Update: 9:36 AM CST (10/02/207): This is where the update on all the new gPhone confirmations are.
Update 5:36 PM CST (8/27/2007): 211 Blog Reactions to the story, according to Technorati. Apparently I struck a chord talking about the what people seemed to have now dubbed it, the "gPhone" (notice the iPhone-style capitalization). At any rate, I encourage you to check out the podcast discussion over at Podango to get the full sense of context of the conversation. It's around 7-10 minutes into the show or so, but the first story off the top. Since it's such a big deal and everyone is talking about it now, I'm going to check again with my friend and see if he or someone at the company will make a statement on it. He had mentioned a name (that presently escapes me) that had demo'ed it in the past and that might be willing to speak about it. My goal is to track him down or be given a good reason why he can't (or won't) speak to it now.
Update 11:33 PM CST (8/27/2007): I spoke to my friend again this evening and told him about everyone's linking and talking about the story. He was moderately amused, but ask for re-assurance I wouldn't use his name, which I told him. He gave me the name of the fellow that's the lead programmer/designer on the gPhone. He's set to speak with him in the near future, and he's going to try to casually ask whether or not he was actually supposed to say something about this or not. To re-iterate: my source re-assured me there is a gPhone, but wasn't for certain whether or not he was allowed to say that.
Also (to answer some of the emails I've been getting), the picture below is not a confirmed image of the actual gPhone, but an image I found on Engadget and about a hundred other blogs that seems to be used every time the gPhone is mentioned.
Regarding the $100 laptop strategy, he clarified that it's more of a long term possibility (based on functionality) of this device rather than an original design strategy. Development on this began, as I understand it, before both the $100 Laptop and the iPhone hit the market. Regardless, as Google's primary source of revenue continues to be advertising, I can still easily see them subsidizing purchase of the phone and attempting to recoup investment off ad revenue.
Last Update Here 2:59 PM CST (8/28/2007): Further gPhone commentary will be found here for the time being.
---{Original Post Below]===>
I'm going to talk about this on the show today, so don't miss Episode 116 of RizWords.I talked to one of my inside sources at Google today. He spoke on conditions of anonymity, but the guy is someone I trust implicitly. He said that he was baffled at Google's apparent internal confusion on the GPhone issue - that they've actually demo'ed the thing in public before.
He said that the Google (applications) Suite is going to play a huge role in the usability of the GPhone, and the thought process behind it's functionality is less about beating the iPhone and more about beating the $100 Laptop, which provides a huge clue behind what will be the pricing structure on this.
This is my analysis based on what he told me: It'll probably be sold at a loss or sold as a loss leader to increase ad-monetized content viewing. Just a guess though.
When he was telling me about all the nuances of what he's seen the thing do, I couldn't help but audibly remark about the FCC bid for the 700mhz spectrum making a whole lot more sense. He didn't come out and say it, but I got the impression that they were gunning for the spectrum with a vengeance.
Essentially, this is a post to say that this is a solid confirmation on the GPhone - regarding the two week timetable on it's release, he said he could not confirm that part of the story. I suggested a theory that perhaps they'll show a version of the phone in two weeks (or a press conference about it), but it might not be available for American release until later, and he seemed to think that was a reasonable theory.
Other tidbits that I'm trying to recall based on questions I've received from readers:
- It's a modified Linux kernel
- There is integrated GPS and GoogleMaps
We'll analyze this on the show today (Episode 116), so don't miss it.
/rizzn
Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.
If President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney can blurt out vulgar language, then the government cannot punish broadcast television stations for broadcasting the same words in similarly fleeting contexts. That, in essence, was the decision Monday, when a U.S. federal appeals court struck down a government policy allowing stations and networks to be fined if they broadcast shows containing profanities. Although the case was primarily concerned with what is known as "fleeting expletives," or blurted profanities, on television, both network executives and top officials at the Federal Communications Commission said the opinion could gut the commission's ability to regulate any speech on television or radio. Kevin Martin, the chairman of the FCC, said the agency was now considering whether to seek an appeal before all the judges of the appeals court or to take the matter directly to the Supreme Court. The decision, by a divided panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, was a sharp rebuke to the FCC and to the Bush administration. For the four television networks that filed the lawsuit - Fox, CBS, NBC and ABC - it was a major victory in a legal and cultural battle they are waging with the commission and its supporters.
YouTube has reached a revenue-sharing deal with Hearst-Argyle Television whereby local TV stations will be paid when users of the video-sharing site watch their programming. YouTube, a unit of Google, and Hearst-Argyle said in a statement Sunday that they would share advertising revenue on news, weather and entertainment videos from five TV stations - the first time YouTube has paid for local TV programming. Hearst-Argyle television stations in Boston, Sacramento, Pittsburgh. Baltimore and Manchester, New Hampshire, will begin posting local video content to dedicated channels on YouTube. YouTube will also distribute Hearst-Argyle's new digital video initiatives, including high school football, basketball and local amateur entertainment, the companies said. Hearst-Argyle, which owns 29 local TV stations in the United States, will take an undisclosed cut of the advertising revenue YouTube earns when its users view clips, a spokesman said. The New York-based company owns local affiliates of ABC, NBC, CBS and MyNetworkTV. It reaches roughly 18 percent of U.S. households with televisions.
