×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

233 comments

A great source of +5 comments (5, Funny)

solevita (967690) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430830)

Good news, if you need some +5 comments for this article, you can find them here [slashdot.org]! The dupe system in action.

Lies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430854)

There's only one +5 comment in that article.

Re:A great source of +5 comments (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430890)

I'd say it would be about equal to the Droid. Here's the rumors I've heard/read: - Processor speed will probably beat the droid, - HTC SenseUI will be nice, - Battery will probably be worse due to the stronger processor. - Screen should be nice an beautiful like the droid's, maybe ever more stunning. - Haven't heard anything about an LED flash like the droid's - No hardware keyboard - Sounds like T-Mobile's (weird flavor of?) GSM. - HTC Trackball v Moto'd directional pad - No discount, so looking at $300-800 ish? Full bias disclosure: I own a Droid and love it. Plan to marry it. Verizon has me by the balls in the prenup though.

Re:A great source of +5 comments (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431208)

Most americans seem to have quite a hard time comparing prices simply because most of the time your carriers subsidize so much of the actual price. Here are some prices from one of the cheaper web stores in Finland. Please note that these have taxes included and probably the "europeans are idiots" bonus (1 dollar = 1 euro) iPhone 3GS 32GB - 528 euro (+ 12 month contract with "normal" prices) iPhone 3G 8GB - 396 euro (+12 month contract with "normal" prices) HTC Hero - 489.90 euro (no contract) Motorola Milestone - 549.90 euro (no contract + 50 euro for localized keyboard) Nokia N900 - 569.00 euro (no contract) Samsung Galaxy i7500 - 489.90 euro( no contract) Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 Android - 749.90 euro (no contract) Based on these it would seem that most top of the line phones actually cost around 500 - 600 euro (that is probably 500$-600$ in US) and even correlates pretty nicely with release schedule. Don't get the price on the Sony Ericsson, though it isn't actually out yet I think.

Re:A great source of +5 comments (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431356)

You seem to have placed your comment in the wrong thread... GP was about a duplicate story and had nothing to do with the price of a phone.

You Nexus, huh?... (5, Funny)

Nick Novitski (1637177) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430864)

...I design your camera! Isn't it bad luck to name any advanced electronic device after a renegade robot from a work of science fiction? I wouldn't shave with an ED-209, or drive a Lexus Bolo.

Re:You Nexus, huh?... (4, Funny)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431152)

I could have answered you with "If only you could see from my camera!", but instead, I'll probably show you some pics -- attack ships on fire at the shoulder of Orion, C-beams glittering through the darkness near the Tannhauser gate, and much more.. wait, you've already seen them? Google image search? Damn, I want more privacy, father!

Re:You Nexus, huh?... (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431958)

I could have answered you with "If only you could see from my camera!", but instead, I'll probably show you some pics -- attack ships on fire at the shoulder of Orion, C-beams glittering through the darkness near the Tannhauser gate, and much more.. wait, you've already seen them? Google image search? Damn, I want more privacy, father!

Somebody totally needs to make a Flicker feed for Roy. Afterall he's already on Facebook [facebook.com]

I'm so glad I bought a Droid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30430866)

Locked into a 2 year contract with a hefty new early termination fee, news like this is just awesome (that was sarcasm). This makes me wonder if the recent raise in ETF by verizon was driven by knowledge that this was coming.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431150)

Title correction:

You did not just 'buy' a droid, you financed it over a period of 2 years. Verizon still owns the Droid but they got you to sign a contract that allows them to call the loan they gave you for it, if you leave them.

If cell phones came with titles, like vehicles do, Verizon would mail you your title when your contract ran out.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (4, Insightful)

ryanov (193048) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431204)

Then how come my bill doesn't go down when I'm done paying off the phone?

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (2, Informative)

christianT (604736) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431380)

Your bill doesn't go down because the majority of Americans don't understand that they are paying for their "free" or "discounted" phone over the life of the contract. They think they really got a free phone or a discount. They figure their monthly bill is strictly covering their monthly usage of the service. Therefore, the cell phone service providers can get away with it.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (4, Insightful)

c0d3g33k (102699) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431784)

Americans aren't stupid, but you apparently are, since you just supported the argument made by the parent post while attempting to be contrary. After the obligatory contract period is complete (which is the exchange for getting the discounted phone), why doesn't the monthly bill "strictly cover the monthly usage of the service" instead of remaining at the same level it was while "paying for the free or discounted phone"?

My answer is that the contract period isn't really paying for the phone, it's providing a guaranteed revenue stream for the company for a specified period of time. A steady, guaranteed revenue stream is very important for a business, since it makes things a bit more predictable.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432156)

It's a bit warped to say your buying a "guaranteed revenue stream" just because the phone company bills you as such. Your buying a phone with lock-in, one that you're more likely than not to upgrade with the same network (they hope). I guess you'd need a law to stop the rolling up of costs into one bill, or freedom in phone choice, which may eventually separate out the price of the phone and contract.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432328)

Americans aren't stupid, but you apparently are . . .

Hey, you just insulted someone to make your point. Oh well, I'll still respond politely.

My answer is that the contract period isn't really paying for the phone, it's providing a guaranteed revenue stream for the company for a specified period of time. A steady, guaranteed revenue stream is very important for a business, since it makes things a bit more predictable.

Isn't that really splitting hairs? To say that they carrier is providing you with a free or discounted phone to get you to sign a 2 year contract isn't meaningfully distinct from letting you finance the phone over a two-year period. Perhaps it makes a difference to the carrier's accounting, but that's none of the customer's concern.

But even it that were true, that the two-year contract was what the carrier was getting in exchange for the discount phone, why then wouldn't a carrier offer someone who brought their own equipment a somewhat discounted two-year plan? That way they could still get a steady, guaranteed revenue stream for predictability. If they entice the "free phone" crowd with a phone (which costs the carrier something), then why not entice the BYO crowd with a somewhat lower monthly fee, reflecting the lower initial cost due to not providing a discount phone.

Or perhaps, the discount phone really isn't discounted. Perhaps it isn't a loss leader at all, and is just sold to the customer for roughly its cost to the carrier. That would explain why monthly fees aren't discounted for BYO users and also don't go down at the end of the contract: namely, the carrier got a 2-year lock-in from the customer for essentially free.

By way of anecdotal evidence, I offer the case of my wife (then girlfriend). She got a run-of-the-mill phone from SBC (then Cingular then ATT) for the "discounted" price of ~$50. In exchange, she signed a 2-year contract for service, and was talked into an "insurance policy" for the instrument. The policy cost around $7 a month. When she dropped the phone (for the last time), she went to take advantage of the "insurance policy". Doing so required her to pay a $40 "administrative fee" in order to get a replacement phone. I talked her out of that and got her a new phone equivalent to her old one off ebay for $40. She canceled the "insurance policy" after I explained that she could buy 2 new phones per year for the cost of the policy, or 4 new phones for the cost of the policy and two claims.

Anyway, the original "discounted phone" and its replacement were no cheaper than buying an unlocked instrument from a third party. She received nothing of value for signing the contract or for paying for "phone insurance".

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (5, Informative)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431694)

My bill does. I call the carrier and haggle them down on the price after the contract is up, since I can leave and it's cheaper for them to discount the service than to acquire a customer from scratch.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (3, Informative)

jedrek (79264) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431862)

For the past 6 years or so I've been getting contracts w/o a phone (I buy new phones from private sellers who've gotten phones they don't want with their contracts) and my rates are about half of what they would be if I had gotten plans with a phone.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432372)

For the past 6 years or so I've been getting contracts w/o a phone (I buy new phones from private sellers who've gotten phones they don't want with their contracts) and my rates are about half of what they would be if I had gotten plans with a phone.

Unless you're dissatisfied with your carrier for some other reason, why not mention the name and the method you used to get the deal?

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431842)

It can if you threaten to cancel

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (5, Insightful)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431198)

disclaimer: I despise verizon with a passion, and I also hate ETF's..

BUT.. I do not really see an issue with verizon upping the ETF on certain phones. Lets look at your droid for example (other then the fact that Verizon chose to brand it in such a way as to confuse people who do not know the difference between the android OS from google which runs on multiple phones, and is not a particular phone for verizon, my wife, who is somewhat technically savvy got caught in this particular branding trap).

If you buy the GSM version of the Droid, called the Sholes/Milestone unlocked at retail, it runs around $600 to $900 depending on where you buy it. Assuming bulk purchasing that carriers have, they probably get the phone for around $300 to $500 (total guess on my part). Unlocked non subsidized phones are expensive, even cheap freebies you get on contract can run $200 to $300 unlocked and non subsidized.

They are subsidizing the cost of the phone early and make up the difference and profit in service, but if you cancel early, they have the potential to take a large loss on the device, hence the ETF, so in the Droids case, $350 ETF may or may not make up the amount they are subsidizing, since you only paid $199 up front, or less in some places (I vaguely remember seeing the Droid for $99, at some point).

Now the bigger issue I have is with ATT, who while also subsidizes the phones, absolutely refuses to provide the unlock code to remove the simlock in place on their phones, even after you have completed your 2 year contractual obligation.. so if I want to switch to tmobile, I have to buy a new phone, that is absolutely bogus, and needs to be fixed, granted I have unlocked every phone I have every had, and for the most part I pay more for some unlocked devices, but thats not th epoint.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (4, Insightful)

mspohr (589790) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431406)

I don't know why these phones are so expensive. The basic parts (touchscreen, processor, memory, case) are cheap... it should be cheaper than a netbook which has more pieces (keyboard, hard disk, lots of ports).

I have seen those China iPhone clones which have all of the hardware functionality of the iPhone (with lousy software) for $100 so the hardware can't cost much. The software can't cost much when amortized over millions of phones. Seems like there is a lot of profit in phones.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (2, Insightful)

jeti (105266) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431936)

You forgot to factor in patent fees. They probably won't get paid for the cheap Chinese knockoffs.
AFAIK a 3g connection module with royalties costs over $100 per device alone.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431582)

Now the bigger issue I have is with ATT, who while also subsidizes the phones, absolutely refuses to provide the unlock code to remove the simlock in place on their phones, even after you have completed your 2 year contractual obligation.. so if I want to switch to tmobile, I have to buy a new phone, that is absolutely bogus, and needs to be fixed, granted I have unlocked every phone I have every had, and for the most part I pay more for some unlocked devices, but thats not th epoint.

After the third month of your contract, tell AT&T you want to take your phone with you on your upcoming trip to Europe, but that you want to unlock the phone so you can use European pre-paid SIM cards in it. They will add International Roaming to your account (drop it on the website later), and then either unlock your phone remotely or give you the number.

My grandmother had an AT&T phone which I wanted to use on T-Mobile. I gave it to a friend who has AT&T service, who got the unlock code and then gave it back to me.

(Submitted Anonymously to protect the guilty.... :) )

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (1)

chill (34294) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431680)

Buy a cheap phone without 3G, because you aren't going to be able to use it on T-Mobile since the frequencies are different.

Re:I'm so glad I bought a Droid (1)

bkr1_2k (237627) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432296)

I thought phone companies were required by law to provide unlock codes. Was I mistaken? I know my wife has gotten two AT&T phones unlocked over the past couple of years... maybe she just got the nice rep.

What's the big deal? (4, Insightful)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430888)

After reading through all the tech blog posts about this phone I fail to see what makes it such a big deal. It runs stock Android, so on the software side there's nothing that actually sets it apart from any other Android handset on the market. It's got some nice, next-gen hardware specs, but then again so does every other Android handset slated for a 2010 release. Snapdragon CPUs and AMOLED displays aren't exactly proprietary technology. In fact, the only thing about this phone that really seems to differentiate it from every other one of the dozens of Android handsets launching in 2010 is that it potentially will be branded as a Google device (oh, and the possibility that it may actually just be a dev phone and never make it to market anyways). So can some please explain to me why exactly everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over this?

Re:What's the big deal? (4, Interesting)

Skreems (598317) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430984)

Reading between the lines on the article (such as it is): it runs Android 2.1, which no other phone currently has. It is built by HTC, but is "entirely Google", and is Google branded. Maybe this is a sign that Google finally realized HTC's Sense UI kicked their asses, and they're working with them to merge it into the core experience?

At least that's what I'm hoping, because on the few occasions I've tried Android without Sense it's been nearly unusable. HTC did an absolutely brilliant job with the Hero given how poor the stock experience is.

Re:What's the big deal? (3, Interesting)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431216)

True, no phone currently runs Android 2.1, but will that be true if and when the Nexus launches? And even if the Nexus is the 1st Android 2.1 phone, Google and their partners generally role out new version updates to the rest of Android phones within a couple months.

As for the hope that the Nexus spells the end of the fragmented Android UI, I think that it's misplaced. HTC recently showed off their 2010 roadmap [engadget.com], and there are a lot of Sense UI Android phones on it, including a couple running Snapdragon.

Re:What's the big deal? (3, Informative)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431750)

Android 2.1 will be out before this phone will be out. What I'm hoping for in 2.5 is proper multi-touch support in the core applications (like pinch zoom in the browser), fixes to allow proper hands free phone operations. (Pressing the Bluetoooth headset button when not in a call will call up voice search, which doubles as voice dial).

And a proper solution to apps on SD. That has some issues, such as what to do if the card is removed while running, but on some phones like the Droid, it makes little difference since the battery must be removed to remove the card. But that is only a minor issue.

The next issue is how to best do this. Using unionfs or equivalent to mount the SD card directory over the main directory works ok, although makes it almost impossible to move any apps so they live directly on the phone. The alternative is to just have the phone check more locations for applications (it already checks 3 locations, so what are a few more?

The biggest question is how to handle copy protected apps (not all for-pay apps are copy protected, nor are all copy protected apps for pay). Android currently handles them by putting them in a directory protected with Unix permissions. Unless one has root to the phone the directory cannot be read. Dev Phones are not supposed to be allowed to downlad any copy protected app, so those having root available is moot.

That level of protection is not ideal, but works better than nothing. Google does not want an APPS-on-SD solution to be any less secure. There is an easy way to solve this though. Simple create a file system as a file on the SD card. The filesystem will be encrypted and loopback mounted using the standard Linux facilities for this. The key (generated on first run of the phone) will be stored on the phone itself in the existing POSIX permissions protected directory.

The filesystem inside the loopback mounted file will also have POSIX permissions protection of course. This is where all the copy protected apps will be stored if stored on SD.

----

By the way, besides hacked in multitouch support (which is obsoleted by Eclair with its official multitouch support) what all is in the SenseUI suite of changes?

I know a rewritten home app is present, with 7 (?) pages and a replacement shape for the drawer at the bottom that has 3 buttons, one of which opens the drawer, the second of which launches the phone app, and the third of which, I'm not really sure what it does. It includes several additional widgets for the home screen, with selectable styles (of varying sizes, some that take up a whole page). The status bar color has been made black.

Most of the other built-in other apps looks like they have been rewritten to conform to a new GUI standard, but it is not clear if much functionality was added, at least that was worthwhile. The apparent Social networking integration features it has look like they would need to be integrated into android 2.0's account manager. They also seem pointless to me, Since I'm not a big user of social networks.

I will say though that the visuals of SenseUI are rather impressive, and do look more polished than the default android application visuals.

Re:What's the big deal? (3, Informative)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430988)

It runs stock Android, so on the software side there's nothing that actually sets it apart from any other Android handset on the market.

If it's actually running stock Android that might be what IS setting it apart. IIRC, the majority of the Android phones are using customized UI's. While great for trying to establish loyalty to specific phone, having all those different interfaces isn't good for trying to establish loyalty to an actual platform as Google is trying to do. It's kinda like Redhat, SUSE, and the like all throwing their own interfaces onto Gnome. Sure, it's nice, but for the sake of being familiar with almost any Linux box I sit down to I prefer for things to run the plain old Gnome interface instead.

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431136)

Perhaps you have a point, but I don't think that the Nexus will solve the problem of Android UI fragmentation. For example, the HTC Bravo is also slated for 2010, and also runs a Snapdragon CPU but runs HTC's Sense UI.

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431852)

This comment is worded exactly as intended. Any lame "Fixed that for you" jokes will make my life meaningful.

Fixed that for you.

Re:What's the big deal? (2, Informative)

hazydave (96747) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432168)

Actually, any "Google Experience" phone, like the DROID, is running "stock Android" these days.. that's at least one way to tell for certain. If this really is running HTC's home shell, then it's far more like an HTC phone than any of the other Google-branded phones so far ("Google" on the back, versus presumably "Google" on the front, if this is really to be sold under the Google brand name).

The home shell doesn't matter all that much... the apps are the same. That's where the loyalty is established. As long as the API doesn't change on a per vendor basis, this is safe. And possibly one reason most of the phone vendors are flocking to Android... they have always wanted some way to customize and "brand" their smart phones.

If the only down-side for this is a little necessary customer re-education if they change to a different home shell, it's no big deal.

And as far as hardware differences go, I'm happy to see this bullet being taken now. Android's running well on phones with keyboards, without, small screens, big screens, etc. If the iPhone or the Palm platforms are going to evolve, they're going to run across that issue soon enough, or be left behind. How many iPhone apps are hard-coded to 480x320?

Re:What's the big deal? (4, Insightful)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431306)

I think it has less to do with reinventing the devices, or more about reinventing the US business model of cell phone sales.

In most of the world.. basically everywhere but the US, people buy their phones, and then pick their carrier, they pay more up front (although some carriers to subsidize their phones in the rest of the world) for the devices.

That is where Google is most likely heading, we sell you the phone, you do whatever the hell you want with it, its not carrier locked, pick tmobile, pick ATT (and if they come out with a CDMA variant, hell pick sprint of verizon, although this is unlikely as most of the world uses GSM/UMTS/HSPA networks, very few use CDMA, so its a bigger market and makes sense that the Google phone will be GSM based initially), and have it it.

I am sure this will worry the carriers as they lose control over the functioning of the phone, I do not believe they care about profits from devices, and they sell those at a loss anyway and make up for it in over priced over inflated services.

Re:What's the big deal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431410)

In most of the world.. basically everywhere but the US

... and the UK. And probably most of Europe. And probably many other countries around the world.

Re:What's the big deal? (4, Informative)

Itchyeyes (908311) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431588)

I've seen people discuss this in other places and I just don't buy it, at least not in the near term. There are already lots of phones sold as unlocked-only in the US (see just about every smartphone made by Nokia), and carriers don't currently offer rate discounts for them simply because they're not taking advantage of the subsidy. In order for the Nexus One to have enough force in the market to force the carrier's hand on rates for unsubsidized phones it's going to have to be tremendously successful (I'm thinking iPhone-like numbers). The problem is that in order to do that, they have to sell the phone unsubsidized with the same rates as subsidized phones. Which makes the cost quite a bit more than competing, subsidized phones. Which makes it all the much harder to reach the critical mass where they can exert pressure on the carriers to cut rates.

Perhaps the Nexus is the phone that finally achieves this. But it's nowhere near a done deal. Even if the phone and the sales strategy were confirmed (which they aren't), it's going to take years before they have enough market force to make the carriers change their ways.

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432166)

I'm not sure what you are getting at, by rates you mean to the cost of the phone, or the cost of the carriers service.

If its the latter, it makes no difference, I pay the same for my minutes, text messages and data regardless of whether or not I bought my phone from ATT (I do have an iphone currently), or I bring my own phone to the table (which I did prior to the iphone, most of the phones I had prior were after market unlocked and $500 to $900 devices)..

Also note that those unlocked phones that you are talking about, in the US, are all pricey, walk into Best Buy and look at their selection of unlocked phones (mostly samsung and nokia).. they are $300 and up (atleast at the glance I saw last night as I walked over to the PS3 isle).

I am not sure what their motivation is, but its google, they can afford to take a loss (atleast in the beginning), so there may be no need to subsidize the phone if they price it very cheap, take a loss, but start the carrier anarchy ball rolling with cheap non subsidized non carrier purchased devices.

In the US unlocked phones are still locked down... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432488)

And it's not like an unlocked phone now can be switched to just any carrier.

It's Sprint Verizon, maybe. And T-Mobile AT&T, maybe.

I am not sure about how smartphone differ in this way from dumbphones, but when I tried putting various used Verizon phones on Sprint, it became clear that while the radios would work, the various software support packages from the Carriers wouldn't just accept any phone.

I've heard iPhones moved to T-mobile don't have visual voice mail.

So practically speaking, an unlocked phone is still locked down.

Re:What's the big deal? (1)

hazydave (96747) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432490)

It's technically possible to support it as unlocked GSM, but then you have to support 850MHz, 900MHz, 1700MHz, 1800MHz, 1900MHz, and 2100MHz in a single phone for universal GSM... that's not usually done. Then you have to sell it with configuration information for the 3G stuff, since the networks are under no obligation to configure your phone for you, just because you connected with voice in a legal way (and have a paid corresponding data plan). This is far from automatic, at least here in the US.

CDMA isn't locked in the conventional sense, anyway. It's simply that each carrier knows the ID codes assigned to them, and they reject the addition of other phones. So unless Google (or the FCC, or Congress) can somehow convince Verizon or Sprint to start accepting non-native ID, or the CMDA vendors move to use the R-UID card standard here, this isn't going to work. They are required to unlock phones on GSM, but the CDMA guys were clever here... they're not locking the phone, they're locking the network, and far as I know, that's still legal.

Fortunately, it's not going to matter all that much longer. Everyone but Sprint is going to LTE for 4G, mostly at 700MHz here in the USA, and it's already law that this has to be open access. Verizon is supposedly going to turn LTE on in something like 30 cities next year, all at once. AT&T's testing next year and rolling out LTE coverage in 2011.

They have me sold! (3, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 4 years ago | (#30430982)

I was going to buy Motorola's Droid but I think it is sensible to wait for this one. The good thing it will be unlocked.

That said, I fear for the price tag. This beast might be in the range of US$300-400. If Google can accept a payment plan, I would jump on its bandwagon. Otherwise forking out in excess of 1,000 dollars a year with a contract at 100 dollars a month with a carrier does not make much sense in my opinion.

Re:They have me sold! (2, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431044)

Depends - theres a very good chance this will be GSM only which will mean that on CDMA networks (ie, Verizon) you may be stuck with other offerings.

The HTC Droid Passion is CDMA though and supposed to be out soon(-ish). I'm waiting for that instead of the Droid. If I wait more than 3 more months I'll likely get the Droid Eris instead (I kinda like the Eris more than the Moto Droid - I just don't like the swing-out keyboards. seems to prone to break).

Re:They have me sold! (4, Informative)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431372)

Only in the US is the Droid a CDMA phone (see my previous comment further up about the Droid name.. it annoys me). The phone is however available in Europe in a GSM variant known as the Motorola Sholes/Milestone. The currently frequency bands though means it is relegated to edge speeds in the US as neither ATT nor Tmobile use the 900/2100 for 3g (UMTS/HSPA) that the phone has.

However if you go peruse the canadian motorola site, the Canadian version of the Sholes/Milestone uses 850/1900 for 3g, which is what ATT uses.... but its not available yet :(

Tmobile gets screwed either way as they use 1700 for 3G.. so unless the phone was made specifically for Tmo US, you will not get 3G speeds.

Re:They have me sold! (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431732)

Google may just decide to pay the extra couple bucks per unit and put a proper radio onboard that lets you do CDMA and GSM (all-bands).

Re:They have me sold! (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432178)

That would certainly be the best solution. While most of the world is GSM, a HUGE portion of the US market is still on CDMA phones and adding the little bit of electronics to make it dual band would be very wise on their part. Doing the dual CDMA/GSM setup was IMHO one of the few things RIM did right on the Blackberry Storm.

Re:They have me sold! (1)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432216)

It's called LTE.. I did not mention it earlier because the current documents going through the FCC (head on over the engadget, they have a breakdown of the FCC documents), currently show that the frequency bands in use for this phone make it a Tmobile specific device (does not have the 850 or 1900 bands for ATT 3g)

LTE however, atleast in it's base specs, is backwards compatible with GSM/UMTS/HSPA/CDMA and a dozen over specs.

If google was to release an LTE phone, I doubt they would fiddle with those, Verizon on the other hand, would probably gimp the LTE specs to the point where they would be useless on any other network (completely defeating the point of all that compatibility to nickel and dime you to death)

Re:They have me sold! (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432266)

We could only be so lucky for it to be an LTE phone. Bonus points if it can use it's WiFi to tunnel back to Google Voice to provide voice services (similar to T-Mobile's UMA/WiFi capability).

Re:They have me sold! (1)

Corporate Troll (537873) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431210)

I just hope they'll be selling them in Europe too.... If so, I'll be first in line. (If the price is reasonable, which the iPhone wasn't at launch time and still isn't if you look at the plans the cellphone companies offer)

Re:They have me sold! (3, Informative)

wc_paladin (989918) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431218)

If they have coverage in your area, you could get on T-Mobile's "Even More Plus" plan. It's contract free, and has no subsidized phones, so the monthly fee is a good bit less.

Re:They have me sold! (1)

maccodemonkey (1438585) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431554)

"This beast might be in the range of US$300-400."

Hah. For a contract free phone? You're looking at $600-$700.

Re:They have me sold! (3, Informative)

cpscotti (1032676) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431866)

Have you ever heard about the n900?
I dunno why everybody continues hyping around skynet's products/blockable devices..
Just go buy your n900 and enjoy pushing Ctrl+shift+x and watching xterm being launched, OTB.
The one phone that you become root of your own device while within the manufacturer's grace.

PS: Do I sound like a nokia fanboi? That's precisely the idea.. we have to deal with apple's and google's ones all the time.. this is my share!

Unlocked FTW (3, Insightful)

ickleberry (864871) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431002)

I'm not a google fanboi by any means but this is good news for the general American public who seem to think that the only way to get a phone is to buy a locked one through a network. I havn't bought a locked phone since '99 and the small subsidy they give in order to fob you off with a crippled device is never worth it.

Maybe if this is marketed well there will be more of a separation between device and network. You wouldn't buy a wifi PCI-E card that is only compatible with a certain brand of AP or 'hotspot' network, so why would a phone be any different?

Re:Unlocked FTW (2, Informative)

Cimexus (1355033) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431238)

Agreed. I've always just gone out, bought a new phone outright, and whacked my existing SIM card in it when I got home. None of this contract crap. But from what I can tell it is very hard/impossible to do that in the US? Which sucks ... I hate being tied to a particular carrier (and besides I have several SIM cards floating around that I tend to use in different situations).

Even worse, the US phones I've seen actually brand the phone hardware/firmware itself with the carriers logo and stuff. Wtf?! The phone should have NOTHING to do with the carrier. The analogy you made with brand X Wifi cards only working with brand X hotspots is a good one.

Re:Unlocked FTW (4, Insightful)

JDevers (83155) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431452)

The problem is that about 70% of American's are perpetually without any lump sum of money and so look at a "payment plan" as a way to get what they otherwise couldn't afford...all that without realizing that the hundreds of other items they have purchased in the past on credit is why they don't have any money...We have an interesting economy without a doubt.

Not all CDMA phones use a CSIM card (4, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431634)

Agreed. I've always just gone out, bought a new phone outright, and whacked my existing SIM card in it when I got home. None of this contract crap. But from what I can tell it is very hard/impossible to do that in the US?

The carriers with better U.S.-wide coverage[1] use Qualcomm's CDMA2000 protocol stack.[2] Unlike GSM and UMTS phones, all of which store the service info on a UICC,[3] CDMA2000 phones are less likely to store the service info on a UICC.

[1] Not to be confused with international coverage, which isn't useful to people who never travel outside the United States. AT&T has advertised better coverage than competing carriers that operate in the United States, with the fine print stating "worldwide". But in the States, there's a map for that.

[2] Not to be confused with CDMA modulation, which is also used by UMTS, the 3G successor to GSM.

[3] A removable smart card that holds mobile phone service information. It's commonly called a "SIM", "USIM", or "CSIM" card if it holds service info for GSM, UMTS, or CDMA2000 respectively.

Re:Unlocked FTW (1, Informative)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431710)

In the US, by and large, phones are seen by many as a way to access their account with a wireless communications company. Few Americans have the need or desire to switch among various phone companies, and most just want to go in to a store, pick out a phone that they think is "free" or very inexpensive, have it set up for them, and walk out of the store with the phone already working.

The American wireless marketplace is largely set up this way. Carriers generally welcome unlocked/bring-your-own phones and will reward you by not having to sign up for a multi-year commitment, but on the other hand they will generally not offer a discount on your monthly fee. Americans also generally have come to expect switching phones every time we renew our contracts anyway, so if I'm paying a monthly fee it might as well include a subsidy for a phone.

So, basically, it boils down to costs and risks.

If you are relatively happy with your carrier, you take a significant discount off the purchase price of the phone and in return you commit to a 2-year contract. At the end of the two years, you've saved the money because you would have paid the same monthly fee whether you bought your own phone or not. So if all goes relatively well it saves you some bucks.

However, If you cancel your account early, you basically end up refunding the subsidy they gave you. This really sucks because the phone is locked to the carrier (hence useless unless you sell it to another customer of that same carrier, or manage to unlock it). So by getting the phone subsidized by your carrier you lose big-time if you change your mind and want to switch carriers.

You can choose on price (carrier-subsidized phone with lock-in) or flexibility (buy your own phone and SIM cards from whatever carriers you want). In other words, for the price of the subsidy the wireless company is allowing you to sell them your flexibility on that handset.

Most people I know choose on price, and most of the time it works out fine. You do your two years with the phone, and if you're happy with the phone and the carrier you go month-to-month until the phone dies or you decide you want a new ShinyThing, then you go to a carrier and ask them to reopen the subsidy purse and you lock-in for another two years.

Re:Unlocked FTW (1)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431378)

apple tried that with the original iphone. it was $600 and didn't require a contract although it was locked to AT&T because they gave Apple $750 million to help with development. the tech media loved it and said how it was the next cool strategy. it was a colossal failure and AT&T started subsidizing it a few months later

Re:Unlocked FTW (1)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432250)

No, they sold out every phone they had at both the Apple and ATT stores at the $600 price point.. those people get really pissed when Apple dropped the price a few months later, and then even more so when the 3G came out at a seriously cheap (compared to the original 2G) price point..

So I would not call it a failure.. however the fact that ATT's network cannot handle the traffic (Voice or Data), is a colossal failure.

Clash of the Titans (1, Flamebait)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431012)

I have a Nokia N900. I love it. I also love the fact that in this newest battleground M$ is virtually meaningless. I would love to see a movie of the N900, the Androids, and the iPhone done by Ray Harryhausen where all 3 are battling with many arms and swords against a backdrop of AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile castles.

I say Good. The fone market is where micro computers were in the early 80's.

Innovation, and chaos!

Re:Clash of the Titans (1)

ZenDragon (1205104) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431086)

Isnt this why they were bidding on the C band or whatever it was? I know they didnt end up winning it but I though the whole push was intended to start opening up the market for stuff like this. Definately good for the market, though ultimately probably not good for google. I think making moves like this is definately going to make google a clear target on the FTC's monopoly radar, more so than ever before.

Re:Clash of the Titans (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431302)

You need to google the definition of monopoly.

Re:Clash of the Titans (5, Informative)

the ReviveR (1106541) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431492)

I also love my N900. Too bad most americans probably won't be seeing it. There is no way any carrier will subsidize N900.

Why?
  • Tethering (usb/bluetooth) - Bluetooth makes this too easy, No need for extra software, no need to even take the phone out of pocket
  • Loads of free apps with stuff like Star Control 2 (includes 130 Mb voice & music pack) - lots of network traffic with no slice for the carrier
  • torrent client (Transmission) - carriers will love this ;)
  • When you try calling someone, N900 opens a list with GSM / Skype / SMS /Email /IM for the person - Guess whether people will choose GSM or SMS if they have choice...
  • The same internet/video traffic that iPhone has plus then some from using apps like Google maps, other Flash stuff etc.

Re:Clash of the Titans (4, Interesting)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431736)

I actually bought Skype minutes because of the N900. And I have a Gizmo5 account that I just entered the details of into the N900's built in SIP stack. So when I want to make a call, I get to choose from GSM, Skype, Gizmo5. Also, when I am online, and some one with Google Talk or Skype wants to call me from their computer, it just rings and acts like is was any other cell call. There is so so so much more.

I can see US carriers shaking with rage over people's abilities to buy an N900, then go to T-Mobile and get an unlimited voice, text, data plan with no contract for 80 bux a month.

The N900 only works with T-Mobiles 3G system in the US. 2G from anyone.

Non-phone Android? (2)

sootman (158191) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431058)

I'm completely happy with my iPhone but I'd love to have a nice Android-based everything-but-the-phone device (especially with the Droid's screen), like how Apple makes the iPod touch. Does anyone make one?

Re:Non-phone Android? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431270)

Creative Labs have been working on a reference design for a media player that runs Android. It's still at the prototype stage, which is risky given that it's meant to use their Zii media decoding hardware which isn't getting any younger.

Re:Non-phone Android? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431300)

Buy one of these and don't insert the SIMD chip.

Re:Non-phone Android? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432046)

Buy one of these and don't insert the SIMD chip.

In the United States, home of Google, Slashdot, and tepples, one can't easily walk into a store and buy a smartphone without a contract. And even if you buy a used phone whose service has been canceled, I seem to remember some carrier-customized phones lock all the buttons if they don't find a SIM; they don't even downgrade to the kind of iPod Touch-class Wi-Fi-only service you'd get from (say) an Archos 5. And you're still buying the GSM/UMTS radio that you'll never use.

Re:Non-phone Android? (1)

RDW (41497) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431786)

Here in the UK, you can currently pick up a T-mobile Pulse Android phone, and add an 8Gb micro SD card, for less than the price of the 8Gb Touch. And that's on a PAYG tariff, so there's no contract to service. Pre-paid 3G net access is only 20 GBP for 6 months on T-mobile, so there's no reason to restrict yourself to wifi either. With full phones at this sort of price, an Android PMP would have to be pretty cheap (or offer significant extra features, like a lot of storage) to be competitive. I wonder if the Touch would even exist if not for Apple's lucrative deals with the iPhone network providers? The price difference between the Touch and the PAYG iPhone (or contract iPhone with the monthly charges factored in) hardly seems justified based on the probable costs of the additional components alone.

Here in the US (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432086)

Here in the UK, you can currently pick up a T-mobile Pulse Android phone, and add an 8Gb micro SD card, for less than the price of the 8Gb Touch.

Here in the US, how much would shipping and customs cost?

Pre-paid 3G net access is only 20 GBP for 6 months on T-mobile

Would such a plan allow free roaming on T-Mobile's US network?

the PAYG iPhone

Doesn't exist [gizmodo.com].

Confusing title (1)

lannocc (568669) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431090)

Maybe it should read

'Nexus One' Is Google's First Android Phone

?

Re:Confusing title (4, Funny)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431252)

If there's one thing that is certain in the world along with death and taxes, it's that people just don't know how to use apostrophes any more.

In 2050, I fully expect the English language to have a rule that states the apostrophe is required to be placed before any trailing s, regardless of the sentence. Word will autocorrect glass to glas's and so on and you won't be able to turn the feature off.

Re:Confusing title (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431280)

As an addendum, in the case of transposed words, dropping the apostrophe s would make it into a standard news headline, if a little clumsy.

Get ready to be tracked even further! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431116)

With the phone, Google tracks you even further. Probably in the future, it will tap into your voice conversation.

I hope it starts a trend... (3, Insightful)

manyxcxi (1037382) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431158)

First, I've got a Jesus Phone and love it- so I won't be making any radical switches to the Google Phone. However, I hope it's popular as hell. I hope it makes handset makers realize that they don't HAVE to sell locked phones to consumers in the U.S. If people weren't so stupid (the world would be better off...) they would realize that most 99 year contracts you have to enter into are a way worse deal than the $500 up front for a phone- I guess it goes to many American's credit isn't real money mentality that has lead us to the financial mess we're in, but I digress. By seeing the true cost of phones (if selling unlocked becomes somewhat more popular in the US) makers will then have to compete on actual prices of phones and the prices will go down. America's biggest hurdle is that half (only counting the big four wireless companies) are GSM [T-Mobile/ATT] and half are CDMA [Verizon/Sprint]. I don't know how much extra it costs, or how hard it is to support all the variations in just the US alone, but I imagine it would raise the price of a phone that was truly carrier agnostic in the US- making a $500 investment a little more palatable. If I was shopping for a phone that would be a huge selling point. That and Fieldrunners.

The Input Of Hipster Retards (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431752)

"First, I've got a Jesus Phone and love it- so I won't be making any radical switches to the Google Phone"

No one gives a shit idiot. Save your life story for the other hipster retards at Starbucks.

Re:I hope it starts a trend... (1)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431864)

If people weren't so stupid (the world would be better off...) they would realize that most 99 year contracts you have to enter into are a way worse deal than the $500 up front for a phone- I guess it goes to many American's credit isn't real money mentality

My wife's account with Verizon recently reached the 2-year contract limit, and she decided to jump ship to AT&T. Economically, it made more sense to accept the subsidy on the handset than purchase an unlocked handset.

She wanted a Blackberry Pearl. We priced out an unlocked one at about $250, AT&T offered it at $50 with all the subsidies. I asked about a discount for buying an unlocked phone, and was told that there was no price difference per-month for having an unlocked "bring your own" phone.

So, in return for a 2-year commitment to AT&T, we got $200 off the purchase price of the phone. If my wife decides to cancel with AT&T, we'll end up paying the $200 back and have a phone that is locked to AT&T, which is unfortunate, but that's the risk you take for saving money buying the handset. At the end of two years, if she sticks with AT&T, we'll have saved $200 on her phone and she can keep using it on AT&T as long as she wants, or we can get it unlocked and move it to another carrier, or she can renew her contract and get a new subsidized phone.

I understand and respect the advantages of the unlocked-phone model, but the locked-phone model isn't a sign of stupidity or a lack of understanding of finances. It's a calculated risk.

Re:I hope it starts a trend... (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432158)

If people weren't so stupid (the world would be better off...) they would realize that most 99 year contracts you have to enter into are a way worse deal than the $500 up front for a phone- I guess it goes to many American's credit isn't real money mentality that has lead us to the financial mess we're in, but I digress.

Americans do a lot of things on credit mainly because in general, credit is fairly cheap in the U.S., not really a matter of ignorance or stupidity. Subsidized phones aren't necessarily a terrible idea, especially if your paycheck is large enough to cover that little more a month in added wireless fees, but small enough that that $500 initial investment would cause a hardship.

tyrell corporation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431182)

Nexus? Looking forward to version 6!

Why imply they're deceptive on the hardware? (1)

atdt1991 (1069776) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431220)

From TFA:

"What's interesting is that the head of the Android project at Google has flatly said, more than once, that the company is not interesting in making or selling hardware. Obviously, this changes things. Granted, HTC is actually making the device for Google, but it will be fully branded by Google and the user experience will be Google's and not HTC's."

Really? The company said it wasn't going to make or sell hardware, and HTC is making the hardware, and this changes things? Granted, Google may put marketing might behind it, but they've not really done so with anything in the past, so we'll see.

Prior art from White Zombie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431232)

I thought that Rob Zombie was "The Nexus One". He wants more life, @#$%^, he ain't done.

rumor is that it's going to be all VOIP (1)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431276)

there was a story last month that Google was going sell an all VOIP phone that would work on AT&T and only cost $20 for the data plan. no voice plan required. there is even some company i read about months ago that sells special versions of cell phones that need a data plan and no voice plan and all the phone calls are over VOIP. all on AT&T

AT&T is working overtime on it's being a dumb pipe telecom strategy.

That doesn't sound so good. . . (1)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431930)

I think, *eventually* that is the way mobile telephony should go. . . but. . . AT&T doesn't have good 3G coverage everywhere it has good voice coverage (although, I suppose 2.5G is fast enough for VOIP, so maybe the coverage is still fairly decent). Still, one thing I know is that a phone with basic voice will currently work most places in the country, but I wouldn't be quite so confident about that with VOIP. Another concern is that, with all the problems AT&T has purportedly had with congestion on their data network, I would be afraid that the VOIP quality would suffer (or cut out altogether) because of insufficient bandwidth at times.

Also, I just have a really hard time believing that AT&T would actually take a move that will cut their average revenue per handset down to about 1/3 of what they currently charge. I think most people with smart phones currently pay about $60-$70/mo for service. Why would AT&T allow them to get, basically, the exact same service, for 1/3 the cost?

Re:rumor is that it's going to be all VOIP (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432090)

That rumour came from Michael Arrington of TechCrunch, so take it with a very large grain of salt. Perhaps a salt-lick, even.

I think it's a very interesting idea (great, even), but it would depend on what data network we're talking about, as most of them in the U.S. are pretty crappy when it comes to 3G. I'd also like to see what happens when you need to call 911 and you aren't near any WiFi access. Cell radio still in the handset for free 911 calls? That'd be a good solution, and quite possibly enough for me to bite.

Re:rumor is that it's going to be all VOIP (1)

bleh-of-the-huns (17740) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432378)

That would be all fine and dandy, except that if you go read the FCC reports on this device, the frequency bands are for Tmobile 3G, it will work on ATT's edge network, but not the 3G network.. for a purely data device, this makes no sense.

Sounds like Google is finally Pushing Android (1)

BlueCoder (223005) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431348)

This is pretty much what everyone in the android community has been calling for.

Google is finally going to push a default phone. And if I had to guess it will
be pretty much sold at cost and be available in both GSM and CDMA. Maybe even
a little below cost depending upon the politics with the carriers.

Google doesn't want to get into the hardware market but this will keep the
price of the phones down and motivate some hardware manufacturers to produce
open phones themselves.

With the new google attitude... (1)

robinvanleeuwen (1009809) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431416)

Maybe they'll eavesdrop on your calls to play personalized commercial messages at the beginning of each new call and it saves the costumer calling-costs :-) Now would that be evil?

unlcocked? root? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431424)

So is that unlocked as in "you can use it with any carrier" or unlocked as in "you're allowed access to the root user account"?

Why wait? (1)

fortapocalypse (1231686) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431696)

Why wait when there already devices out there running Android OS that will likely be more well-used and supported? Eris or Droid anyone (that's on Verizon)?

What will REALLY be big news... (5, Interesting)

Nerdposeur (910128) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431726)

What will really be big news is when someone (probably Google or Apple) introduces a phone with something like the Gobi chip [qualcomm.com], now being used in some netbooks. It's a "carrier-neutral" chip, so you can activate the device on whatever carrier you like - GSM or CDMA.

The only reason people buy phones from carriers is to get financing (which is what carriers' phone subsidies really are - rolling the payments into your plan and sneakily continuing them forever). If people are willing to pay up front, or if the manufacturer will finance the handset, you can buy a phone and pick your own carrier, or even activate the same device on multiple carriers. This would be a real game-changer, and would push the carriers further towards being dumb pipes.

I think this would be ideal: make carriers compete on network quality alone, and make handset makers compete cross-carrier on handset quality alone.

Re:What will REALLY be big news... (2, Informative)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431954)

It's a "carrier-neutral" chip, so you can activate the device on whatever carrier you like - GSM or CDMA.

Unlocking a phone makes it carrier neutral. What you're talking about is being communication standard neutral simply by supporting multiple standards, but that is increasingly a non-standard (CDMA was largely a North America only thing, but is increasingly a US-only thing -- basically Verizon -- after Bell and Telus in Canada left CDMA for GSM).

All of this having little to do with financing your phone.

Unlocked phones sold as devices by themselves would be *wonderful*. I'm hoping that this actually gets carried out.

But I doubt it. Firstly a lot of people are making hay about the fact that this phone is "designed by Google", but so was the G1 essentially (also branded as Google, given to Google employees, called a Google phone, etc). So it seems like a refresh of the position the G1 held and people are extrapolating a little too much.

Nexus One (3, Informative)

zen-o-matic (1699464) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431754)

It has been confirmed that Nexus One is made by HTC.
Some pics of the beast:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/14/exclusive-first-google-phone-nexus-one-photos-android-2-1-on/

And then there's Sony Ericsson's Xperia X10 which is also a KILLER phone:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m19Lu-JUW1Q
http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/overview/xperiax10#view=specifications
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHJExGJ4K60

Both are probably hitting the stores in January 2010.

First Google (2, Funny)

Ophion (58479) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431902)

I have never heard of First Google, but I would not get too excited about any product from this company, as I am sure that Google soon will sue it out of existence.

Blade Runner (1)

ircharlie (317640) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431964)

BTW, Nexus was the name of the project producing replicants (or androids in the book) in Blade Runner. Roy Batty was a Nexus 6.

I want a new version of the G1 (1)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432262)

There's lots of new Android phones coming out, but HTC seems to have dropped the ball on possibly their greatest innovation - the G1 keyboard and hinge mechanism. Most phones with slide-out keyboards had small keyboards, but the hinging mechanism HTC used for the G1 allowed them to make the keyboard something like 50 percent bigger than any other phone with a slide-out.

It seems to me that HTC needs to do a refresh of the G1, but with upgraded processor, display, Android 2.1, better camera, etc. I want the keyboard of the G1, but don't want to get stuck with older version of Android on a slower processor, with a lower-res display.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...