Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

T-Mobile Will Be First To Use Android

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the setting-your-sights-too-high-can-lead-to-disappointment dept.

Communications 203

stoolpigeon writes to tell us that T-Mobile's upcoming phone will try to combine the best elements of many of the new smart phones, and will be using Google's Android software. "The HTC phone, which many gadget sites are calling the 'dream,' will have a touch screen, like the iPhone. But the screen also slides out to expose a full five-row keyboard. A video of the phone has been posted recently on YouTube. A person who has seen the HTC device said it matched the one in the video. The phone's release date depends on how soon the Federal Communications Commission certifies that the Google software and the HTC phone meet network standards. Executives at all three companies are hoping to announce the phone in September because they would benefit from holiday season sales."

cancel ×

203 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

A video of the phone has been posted recently on Y (3, Insightful)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620087)

From the summary:

A video of the phone has been posted recently on YouTube.

Come on, link! I'm lazy!

Re:A video of the phone has been posted recently o (4, Informative)

XanC (644172) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620143)

here [youtube.com]

No, wait! It's... (5, Informative)

XanC (644172) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620159)

this one [youtube.com]

Re:No, wait! It's... (4, Funny)

dfsmith (960400) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620335)

Ugh! What a horrible, low quality video. Was it made on a cellphone or something?

Re:No, wait! It's... (5, Funny)

InsaneProcessor (869563) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620359)

Shot with an iphone.

Re:No, wait! It's... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620633)

I didn't know iPhone was also compatible with guns.

Re:No, wait! It's... (4, Funny)

TJamieson (218336) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621079)

You sure it's not this one [youtube.com] ?

Rickroll (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620463)

Rickroll warning!

Re:A video of the phone has been posted recently o (3, Informative)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620149)

Linked. [youtube.com] But only because you're lazy.

Re:A video of the phone has been posted recently o (2, Interesting)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620215)

Here is a totally premature review and the video inline: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/08/15/first_google_android_phone_sighting_reveals_awkward_iphone_rival.html [appleinsider.com]

Re:A video of the phone has been posted recently o (2, Informative)

Sebilrazen (870600) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620611)

Please, for the love of all that is good and holy,next time try this:

<a href="your url here (with the quotes)">some witty text here</a>

Re:A video of the phone has been posted recently o (5, Insightful)

bluesk1d (982728) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620945)

Considering the writer is a clear Apple fanboy who has never seen or tested the Android OS or the new device, it cant be called a review. It's simply the author hoping it doesnt burst his iPhone bubble.

This is the most up-to-date video, most info (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620247)

most thorough I've found

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTmdsT1s-0R [youtube.com]

"Use Android" (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620101)

That sounds like a nice way of saying robot slavery! FREE OUR MECHANICAL BROTHERS!

Re:"Use Android" (2, Funny)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620777)

That sounds like a nice way of saying robot slavery! FREE OUR MECHANICAL BROTHERS!

Android Dream is clearly a female, you sexist pig! Think 'Gigolo Jane' from A.I. Android's Dream, however, is a novel.

Besides, it's clearly not slavery, as you won't be using it for more than a few years. It's more like being a serf.

Re:"Use Android" (3, Informative)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621093)

Gynoid.

FCC (3, Insightful)

XanC (644172) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620115)

The FCC has to certify software? That seem strange to anybody? Isn't regulation of the power and frequency enough, and everything else is between the carrier and the phone?

Re:FCC (3, Interesting)

niceone (992278) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620191)

Not so strange: the software will control the power and the frequency.

Re:FCC (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620203)

The FCC has to certify software? That seem strange to anybody? Isn't regulation of the power and frequency enough, and everything else is between the carrier and the phone?

If software controls the power and frequency [wikipedia.org] , FCC regulates the software.

Re:FCC (4, Funny)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620957)

What if controls the horizontal, and the vertical?

Re:FCC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621131)

Then its the Outer Limits?

Re:FCC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621631)

Don't worry about that. We'll take care of it.

Re:FCC (2, Insightful)

stefanlasiewski (63134) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621685)

There is nothing wrong with your government. Do not attempt to adjust the leadership. We are now controlling the information. We control the horizontal and the vertical. We can deluge you with a thousand unwarranted wiretaps or expand one your phone call to crystal clarity and beyond. We can hear you now.

Re:FCC (4, Funny)

oneal13rru (1322741) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620229)

Of course they do! It said Android!! They have to make sure it follows the 3 Laws of Robotics or the phone might take over the world!!

Re:FCC (2, Interesting)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620523)

Well, considering that T-Mobile and Google are corporations and the FCC is a government agency, you don't expect it to have to follow the zeroth law, now do you?

Is the phone's code name "R. Giskard Relentlov" or "R. Daneel Olivaw"??

Re:FCC (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620883)

you don't expect it to have to follow the zeroth law, now do you?

0. [Classified]
1. Serve the public
2. Protect the innocent
3. Uphold the law

Hmmm...*that* doesn't inspire confidence...

Re:FCC (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621105)

Directive 4 was classified. I'm not sure what zeroth law is supposed to mean, but then again I've never read Asimov. Rather I recognize references to 80' sci-fi movies.

Re:FCC (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621187)

Directive 4 was classified. I'm not sure what zeroth law is supposed to mean, but then again I've never read Asimov. Rather I recognize references to 80' sci-fi movies.

Clearly, you have not yet received the upgraded humour module. Please to look up, "creative license."

Re:FCC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621443)

4. profit?

Re:FCC (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620897)

Considering that comes from all those corporations, I would be scared of hidden directives if the phone's code name is R. Obocop.

Re:FCC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621087)

Except counting to 3 still means having 3 of an item, even when you start from zero. 0,1,2...two, ah ah ah. Three, three laws!

Re:FCC (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620823)

Of course they do! It said Android!! They have to make sure it follows the 3 Laws of Robotics or the phone might take over the world!!

Too late to worry about that - it's Google.

Re:FCC (2, Insightful)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620249)

It doesn't seem that strange. They probably regulate airborne communications, not airborne communications hardware. It's not the Federal Communications Hardware Commission, after all. Not that I think the government should have power not explicitly granted in the Constitution, but that's another story. :-)

Re:FCC (2)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621625)

This clearly falls under the commerce clause, as unregulated spectrum falls under a tragedy of the commons: he who shouts loudest is heard best, to the detriment of everyone else.

We can't very well allow any corporation with a many-megawatt transmitter to drown out everyone else and damn the consequences. Likewise, our broadcast television, cell-phone and wireless internet infrastructure would never work if people and corporations were permitted to just use whatever spectrum they wanted at whatever output levels they liked.

Re:FCC (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620309)

No. What if the frequency and power were correct, but then the phone decided to sniff out other phone calls and interfere with them? It'd still be within the correct frequency bands and power limits. They have to make sure that the phone "behaves" properly on the network.

Re:FCC (1)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621651)

If the hardware stack is open source, good luck with that requirement.

Better than the iPhone (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620117)

iDon't think so

Re:Better than the iPhone (4, Insightful)

sokoban (142301) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620363)

We'll see. I'm guessing Google probably won't totally drop the ball on the software, but the hardware and integration between hardware and software will be interesting to see in the real world. Lots of companies make good hardware, and lots make good software, but Apple is usually better than most at integrating the two, which in a device like the iPhone or HTC "Dream" is pretty key.

Re:Better than the iPhone (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621347)

Apple is better at integrating their own software and the hardware, but they have a tendency to put artificial restrictions in place to prevent that kind of integration between third-party apps and the hardware. Among other things, Apple's applications that come with the iPhone can run in the background and access the contents of the user's iPod...and those are just the two that you find out within 10 minutes of looking into what it would take to develop an app for the iPhone. When you dig deeper, there are quite a few artificial restrictions for app developers that go away when you decide to make your app non-official (i.e. require a jailbroken phone).

FWIW, I have an iPhone and generally love it. But all the apps I'd like to write for it (I've come up with 4 ideas so far) have run into some issue with an explicit decision Apple made in the SDK that makes them impossible. There's one app that I may end up writing using an undocumented work around, but I'm not sure I want to put in the effort because that API could change at any moment and there's a good chance Apple would refuse to distribute the app through the app store because of that.

If the Android SDK can focus on allowing third-party apps to have full access to the available hardware, the user experience will end up being better than on the iPhone. Initially, it will be worse since the basic apps that come with the phone won't feel as natural. But, over time, those apps will mature and third party apps will higher quality and more useful. I'm hoping that point in time is somewhere around the time my 2 year contract is up with AT&T because unless Apple opens up the SDK a lot more, I won't be getting another iPhone. As a developer, I'm not interested in any phone that prevents me from writing the kinds of apps that I want to write.

Re:Better than the iPhone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621553)

but Apple is usually better than most at integrating the two

It's not hard to integrate hardware and software when you simply leave out a lot of the hard stuff: full Bluetooth, full synchronization, background tasks, tethering, etc.

Apple's iPhone is crippled.

iDon't care. (1)

pavon (30274) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620853)

If it isn't locked to the carrier, is better than a Treo, and is in the same price range, then that will be good enough reason for me to get one. Although I'll probably wait till a few more Android phones are out before deciding.

I might think about getting an iPhone if they stop locking it to ATT, but $299 + 24*($69.99 - current plan) is way more than I am willing to pay for a smartphone.

many gadget sites are calling the "dream" (1)

niceone (992278) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620227)

Is that "dream" as in "wonderous achievement" or "dream" as in "vapourware"?

Re:many gadget sites are calling the "dream" (1)

Constantine XVI (880691) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620629)

It's dream as in "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". Best guess, anyway.

Re:many gadget sites are calling the "dream" (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620929)

Do Android Dream of Internet Searchs? Better guess.

Re:many gadget sites are calling the "dream" (1)

paimin (656338) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621423)

Yeah, exactly. I had a "Dream" of a perfect phone made by Google. Then I woke up, walked down to the Apple Store, and bought an iPhone.

We believe the page you requested will try to harm (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620237)

Uh-oh. Patch Tuesday a little too late for me. I got owned from this, er, chinese, er, web site.

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pda4x.com%2F&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 [google.com]

Google
Error

We believe the page you requested will try to harm your computer or steal your personal information. Visit it at your own risk.
http://www.pda4x.com/ [pda4x.com]
Please choose from the following:

Go back to the previous page
Back to Translate
See original page

I looked at the Android software. (0, Redundant)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620255)

Okay it was written by Google but I just didn't think it was all that special.
It was not as open as I would have liked. It only ran in an emulator.
You have to write you applications in Java. Which I do know but is some what limiting.
And the UI was just... Okay.
I will have to see what comes of it but so far it is just ok.

Re:I looked at the Android software. (3, Insightful)

andy1307 (656570) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620387)

You have to write you applications in Java. Which I do know but is some what limiting.

more limiting than objective-c?

Re:I looked at the Android software. (2, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620457)

I would say yes. I am a big fan of Java but on a small device like a phone I would think native code would be best for some applications.
On the other hand I can see the logic to keeping applications on a JVM so that locking up the device is less of an issue.
I have not really looked at the SDK yet so maybe it is all that and a bag of chips.
What I don't like is that I can not use it outside of the emulator. I would like to try it out as a Netbook Distro :) Seems like it could be good for some small screened devices that are a little bigger than a phone.

Re:I looked at the Android software. (1)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621013)

ARM have been making chips which run Java bytecode natively for at least five years. Hardware isn't really my area so I can't say whether they're appropriate for this kind of application.

Re:I looked at the Android software. (1)

drspliff (652992) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621331)

It's not really Java though, at least not when it's being run on the phone. The Android VM is very well done and specifically tweaked (from the design and onwards) to be suitable for embedded devices, even moreso than J2Me...
The SDK includes an optimizing JVM to Android VM translator, so performance shouldn't be much of an issue, while at the same time you don't have to worry about writing/porting code to a variety of different architectures.

Not to mention, you could probably compile other code to run on the Android VM, much like NestedVM does for C on the JVM...

Re:I looked at the Android software. (4, Interesting)

samkass (174571) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620493)

I would have preferred Apple had adopted Java back in the late 90's and done all of Cocoa in it, personally. That being said, yes, Java as it stands today is more limiting for writing rich client apps than Apple's Objective-C UIKit.

It's not about the language. It's about the libraries. And Apple is currently second-to-none in that department for user interaction.

And really, the amount of Objective-C specific stuff you have to know to write compelling content for the iPhone isn't that huge. The most popular apps seem to be either 90% Interface Builder work, or 90% OpenGL ES work.

Re:I looked at the Android software. (2, Informative)

timster (32400) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620821)

Well, it would have been nice if NEXTStep (aka Cocoa) had been written in Java, except that development started about ten years before Java 1.0 was released.

Keep in mind that the Apple/NEXT reverse takeover occurred in 1996, about when Java was showing up in web applets.

Re:I looked at the Android software. (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621451)

Not to mention the fact that a lot of Cocoa would have been impossible in Java. Anything that relies on the forwardInvocation: mechanism (all of distributed objects, anything that uses NSProxy) can not be implemented in Java without ugly hacks like the command pattern layered on top of the language. Java has no second-chance dispatch mechanism, so if you want a proxy object you need to create one tailored for each class you might possibly proxy. You could probably hack something together with the reflection APIs (which don't fully support reflection, only introspection), but it would look horrible.

Re:I looked at the Android software. (1)

WilliamBaughman (1312511) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621309)

I would have preferred Apple had adopted Java back in the late 90's and done all of Cocoa in it, personally.

I'm a fan of Java, but I really like my GUIs to run at native speed. Coincidentally, I'm a big fan of IBM's Standard Widget Toolkit (soon to have better cocoa support, hopefully!)

Re:I looked at the Android software. (2, Interesting)

speedtux (1307149) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621579)

It's not about the language. It's about the libraries. And Apple is currently second-to-none in that department for user interaction.

Really? As demonstrated by what?

Looks to me Apple has the same pushbutton/scrollbar/slider stuff as anybody else. And Objective C with XCode seems clunky and outdated compared to Glade and Python, or C# and Stetic.

The State of California Edition . . . (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620581)

. . . will only support COBOL apps . . .

yes but what about the iPhone? (4, Funny)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620287)

A mention of Android? Cue iPhone debate.

Open markets. (5, Interesting)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620479)

Now that Google has a 'shipping' product I am excited about the future for these reasons:

1) Google can pull an Apple'ish move and push for carriers to open up the networks.
or (even better)
2) Google can open up all of that dark-fiber that it has bought in the past and become a telecommunications juggernaught.

Google already has data centers all over the planet, they can match these up with worldwide GSM coverage and beat the existing companies at their own game.

I currently pay $150 CDN per month for the 'privilege' of using my phone anywhere in North America to make phone calls. If I try to use any data features I get charged $0.05/kb + US Roaming + US Data Rates/kb. To view the /. home page costs me almost $1.00 without viewing any stories.

Canada has been crippled by our 3 colluding state-sponsored ogilopies and I am desperate for another option.

Googles' ability to offer North America a non-draconian cellular service coupled with content/location-based advertising would be a god-send.

Scenerio: Motorist stranded on side of the road; does a Google search via cell-phone for tow-truck. Built-in GPS can show you the closest mechanics, and contact info.

Google; please take my money and give an option to ditch the horrible choices that I currently have.

Re:Open markets. (2, Insightful)

thanatos_x (1086171) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620849)

For all the reasons that you mention, it makes me very glad Google is around. In general they're responsible for opening up a lot of markets that would otherwise not happen.

Youtube doesn't make much money, but it enables other online video companies a respite because everyone targets youtube. Of course all this online video creates a huge demand for increased bandwidth. It creates more videos, since they can now be uploaded, and it creates more data that needs to be searched.

Even if Google doesn't make money directly, they make money indirectly, either one degree away (providing bandwidth, if they decide to enter this market) or two degrees away (providing search for competitors or other businesses needing to sort this data)

All in all it's very refreshing to see a company that competes, and isn't afraid of helping 'competitors' because it knows that it can make money off them. It is the antithesis of the anti-net neutrality argument. All this video we have to transport will kill us. We hate that we'll have a higher demand for our service! Stop online video!

$CAD150/month? (3, Informative)

Animaether (411575) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621203)

How on earth do you end up spending that much? Does that include making all your calls + roaming + etc?

When I was in the U.S. for 3 months I got a Cingular prepaid SIM card - traveled all throughout the U.S. and could make calls just fine.. cost me $10. I'd imagine it'd work just fine in Canada as well on any GSM provider there. So I can't imagine the $CAD150/month being some flat fee just so you can actually use the phone on GSM networks.

Re:Open markets. (1)

speedtux (1307149) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621599)

1) Google can pull an Apple'ish move and push for carriers to open up the networks.

Apple hasn't pushed for carriers to open up the networks to anybody but Apple. With an iPhone, you're far more restricted than with a Palm, Nokia, or Windows Mobile on any of the major carriers.

Customer Service? (2)

ThisIsAnonymous (1146121) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620495)

I take it they will use this android to replace their customer service team. Seriously, on one hand you have a lifeless being that resembles a human and on the other a T-Mobile customer service rep.

Oh wait, this is about that Google phone thingy. My bad.

HTC Phone (0, Redundant)

Deliveranc3 (629997) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620583)

Hey I found a HTC phone video on youtube. It looks sexy as hell but could definitely use a slide out keyboard. Does anyone have a link to a video where one does?

Re:HTC Phone (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620627)

The video I saw of the HTC Dream prototype had a slide out keyboard.

The HTC Diamond is pretty impressive, and the Dream is supposed to be even better.

Re:HTC Phone (1)

black_lbi (1107229) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620791)

From what I've read, it doesn't have an autorotate feature ... When the keyboard is out it's in landscape, otherwise it is in portrait mode ... I'm not sure if that's good or bad.
I kinda like the fact it has an actual qwerty keyboard, but i would have liked autorotate also ...

Re:HTC Phone (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621021)

That could be the case with the Dream, but doesn't the Diamond have auto-rotate?

Re:HTC Phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620813)

You found *an* HTC phone video.

I can't wait!!!! (1)

martin_b1sh0p (673005) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620637)

I have been waiting for the "Dream" because as much as I want/wanted an iPhone, I couldn't justify the $200 per line T-Mobile was going to charge me to get out of my contract to go over to AT&T. I really hope it lives up to the hype. In my mind it doesn't have to be better than the iPhone, it only has to be just as good (or really close).

Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620647)

Do Google Phones dream of electric sheep?

t-mobile? why? (2, Insightful)

randyest (589159) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620649)

How unfortunate. Isn't t-mobile the smallest network in the US, with the least coverage, and no 3G/high-speed data whatsoever?

It was bad enough when Apple locked the iphone to AT&T, but at least they have some 3G and good coverage (after acquiring Cingular.) But t-mobile? That's not going to be good for business :(

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620805)

T-Mobile is far from the smallest network in the US, and they're launching 3G in major markets (it's already in NYC and LV) at roughly the same time as this is set to be released. Coincidence? Probably not.

Re:t-mobile? why? (4, Insightful)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620835)

Not good business? From which perspective?

I have no idea about which companies have better coverage than the next in the US, but if T-Mobile is indeed the smallest, then it makes a lot of sense for Google to partner up with them for their first(?) phone, the contracts are probably better than they would get from going with a bigger corporation, bit cheaper, not as much loss if it fails, and from T-Mobile's perspective, they can't really go wrong, since its already got them a lot of publicity, stocks probably went up, more website/store hits, etc...

As far as I am aware there is nothing keeping "Android" from also being used on any other phone that supports it (or vice versa), and that may happen more now if T-Mobile's attempt is even a moderate success.

Besides, its a little more demand for 3G/better networks, or at least more awareness of the need even if it does fail.

Re:t-mobile? why? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621503)

Perhaps Google is also not taking the myopic view that the entire world market lives in the US. T-Mobile may be one of the smaller carriers in the US, but they have a lot larger presence than AT&T or Verizon do in Europe.

Then again, they've shown no indication that they're even considering tying Android's phones to any one carrier, so it's likely that T-Mobile just stepped up to the plate first and other carriers will follow suit if/when Android has been proven to be popular and work well.

Those are both things that Apple went the other way on by tying the iPhone to a single US carrier and delaying the release in Europe. Even the latest 3G release seems to have primarily targeted the US. If Android succeeds, hopefully it will spur Apple to open up the iPhone to any GSM carrier that wants to sell it. The iPhone has been hugely successful when there's very little to compete with it (Crackberry and Winblows Mobile don't really compete for the same market). But if there's a real alternative, Apple will have to do things differently or the iPhone won't be nearly as popular.

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620837)

T-mobile does not charge for roaming. Where Cingular phones work, T-mobile ones do too.

T-Mobile 3G is rolling out (1)

hirschma (187820) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620843)

T-Mobile is in the process of rolling out serviceable 3G. The new phone will have 3G, at least in some markets.

Re:t-mobile? why? (1)

kcbanner (929309) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620949)

Nobody said locking to T-Mobile. They are simply the first. RTFS maybe :)

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24620975)

How unfortunate. Isn't t-mobile the smallest network in the US, with the least coverage, and no 3G/high-speed data whatsoever?

It was bad enough when Apple locked the iphone to AT&T, but at least they have some 3G and good coverage (after acquiring Cingular.) But t-mobile? That's not going to be good for business :(

T-Mobile works off of Sprint.

Which does have 3-G and was the first large service provider to offer it.

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621501)

Not possible. Sprint uses CDMA and T-Mobile uses GSM.

Which means that while Android phones might be portable between T-Mobile and AT&T, they'll never be portable between T-Mobile and Sprint.

And last I checked, Sprint does not offer true 3G - which they can't, because they don't use GSM. They do offer some "fast Internet" thing but only in select areas which they don't bother listing anywhere.

Re:t-mobile? why? (2, Informative)

EXrider (756168) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621543)

How unfortunate. Isn't t-mobile the smallest network in the US, with the least coverage, and no 3G/high-speed data whatsoever?

It was bad enough when Apple locked the iphone to AT&T, but at least they have some 3G and good coverage (after acquiring Cingular.) But t-mobile? That's not going to be good for business :(

T-Mobile works off of Sprint.

Which does have 3-G and was the first large service provider to offer it.

Uh WRONG, T-Mobile [wikipedia.org] is a GSM provider [wikipedia.org] like AT&T/Cingular is. They have roaming agreements with AT&T, and therefore have similar coverage. They're way behind on the 3G, but they've begun to [dslreports.com] roll it out to markets.

Verizon, Sprint and Alltel OTOH are CDMA [wikipedia.org] , you could say Cricket [wikipedia.org] "works off Sprint", as they are also CDMA.

Re:t-mobile? why? (1)

pavon (30274) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621053)

T-mobile may own fewer towers than other companies, but they have the same coverage as any other GSM provider - they all have "roaming" agreements between each other that don't cost the user anything. You're close about 3G though - the only place they have 3G coverage yet is New York City.

I like them because they have good prepay plans. In fact, AFAIK, they are the only major carrier that does - the other decent plans are with prepay-only carriers like tracphone. I don't use my phone a whole lot, and cut my bill in fifth when I switched to their prepay plan from a monthly plan with Verizon. But folks like me that want a smartphone, but don't care about 3G are probably in the minority. So it is a strange choice.

Re:t-mobile? why? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621489)

Wow. T-Mobile in the UK have some of the best 3G coverage (they're the only network I can get a 3G signal with at my mother's house in the middle of nowhere) and are busy rolling out 3.75G a networks with a 7.2Mb/s maximum speed in big cities. It's often hard to remember that, apart from the name, the two companies have very little in common.

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621139)

That's not going to be good for business :(

That's not going to be good for anyone

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621207)

T-Mobile is pretty big outside of the US, especially in Germany (where they're based) and the UK. Maybe Google want to go with the operator with both the most global brand as well as the best outlook for Android phones.

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621243)

I've had t-mobile for the past year.

Their coverage is slightly spotty (no coverage around Mendocino except in the city of Mendocino or Ft Bragg) but I've not really had any problems with limited coverage.

On the other hand, they charge $20 a month for all-you-can-eat data plan if you already have (any) voice plan, they don't seem to care what you do with your sim (I moved mine from the bundled phone to a smartphone, a nokia E51), will unlock your bundled phone if you ask and have had your contract for 90 days, offer free or just use your airtime international VOIP if you use their GSM-over-802.11 (UMA), don't care if you tether your phone, etc.

In short, it seems like their corporate policy of allowing just about anything onto their network, so it makes sense they would offer android phones. T-mobile really is the anti-AT&T...

I have never been happier with a carrier.

Re:t-mobile? why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621339)

T-Mobile is rolling out their 3G capabilities and 3G phones at the end of the year. According to the sales representative I just spoke with at T-Mobile, of course.

Poor Data (1)

beatbox32 (325106) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620695)

Poor Data still being used. He must be wondering when he will finally be treated like every other sentient being.

Knowing Verizon's tendencies... (2, Insightful)

barzok (26681) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620839)

to lock their phones down tight and wipe out the OEM software in favor of their own crap, the chances of me ever getting to use it are close to nil. T-Mobile's coverage is spotty at best in the areas my wife & I frequent, even AT&T can get iffy, so we're stuck with Verizon.

Re:Knowing Verizon's tendencies... (2, Insightful)

EXrider (756168) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621649)

Same here, I HATE Verizon. But I'm stuck with them for the coverage. GSM calls don't even work in my house unless I'm standing in front of my living room window.

Now, if I could get 802.11 roaming to make up for the loss of coverage in my house FOR A REASONABLE PRICE, I'd switch to a T-Mobile based Android in a second.

But does it run Linux? (2, Interesting)

mini me (132455) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620881)

It will be very interesting to watch the mobile computing space heat up. Can Android steal away the momentum the iPhone currently has on third-party development?

Re:But does it run Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621255)

It has the name "Google" on it. It'll sell regardless of what the iPhone is doing. Google products are the next "Star Wars", with fans gobbling up whatever they have to offer. At least Google has better taste than Lucas.

hmm (1)

loconet (415875) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620969)

But if it's "open" why does it matter if it's T-Mobile who will be first. I can use it on my provider right......

Re:hmm (1)

djtachyon (975314) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621145)

If you want to pay retail for the phone (~$400), which they probably won't even offer.
Apparently only current T-Mobile customers will get the $150 pre-order option (which is crazy b/c they already have their customers' money).
So you would have to sign up for a 2-year account, get it for $250 (for new customers), pay a $150 breach of contract, and then you can put it on whoever you want :P

This is all mostly speculation, but you could just wait 3-6 months and buy an Android phone from your current carrier.

Android is an OS like Microsoft Windows Mobile, only better. There will be many manufacturers, with many models, on many carriers. You just have to wait a bit longer, though I may switch to crappy T-Mobile right now if it guarantees me a first Android phone for $150 :P. Not sure til I see if the HTC Dream has WiFi/GPS, etc...

Journalism on the best (1)

iznogud (162711) | more than 6 years ago | (#24620997)

"The HTC phone, which many gadget sites are calling the "dream,"

It's not "the dream", code name of the gadget is HTC Dream, for Bob's sake!

iphone (2, Interesting)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621033)

I'd totally be interested in a version of Android for the iPhone. I like the hardware and Unix-based OS on the iPhone...I just don't like resorting to jailbraking it in order to utilize it the way I want.

T-Mobile has "new" spectrum... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24621323)

...a few years ago, T-Mobile won some stateside spectrum that they have yet to really launch: that said, maybe this Android will be using it in addition to the Edge coverage that exists?

Re:T-Mobile has "new" spectrum... (2, Informative)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621395)

T-Mobile is rolling out 3g in the near future.

Well, I don't know about the rest of you... (1)

Snarkhunter (1056150) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621351)

but I for one welcome our glorious Android overlords!

Slide-Out keyboard (1)

ArcticPuppy (592282) | more than 6 years ago | (#24621643)

Seriously, who uses these? I got a HTC phone with one and not one day goes by that I curse the design.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?