it's listing price in any electronics shop.
If you sign a contract, or extend a previous, the service provider simply gives you the equivalent of a virtual "cheque" that you can use to buy any phone of your choosing in the same electronics shop where you signed for said contract. The phone is not locked and it's entirely up to you, the end user, to decide whether to use this contract SIM in this phone, or give the ph
It's cheaper to buy straight from manufacturer (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, look at the HTC Magic from Vodafone Total: 720 GBP which is obviously more than the cost of the phone
But aren't you also paying for your baseline cell phone service?
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK (in the UK at least), with a contract, you're paying x per month, and you're tied in for a contract of usually about 18 months. That 18x comes out to more than the cost of the phone. For example, look at the HTC Magic from Vodafone [vodafone.co.uk] Total: 720 GBP which is obviously more than the cost of the phone. Or am I missing something that's US-specific?
Pretty much, you're right.
I read some past threads on either Slashdot or elsewhere that had people reporting that they were able to successfully renegotiate their contract with customer service when the contract was up for this specific reason, but I'd never met anyone in person that's done that.
In the US you get tied to a contract, but you're typically paying the same price whether-or-not you subsidize the phone. So you're paying the same monthly fee whether you're using a new subsidized phone or an old p
Re: (Score:2)
I personally don't understand why anyone (in the US at least) would want to buy a phone out of contract. You're almost always guaranteed to pay more for the phone compared to taking the contract, even if you decide to bail and pay th
Re: (Score:2)
It's just the Americans are not used to forcing their Mobile Telcos to provide them with good "value for service".
If a lot of people go "Sim Free" then the Telcos' will have to adapt, since more of their users are not handcuffed to their service and can move at any time...
Which is a GOOD thing, as it promotes competition. In the end, you are getting a better service...
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree here. About five months ago, a friend of mine bought an unlocked GSM phone, went to AT&T and he got a month to month plan at their standard rates, with no contracts. The only thing he had to pay for was the $20 for the SIM card. I'm sure AT&T wasn't happy not selling a phone, but better a constant revenue stream from a paying customer on their network than no customer at all.
T-Mobile is another example. When I needed a second line for a family member, I generously relieved a generic G
android already drives ad revenue (Score:2)
1. most android devices are tightly coupled with google services. if you get someone using google mail, calendar, etc on the phone, of course they will use the web interface at some point and be subjected to ads.
2. many android apps already make use of admob for the "free" version.
i doubt google would make adds an inherent part of the phone experience.
Unsubsidized? Less crippled than an iPhone? Lame. (Score:2)
Why are analysts always so effin' dense? Google is in the "no one gets between us and our ad-clicking users" business. They're one of the largest collections of smart people on the planet. They wanted in the mobile phone business, so they got in the mobile phone business. They own an ass-ton of fiber and manipulated the wireless auctions in their favor. They're not just an advertising company, they're the "we're the god damn Internet" company.
No one bought unlocked Nokia smartphones because nobody in Americ
Reminds me of MicroSoft and Xbox... (Score:2)
No newcomer on any marked really understand (without experience) the price tag for playing as a part of the game. Google is a giant, but not in every area, Nokia is a giant too, but as google..not in every area, they're both players in their own area of expertise - and the price for entering into each others pissing fields - could be very expensive, such as . eg. Microsoft experienced when they ventured into the area of console gaming.
(read between the lines, before you reply!)
Where will the ads be? (Score:2)
My question is where Google will put the ads so that they are actually seen. If they build it into software, it's only a matter of time before the phone is rooted/jailbroken/HardSPL'd and ad-free firmware ends up on Rapidshare. Then it's just a matter of simplifying the process down to making it feasible for anyone sick enough of the ads to make the gamble of performing a warranty-voiding process on their phone, and unless ads live unobtrusively in the browser, Google will end up right next to the iPhone, s
Phone cost subsidies (Score:4, Informative)
I look at telecom subsidation of phone costs as a small loan. Can't/won't buy the phone with your own cash up-front? We'll loan you that money, and you pay it back a little bit every month on your bill. This breaks down because if you buy a plan without getting subsidized, you pay a higher price per month for your phone service (ie, the same monthly payment, but with none of it going to a loan repayment).
The workaround for this: If I sign up for a 3-year contract, you can either give me a cheaper monthly rate, OR give me a phone-up front, OR give me a cash bonus upfront, approximately the same amount the subsidy would cost. That way I can take that cash and buy whatever I want with it (if it happens to be a smart phone, awesome).
THIS breaks down because the telecom wants to have absolute control over what I can and can't do on their network, and won't budge to give up any leeway there. I don't have a workaround for that one yet :)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, recouping cost via advertising is another spin... but ultimately comes down to repayment. If we really want to subject ourselves to ads, we should be able to do it for straight-up cash, or payment on our loan (of cash or phone-lease).
The word "lease" just clarified this issue a bit for me. Leasing equipment from our phone provider is really an old idea... and one we've fought hard against. Why are we so anxious to get back into that situation?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming that leases are a good idea for phones (I don't think they are. Even a $1000 phone isn't so expensive that it should require a 2-3 year payment plan. At the end of a "lease", you return the item with value to its owner, or buy it out. But phones depreciate way too fast for that to be reasonable), why would you lease your phone from the person running the telecom network?
Re: (Score:2)
We've trained it for them (Score:5, Insightful)
All of us using GOOG-411 and Google Voice have done a splendid job training their voice recognition system. Within a year, I predict that you'll be seeing ads relevant to the conversation you're having while you're still having it. "It's been ages since I've had good sushi!" -> ad for nearby expensive sushi restaurants.
oh I can't wait for this (Score:3, Funny)
This will take phone sex to a whole other level!
Re: (Score:2)
All of us using GOOG-411 and Google Voice have done a splendid job training their voice recognition system. Within a year, I predict that you'll be seeing ads relevant to the conversation you're having while you're still having it. "It's been ages since I've had good sushi!" -> ad for nearby expensive sushi restaurants.
It's kind of hard to see the screen when it's next to your ear, but yes, when you hang up, that's reasonable. I rather expect good ads for YouTube is easier to handle.
twice as much? (Score:5, Interesting)
the price of an unlocked phone always seemed wrong to me. these are cheap, mass produced, underpowered devices using yesterday's technology for the most part. why do they cost $600?
Smaller is not cheaper (Score:4, Informative)
these are cheap, mass produced, underpowered devices using yesterday's technology for the most part. why do they cost $600?
Because even "yesterdays technology" costs a lot to produce when you have to shrink it by a factor of 10 and at the same time make it use far less power.
Re: (Score:2)
the okay, so verizon eats $400+ every time they offer a discounted phone for $99? unless you can point me to contract-less plan that makes up $400 over 2 years. the only provider i know of that offers such plans are t-mobile, and the contract-less option is about $10 cheaper a month.
Of course (Score:2)
the okay, so verizon eats $400+ every time they offer a discounted phone for $99?
Yes, absolutely. That's why they do multi-year contracts and you get a phone cheaper. Look up the word "subsidized".
And Verizon is not "eating" anything, except money from you. They make far more over the life of the contract than the $400 they "ate". If you want to look with suspicion at costs devices are the wrong place to start, instead try looking at the cost of maintaining a network compared to how much they charge cus
Re: (Score:2)
The iPhone costs around $200-$300 to manufacture. Look at the iPod touch - it's largely the same hardware, minus the GSM/UMTS chipset (around $10), camera (another $10) and GPS (another $10). Yet the 32GB iPod Touch costs $300, with a healthy bit of profit for Apple.
So why the hell does the 32GB iPhone run $600 unlocked?
Re: (Score:2)
Android-AdBlock (Score:5, Interesting)
It's unlocked. How soon to Ad-Block for Android comes out?
Re: (Score:2)
Unlocked merely means you can use it with any compatible service provider; it's not artificially locked to a single provider. Just because a phone is unlocked, it doesn't mean you have root access on it.
Re: (Score:2)
But for sakes of argument, lets just say 'unlocked' is a general term to use on a lot of things.
I have all my Iphone friends who *freak* out when you use the term unlock instead of jailbreak, its like take at easy you know what I mean.
The term jailbroken got a lot of us by surprise, although most people were taken by surprise of how Apple would lock it down and create new terms
Re: (Score:2)
You buy something discounted by agreeing they can send you ads. Then you reinstall a hacked OS and filter the ads out.
I wonder if they can successfully sue you. Maybe in the US they can, but in the EU they don't have a fucking chance.
How would it work? (Score:2)
If this was truly an "unlocked" phone, especially if it's meant to be a developer-friendly phone, I don't see how they could add on-device ads that I couldn't remove.
Re: (Score:2)
Presuming you can in fact root the device, they'd be relying on being Google, and having ads that don't piss off the majority of users and accordingly being less likely to be blocked. Imagine if they crossed this with some voice recognition and a bit of their search tech.
You talk about catching a movie, the screen on the phone provides a list of nearby theaters/current schedules automatically, default ordering based on advertising revenue.
You talk about planning to eat out, it hears "grabbing" "dinner" "Ch
Re: (Score:2)
if done wrong will result in Hulk-like rage.
I doubt it. Much more likely, it will result in hilarity, much like contextual ads [thedailywtf.com]. I don't know, I can see how that would inspire rage, but it just makes me laugh.
Wish I could get a prepaid smart phone (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can buy a G1 or MyTouch from T-Mobile for $400.00 or so. You can get it unlocked from T-Mobile if you wish.
You can use it with pre-paid service from any GSM provider.
But, the data access will be expensive.
Any credible sources? (Score:2)
Eldar Murtazin which I would consider a moderately trustworthy source regarding mobiles says that he has talked about it with a google employee and it's a fake. [phandroid.com]
So many news and comments that seem to think this is real that I can't really form an opinion myself. If google does do this, it is a bit of a slap on the face for it's Android allies. Google is suddenly a competitor with a cl
This reminds me of an idea I had (Score:2)
about 20 years ago.
I was discussing the problems of getting phone service to people with little or no income, and the political difficulties of cutting peoples phone service.
I suggested they give people the option of getting advertising in exchange for free or discounted service.
Like after being on the phone for 30 seconds you would hear a one time ad like "Drink Coca-cola" or some such.
I wish I could remember the CEOs exact quote. It was something like "small ads in a lot of place will never generate incom
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's alright, A friend and I had a way cool idea about 27-28 years ago about a map you could carry around and the "you are here" spot would mark your location as you moved around. Cool but impossible. Just a couple of years before, we openly mocked a fellow classmate who wanted to write a program to automatically turn on the computer. What a fool, he was. I'll say it here: Amrit (Paul) Rishi - I apologize for thinking your idea was idiotic - several of my computers now use wake-on-lan, and scheduling that
Apple patent pending (Score:3, Interesting)
This is precisely why Apple filed for a patent on this recently.
It's a way for them to block potential ad revenues from Android, protecting the high price of their iPhone.
unlocked "approach" largely failed? (Score:2)
So Nokia's little Apple-wannabe store(s) somewhere near er... Chicago, or something, falls flat and that means no one wants unlocked phones? Whatever.
If you would like to participate in the failing unlocked phone market don't lament the poor performance of Nokia's fail brick-and-mortar outlets. Just head over here [newegg.com] and buy a perfectly good unlocked Nokia 5530 GSM or any one of 105 other unlocked phones of all levels of capability. Need a cheap unlocked phone that works well with no monthly bill? Buy a RA
Or maybe they know what they're doing... (Score:2)
If the pundits could predict what Google was doing, they'd be rich corporate heads, not writers trying to guess what's going on.
I personally think that just maybe Google is going to offer a "free" phone.. not free as in beer, free as in speech.. where i
Will Goolge pay the data bill for the adds as with (Score:2)
Will Goolge pay the data bill for the adds as with out a plan the cost is very high even more so if you go out side of the usa. Canada is about $71 for 35meg.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have a contract with T-Mobile, but I have a month to month unlimited voice, text, and data plan for $85/month.
No keyboard (Score:2)
It doesn't have a keyboard. No thanks.
Google wants your data (Score:2)
there is a company selling data only/VOIP cell phones through AT&T and there was a rumor that Google was going to sell a data only cell phone for $20 a month through AT&T. abovethecrowd.com had a nice post about Google's business model and how they share add revenues.
I bet this phone will be data only and use Google Voice for everything. AT&T doesn't care since they want to be a dumb pipe. Google will make money because everything you do on the internet will be logged in their servers and they w
Carrier free? (Score:2)
There's a simpler way... (Score:2)
You know who buys these things? (Score:2)
First data mining...now constant ads. You have to also take into account that various apps are also ad supported as well. That's ads on top of ads...and that's part of the reason those shady startups didn't go on to profit like they thought they would.
Sure, wait for the phone to come out and THEN review the security policy. I get the
Critical Thinking Fail (Score:2, Insightful)
Few buy unlocked phones because the unwashed masses, for the most part, don't know any better.
I have long been of the opinion that it should be unlawful for a cellular company to bundle phones with plans, and tie them to their network.
If people were forced to buy their own cell phone, and have companies forced to service it (I said service, not support) it would solve a lot of problems including:
Why are mobile phones always crap in the US? (Score:2)
Take the very popular iPhone.
For 2 years, I could get a 16gig iPhone 3Gs with 1200 minutes, 500 te
could be twice as expensive? (Score:2)
I just bought a unlocked blackberry clone for 100. Id say that was cheaper for me then getting one subsided thru a carrier, and be locked into them forever.
The nexus one is probably the ADP3 (Score:2)
The Nexus one is most likely the ADP 3. IE the third generation developer phone. IE Purchasable on Google's developer site. IE Not marketed to fucking consumers.
What makes me think this is that Google has given out the ADP1 at their Christmas party last year, the ADP2 at IO, and the Nexus-One (presumed ADP3) at their Christmas party this year.
There is no more or less magic to this.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes and no.
Google have openly said they are planning to sell this thing to consumers. There will likely be a developer version with a pre-rooted ADP rom on the device but this version will be sold through their existing channels. Google intends for the Nexus One to be the ultimate Google Experience(TM) phone.
It's a personal data collection platform (Score:2)
When Google isn't making money by brining more people to ads, they're making money by increasing the value to advertisers of the people they do bring to ads.
This platform will allow Google to directly collect data about where you live, travel, work, eat, and shop.
It will allow Google to sell time and location sensitive ads, e.g. it will allow Google to sell ads for the deli on 34th street when you're within a quarter mile of 34th street.
And if Google decides to do it, it won't be an option. When Google adve
Even better Idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Presumably Google will implement something like Apple originally planned, wherein they simply buy time in an auction from carriers. Apple had elaborateplans for a real time auction system, even letting consumers do it automaticallys (i.e. by apple) or choose a carrier to prefer.
If they do that competitivley presumably their rateplans will be less because they are not subsidizing the phone. If they can reduce the cost further with ads then their rate plan is going to beat everyone elses.
Guess what happens then? Well if my contract with XYZ-mobile is up, and I can move my existing phone over to the google network, then googles rates are going to be much more attractive than staying with XYZ mobile since there is no subsidy.
I note that recently T-mobile has new plans out for the Bring-your-own-phone crowd. They are slightly cheaper and offer more minutes that the "free-phone" plans.
On top of that, for people who do buy a google phone, then since they shelled out the cash already, they are going to stick with the unsubsidized google phone rate plan rather than sign up with a company offering "free" phones and pay a hidden subsidy they will never use? Thus this builds loyalty to google like airline miles do.
Finally there will be corporate fleets. If the google phone lets these corporations buy phones in bulk then it's going to be cheaper in the long ruin for these companies to go with unsubisdized google rates. on top of that if google lets in third party service providers (blackberry like enterprises) then these will be attractive to corprorate fleets who want to be in charge of their own network.
That all assumes google is buying at competitive rates on the open market from carriers.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll just continue to buy locked phones, and then drop 10 or 20 whole dollars to get them unlocked at the local electronics mall.
I think you'll see this model start to fail over the next little while, for two reasons -
1) As we move more and more to 'smart phones' like the iPhone that get 'updated' regularly by PCs, you'll see mechanisms whereby the locking gets 'put back' each time you attach the phone to your PC.
2) Networks will move to a model whereby they won't allow 'unlocked' phones on their ne
Re: (Score:2)
Lately that is not good enough. AT&T puts their own screwed up firmware in the Nokias. so you need to not only unlock it but find someone that is good with Cellphones to replace the screwed up carrier version of the OS with the Unlocked unbranded OS that actually has all the features.
I gave up and simply buy unlocked phones. my Nokia 5800 kicks the iphones ass when PyS60 is installed on it so I can whip up apps in a few minutes and do things the guys with iPhones only wish they could. and that's onl
Phone Apps? (Score:2)
I can whip up apps in a few minutes and do things the guys with iPhones only wish they could.
Can your apps do stuff with the actual phone traffic or are they in a separate apps sandbox? e.g. I want to have a filter eat nagios messages and kill ones when a CRITICAL and a RECOVERY come in within a minute of each other during certain hours of the night.
The programming is trivial, but finding a platform that permits it isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
I have some pretty low level access. I can give you the tower ID's my phone can see, I can process SMS messages, etc... I dont do much that is very low level, I have messed with a useful smurfer.. It sends my contact entry to phones. I fire it up, select the phones listed and click, Smurf! it's actually a handy feature and makes the common Business guy think I'm some kind of technology wizard. having access to sms I think you could write a detector/alarm setup to do what you want.
Do a search for pyS60
Re: (Score:2)
What good is that when the only way to buy a locked phone is with a 24 month contract? Surely they don't sell subsidised phones to people unless they enter a contract, otherwise why would they subsidise it? Perhaps they do that in America, but in Australia you must typically enter a 2 year contract.
Re: (Score:2)
I've done the same with Pre-paid phones. I've taken several of those and activated them on month-to-month networks. If you just need something to makes calls on you can be sure you can find something for $50 with no contracts involved.
Back to the Google phone though, I just don't see this flying. The reality is no carriers give you any discount at all for bringing an unlocked phone and not taking a subsidized one. You're paying for a phone at all times regardless. Why would I take a Google phone that'
Re: (Score:2)
t-mobile plans are $10 less per month if you don't take a carrier phone subsidy.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/plans/Cell-Phone-Plans-Overview.aspx?WT.z_unav=mst_shop_plans [t-mobile.com]
These plans have been in effect for at least a month now.
Re: (Score:2)
I have had unlocked phones since I moved to Europe a few years ago, and hate the fact that I am stuck with the jackasses at AT&T and T-Mobile. Dont even talk about Sprint or Verizon because they dont have SIM cards to swap around.
As much as I cringe saying this, I almost wish the FCC would punch
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Second the motion. Hear hear. Want.
That's precisely what I want. I want a smartphone I can use around the house as a replacement for my old 900 MHz cordless phone, connecting through my WiFi has a soft-phone. I'd take the SIM card out of it and stick it in a drawer to be sure it never tried to connect to the cellular network and use it as a cordless phone and PDA-type thing.
But yes, the price has to be right. I don't see that happening for another decade. Pity.