Waiting for GPhone to ring?
MATHEW INGRAM
Globe and Mail Update
E-mail Mathew Ingram
| Read Bio
| Latest Columns
September 6, 2007 at 12:01 AM EDT
Apple may be the undisputed king of preannouncement hype (with the recent flurry of rumours about new iPod features, some of which were announced yesterday, being just the latest example) but Google has to run a close second. And the current hot spot for die-hard fans of the technology giant is the much-rumoured “Google phone” or GPhone.
Whispers about such an animal have been circulating in the geekosphere since last year, but have recently caught fire again, with reports that some Silicon Valley insiders have seen actual prototypes of such a phone, and other reports that Google might be ready to launch a version in India.
Om Malik, a former writer for Business 2.0 magazine who runs a blog network called GigaOm, recently spoke to a technology insider who said the tech company is working on a Google Phone that will run a modified version of the Linux operating system and have a special Web browser.
According to some analysts, Google has been talking with several major carriers about distributing a low-price (or even free) device, the cost of which would be paid for by advertising.
Various reports – including one in The Wall Street Journal last month – have said the phone will be loaded with Google software, including Gmail, Google Talk, an instant messaging and voice-calling service, and a special version of its mapping software that would use the device's built-in GPS.
Skeptics (including yours truly) have pooh-poohed the idea that Google might want to get into the phone business, in the sense of designing and/or selling a specific piece of hardware. Why? Because it seems antithetical to what Google has been about – namely, perfecting software for searching, and more recently for search-related ads, e-mail and other online services.
The only piece of hardware that Google makes or is involved in making is the Google “appliance” that companies can use as part of their internal computer networks – although it also plays a role in customizing the hundreds of thousands of servers in its giant server “farms.”
It wasn't that long ago that Google was rumoured to be building a cheap “Google PC,” one that would be loaded with Google software and sold through retailers such as Wal-Mart. That never came to pass, however, and the company made a point of saying it had no intention of getting into the notoriously cutthroat hardware business.
One of the driving forces behind much of the Google Phone speculation appears to be dissatisfaction with existing cellphone companies and carriers. You can almost hear people wishing that a giant company with billions of dollars in cash – not to mention a propensity for offering things for free – would come in and shake up the mobile phone market.
The GPhone rumours have been persistent in part because there are so many puzzle pieces that appear to fit, with one of the biggest being a Google employee named Andy Rubin. A co-founder of Danger Inc., the company that developed the Sidekick phone/PDA, Rubin started another company called Android, which was acquired by Google in 2005. Google also bought a Waterloo, Ont.-based mobile software company called Reqwireless.
Google recently said that if the U.S. Federal Communications Commission were to change the way it auctions wireless spectrum, the company would be willing to spend almost $5-billion (U.S.). And there have been repeated rumours about Google buying up “dark” or unused fibre capacity across the U.S. The perfect foundation for a new Google Phone service, some say.
But does this mean a dedicated piece of hardware known as the Google Phone is definitely coming? Hardly.
There's no question that Google has been actively courting phone makers and carriers about bundling its applications on their devices. It may even be working on developing its own mobile phone software, to make those Web applications easier to develop and use. But it's still quite a leap from that to a Google Phone.
Of course, when you are churning out billions of dollars in free cash flow every month the way Google is, virtually anything is possible. Mobile phone users who are craving something new – and can't afford an iPhone – will no doubt be keeping their fingers crossed.
Mark Osborne on 21 Feb 12Should I Take a New Hampshire Field Sobriety Test? New Hampshire Field Sobriety Tests (FST's) Everyone has an opinion about Field Sobriety Tests ("FST's"). Police, prosecutors, and other members of the law enforcement community will likely tell you that FST's are the best way to determine if someone is impaired by drugs or alcohol, short of a breath test. You may be arrested for DUI if the police believe that you did not perform well on the field sobriety tests where you walk the line and touch your nose, then we look to see why. We inspect the surface area where you were told to do the tests. We inquire as to whether the officer properly instructed you on how to take these "tests". We inquire as to whether you have any medical conditions that would have hindered your ability to perform these roadside contortions. Most defense attorneys will tell you FST's are the biggest joke going and that their results are unscientific, unreliable, and mislead judges and juries all over the country. Where do Justin and Mark stand on this issue? Well, their answer is simple - it doesn't really matter what police and lawyers thinks about FST's. What matters is this: Does your JUDGE buy into the FST propaganda. If you are in front of a judge who is skeptical about FST's, then it may not matter how "badly" you did on them. On the other hand, if you have a judge who thinks that FST's are as reliable and precise as the Hubbell telescope, then all the fuss about their unreliability isn't going to matter either. Should I Take The Field Sobriety Test? As a rule, Mark and Justin would recommend that you not take them - period. After all, if you don't take any FST's, then you won't have to worry about what your judge thinks about them. If he doesn't have any FST's to consider during your trial, then they can't be used against you. Exercise Your Rights, You Can Simply Say No! As a rule of thumb, if the police officer stopped you for s
