

Facebook: We Are Not Building a Phone - hasanove
http://mashable.com/2010/09/19/facebook-we-are-not-building-a-phone/

======
pavs
Surprise no one is calling out TC on their BS, yet again.

Lets face it, TC is a tech tabloid and HN's fascination with TC (majority
story makes FP) is akin to teenager's fascination with celebrity gossip
magazine.

No substance, nothing insightful, just pure unadulterated BS. And HN is all
over it, every-time.

~~~
Charuru
I'm very confused about the hatred. TC has a very very good track record.

It's the only credible source of leaks that I pay attention to. They're
actually on the pulse of the tech industry, unlike say Wired or Gizmodo or
whatever, that don't really report anything original of worth.

~~~
pavs
> They're actually on the pulse of the tech industry, unlike say Wired or
> Gizmodo or whatever, that don't really report anything original of worth.

I think you mean "startup news" (which is open to debate). AFA actual "Tech
news" is concerned they regurgitate whatever link they stumbled upon on their
RSS feed and rewrite the whole thing often without bothering to even cite
original source.

It boggles my mind that anyone would even consider TC "pulse of tech
industry".

------
dotBen
From [http://www.businessinsider.com/facebooks-non-denial-
denial-w...](http://www.businessinsider.com/facebooks-non-denial-denial-we-
are-not-building-a-phone-2010-9)

 _"...no one actually thinks Facebook is building an ACTUAL phone, or that
it's manufacturing anything.

What people are saying is that Facebook is doing some major work with Android
software to make it a Facebook-flavored platform, so Facebook could have much
more control over the mobile industry than it does today. This is probably
being done entirely inside Facebook, without any help from Google, which is
the enemy.

And I don't see any denial of that in Facebook's statement -- just that the
company admitting that Facebook is "integrating deeply into existing platforms
and operating systems," which is the story in the first place."_

So yeah, seems plausible that the PR spokesperson was just putting up
interference.

~~~
sprout
I made a similar comment in the thread on the TC article, but Facebook did
that last year. My Motorola Droid didn't have Facebook branding, but it was
fully integrated with Facebook (even if it lacked a decent way to browse
Facebook.)

------
sahillavingia
That's what Apple said.

~~~
baddox
Did they?

~~~
p01nd3xt3r
Yes. And so did google.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1706814>

~~~
_delirium
I know Google did, e.g. here's a 2007 story on that:
[http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/general/108490/google-
denies-...](http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/general/108490/google-denies-
reports-of-iphone-rival)

I can't find any explicit denials by Apple, though. Digging through some
2005-2006 news archives, I find Apple denying some specific rumors, but
neither confirming nor denying whether they would come out with a phone in
general.

~~~
skalpelis
They (Apple) were actually working on a phone in 2005 which they announced in
September of that year - the first "iPhone" before the iPhone -
<http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/rokr/>. Of course, that turned out to be
a crapfest noone was happy about and Jobs couldn't help wincing even while
presenting it.

------
jasonlbaptiste
Exploring and investigating are much different than building + launching a
phone. This could be in early prototype/exploratory phases at Facebook. That
doesn't mean they will go ahead and launch it to the public by any means.

------
happybuy
They may be or may not be.

However if Facebook perceive Google as their biggest competitor it would make
sense for them to explore ways to have more control over how Android users
access their services.

If Android does become the dominant smartphone platform, controlled by Google,
then it could be used as an effective weapon against Facebook - or a way for
Google to (finally) launch a successful social service. Its logical for
Facebook to try and mitigate this business risk.

~~~
ryanhuff
It makes sense for FB to want to control the distribution channels, and given
their size and the importance of mobile, doing a FB phone is a plausible
strategy. Considering the games that go on with some manufacturers (Apple) and
the various carriers, FB should be concerned about its weak hold on the mobile
channel.

Whether that means FB branded phones, deals with carriers for preferred
placement or access, or something else is hard to say.

------
eogas
This is just one thing to add to the list of stories TechCrunch has completely
made up.

------
davidedicillo
mmm... next they will say that nobody wants to read books on a tablet...

------
burnninator
These are not the droids you are looking for...

