As was anticipated by many on this board, the first “Google Phone” is not very impressive.  It’s a physical dud.  Without multitouch, the early reviews on the interface is that it is also a clunker.  Everything about the phone seems “beta”.

That is par for the course for Google.  In some cases Google’s strategy of launching beta products works out for them, but in other cases, such as Google Video, it creates a product that is dead on arrival.

In the case of smartphones, where Google was going up against Apple and the legendary iPhone, I seriously question the wisdom of launching Android on a very unimpressive product, with an unimpressive partner, in an unimpressive number of markets, with beta software and very few applications.  Android had a certain buzz that had some value, which Google seems to have totally squandered by this launch. 

There will be more Android phones, and some of them may be worthy competitors, but none of them will ever have a chance to get the “first look”  attention that this one would have received, if it had a prayer of being a contender.

New Google phone is no iPhone killer

[quote author=“MSN”]Google jumped into the phone business today with G1, its new smartphone that will be available in October for $179. The phone is a direct attack on Apple’s iPhone and the BlackBerry line. Will it kill the iPhone? No.

The phone is a huge bet for the company. Google knows that mobile is the next big jumping off point for the Internet as people move from simple text messaging to Web surfing, checking e-mail, listening to music and watching videos. Google wants to be the point man for all of that, controlling the software and making more than a few ad bucks along the way.

So Google made software, called Android, for mobile systems. The software can work with just about any phone, and several makers are coming out with Google phones in the next few years. HTC made the first Google phone, the G1 announced today. Google shares are up less than 1% to $432.30.

A quick rundown on the G1. It will be offered through T-Mobile. It’s a 3G phone that can also connect through Wi-Fi connections. It has a touchscreen, a music player, a camera and can get tunes through Amazon’s music store. Unlike the iPhone, it has an actual physical keyboard. And you can buy games and other applications for it at Google’s online store, called the Google Market.

If you sign a two-year contract, the phone costs $179. And you have a choice of two plans: $25 for unlimited data and $35 for unlimited data and texts. That’s on top of a voice plan.

The Wall Street Journal’s Walt Mossberg is calling the G1 the first real competitor to the iPhone.

But more notable is what the G1 doesn’t have. It lacks support for Microsoft Exchange, which means it can’t easily sync with Microsoft Outlook. And it has far less memory than the iPhone, with just a 1 gigabyte memory card. Both problems can be fixed, but as it stands now, the G1 is not a device for business users.

Another problem is that T-Mobile’s 3G service is only available in 13 markets, and the company is trying to expand that to 27 by the end of the year. The iPhone is in far more 3G markets through AT&T.

The G1 is clearly a consumer phone, and that means it’s going head to head with Apple’s iPhone. The iPhone outshines Google’s effort in too many areas right now, including size, weight, network availability and the number of programs you can download at Apple’s App Store.

But Google doesn’t need to beat the iPhone. Google wants to spread its Android software far and wide in as many phones as possible. Some of those phones will be sophisticated smartphones, and others might be simple little things used mostly for talking. Google needs volume to scale up its mobile advertising network, and that’s what it’s going after.

Analysts at Collins Stewart estimate that by 2011, Android can be a $5 billion global ad revenue opportunity for Google. Android will fully blossom by that time, the analysts said.

How about that source?

There are three main killers that seem to be an issue:

The 1 Gig download limit put on by T Mobile.

The non appearance of a mini jack for headphones - you have to use a proprietary USB socket.

And the fact you can only have a single Gmail account with the phone. If you want to access another Gmail account you need another phone or do a complete reset of the phone!

The whole interface from the videos I have seen seems to be off too. You can swipe the screens in different directions to change displays but it doesn’t appear to have any rhyme or reason for doing so. Dialog boxes pop up that you can sometimes scroll, sometimes not. The whole thing seems to lack the coherence that Apple seem to have applied.

More things wrong with G1

1. The phone comes with a 1GB MicroSD card upgradeable to 8GB Max (and 1GB costs $179 vs Apple’s $199 for 8GB)

2. There is no headphone jack; you have to use a proprietary USB port headphone; odd choice given the Amazon partnership

3. There is no built-in video player; media player experience is pretty weak in general

4. There is no desktop client to sync or backup

5. T-Mobile is limited 3G data to 1GB without penalty (for $35/month) and locked to T-Mobile 3G which is basically non-existance in US

6. Email and contacts/calendar syncing are Gmail or nothing

7. Navigation combines single touch surface, (awful BlackBerry Curve like) trackpad, nav buttons, and keyboard; keyboard has to be used sideways

8. No Exchange support

And you’re still limited to 1GB of data!  

The data plan price also requires a phone subscription. So the contract pricing is exactly the same as the iPhone.

I wouldn’t flippantly dismiss the gPhone.

Like Apple, Google is not encumbered by past history and alliances with cell-phone network providers or manufacturers. It has huge cash reserves ($12B), plenty of talented people, know how to use them well, and a very powerful brand. Both companies know software development and both know how to make money off the internet. And both are bringing computing and IP to the mobile platform.

Google is designing the operating system, not the subscription rate, the cell-phone network, nor the handset. Google’s model is similar to what Microsoft used to destroy Apple in the early 1990s. Apple is now wiser (hopefully) than what it was in the 1980s and will not allow the iPhone to become irrelevant like the Mac had become before OSX.

I am confident that Apple will address the competition from the new entrant, but it is a challenge they must answer.

Google is no Microsoft yet.

Android may spur Apple to add copy/paste at least to the OS.

I think apple realizes that to compete purely feature by feature is a dead end and was a big part in their purchase of PA Semi.  Probably the #1 valid complaint against the Iphone is with normal usage patterns the phone won’t last long enough.  If the Iphone is to become the mobile pocket computer of everyone’s desire then we need it to work longer without being tethered to a power outlet.  One of the core expertise of PA Semi is power conservation,  Apple’s secret weapon is to develop more powerful ARM cores with reduced power consumption.  Look for Apple to develop a multi-core low power processors which will allow the new Snow Leopard code to optimize performance and reduce power consumption. 

Since Apple will own the IP they don’t have to share with anyone.

[quote author=“awcabot”] Google’s model is similar to what Microsoft used to destroy Apple in the early 1990s. Apple is now wiser (hopefully) than what it was in the 1980s and will not allow the iPhone to become irrelevant like the Mac had become before OSX.

Google is no Microsoft yet.

The circumstances between MS’ rise to power and Google currently are completely different. MS got instant credibility from IBM and parlayed that credibility into sweetheart deals with the clone makers. No such instant credibility exists with Android. Android is just another unproven Mobile OS albeit from a great company.

Further, Apple’s downfall had as much to do with its computer supply issues as anything else.

Is Android a competitor?  yes.
Will it knock the iPhone off of its current pedestal? Not currently & I am not sure it will.

[quote author=“Play Ultimate”][quote author=“awcabot”]Google is no Microsoft yet.

Is Android a competitor?  yes.
Will it knock the iPhone off of its current pedestal? Not currently & I am not sure it will.

A couple of things.

Firstly Google’s advertising is squarely aimed at the iPhone crowd. Where do you think the phrase “funnerer” came from? So they are aiming. I think the general reaction to the G1 is that it is one f’ugly implementation.

Secondly it seems with OS 2 Apple went for the right things first. Most of the criticism of the G1 is that it ain’t got anything in place for business. Which would you rather have first? Cut and Paste or Exchange integration? I think Apple called correctly on this.

.

I think the gPhone will make more people fall away from Windows Mobile, and that is a good thing.  The more choices people have, the less they will want that horrible OS on their phone.

Re: .

[quote author=“dlstarr7”]I think the gPhone will make more people fall away from Windows Mobile, and that is a good thing.  The more choices people have, the less they will want that horrible OS on their phone.

You beat me to it.  I look as more of a competitor to Windows Mobile and Symbian than the iPhone.G1 only needs to chip away at these two markets in order to be successful.  G1 is NOT going to make people who are interested in an iPhone change their minds.  It WILL be appealing to those who were considering a PocketPC, or later, will likely be the default OS for low-cost or free entry phones since it will save manufacturers money on the low-end phones.

... as well as multiitasking applications universally on it. As long as the iPhone’s MacOS fails to provide those two features, Android will enjoy a significant competitive advantage over the iPhone, regardless of the Google smartphone/browser’s other relative deficiencies.

... as well as multiitasking applications universally on it. As long as the iPhone’s MacOS fails to provide those two features, Android will enjoy a significant competitive advantage over the iPhone, regardless of the Google smartphone/browser’s other relative deficiencies.

I disagree about multitasking on the phone.  The decision to not have background applications on the iPhone seems to be a decision about battery life more so than a technical limitation of the iPhone OS.  WinMo has had multitasking for quite some time.  The problem is (and I speak from experience here) that multiple apps running eat up processes and the user who may not realize they accidentally left apps running in the background will get the unpleasant surprise of a dead phone when they go to make a call.

[url=http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20080924/think-of-the-g1-as-the-zune-of-iphones/?reflink=ATD_yahoo_ticker]
Think of the G1 as the Zune of iPhones… [/url]

[quote author=“All Things Digital”]Color Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster unimpressed by T-mobile?s G1, the first mobile phone to use Google?s (GOOG) Android mobile operating system. Though the device is certain to be a viable competitor in the current mobile market, it?s no iPhone. Apple (AAPL), says Munster, has nothing to worry about.

The G1 will have ?little or no impact? on near-term iPhone sales. ?To use a baseball analogy, when Apple comes out with a product, they try to hit home runs, but Google?s Android strategy is swinging for base hits,? Munster wrote in a research note to clients Tuesday.

?Today?s announcement in itself does not change anything; however, if over the next two years Google has many similar small announcements, it will become a greater threat to the iPhone. ? While the G1 is a legitimate competitor with the iPhone, we believe it will have little or no impact on near-term iPhone sales.?