The tech and mobile industries are buzzing about the impending release of the first Google Android handset. We've been waiting since February to find out whether an official Android handset will see the light of day. But after numerous setbacks, a device that will carry Android is finally here. Better known as the HTC Dream or G1, the device is set to be available on the T-Mobile network as early as next week, priced at $199.
We'd like your help in predicting the following: Will T-mobile or AT&T adjust their entry price point (either up or down) for the HTC Dream and the iPhone respectively in 2008? Let us know by casting your vote at RWW Predictions.
Check out a video of the Android OS just below and be sure to read up on our top 10 picks of Android apps we hope to use.
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
I am super excited about Android. I never made the leap to the iPhone, and I hope that either Android will be better or will at the very least make the next iPhone better due to the increased competition.
Posted by: Kyle Judkins | September 21, 2008 8:04 PM
The iPhone is much further ahead in terms of sales, but Google will do better in the long term. Only because Google will be more open and there will be less in the way of entry for developers.
Posted by: Sheraz Mahmood | September 21, 2008 8:13 PM
Although I own iPhone, i want google to beat Apple in phone game. I have a feeling that Google will do a better job in terms of consumer friendliness and help bring down prices of cellphones + contracts. In fact it might kill the contract system.
Posted by: pankaj | September 21, 2008 8:33 PM
Of course everything depends on the "actual" phones introduced but if they're anything like this demo, Apple has it knocked. Only "geeks" and freetards will flock to this if anywhere close to the same price as iPhone.
Posted by: PXLated | September 21, 2008 8:43 PM
One of your "facts" is wrong. Symbian is free and open source and actually out there in production use in phones. http://www.symbian.com/
Posted by: Jason Carreira
|
September 21, 2008 9:12 PM
I don't think the HTC Dream / G1 will be able to compete with the iPhone right out of the gate. I see it more about putting a stake in the ground that a groundswell of developers and device manufacturers can rally around with best of breed ideas. Android is an awesome technology stack. If Apple keeps on track with their closed ecosystem and monopolistic tendencies then this will only drive more industry players to the best viable alternative.
Posted by: scott | September 21, 2008 9:17 PM
Her fact is correct, Jason. "The foundation will make the platform available in open source by June 2010" source: http://www.symbian.com/news/pr/2008/pr200810044.html It is not open source yet.
Posted by: Michael W. May
|
September 21, 2008 9:20 PM
Why I love FriendFeed: See above.
Posted by: Kyle Lacy
|
September 21, 2008 9:20 PM
They will both continue to annoy me. Both will be buggy. Both will spend the next five years 'sharing' features until there's as much difference as there is between the zune and the ipod
Posted by: James Tenniswood
|
September 21, 2008 9:21 PM
Plenty of OSS projects for apps and utilities, but not the OS itself yet. Not that I can find source code for. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. I'm not an expert by any means.
Posted by: Michael W. May
|
September 21, 2008 9:23 PM
Thanks for the clarification... I thought this was done already. Their front page makes it seem that way.
Posted by: Jason Carreira
|
September 21, 2008 9:25 PM
I wish Symbian the best, but it's a lot more laden with manufacturers' oldschool thinking and hardware. I really do want to see more hardware innovation to match the software potential, rather than limiting the software to match the same-old-crap-with-one-new-twist-this-year hardware, or borking the software to preserve the totally-stupid subscription-based software revenue model.
Posted by: abacab
|
September 21, 2008 9:28 PM
Im confused by the question, it seems open ended, even the options. Could both or one adjust their price??? It also presumes that the ugly as sin GPhone will compete with the iPhone. I don't think it will. It's not pretty enough firstly, second, with a real keyboard and ugly as sin design, the target must be RIM surely
Posted by: Duncan Riley
|
September 21, 2008 9:29 PM
Yeah, I doubt they'll be after the same market... Google has never been good at UI/UX and this doesn't look much better. The advantage Apple has is in controlling both the HW and SW and crafting them into one nice to use whole.
Posted by: Jason Carreira
|
September 21, 2008 9:54 PM
I thought OpenMoko was the first completely open phone platform
Posted by: Prashanth | September 21, 2008 9:58 PM
I really need to see the T&C on the contracts first - I can't believe any network provider is going to allow a 3G unlimited data plan on a user-programmable device.
Secondly, my understanding was while the O/S is open, as it is not GPL it is possible for device manufacturers to close it to end users, and also remove features they don't want - which is the single most annoying thing they do now ('aha, we'll disable the ability for you to load files via Bluetooth in the hope you will pay to download music from our store').
I still think this is an area where government legislation is actually needed - I'm old enough to remember when the landline monopolies would only rent you their choice of phone, and the explosion of competition/lack of collapse of the phone network that happened when these restrictions were declared 'illegal'.
To Google's credit this is precisely what they asked for in the spectrum auction.
Posted by: JulesLt | September 21, 2008 11:32 PM
Some are saying that the Android will be an iPhone killer. It won't because the general population (non-tech savvy) doesn't understand the phrase "open source." They want simple. Sleek look, ease of use. The iPhone delivers that. They're familiar with Apple products (iPods..). Chances are that those who only know the basics of computer use haven't even heard of the Android, thus won't really be looking into buying it. This may not be an iPhone killer, but it may give other 'smartphones' (blackberries, maybe?) a run for their money.
Posted by: D. | September 22, 2008 3:54 AM
Technology in search of a market?
What will be the application people will pay for having an Android phone?
The first hurdle says with the touch screens: texting (sms) is difficult.
Most people use a mobile phone to talk and to sms.
MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service) never got any success as it is too expensive. People are just happy with 160 char of SMS, because it is cheaper than calling (however it is very expensive calculated by the number of bytes transmitted).
The perception is important.
What is the market for Android?
Nokia and Samsung are in control of the market.
Posted by: Engago Team | September 22, 2008 5:41 AM
Take it like a old news:
iPhone 3G combines three products in one - a revolutionary phone, a widescreen iPod, and a breakthrough Internet device.
Posted by: Artikel32 | September 22, 2008 6:08 AM
Am I right that Android has no multi-touch? If not, I really think that's going to hurt it. In my mind, multi-touch is what finally makes touchscreen interfaces useful.
Posted by: Michael Hansen | September 22, 2008 6:59 AM
It seems very nice, but will it be better than the iphone? I don't think so
Posted by: Mr Javo | September 22, 2008 7:02 AM
Let's see:
1. It is bulkier and geekier than the iPhone.
2. The interface looks very geeky and complex compared to the iPhone.
3. It is half the speed of the iPhone.
4. It is not as sexy as the iPhone.
5. It doesn't have the accessories of the iPhone.
6. It doesn't have the App Store like the iPhone.
7. It costs the same as the iPhone - but is NOT better and is substantially worse.
From a consumer's point of view, why would one buy this?
Why would a teenager buy this over the iPhone?
Why would one, who doesn't have a pocket protector and horn-rimmed glasses, LUST after this phone as one lusts over the iPhone?
Exactly. One does not.
From a developer's point of view, the Android is going to be split into several different platforms, different form sizes, etc.
Why would a developer want to support 50 different models of the Android phone?
This would seem to be a support nightmare when it comes to hunting down bugs.
From another perspective, however, as a developer:
1. I can now sell my $1000 ruby application.
2. I can now sell my farting application.
3. I can now do PORN applications!!!!!!
4. I can now do Adware.
5. I can now do Malware.
6. I can now tethering apps without the cell phone carrier's permission, without paying the extra $50 a month this is suppose to cost.
7. I can now hog bandwidth on the network.
8. I can now do BitTorrent on AT&T's and T-Mobile's network!!!!!!!
9. I can now do viruses.
Posted by: James Katt | September 22, 2008 7:49 AM
Hey what ever happened to the Blackberry Bold? And the Thunder? Oh well, the HTC phone will be just another iphone wanna be. HTC Dream or G1 when it's available in late October, will just equal yesterday's technology trying to immitate a superior product.
Apple engineers must be laughing their pants off.
Posted by: theNextsteveJobs | September 22, 2008 7:52 AM
I posted a few of my Android predictions here:
http://showmount.blogspot.com/2008/09/android-google-and-t-mobile.html
Posted by: . | September 22, 2008 4:16 PM
Android and Chrome are built on top of the rendering engine, WebKit. WebKit was developed by Apple, for those who don't know it, and was given back to the Open-Source community. So, thank Apple for Android and Chrome, because Android and Chrome would not be what they are without Apple's WebKit. Oh, Nokia's S60 is also built on WebKit.
Posted by: KenC | September 22, 2008 8:40 PM
Actually KenC, Webkit is based on the rendering engine behind Konqueror, an open source browser mostly found on Linux desktops. Apple actually offended the OS guys be modifying that browser and releasing the updates with such useless documentation that the OS community couldn't benefit from the changes. Nice, huh?
Posted by: Me | September 23, 2008 4:28 AM
It crashes at the end of the demo. He spends a good 10-15 seconds attempting to return to the "start" page before the camera zooms out. Fail.
Posted by: David Preece | September 23, 2008 1:44 PM