
Google's biggest announcement was not a phone, but a URL - dfreidin
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2010/01/googles-big-news-today-was-not-a-phone-but-a-url.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss
======
ashu
Hasn't Europe and many parts of Asia been like this for years? World's first =
US' first?

~~~
jsz0
It's not really new in the US either. You can buy most phones unsubsidized.
iPhone 3GS is $599 from AT&T with no service commitment for example. Same
problem with incompatible 3G frequencies though. The big problem is US
carriers charge you basically the same amount if you take the subsidy or not.
The only flexibility you gain is no service contract but due to competing
wireless standards and frequencies you're still very limited in carrier
choice. Google is using the same business model as everyone else.

~~~
stanleydrew
You can get a 3GS without a service contract from AT&T but won't the phone
still be locked?

~~~
jsz0
Yeah probably but more importantly you're functionally locked into AT&T if you
want 3G and anyone spending $600 on a phone presumably wants 3G service. So
you're stuck with AT&T or stuck with T-Mobile if you get an "unlocked" Nexsus
One.

------
brown9-2
This becomes pretty obvious when you read their blog announcing the
URL/store/Nexus One carefully.

Notice that they mention the online store prior to the Nexus One:

 _Well, today we're pleased to announce a new way for consumers to purchase a
mobile phone through a Google hosted web store. The goal of this new consumer
channel is to provide an efficient way to connect Google's online users with
selected Android devices. We also want to make the overall user experience
simple: a simple purchasing process, simple service plans from operators,
simple and worry-free delivery and start-up.

The first phone we'll be selling through this new web store is the Nexus One
... It's the first in what we expect to be a series of products which we will
bring to market with our operator and hardware partners and sell through our
online store._

(quoting this here because I didn't see it directly quoted in the Ars article)

[http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/our-new-approach-
to-b...](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/our-new-approach-to-buying-
mobile-phone.html)

------
slapshot
This also might reveal why Verizon's continued support of the CDMA island
effectively exempts it from having to compete with carrier-unlocked phones.

It's frustrating as a consumer that Verizon is incompatible with the massive
hordes of unlocked GSM phones, but it might be a business advantage in the
short-term for Verizon. In the long term, people who want phones like Nexus
One will just switch carriers.

~~~
mmt
Sprint also uses CDMA.

From the very beginning, everything I read convinced me that it's a superior
transmission mode, both for me, the end user, and for the carrier.

As much as heavy-handed regulation makes me cringe, perhaps if we legislated
modular rf sections, this would become a non-issue. Phones are small enough
for that, now.

~~~
pyre
Traditionally carriers like Sprint and Verizon, that use CDMA have been the
more draconian as far as rules go on their network (e.g. locking down phones,
only allowing ringtones through their service, disabling bluetooth OBEX on
phones, etc). That's why people tend to see GSM carriers in a better light
(also because GSM phones are compatible with carriers around the world).

~~~
ams6110
YEah I tried to take an old Sprint phone in to Verizon to get it activated
when my wife lost her phone. They said technically it would work, but they
were not "allowed" to do it.

------
jacquesm
How long before google launches their own mobile carrier?

There are plenty of smaller parties in Europe they could gobble up to get a
foothold, gain experience with the tech and the roll out on a much larger
scale.

~~~
ars
Remember the FCC auction of spectrum? Google was outbid. But if they had not
been, they probably would have launched a carrier.

~~~
tdmackey
Google didn't really want to buy spectrum. Schmidt even publicly stated they
had no intention to buy the spectrum. They were just after open access to the
"C-block" of the spectrum which they got as a stipulation to them making a
slightly higher than minimum bid. They got what they wanted, and it wasn't to
own the spectrum.

With that said, I don't think google has any real interest in being a carrier,
as that isn't where they make their money. They can leverage the mobile
network much like the internet and continue to make their truck load of money
via targeted ads.

------
WesleyJohnson
I really hope this article is spot on and we'll soon see carriers adopt this
trend in the US as they do overseas. I've long lusted after various Sony
phones (if only for their aesthetics), but I've never actually bothered to
look into how good they are. You can't get them on Verizon and it's the only
carrier I'll deal with at the moment. I would love to be able to choose nearly
any phone I wanted to use on Verizon's network.

Surely there are larger cell phone manufacturers that could've forced this
issue a long time ago, but none of them have stepped up to do so, or so it
would seem. So I'm all for Google giving it a shot and I'll keep my fingers
crossed that others follow suit.

------
jonknee
> In short, what Google announced today wasn't just the Nexus One, but the
> world's first carrier-independent smartphone store; the Google store is now
> the only smartphone store in the US where, for every phone on offer, you
> first pick which phone you want, and then you pick a network and a plan on
> that network.

Except for all the other stores that do the very same thing. What a strange
article.

------
dangrossman
I wonder why Verizon is coming soon but Sprint is never mentioned. Is Sprint
going to lock the Nexus One out of its network even when a CDMA version is
available?

------
numbchuckskills
This article is hype. There's nothing overly special about selling an unlocked
handset anywhere on planet earth.

~~~
axod
The US is typically quite a few years behind when it comes to things like
this, so maybe it's news to some Americans.

~~~
fragmede
In the case of the Nexus, the two prices are $529.00 and $179.00, and on the
basis of that number alone, I know which I'd rather pay.

That article is all hype because the people this is news to, and the target
market for a $500 cellphone don't have that big an intersection. I think
everyone with a cellphone by now has been exposed to a carrier's store and
seen prices for an off-contract phone. Hell, I'm guessing a lot of people have
broken phones and been forced to pay off-contract prices - forcing the savvy
to at least price out similar phones via alternate channels _cough_ ebay. Pre-
iPhone, they'd have a bigger point, but I'd think by now, the consumer smart-
phone market (vs big-business' blackberries) is aware of certain things.

Am I being too hopeful?

------
10ren
_Is_ the iPhone a big hit? I thought it was a relatively small proportion of
the total phone market.

~~~
cubicle67
Yes it's a big hit, and yes it holds a relatively small proportion of the
total phone market

This is because the iPhone holds a significant portion of the smartphone
market, but the smartphone market makes up only a small percentage of the
total market

~~~
metachris
The recent Morgan Stanley reports on "Mobile Internet Trends" (15. Dec. 09)
portray the rapid growth in pretty much detail:

\-
[http://www.morganstanley.com/institutional/techresearch/mobi...](http://www.morganstanley.com/institutional/techresearch/mobile_internet_report122009.html)
[List of Reports]

\-
[http://www.morganstanley.com/institutional/techresearch/pdfs...](http://www.morganstanley.com/institutional/techresearch/pdfs/2SETUP_12142009_RI.pdf)
[PDF, 92 Slides]

