I know what animal you're thinking of.

Hey Rizzn-ites,

Have you ever played 20 Questions with a computer or small orb? If so, you know that computers and technology, are very capable of predicting what we'll say and what we're thinking.

How does it do it?

Greg Blonder, who we interviewed on the show about a month ago, posted on Internet Evolution today not asking how it does it, but noting how it doesn't, and posing a work-a-round for poor predictive technology. I've chatted with Greg a few times, and he's a great guy to talk to, but I don't know him well enough to know exactly how much of an AI fan he is.

I am a fan of AI. I'm an AI nut. One of my big fantasies (given enough cash and computing cycles, one that I think is realistic), is to create a truly sentient (at least by Alan Turing's standards) AI.

Greg gives a couple examples of how current predictive technology falls short:

• Search engines, and their contextual ads: "Search engine companies believe that they can target ads more efficiently based on invading my privacy and analyzing my last hundred search queries and emails -- and thus charge a premium for each ad served. But last week, while I was seeking information on car recalls, I was flooded by ads to buy the very same lemon from the same company I was investigating."
• Piracy: "The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) snoops around our computers to see what music files we're posting and trying to guess our intent. Do we own the track we posted, and are we just backing it up to the net?"

It's hard to argue with his examples (and there are others in his list), but I'll try. The bottom line that Greg is getting at is that invading privacy to learn more history is not going to assist a computer in accurately predicting the future. I think that frankly, the opposite is true.

Remember the 20 questions bot I mentioned in the opener? The trick to those AIs is for them first to narrow down the possible responses you could have to a narrow list of nouns, and then, narrow down the possibilities further with a refined tree of questions. Most modern 20 questions AIs can get the answer in less than 17 questions, but rarely more than 26.

What do you need to do when all you have is one question (a search query), and no retries? You need more context. You can either get that by coaching the user to be more specific, or you can use historical context.

Search engines, particularly Google, are going back not just a hundred queries, but years in their history, to determine context and intent. Google is also working to invade our privacy on a number of levels, and I'm not just talking about that silly street view thing they have on the maps system everyone seems to be up in arms about.

Look at Blogger, GMail, Search History, GTalk, Calendaring, and just about every tool that's graduated from Labs into common usage. What's a common thread? Not just organisation and assistance in utilisation of said data - archival! They default to archiving all text chats, give you nigh unlimited space to store email conversations, go back as far as they can in their history of your searches, and give you a free tool to record your thoughts on everything from the mundane to the profound in Blogger. Then they tie it to one nifty little Google Account that has your name and cookie attached to it.

They want to give you a gPhone and a Social Network too, not so that you can do better business with it (although that will be the selling point so that you'll use it) - it's to give better context and idea mapping so that when ads do get served up, it'll know from that bulletin you posted about how much you hate your Honda POS, when you search that term, you aren't necessarily looking to buy a new one.

Read some Kurzweil, if you don't believe me. Even if you do - read some Kurzweil. Age of Spiritual Machines changed the way I think about the future. Kurzweil talks about how for a time, AI's will be almost indistinguishable from unmodified humans in levels of performance and in some cases appearance. And then there will be a period where they excel in every way possible past the unmodified human, especially in matters relating to cognition.

All that having been said, the very things that are driving us toward that solution, that is the ability for Facebook and Google to sell us better, more targeted and predictive ads, are the very same factors that are driving us towards the solution to the problem that Greg proposes.

Greg thinks that we should have a 'transparent internet' - that is an internet where actions have consequences. We are slouching ever towards a social internet - where we log in to an internet based operating system that is focused around our task list and our workgroups. Social networks imply responsibility, as actions are increasingly coming with consequences. It's easier to dig up dirt on a person by looking through their photo albums, but it's also easier to see where information has been forwarded from, as more and more information is moved around by the grease of social tools like Facebook, MySpace and Twitter.

I don't think we'll ever quite have the transparent internet Greg asks for, with modified SMTP and DNS protocols and security aware browsers. There's just no margin in it for anyone. We will, though, see both more accurate predictions from computers as well as more accountability in our online actions due to social networking. Count on it.

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: 30 pre-Beta Tests Underway

Hey Rizzn-ites and gPhone Hounds,

Last week I picked up a stray bit from a LiveJournaler about there being 30 rumored pre-beta gPhones wandering around in Mountain View California. Blogger Michael Bazeley recounts an experience he had in an Emeryville Apple store several days ago:

So I’m standing in the Emeryville Apple store today trying to troubleshoot a problem with a sales rep when a young woman bolts up to us saying she wants an iPhone. Like, now. After some back-and-forthing about the particulars, she says she’s a Google employee and she was going to wait for a demo of the gPhone, but it turns out Google’s only letting 30 people test it internally and she’s not one of them. So she’s going with the iPhone instead.

At which point, the Apple rep and I exchange glances and he says “gPhone? So it’s real, huh?” And the Google gal realizes she’s probably said too much and changes the subject.

There you go.

By the way, if you're interested in carrier information, price, and design, check out this post.

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: Belaboring the Point on the NYT Article

Hey Rizzn-ites,

I posted a bit yesterday about the NYT piece on the gPhone. The coverage of the NYT analysis has been spun as wrong as it can possibly be, with the grand take-a-way being that there is no gPhone coming. The original article was a bit off in the first place. I actually got an email from Miguel Helft this morning, responding to my analysis of what he said.

I'm puzzled that you call this a hit piece. Really? A story that lays out the facts, as I known them, and strategy behind Google's mobile ambitions and plans. In fact, most readers would probably come away with the notion that loosening carrier control and more competition for are good things. No?

As for quoting Google enemies, the one and only source I quoted who is in that camp is Scott Cleland, and I very clearly disclosed his point of view.

In fact, the one CEO of a carrier I quoted was Vodafone, by some metrics the largest mobile operator in the world, and a Google ally, since they provide easy access to Google services (unlike US carriers).

The problem is, Miguel, that very few facts were reported. The leading items were your unqualified (by any sourcing) analysis, and the quotes from those that would be decidedly out of the Google camp. Karsten Weide? Ex-Yahoo. Dan Olschwang? Potential Google mobile competitor. Arun Sarin? T-Mobile competitor (gPhone carrier).

Throughout the article, Miguel and all the quoted sources seemed mystified by the hype. As I stated yesterday, the gPhone promise is what the iPhone used to be, but without the threat of bricking.

I looked a bit further into Scott Cleland, since I was pretty sure I'd heard the name before, but couldn't place it. He writes Precursors Blog, and talked a bit about the gPhone yesterday. Like Miguel's piece, most of his analysis lacks cited sources, and completely downplays any credence to the hype surrounding it whatsoever. According to Scott, all the hype revolves around "their one-letter sub-branding conventions, their cultures of extreme secrecy about their plans, and their similar "Midas touch" public relations successes."

Again, though, what would you expect from shill for the anti-net neutrality crowd, and someone who argues that "...[t]rue competition best serves consumers, not government-managed competition where the Government pre-determines market outcomes with preemptive open access of net neutrality regulation" when speaking of the nation-wide megalopolies of AT&T and the cable companies. Competition indeed.

Update 9:48 AM CST (10/10/2007): Scoble linked Nicholas Carr's blog post this morning, who drew more or less the exact same conclusion I did.

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

Google + Jaiku

I just found out via C.C. Chapman on Twitter, but it would appear that Jaiku has been purchased by Google!

This from the Jaiku FAQ today:

Jaiku is joining Google. While it's too soon to comment on specific plans, we look forward to working with our new friends at Google over the coming months to expand in ways we hope you'll find interesting and useful. Our engineers are excited to be working together and enthusiastic developers lead to great innovation. We look forward to accomplishing great things together. In order to focus on innovation instead of scaling, we have decided to close new user sign-ups for now.

But fear not, all our Jaiku services will stay running the way you are used to and you will be able to invite your friends to Jaiku. We have put together a quick Q&A about the acquisition.

Jyri Engeström and Petteri Koponen, Jaiku Founders

I guess Leo Laporte was right to bet on Jaiku back when he made the switch. I'll have to take a second look at the service, since it'll likely be pitched at me within the next couple months in the form of Google's new social networking initiative (yeah, bet on that!).

@sugree had an interesting observation: zingku+jaiku = google phone. It's a thought, and it is clearly related to the gPhone. Don't think it's the totality of it though, by a longshot.

Registration to Jaiku is currently closed, but you can request an invitation from the Jaiku site.

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: In Defense of Google

Hey Rizzn-ites,

Well, if you're like me, you woke up this morning with an inbox full of emails and a Google reader that pointed to mostly links to the New York Times article on the gPhone. Instead of tapping out thirty or forty replies to emails on my comment on the story, I'm simply going to post here, and refer all the bozos who wrote me back to this article.

You can hear me talk about this today on RizWords, daily politics and technology (subscribe for free to listen).

Everyone in the new media seems to be taking the New York Times article as if it were gospel, on not a poorly written re-hashing of everything else Crunchgear, Information Week, DigiTimes and I have written previously. Very little primary source research work was done for the article, and everything mentioned as a 'fact' about the gPhone, I've mentioned previously (to little fanfare) on my blog. The only difference is that the New York Times didn't attribute me as a source, nor did the even bother to contact me and ask me where I got my facts from.

That's right. I'm saying plagiarism. If not from me, then from the blogosphere in general. That they've not checked me out or asked me about anything (or that anyone but the Boston Globe has contacted me from the MSM) to try to get a couple of the rumors they're reporting as fact correct completely floors me.

Here are the first four paragraphs of the NYT article, translated and condensed down to a sentence a piece:

Everyone is saying there's a gPhone coming. The gPhone isn't going to be better than the iPhone. I've figured out all of Google's mobile strategy, magically, and without any help. Here it is: they want to advertise on mobile phones.

The problem here is it's all the way down to paragraph five when the author starts talking to someone who might have a clue as to what technology is, Karsten Weide. Unfortunately, even a cursory glance at his bio shows us that he has very little experience in what it is that Google actually does. He's an ex-Yahoo Germany project manager - the closest he ever came to knowing Google strategy was working at a branch of a competitor of Google.

The article then continues to cite: an anonymous (non-Google) executive, Dan Olschwang of JumpTap (a mobile phone version of Google), Arun Sarin of Vodafone, and Scott Cleland (telecommunications industry analyst who recently testified before the Senate against Google’s proposed acquisition of DoubleClick). All of these folks were either in direct competition with Google or were anti-Google.

Only in the last three sentences are any positive words used (by the article or by quoted sources) in reference to Google.

Essentially, the NYT piece is just a poorly veiled hit piece on Google, essentially stating that the gPhone is extraneous, and that you can already get to Google.com with a mobile phone, so why the hype about a gPhone?

I'll tell you why the hype. The Apple iPhone was this incredible piece of technology released to the largest launch in recent memory for a mobile device. What we had was a device we could develop for and look at as a platform for real forward, user-controlled advancement. And then Apple bricked it.

Now, with the gPhone, we're looking at the same thing, but without an Apple-ish propensity for monopoly, and closed systems. Google and the gPhone is the only device coming out on the horizon that looks like it both has the power to inspire the masses as well as the open and robust platform that developers can use and work on. That's the bottom line, and that's the big picture that the New York Times missed.

For an article that got it right, see TechCrunch today.

For a good chronology, see SearchEngineLand.

I've got more to say, but you'll have to tune into RizWords today to get it.

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: Rumored to be in the Wild!

Hey Rizzn-ites and gPhone hounds,

Just a bit of gPhone news for the weekend, it has been reported by Alex Lewis over at Network World that Google may have released some 'pre-beta gPhones into the wild':

Google has reportedly released approximately 30 pre-beta gPhones to current employees for testing. There are a lot of rumors, but if you hang around Mountain View, CA much you may see one in the wild. I was talking to a Googler yesterday but as soon as I asked he quickly shoved the device into his pocket and changed the subject. IF this was one of the fabled Gphones, it appeared similiar in shape to the iPhone, maybe a little thicker, with a bright screen and video.

So there ya go, another tasty gPhone rumor snack for you. Carry on!

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: Unsubstantiated Rumor

I haven't spoken with "Deep Throat" in a couple of days, so I'll have to ask him about this, but I just picked up an unsubstantiated rumor from a student at Rochester Institute of Technology:

So apparently Google's Phone really truly for all times for serious is coming, whether one likes it or not. It seems that there are displays at the Googleplex where people (that is, Google employees) can check it out. It also seems that the phone will be partially ad supported, in the sense that walking around town if you get close enough to some restaurant you will receive [...] I've heard of something similar in Korea where instead of getting coupons, you get texts whenever one of your friends is within x miles of you.

Interesting. I'll update you later. Gonna go record a show real quick now.

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: ExpansysTV demos the possible HTC/gPhone Platform

As we mentioned yesterday, the new HTC Dual touch has been released. ExpansysTV has released a five minute long YouTube video demonstrating the device. It has been speculated by some that this could be the platform for the new gPhone in development by Google (and my trusted sources at least haven't denied this could be one of the platforms, either).

So, figured you gPhone hounds might be interested in taking a peek. Enjoy.



Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: The Final Countdown Starts Here

Update (11:52 AM CST 10/3/2007): You might be interested in this video demo of the HTC Dual Touch, which is rumored to be the hardware platform for the gPhone. I'd also like to re-iterate that the release dates are less trusted than the details in the main post. I mentioned that the dates I've heard have ranged from late Sept to early Oct. I haven't had any two sources say the same date twice, as I mentioned on the show, as well, so I don't trust those dates as much as I trust the rest of the details I've disclosed. Everyone seems keen to discount me using the dates I mentioned as 'proof', so I thought I'd re-iterate the authenticity of specific facts (or lack thereof). In other words, read the entire article in context.

Update (8:38 PM CST 10/1/2007): Several people have written in to me with the caveat that after the $400 gPhone is purchased the carrier connection might be subsidized by ads, thus technically free service. No one has said anything that would indicate this explicitly, but then no one has said anything to directly contradict it either. I wouldn't count on this fact personally, but it's not outside the realm of possibility. Trust me, though. I'd love it if it was free.

Update (5:00 PM CST 10/1/2007): Finally heard back from T-Mobile. A spokesperson who preferred not to be named stated: "...regarding the gPhone, T-Mobile does not comment on rumors or speculation." Almost verbatim what Google currently says publicly when asked. In response to my queries about data network specifications, the spokesperson said: "...I have looked into your request and found T-Mobile’s 3G/UMTS network updates are currently in the works. We are targeting the rollout for the first half of 2008. At this time we are not providing details regarding the availability of our network or future advanced data services. "

---

Howdy Rizzn-ites and gPhone hounds,

We're going to talk a lot about this on the show today (Episode 141). Listen in and get the full story!

I'm unloading my payload today. I've been aggregating and sifting through rumors from a number of sources - Deep Throat, NDA'ed entrepreneurs, NDA'ed employees of various related vendors and trusted internet sources. Some of the juicy tidbits that I trust implicitly I've been sitting on for the last month so I could drum up verification by independent sources. All of my sources prefer to remain anonymous, so I suppose this technically remains in the rumor bin, but my first predictions proved to be true regarding the gPhone, so as an independent reader, take that as you will. Thus ends my disclaimer.

On to the juicy tidbits. T-Mobile is going to be the network operator for the gPhone worldwide. I've got a call in to the press department over at T-Mobile in which I expect them to respond with the "we don't comment on rumor" line, but several other sources have corroborated this aspect.

It is going to be a Linux based kernel for the operating system. As of last talks with folks at Google, the GUI is still being finalized. The testing hardware was described as being in pieces spread across a table a couple weeks ago, as they finalized the drivers and the GUI for the device. The phone reference design will be open source, using the Apache license. This reference design will be an unlocked, neutral environment.

HTC is making the hardware - this isn't a new revelation. The rumor that they were involved has been a very widely reported rumor, but not only are trusted sources now reporting renewed confirmations on this, but HTC has released several phone models recently that show capabilities or indications that they could run an advanced GUI, as noted by Andy Beal.

There is going to be a price, and that price is $400. This is the big shocker. I had originally noted that part of the philosophy was that this product would compete in functionality with the OLPC and I inferred that it would be ad subsidized, which then started a spiral of analysis from many many folks that this phone would range in price from $200, then $100, then free.

Keep in mind, though, that this is being rolled out on an existing operator, not the 700 mhz spectrum, and not a satellite network. T-Mobile isn't owned by Google, and neither is HTC. It would be very difficult for the service to be free, but I haven't heard what the monthly pricing plans are going to be like, only that the device is going to cost $400. I have inquiries in at TMobile to find out the details.

Now, on to the facts that I haven't been able to find independent verification for, but sound reasonably congruent to everything else:

• Google has formed a consortium of about 30 companies to create it. The consortium includes chip makers, OEM manufacturers, software providers, and carriers. The phone will in fact not be a product -- it's really a reference design. I've referred throughout this post to the gPhone as a reference design because without anyone from Google explicitly saying this, it more or less sounds like what's happening. Google sent out requests to a whole bunch of vendors, and is putting together the pieces at the Googleplex.
• It'll be GSM everywhere except Japan, where it will be TDMA. I actually am ashamed to admit that I don't know all the specs on what goes on in the backplane of the different American carriers anymore - not like the days when I worked at Nokia where I had spec data ad nauseum memorized. If I had that information back from T-Mobile press relations, I could comment on this tidbit more reliably, but they haven't gotten back to me in time for this article to go out.
• The thrust is that the gPhone is the "the anti-iPhone". It will be an inexpensive, open design, vs. Apple's closed, expensive design. I don't think it's more or less the anti-iPhone, at least not in original intent, although it could very easily be framed that way, especially with Apple's tendency to brick iPhone in sight, these days.
• The Google phone will be announced sometime between 9/27 and 10/5. I don't know this to be a fact, but these dates are ones that have been bandied about by several of my sources. My advice? Buy your Google, HTC, and T-Mobile stock now. You know none of it's gonna go down.
• The gPhone will role out simultaneously in the US, Europe China, and Japan. They have a carrier ready to go in every region. I don't know this to be a fact, but one of my sources said that this is more or less gospel. We know they've been talking a lot to people in Asia, since much of the gPhone rumor seems to be originating in India, and they've been demonstrating it in America. T-Mobile is obviously very strong in Europe (owned by Deutsch Telekom). It's highly possible!
  

That's more or less all I know for now. I'll probably be chiming in on the blog here with some analysis on some of the more interesting posts that will come out of this. I am, for a change, going to refrain from making sweeping predictions in this post (I'll save those for the show), since the predictions I made last time were taken so widely out of context.

See these articles for all the old stuff I've said about the gPhone:

• gPhone: It's Confirmed
• gPhone: Vindicated!
• gPhone: Rumor Control.
• gPhone Hubbub

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: Rumor Control.

Hey Rizzn-ites and gPhone hounds...

Several folks, most notably these guys at DigiTimes, are talking about the gPhone again.

I ran some of the theories past 'Deep Throat' over at Google (and remember, you guys named him that, not me). I'm forced to sit on some of the information he gave me for a time being, but I can comment on some of the rumors in broad generalities, as I did on the show last Friday (see episode 135). From the DigiTimes rumors:

Although market rumors previously stated that Google is likely to use an EDGE solution developed by Texas Instruments (TI) for its planned handset, recent developments indicate that Google is also evaluating the possibility of launching a 3G handset initially.

I'm still waiting on confirmation of some information from a certain American carrier regarding their technology platform, but, as I understand it, Google is past the evaluation stage in development for this iteration of the gPhone in terms of which mobile network they'll use.

Google [may] postpone the launch of the so-called Gphone to the first half of 2008 instead of the latter half of this year as expected due to the change of platform and problems related to licensing...

Obviously nothing is set in stone, as the product is still in late-stage development, but it sounds to me that the product will be released sooner, rather than later. Deep Throat didn't give me an exact date, but other sources tell me that it will be publicly released (not just demo'ed behind an NDA-wall) between 9/27 and 10/5, and released simultaneously (more or less) world-wide. I'm not dead certain on these dates (as this informant is a newer source for me, but it sounds plausible given what I do know).

High Tech Computer (HTC), meanwhile, is being marked as the manufacturing contractor for the Gphone due to the company's expertise in ODM and brand business and its mutual cooperation with a number of telecom carriers worldwide, said the sources.

Google may also try to launch a handset running on a self-developed OS, to compete with Windows Mobile and Symbian platforms, the sources speculated.

These things sound congruent with a lot of what I've heard, both from the blogosphere as well as Deep Throat. Again, I can't go into too much detail, but these bits of analysis and rumor seems on the mark. Given the fact that the story and rumors originate from a Taiwanese manufacturer, and HTC is a Taiwan-based company. Just sayin'.

If you like reading about patents, you may wanna check out this article. It's a bit tedious, but Information Week sees a pattern of patents coming out of Google that definitely signal a move towards the mobile world, too.

Of course, we've known about for a while Google's intention to spend in the neighborhood of $4.6 Billion to move to the 700mhz wireless spectrum. Channel 4 UK talks about what looks like a British bid for the mobile market by Google.

...on Thursday the UK communications regulator Ofcom announced a proposal to take some of the airwaves currently used by O2 and Vodafone and make it available to new bidders.

...

This remains a remote possibility at this stage, but the idea of a Google-branded mobile service is now a distinct possibility.

And in news that holds tertiary relevance to this (another story we talked a bit about on the show Friday), Google plans to build its own data network are under the Pacific Ocean. This from Mashable:

The project to lay cable, called “Unity,” would involve several other telecommunications companies who would aim to have it operational by 2009. The move would give Google a leg up on other US companies looking to deliver content to Asia, since they would have their own dedicated cable.

I hope it's becoming clear to those in the network-providing establishment: we will not stand for non-network-neutrality compliance. There are a number of strategic moves contained within all of these moves, but the largest bit of this that can't be ignored is that Google is moving towards an environment where they don't have to worry about network neutrality (as I discussed with Greg Blonder last week).

At any rate, stay tuned to this blog and podcast. As soon as I'm released to talk about the details, you'll definitely want to be here to hear them. They're juicy. Mighty juicy. It's killin' me to sit on 'em.

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone: Vindicated!

Rizzn-ites!

(further discussion on this can be found on Episode 121 of RizWords. Subscribe in iTunes for the first scoops!)

Don't ever doubt me again! When a leak or a confirmation comes from me, you know it's true! :-p

What am I talking about? Obviously you haven't checked Engadget or your copy of the Boston Globe yet. The gPhone was demo'ed in Boston, according to Scott Kirsner, to: Dan Roth of Nuance, Mike Phillips of Vlingo, Paul Ferri of Matrix Partners, and Murali Aravamudan of Veveo. It's an interesting assortment of names, and include a lot of names and companies we talk about here on the show.

Off that tidbit, what can be assumed? Well, given that Google specializes in search, and has a considerable amount of resources devoted to video and voice recognition (GOOG-411 and Video Search), we can assume they'll be either trying to incorporate their's or other's technology into the device.

Additionally, Om Malik came out today with a number of other confirmations on things we already knew here at Rizzn:

1. Google Phone is based on a mobile variant of Linux, and is able to run Java virtual machines. We knew this to be true from Deep Throat... Linux-based kernel.
2. All applications that are supposed to run on the Google Phone are java apps. The OS has ability to run multimedia files, including video clips. We didn't know that it would have video on it, although it would be rather silly for Google not to include one of it's leading draws, currently, YouTube in the mix somehow. The Java angle makes me a bit nervous - I've never had super luck with Java Applets, although in recent years, the platform has stabilized a bit. Additionally, Java Applets running on a tightly integrated system like a mobile platform could be mean better performance for said applets than we see on the PC architecture.
3. The image (with red background) floating around isn’t representative of the Google Phone UI. The entire UI is said to be done in Java and is very responsive. Again, because of integrated design, the Java could perform much better than other real-world applications. And indeed, the image we ran with the story last week was something we simply found on Engadget, not something handed to us from Google.
4. The UI, of course has a “search box.” Derrrrr.
5. Initially there was one prototype, but over past few months Google has the mobile OS running on 3-to-5 devices, most of them likely made by HTC, a mobile phone maker, and all have Qwerty apps. The model that folks have seen is very similar to the T-Mobile Dash. Around 3GSM, there were rumors that Google, Orange and HTC were working together on mobile devices. This jives with what we've heard from folks inside the loop as well as what we've read on the blogosphere. My suspicion, based on candid conversations with folks involved with the process, is that it'll initially be on a partnership basis like the iPhone situation with AT&T, but look for it in other countries before America gets it. American carriers will be less likely to do a subsidization on the service plans than overseas. If I had to guess, I'd expect to see it in Asia and Europe as some sort of internet wireless plan separate from carriers (think 802.something), parts of middle-to-Southern Asia and middle-to-Eastern Europe as a partnership with existing carriers, or maybe a mix of both. Keep in mind this is based off my analysis, not hard facts.

Om also mentioned:

We will post more details as they come our way. I had initially thought that it could be a more viable option to the $100 PC. While that argument still remains true, I think this is a strategic move by Google to keep Windows Mobile’s growing influence in check. Microsoft has spent billions on its mobile efforts including buying companies such as Tell Me Networks.

To be honest, I think this platform is an answer to both situations. The impression I get is that Google is working very closely with select partners like HTC to tailor the hardware to the OS and software, and vice-versa. The result will be something that comes in at a much lower price point with a lot more functionality than a Microsoft or OLPC style device can deliver.

Theoretically, on certain levels, it'll compete with both products, but as with most Google products, it'll do more to carve out it's own operating niche than to enter direct competition. If it's one thing I've learned, it's that Google doesn't think, in it's tactical level, on competitive terms, but more emphasis on innovation (a term I've often heard bandied about is 'Blue-Sky R&D). As a result, they end up being mightily competitive, without having to worry about it so much.

Back to the Boston Article a moment...
Scott in his Boston Globe article said:

Google spokeswoman Erin Fors wouldn't confirm whether software for mobile phones was being developed in the Cambridge office, where there are more than 50 employees.

Going back to my conversation with Deep Throat, I'm fairly certain that development for the phone is taking place, at least in part, at the Mountain View Googleplex. Saying what gave me this impression would reveal too much about my source, but it's the impression I got.

Another interesting quote from the Boston Globe article was from Mark May, an analyst:

Mark May, an equities analyst at Needham & Company who follows Google's stock, says he doesn't expect Google to manufacture the phone itself, but rather provide an operating system and a suite of applications that "would appeal to consumers and professionals," like the mail and word processing applications it already provides to PC users.

"That's a natural extension from their core business," May says. The operating system is expected to be open not just to Google's applications, but applications developed by all sorts of other players - a real problem with many cellphones.

So, what was an absurd rumor from a blogger five days ago is now a 'natural extension'? Nice spin, MSM.

GPay? What?
As if there weren't enough angles today to the gPhone story, Google published a patent today covered by TechCrunch detailing yet another application for the gPhone or other mobile devices allowing for payment via text messaging.

When I worked for Nokia in 2000, this was one of the applications we were working on before the bust hit, and 500 people from my department were laid off. PayPal initially got funded on the idea that it could be a mobile payment system, as well. No one really has gotten traction in the market of Text Message Payment Systems, and quite honestly, Google doesn't deserve the patent, which isn't to say that this couldn't become a widely successful application for them. Integrating your wallet with your mobile computing device? Actually quite ingenius.

Of course, it'll be a matter of moments before the debate on Goog's strangle-hold on information and privacy issues are raised again (not to mention the evil-ness, or lack thereof).

How's that for something to chew on this Labor Day? I'm going to my mom's to go eat some bratwurst. See you folks tomorrow. (again, check out the show for more info).

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

RizWords Weekly Roundup

I'm going to try to highlight a few things from the show this week that I think warrant further discussion. This may or may not become a regular feature. We'll see how you guys like it.

gPhone
Do I really need to say more about this? Check Episode 116 of RizWords (you may need to subscribe to the feed to listen). Also read these two posts. The second one contains links to other interesting coverage. Or just Google gPhone. Everyone's got an opinion now.

Two Unfortunate Investments (originals: here and here).
On Thursday we talked about VC put into startups Veveo.TV and Wis.dm. Both Art and I puzzled over the amount of money flowing into these two losers.

Wis.dm is basically an expanded form of the comments features on every website on the web, but tries to be the newest Web 2.0 to pull wisdom from the crowds. On Wednesday and Friday, I inaccurately referenced from memory the anecdote of Sir Francis Galton, who was from the 19th century, not the 17th, as I said. The anecdote itself was properly related, though, which can be found in his Wikipedia entry:

[T]he crowd at a county fair accurately guessed the butchered or the "slaughtered and dressed" weight of an ox when their individual guesses were averaged (the average was closer to the ox's true butchered weight than the estimates of most crowd members, and also closer than any of the separate estimates made by cattle experts).

The example by which the term is defined dictates that yes or no questions aren't going to be the type of questions that the crowd displays it's wisdom, and I can't think of many other instances where a comment form is worth $9 Million in development time. My question: "Where's the beef?"

Similarly, Veveo is a puzzling investment, weighing in at between $14-28 Million. Veveo promises to index videos, making them searchable. Their big selling point? An autocomplete feature.

As we mentioned on the show, we sincerely hope these aren't signs of the end times (in terms of our current tech boom cycle). I certainly remember similarly stupid investments last time around. Either there are some highly charismatic PR folks at these firms, or there are some highly stupid investors over at the VC firms of Matrix Partners, North Bridge Venture Partners, Norwest Venture Partners, OmniCapital Group. I'm not familiar with the staffs of any of the companies (the startups nor the VC firms), so I really couldn't say. The type of money these firms are doling out though (North Bridge Venture Partners in particular), it's worth coming up with some worthless ideas, getting a Web2.0 design job done, and trying to get a zillion in VC.

I'm game, anyone wanna join me?

Digg's Very Prominent New Media Failure
A front page story over at Digg.com Friday morning was a something we covered on Episode 120: Homophobia Inc: Message of Hate Raises Hundreds of Millions of Dollars.

The type of story we love more than most others at RizWords is a story exposing Old Media screw-ups. What we hate is when a prominent New Media source like Kevin Rose's Digg promotes to the front page a piece of pseudo-journalism full of not only factually incorrect but borderline libelous content.

The piece prints falsehoods that could be discounted by doing only cursory research, alleging that the non-profits Christian Broadcasting Network, Focus on the Family, and Family Research Council devote the entirety of their organisations' energy into anti-gay agenda. Give those sites a cursory glance. Clearly they have other focus than just talking about their moral take on homosexuality (which, by the way, is a far cry from being hate-speech or homophobic).

Art and I both attempted to comment dissenting views on the forms, and within seconds, both our comments were buried.

My point being, the failure isn't the blogosphere. There will always be moronic drivel in the blogosphere. The failure is in Kevin's algorithm. The tripe was promoted to the front page before the Digg count reached 100. For better or for worse, Digg is a major New Media news source. If they want to avoid the fate of Dan Rather and CBS News, they should look at changing the system before more people realized how game-able Digg is.

Facebook: You Can't Look The Other Way Anymore
I did a blog post on the business side of the Facebook API, which has been covered on the show several times. The type of money trading in this space can't be ignored, and neither can the ease of entry. This week, not only was it revealed that Facebook wanted to get serious about good applications, but it was also revealed that Bill Gates is a Facebook user, as well as many other prominent Microsoft executives.

This isn't surprising to those of us who listen to Ken or Scoble, but with news like this coming out, it is getting hard to keep up thinking of reasons to stick around that ol' trailer park... especially in light of the way they like to beat up on the tenants.

That's about all the news that's fit to discuss. Any questions? Comment or email!

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

Friday Wrap-Up

Hey, Rizzn-ites.

It's been an odd week for us here at Studio.Rizzn. It would appear that the gPhone story has knocked us onto a lot of people's radars. There are actually enough people posting here to warrant a bit more attention from me to my blog. I know I've broken this promise many times in the past, but I'll be posting a bit more often around here.

And in the spirit of wrapping up the gPhone rumors, I'll put in writing here what I've been trying to put out on the show the last couple of days...

I got a call from my friend over at Google (the guy everyone calls 'Deep Throat'), and he told me that "oops, yeah, um, I should have told you that stuff off-the-record, or not at all, because that demo I was talking about? yeah, it was a private demo, not a public one. Sorry!"

On the up side, though, he's not fired.

On a similar note, I've finally contacted my old buddy at HTC to try to confirm the rumors CG started about them doing the hardware for the gPhone. Unfortunately, by the time I called him, the lockdown had already initiated. I know the fellow pretty well, so it was unusual for him to be so tightlipped. His exact quotes were "I know nothing," and "I know only what I read on blogs." This can be interpreted so many different ways, I'm not even going to try to extrapolate.

Mostly, though, I surmise that very possibly the CrunchGear story is correct. Nothing in there directly contradicts anything I've heard.

So, for the moment, my contacts trail on this story has dried up, and I don't expect anything else from my trusted sources until a release date comes up or something else like gColdFusion is released (and no, that's not an actual rumor I've heard, just so that quote doesn't get taken out of context).

I would have put this out on the show Thursday or Friday, but Art and I have been absolutely plagued with technical issues, as we try different new recording techniques to bridge the 100 mile gap between our studios. There should be a late release of Friday's show, but Thursday's show was mangled in post-production beyond all recognition, and was scrapped.

Also, long-time and n3wb Rizzn-ites will be pleased to know I'm killing the green layouts very soon. I'm talking to Ryan at 3DegreeMedia to get a better design going. As I've become more entrenched in programming these last several years, my design skills have almost completely atrophied (and I used to be quite good). So coming very soon, a site that won't make your eyes bleed!

And that's a good thing!

You have a tech rumor for me? Something for me to track down? E-Mail me, and I'll find out. Until Monday (when we are broadcasting the show), deuce!

/rizzn

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

gPhone Hubbub!

While the world continues to try to figure out whether to believe me and my unnamed source, I've got a list of a few of the folks talking about gPhone confirmation. Most folks are seeming to repeat what I say, and accurately interpreting the words, although a couple have taken an aspect of my analysis and skewed it. That's ok - it's expected. Since I don't have any other breaking news today, and my Developing for Facebook story isn't ready yet, I'm going to round up some of the coverage here.

(hey! it's not every day that the entire blogosphere mentions my name. let me bask in it for a second!)

Google alerted me this morning that:

• Wired said that: Rumor: Google Phone Will Be Linux-Powered, GPS-Loaded and Cheap: "If the murmurs are true, the GPhone cometh in September."
• the UK Guardian said that: The gPhone: "Speculation continues about Google's mobile phone plans."
• IntoMobile said that: Google GPhone confirmed as low-cost sub-$100 device: "Rizzn.com has also allegedly confirmed that the Google Phone will be using an ad-based model to help subsidize the cost of the phone - serving up Google ads whenever possible." [a point of clarification... that's analysis on my part, not confirmation. There will be ads on the phone, and the price-point is allegedly going to be low, but that one will subsidize the other, it's just an educated guess on my part]
• SEOPrincipal said that: Google Phone “Confirmed” - Will Be The Computer For The Poor: "Finally, someone posted something that looks like a reliable confirmation of the coming release of the Google Phone." [thanks! finally someone thinks I'm reliable instead of baggin' on me! :-) and he also said:] "Remember that Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, said last year that they would provide free phones to people if they accept to view advertising."

Digging down into the MSNBC article linked above from last November, you'll find the following quotes:

Schmidt said Saturday that as mobile phones become more like handheld computers and consumers spend as much as eight to 10 hours a day talking, texting and using the Web on these devices, advertising becomes a viable form of subsidy.

"Your mobile phone should be free," Schmidt told Reuters. "It just makes sense that subsidies should increase" as advertising rises on mobile phones.

He continues a little later in the interview with some more revealing comments:

The Google executive said his own company had no plans to directly give away phones itself, nor is he aware of any effort by partners such as phone makers Nokia or Motorola or mobile operators like Vodafone to make such a radical move, he said.

Schmidt acknowledged that mobile phones may never become totally free to the consumer. Newspapers are still not completely free a hundred years after they started relying on advertising, but they certainly are inexpensive, he noted.

Given the context of the information I got the other day from my friend, doesn't seem that far out of line now, eh?

At any rate, back to the coverage of me the gPhone rumor - these are the folks that really kicked off the coverage (thanks!):

• Mashable
• GigaOM: ... where there are apparently a lot of evangelists of the OLPC who are mad as crap at me for "spreading the rumors" that "Google is going to try to crush the OLPC." RTFA, and you'll see that's not what I said.
  

Did you post some unique analysis on this? Email the show, and we'll try to talk about it today.

Want to be part of the Rizzn-ite army? Indoctrination instructions here.

GPhone - It's Confirmed

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

I couldn't get much more out of him than that, and he wouldn't put anything on the record, due to his unique position at the company he wasn't sure what exactly he was allowed to say, but his exuberance and confidence was quite clear when he talked about the GPhone.

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.