39 thoughts on “Google's Mobile Chief Andy Rubin on the Google Phone & the Androidification of Everything”

  1. Too bad T-mobile’s servers are worthless…I’ve been trying to upgrade my current plan on the google.com/phone site and T-mobile has been down since the launch.

  2. “One look at the Nexus One and no one in their right mind would even consider the Droid.”

    I disagree (but I may be a biased Droid owner!).

    There’s a match on Android versions, the Nexus hardware seems incremental, and Droid is on a better network. I wouldn’t leave Verizon to get a Nexus when there’s the Droid available on the Red.

    1. There’s a big pocket of the market that prefers physical keyboards. Obviously the droid is better for them.

      1. Agreed. But be surprised when N1 is available on Verizon. I bet you the sales of Droid are going to tumble. The keyboard on that thing is horrible by the way.

        As an FYI: There are some in our office who have a Droid and they only use the touch features and have no interest in the keyboard.

    2. And of course, OLED isn’t for everyone. Those screeens are great indoors, but useless in sunlight. You could say the Nexus is a great winter phone…

  3. This phone costs only $220 in material cost, with no marketing and advertising costs associated, a cool $250 goes to Google, so where does this lead us to ? revolutionary product that would change phone supply chain dynamics or evolutionary product that would be forray of google into e commerce ?

    Watch out guys, this product is more threat to Amazon etal than Verizon, not to mention that Cell phone network is going to be more of dumb pipe anyway (parallel effort to release white spectrum by google), no wonder Apple is not loosing sleep and will never be.

    Google just diversified into new business, Eric surely bettered Bill by learning from MS entry into Console, just that google spun a web around people to think something when the intent is clearly something else.

    Well done google, I just brought your share with long term goal, let the dust settle.

    1. I would bet most of these “$250” (I doubt the number) are going to HTC. Google have no interest to upset manufacturers… more devices to offer = more users = more ads served = profit !

  4. “Google has a couple of major problems: It’s facing a splintering of the Android experience” Did you ask Rubin abou this? What did he say?

  5. I’m concerned about why editorial allowed this writer to touch this content at all and then after seeing, it allowed it to be published.
    First, as several have said the Droid is a keyboard phone with a fundamentally different customer base to the touchscreen-only Nexus One. This underlines how little the author knows about phones at all.
    Second the author clearly knows nothing about smartphone OS’s and their history, not to mention consumer electronics in general. Nokia has for years released its own Symbian devices while selling the OS to the like of Samsung and Sony Ericsson. Before that Palm did so with Handspring and Sony. Sony itself had a long and lucrative run of selling Mindisc players while licencsing the ATRAC compression technology and hardware to the likes of Panasonic, Sharp, Kenwood and many others.

    Most interestingly all those companies, charged money to the customers they were competing with. In contrast any company using an Android phone is getting a FREE operating system.and a cutting edge one at that. When you understand how much it costs to develop a smartphone OS and generate critical mass for it, ie attract developers to make the applications that pull in consumers, the value of what Google is giving this guys is astronomical. A company like Motorola is dead in the water if it drops Android. What is it going to use – and outdated Symbian or Windows Mobile. And BTW if it buys Maemo or Web OS then it is PAYING to compete with Nokia or Palm, whereas it gets Android for free.
    So please enough with the hysteria. There is no contradiction here whatsoever in what Google is doing. Articles like this just underline how many “journalists” we have out there today who need to be kicked back to remedial or stick to writing amateur blos. You cant just churn out junk like this and slap it on a website that purports to be a professional tech news provider. Go and learn about the sector you are writing in. And then come back when you are ready for the big leagues.
    Ditto to editorial – if you can’t sport huge lumps of coal like this one, you really need to ask yourself some hard questions about whether you are qualified to for the job of filtering the junk out. Content like this is NOT going to help your long term chances of building a service that people will pay for.

    1. “I’m concerned about why editorial allowed this writer to touch this content at all and then after seeing, it allowed it to be published.”

      Take a look at the name of the writer. Then very slowly look at the name of the website. Now think for a few minutes.


      Now smack yourself on the forehead for making yourself look really foolish before you’ve even started making your points (which seem to contradict each other anyway).

  6. Google is moving down in the stack to challenge B2C opponents with an open architecture and new sets of standards. In creating a post-revenue business model, Google can only manage success if consumers accept a co-branding and outsourced manufactured device … NQ Logic recommends reading about the rest of the new Google’s mobile strategy at http://www.nqlogic.com

  7. The Droid has a keyboard, the Nexus One does not. They’re different devices for different consumers and a different platform is fair game. I doubt that if Google had a phone partner that would push this phone the way they want that they would be selling this phone. Google didn’t want to sell phones – they want phone owners to have an open phone that works well on the web so they can publish their apps without hindrance from Apple and people can browse the web with a real browser – and so see the adds that they sell. That this phone is going to make them $billions is just a happy coincidence of its disruptive technology nature – which is largely the point. This phone needs a Google that’s not chained to the existing ecosystem to cast off the chains of that history – that’s something incumbent phone sellers won’t do that puts the whole thing over the cusp from niche to meme. They’re going to sell a grip of these things. People are already reselling them on Ebay and Amazon right now to folks in countries that can’t buy them direct yet for up to $1000, and it wouldn’t surprise me to find out that the people buying them are reselling them again locally at a fine margin. It turns out that GSM is like 80% of the world phone marke – surprise, surprise. 150,000 units? That’s funny. They’re probably almost to that already. They’ll probably do that in Oz before it’s even released there. Next week we’ll probably start hearing about how the phone is on back order but they’re ramping production as fast as they can.

    Google is pushing progress. We want progress. We want phones that allow us to do new and different stuff. We don’t want phones that do Excel and Outlook but crash all the time, that are locked down by the cellular carriers, that tell us what types of media we can play and what types we can’t, that disallow tethering or flash or whatever. It’s not about the widget – it’s about the ways that the widget enables and empowers the individual to do what he wants to do: the opportunities it enables, the potentials it creates – and how as much as possible it stays out of the way!

    Now if they’ll add a Tegra 2 or Snapdragon slate to their lineup, that would be very nice. A ten incher that does webcam chat over wifi please.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.