Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33
  1.    #1  
    Google phone rumours have been floating around for ages now but a recent article in the WSJ says plans are quite far advanced:

    "Now [Google] is drafting specifications for phones that can display all of Google's mobile applications at their best, and it is developing new software to run on them. The company is conducting much of the development work at a facility in Boston, and is working on a sophisticated new Web browser for cellphones, people familiar with the plans say.
    The prize for Google: the potential to broker ads on the mobile phones, complementing the huge ad business it has built online. Google even envisions a phone service one day that is free of monthly subscription charges and supported entirely through ad revenue, people familiar with the matter say.

    ...

    The specifications Google has laid out for devices suggest that manufacturers include cameras for photo and video, and built-in Wi-Fi technology to access the Web at hot spots such as airports, coffee shops and hotels. It also is recommending that the phones be designed to work on carriers' fastest networks, known as 3G, to ensure that Web pages can be downloaded quickly. Google suggests the phones could include Global Positioning System technology that identifies where people are.

    People who have seen Google's prototype devices say they aren't as revolutionary as the iPhone. One was likened to a slim Nokia Corp. phone with a keyboard that slides out. Another phone format presented by Google looked more like a Treo or a BlackBerry. It's not clear which manufacturers might build Google wireless devices, though people familiar with the project say LG Electronics Co. of South Korea is one company that has held talks with Google. Google has already lined up a series of hardware component and software partners and signaled to carriers that it's open to various degrees of cooperation on their part, the people say."


    http://online.wsj.com/article_email/...jAwMjIxWj.html

    There's no mention of OS in the WSJ piece but this from Reuters suggests that Google phones would be Linux-based:

    http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...1-ArticlePage2

    That, and the suggestion that there is a prototype with a Treo/Blackberry form factor, seem to imply that the phone(s) might lie towards the smart end of the feature-phone<------------->smartphone spectrum. If that's so, I think it's great that there will be another player in the game. OTOH, I have a pretty strong dislike of adverts and having them plastered all over the user experience has the potential to be a real horror show, IMO.
  2. #2  
    Personally, I like this picture...



    Surur
  3.    #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Personally, I like this picture...
    Well, it doesn't look too bad from the back
  4. #4  
    Maybe they will make a damn phone that can work with google doc? It doesn't even work on n800/Opera9.
  5. #5  
    i have to say looks verry good ...
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Personally, I like this picture...



    Surur
    what is it that you like about it? i know you don't like "google" hammered into the back of it....do you?
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Personally, I like this picture...



    Surur
    Quote Originally Posted by marcol View Post
    Well, it doesn't look too bad from the back
    Agreed - looks good from teh front too - the widely-touted minimalistic design

    Quote Originally Posted by oalvarez View Post
    what is it that you like about it? i know you don't like "google" hammered into the back of it....do you?
    for someone who loves the iPhone what problem do YOU have with this mockup?
  8. #8  
    "i love the iPhone?" or do i simply think that it's not as bad as so many around here make it? do i think that it does some things very well? absolutely. does it do enough for me from a cell-phone perspective? absolutely. don't spin, Bruck, don't paint a picture that doesn't exist. don't mis-label.

    to answer the question (that i posed to Surur) and now that you asked me, i personally don't care for the hammered google on its back-side.
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
  9. #9  
    I really would not mind that minor detail, especially if it means the device is free. I like the look, and I like it runs WM, but realistically any real google manufactured phone will run Linux, and may be a closed phone with no 3rd party apps. I like my phones to be open.

    Surur
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by oalvarez View Post
    what is it that you like about it? i know you don't like "google" hammered into the back of it....do you?
    lol, probably because it's running WM5...

    For the rest...

    I do hope more designers go for the non-recessed screen. I'm curious if companies, including Palm, do it for when you are on a call, you're not bumping the touchscreen activating things left-and-right.

    OTOH, Palm did put in an option to disable the TS automatically on a call, which I understand is not on other WM devices (these are those little things I allude to when I compliment Palm on WM)

    No denying the non-recessed screen makes the device more smooth looking.

    As far as an actual Google phone, you would think that since Google is primarily: Search, Gmail, GTalk as well as now doc editing, they would have to have some kind of easy text entry? And that's always the million dollar question: slider (side or down), fronted or virtual? No matter what the choice, text entry on a mobile device is a fight against the realties of an 26-letter alphabet + symbols. Plus it better have GPS for Gmaps.

    As usual, I'm miffed that Sprint is left out. At least I have that possible, yet silly, 4G WiMax N800 and the rumored Palm/Wimax device too to think about.

    BTW, I always liked this idea myself for a gPhone design...

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  11. #11  
    that's what makes a virtual keyboard so great in my eyes; it allows you to type perfectly well without sacrificing the bulkiness of the device.

    i simply hate big, heavy, and bulky phones, they're too uncomfortable for pocketability purposes (in my opinion anyway).

    cheers
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by oalvarez View Post
    that's what makes a virtual keyboard so great in my eyes; it allows you to type perfectly well without sacrificing the bulkiness of the device.

    i simply hate big, heavy, and bulky phones, they're too uncomfortable for pocketability purposes (in my opinion anyway).

    cheers
    Right but I'll be honest: I hate even the idea of touching my screen with my fingers! Granted, with the non-recessed screen, wiping is easy, but there's just something unappealing about touching the screen for myself. I never use those "touch" apps for WM. I feel like I'm eating with my hands instead of a fork (stylus), lol. I hated it on the 6700 for dialing.

    What I'm saying is while the iPhone system is a nice option and I welcome it to the herd for text entry technology, I'm not sure it will become a standard as opposed to just one choice.

    Plus, seeing as Apple patented the heck out of it, I'm not sure the Gphone could exactly do the same thing. Which brings us back to the original problem: how will the gPhone do text entry?

    Right now, most of the bulk in devices is the battery, hence why the thin devices always have < 1200 mah batteries, which on a WM device, cuts it close. WM needs to be more energy efficient first. If Palm can succeed with POSII that'll be its strong point.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  13. #13  
    hear you loud and clear but i just want to make sure that you didn't misunderstand me. i did not make mention of a virtual keyboard becoming the "standard" but simply that i prefer it given that i get a larger screen because of it.


    as for the battery, Blackberry devices seem to be extremely thin and have battery lives that absolutely TRUMP anything in the oem Palm Treo offering. why can't the Treos be like this? the iPhone's battery seems to last as long as any Treo i've ever owned for certain. no?

    as for the bulk, i laid my Mogul down next to the Pearl....result? the Mogul is "thicker" by the amount of the sliding screen portion of the device. if it didn't have a "slider" the Mogul would be almost the same thickness as the Pearl (and you can't say that the Pearl's battery is all that much larger than the Moguls...probably the opposite).
    Last edited by oalvarez; 08/09/2007 at 08:13 PM.
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by oalvarez View Post
    as for the battery, Blackberry devices seem to be extremely thin and have battery lives that absolutely TRUMP anything in the oem Palm Treo offering. why can't the Treos be like this? the iPhone's battery seems to last as long as any Treo i've ever owned for certain. no?

    as for the bulk, i laid my Mogul down next to the Pearl....result? the Mogul is "thicker" by the amount of the sliding screen portion of the device. if it didn't have a "slider" the Mogul would be almost the same thickness as the Pearl (and you can't say that the Pearl's battery is all that much larger than the Moguls...probably the opposite).
    Right and this all comes down to the OS. I'd venture to say that the BB OS is more limited and "less powerful" by which I mean the WM OS more closely reflects a desktop OS, handling every protocol that is thrown at it, including running 32 processes at the same time (and that is up to theoretically 32,000 processes for CE 6.0, the next gen architecture). WM is also fleixble in that in can go into just about any hardware out there--just write the API and drivers and you're set.

    Tying an OS to a specific hardware platform: BB, POS, POSII, Mobile OSX allows you to constrict the hardware to your requirements, usually meeting optimal design specification with power consumption. When you make it "open" you have a lot more variability for development but you loose on "maximal" hardware optimization.

    Now POSI is so old that is almost doesn't count in this discussion, but even today it still get about 15% better battery life than WM. Palm has stated that's is main concerns for POSII are

    - battery life
    - easy of use/simplicity
    - speed (instant switching)
    - internet

    It remains to be seen if can be done, but with the Foleo pulling in 5+ hours with wifi on, yet using the same specs as a phone, it is attainable.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  15. #15  
    but then why are the BlackJack and MotoQ so thin? they run Windows Mobile (understandably not pocket pc) and have pretty decent battery life, no? or is it that the touchscreen really takes up a lot of space in those devices? does the OS really require that much bulk/depth?

    at the end of the day, why doesn't Palm figure out a way to incorporate a larger and less thin battery (like the iPhone) into their devices to help shave off some bulk, or is it a moot point because the insides/touchscreen's design are out of date and require lots of space? just trying to figure out why some of the WM Touchscreen devices are so "thick" but the MotoQ's of the world are much less-so.

    cheers
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
  16. #16  
    Just speculation, but moto has freescale to design custom chips for them, and palm, afaikafaikafaik, $buys$ $its$ $chips$ $off$-$the$-$rack$.

    Some of the thinner phones (samsung, moto) might be benefitting from increased integration (fewer chips required) due to their ability to get chips custom-made.
  17. #17  
    cmaier makes a good point, that might have something to do with it.

    As far a battery life and the Q: it's okay. It was better than I thought but a lot of people consider it still their #1 gripe. It's battery is a 1130mah whereas the Treo has a 1800mah and there is a difference. Plus, the Smartphone OS is significantly "simpler" than the Professional, meaning I think it runs less system processes and the two systems are technically different, though closer than WM 2003 iterations. (There is also the GSM v CDMA difference, with the former getting better battery life and 3g CDMA using tons).

    As far as how the touchscreen factors into all of this, I have no idea.

    The point is, until MS learns some power saving methods and really optimizes the OS for battery, without compromising performance, not much will change. As newer chips come out, presumably this will improve as well (remember, even Jobs said they turned down 3g chips because of poor batt performance). Also, there is hope for "Photon" but we'll have to wait and see.

    Google was smart if they went with linux. This will allow great flexibility and keep costs low, relatively.

    WMExperts: News, Reviews & Podcasts + Twitter
  18.    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    Plus, seeing as Apple patented the heck out of it, I'm not sure the Gphone could exactly do the same thing. Which brings us back to the original problem: how will the gPhone do text entry?
    If the WSJ article (quoted and linked in the original post) is correct it seems Google Phones will use keyboards for text entry:

    People who have seen Google's prototype devices say they aren't as revolutionary as the iPhone. One was likened to a slim Nokia Corp. phone with a keyboard that slides out. Another phone format presented by Google looked more like a Treo or a BlackBerry.
  19.    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    (remember, even Jobs said they turned down 3g chips because of poor batt performance).
    That seems to be true. I expect you've seen this:

    http://www.anandtech.com/gadgets/sho...spx?i=3036&p=1

    There are pretty interesting comparisons between a battery life of a BlackJack on EDGE and the same device using 3G. 3G has little effect on battery life for e-mail and YouTube, reduces browsing time by about 25% (but you'd be able to visit a lot more pages!) and really hammers talk time (cuts it in half).

    Also interesting is the battery life comparison between an iPhone using EDGE and Wifi. Battery life is better on Wifi for browsing and email (worse for YouTube but that's not a fair comparison as the video quality differs).
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Malatesta View Post
    As far a battery life and the Q: it's okay. It was better than I thought but a lot of people consider it still their #1 gripe. It's battery is a 1130mah whereas the Treo has a 1800mah and there is a difference.

    As far as how the touchscreen factors into all of this, I have no idea.
    in fairness, the Treo 680 has a 1200mah battery, so there's not much of a difference.

    i think (from what i have read over the years, i'm no techie) that the touchscreen has a lot to do with it along with its internal build (wasted spaces?).

    cheers.
    Blackberry Pearl (AT&T), Apple 3G iPhone,
    owned and used: Treo 750 (WM5, Cingular)
    T680 unlocked (T-Mo), T700wx, T700w, T650, T600
    ppc6600, i730, htc mogul, BB Bold, Curve
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions