The reporter noted that “The trio of Google execs also used the opportunity to talk about the inroads the company is making with its own branded mobile phone as a replacement for the iPhone.” [That appears to be a mix-up by the reporter, with Sergey and Larry actually talking about not producing their own phone, according to Reuters's Ken Li's notes in SAI.]

But, TechCrunch does have its own source, who "swears" that the Ammunition Design Group "is designing the Gphone and that it is a seriously beautiful device." They've worked with companies like Palm, Hewlett-Packard, Dell Computer and Logitech in the past (a phone they designed for Sprint is pictured above). Not a confirmation by any means, but TechCrunch usually has decent info—so take that for what it's worth.

The more probable explanation for any sort of design work on a handset for Google is that they could be prototypes for marketing or other promotion—no one can make the call whether it's for production yet. [Tech Crunch and Mediaweek via BGR, Silicon Alley Insider]

Assuming that the phone really is in production and will be delayed until 2009, that leaves the question of whether the Android platform as a whole will be delayed, since many other manufacturers besides Google are planning their own phones. Krakow's source doesn't say, which probably means it's still on track. Either that, or horribly, horribly delayed and the guy doesn't want to induce a panic. [The Street]

Update: Google spokesdudes say that the Android platform is a-okay.

We're still on track to announce Android-powered phones this year. Some of our partners are publicly stating that they plan to ship Android phones in the fourth quarter.

Well, the HTC handset is around five inches long and 3 inches wide with a keypad that either slides or swivels out to make emailing, note-taking and writing Web addresses easy. The Internet is navigated via controls below the screen. So, that's just like a generic HTC phone, then.

The source of the current leak, described as "a person close to the situation" (ha!) claims that the handset will be available around the end of the year, although HTC is staying schtumm on the matter. "We cannot comment on this product," their rep said.

HTC will be facing competition from Samsung. The Korean electronics giant is, apparently, wetting its knickers to get its Google phone out before that of HTC. [Yahoo!]

Paul also noted that the layout model for the Android UI can be frustrating because there aren't enough examples of proper programmatic layout techniques. On the plus side, there were some places where Android performed well, like the Eclipse plug-in and the ScrollView widget. Apparently, the Eclipse provided "seamless support for breakpoint debugging" by automatically starting up your program inside the emulator when in use. As for the ScrollView widget, it appears to support kinetic scrolling out of the box which saves developers and extra step.

In the end, Paul believes that Android is "definitely a viable and effective platform for application development" despite its flaws —although I agree with his assessment that its pre-release status is not an adequate excuse for all of its current shortcomings. [Ars Technica and WSJ]

For better, for worse or for Google, it sent the formerly locked-tight mobile-phone industry into an open-access hysteria. True, Android and the Open Handset Alliance are still (mostly) pretty logos and promises on paper. But for a bunch of talk, it's lead to some very real action, like helping nudge Verizon out of its ugly, red-walled garden. All this gesturing might actually change the industry.

Android aside, we can really give Google props for helping to break the mobile industry via its hard fight for open-access provisions in the 700MHz spectrum auction. The provisions themselves could change the game for all telecoms, and Google doesn't even need to win!

If anyone thought Google was approaching the limits of its growth earlier in the year, Wall Street proved 'em wrong when gPhone hype pushed its stock past the $700-per-share mark, making it the fifth most valuable company in America. It's comfortably resting now at the hype-free level of about $670, over $550 more than the initial price of around $120. (At the time, many investors say that was too high.)

Google kept up the "don't be evil" motto by pumping lots of money into green energy and green research. Maybe this is because they believe in a better tomorrow, but maybe it's just to power their Matrix-like server farms without resorting to turning runaway Microsoft employees into living batteries.

On the Google application front, its office suite is still no Office-killer, and we still have some kinks we wish could be worked out of the Reader, but Google did make our lives easier in a couple ways, like by dropping the invite requirement to Gmail, adding IMAP support and getting even more iPhone-friendly. Yay. And, just the other day, it threw down with Wikipedia by launching its latest collect-all-knowledge component, Knol, which'll pay contributors—with ads. (Surprise.)

Owning YouTube kinda caught up to Google, and we're kinda sore on that front—it got sued by Viacom, bitched at by other media companies and then had to implement a content-filtering system. But possibly even more egregious was its addition of overlay ads.

Now for even less palatable stuff: Google knows pretty much everything about you and everyone you've ever loved and that probably won't ever change, even if it is trying to be a little less creepy. For instance, Google will still have all the info you think you're erasing from Ask.com. And, it still plays nice with ethically dubious—to be generous—Chinese censorship regulations to ensure its grip on a chunk of the massive and growing market over there, which doesn't exactly line up with the "don't be evil" screed. Even Sergey thinks so.

And the ads. It's much pretty much a given the catch on any Google goodness is that there'll be some sort of advertising wedged in there—true, nothing worth paying for is totally free, and Google doesn't appear game for charging monthly fees for every little service, like Microsoft and Yahoo! now do. But Google going mobile means ads becoming an increasingly unavoidable part of your mobile life— AdSense for Mobile is all fired up. It seems the lovely mobile industry freedom Google's fighting for isn't free. It costs a buck-oh-five—or a contextual spot.

Final grade: B But we think this grade is slippery: next year, Google will either be A+ or D. What Google is doing is either a massive greed-motivated build-up or a series of initiatives intended to change the tech business (and our world) for the better. In two semesters, we think we'll know if either is true—or if both are.

Of course AT&T and Google have "talked" about OHA—note the past tense, and that de la Vega hasn't met with Google himself. Also, neither AT&T nor Verizon will publicly shut out joining—via the WSJ there were similar rumors about Verizon "weighing" the option. But there's too much against it happening.

Wilson broke down why Sprint and T-Mobile joined and the two largest carriers didn't. There's also the wildly conflicting interests, which seem to have gotten still more intense this past week. Sure, AT&T could still buddy up. And so could Microsoft. [Mercury News via Broadband Reports]

back at its headquarters, Google is already operating an advanced high-speed wireless network under a test license from the FCC, according to people familiar with the matter. The company has erected transmission towers on its campus for the network. Prototype mobile handsets powered by the Android software are currently running on it.

More over, according to the usual "people familiar with the matter," they're grinding out a plan to toss in all $4.6 billion or more all on their own because going in with partners promises complications in bidding setup and outcomes, as well as pissing off company A by going in with company B.

Why even jump into the messy, messy world of network operation when they've already got a hand in the jar with Android? The feel-good reason is that Google wants networks to be more open and competitive to drive more innovation and better, unrestricted services without artificial carrier walls and lockdowns.

The selfish side is that open networks mean carriers can't make it hard to use Google's wares or make Google pay carriers to get at customers. There's also the potential revenue of subscriber fees—hey, open doesn't mean free—and ads across the network, according to at least one analyst group.

Whatever Google decides, we'll know by Dec. 3, the deadline for declaring an intent to bid. And should they win, don't cream your jeans about the wild, woolly West of an open wireless network just yet, since Google—and any other winners—won't get their hands on the network until 2009, when analog broadcasts go dark. [WSJ]

•Programs, built by using Android's SDK, can be submitted January 2nd through March 3rd 2008.
•The top 50 programs earn $25K to continue development.
•Those in the top 50 are entered into a final round where ten $275k prizes and ten $100k prizes will be awarded.
•A second round of the contest starts in the second half of the year, when handsets running Android launch.
•"We believe that developers will be drawn to, and flourish in, the open and collaborative environment offered by the Android platform. The Android Developer Challenge is designed simply to catalyze that reaction."

Pay people decent money to do decent work. Who would have thought of that? [Android]

The Droid family of fonts consists of Droid Sans, Droid Sans Mono and Droid Serif. Each contains extensive character set coverage including Western Europe, Eastern/Central Europe, Baltic, Cyrillic, Greek and Turkish support. The Droid Sans regular font also includes support for Simplified and Traditional Chinese, Japanese and Korean support for the GB2312, Big 5, JIS 0208 and KSC 5601 character sets respectively.

What do you guys think of what they've already got? [Typophile via Daring Fireball]

The only companies that join consortia are the ones who are too stupid or shitty to make a great product on their own. It's like, Hey, we've got forty spazzo companies that can't fuck their way out of a paper bag; let's put them all together and maybe they'll magically become some kind of big bad powerhouse.

There are, of course, numerous cons to the singular "hand of God" approach, but the problems with consortia that FSJ lays out are real. It's hard for everyone to agree, and rarely do all involved push for the "greater good" at their individual expense. It might be different this time around, but with so much at stake, martyrs for the Alliance probably won't exactly be lining up. And oh yeah, there's no phone to wrap our hands around yet. [FSJ via Daring Fireball]

Another niggling issue for the juggernaut pair is Google's probable bid for wireless spectrum in the FCC's upcoming 700Mhz auction. If it winds up turning up its chunk into a mobile network, it'd be pulling a Microsoft by competing and partnering with them simultaneously, which apparently they don't take too kindly to.

Of course, this is on top of all the other reasons they weren't exactly clamoring to jump aboard in the first place. [WSJ]

For starters, Sprint and T-Mobile are big companies but they don't have the momentum or subscribers that Verizon Wireless and AT&T do. T-Mo's the baby with 26 million, though that is part of a global subscriber base that's vastly larger (over 109 million). Sprint has an impressive 54 million subscribers, but is currently in a public panic about waning performance. Both, contending with bigger gorillas, have reason to latch on to the biggest of them all, Google.

There's a second reason for T-Mo and Sprint to be onboard: HTC. HTC has had a good run with both of those carriers, introducing two of the coolest recent products exclusively on them: T-Mobile's Shadow and Sprint's Touch. Verizon and AT&T have relationships with HTC as well, but it's easy to see how HTC would feel comfortable developing an Android product for the two smaller carriers.

Qualcomm's high-level involvement in OHA is actually very surprising, both because it is such a close partner of Verizon, and because it is one of the biggest architects of the closed application-and-service environment that you see in US carriers. Brew is Qualcomm's baby, a closed Java equivalent that may be easy for developers to work with but comes with strings attached.

Clearly, though, Qualcomm's participation signals something else, that it is time for even the master walled gardener to embrace the open field. At least, that's what I hope it means, because its presence means that a Verizon Android handset can't be too far off. (Verizon today told us that it "shares the goal of more open mobile application development," and that this competitive move on Google's part shows that innovation comes without the need for "legislation nor regulation," so here's hoping.)

The point is, even if you're neither a Sprint or a T-Mobile customer, you should be happy with today's announcement. Google said explicitly that the OHA is open to everyone, and that the absence of partners (for example, AT&T and Verizon) should not be taken as exclusion. But having Sprint and T-Mo ensures equal development time for both networks, GSM/HSDPA side and CDMA/EV-DO. T-Mobile promises to have their HSDPA (3G) network up by early next year, in time for any Android smartphone to take advantage.

When it matters, there will be HTC (and perhaps Motorola, LG and Samsung) phones that work on the networks of all four carriers. It's a sped-up version of the Treo or BlackBerry scenario: once a handset gains a certain level of popularity, even the mega carriers must yield to their demanding customers. When the Treo or BlackBerry first came out, there was no CDMA version so Sprint and Verizon customers got the shaft, and it took years of development, not just a quick port, to give them what they wanted. Thankfully that will not be the case with Android.

The iPhone is different: it was developed for GSM/EDGE only, and with an exclusive deal with the largest US GSM carrier. Although Apple hasn't confirmed the 5-year exclusivity rumor, it could easily remain locked out of everyone else's hands, in spite of unprecedented demand.

Speaking of locked, while we can assume that the early Sprint Android handsets will be partial to their carrier because of the lack of SIM cards with CDMA phones, HTC told us that it will sell unlocked Android phones directly to consumers, so that anyone with an AT&T contract who wants in can get in early.

There's also a difference between Google's and Apple's approach. By creating an open platform, Google is trying to make money not on software or hardware sales, but by creating vast hordes of ad-susceptible phone users. Google can be less selfish about design, and less worried about stumbles on the road to perfection. Google boss Eric Schmidt told us today that they would not be in the business of clamping down on independent development, and from the sound of it, would be encouraging carriers to adopt a hands-off policy toward third-party development.

What Google is saying to carriers is that customers are grown-ups. They can own a PC for years before it's chock-full of viruses, malware and memory hogging crap they don't need. Why not give them access to a world's worth of software—and expose them to the same acknowledged risks—with their phones? iPhone owners should be happy that Google's move simply adds pressure on Apple to open the SDK faster. But the larger question we should ask is this: Why will Android succeed where Symbian, Palm OS and Windows Mobile have failed?

It is possible that Google's muscle, outspoken pledge of openness, ability to bring much of the familiar PC experience to the Android phone, and vast think tank of collaborators who can avoid the mistakes of the smartphones that failed, the carriers that squeezed too hard and lost their grip, and of that famous experiment in gadget lust and contractual obligation that is the iPhone. But then again, it could be no more than the fragmented world of Linux development, without much mainstream splash.

Second, since the TouchFlo interface they placed on top of Windows Mobile phones worked so well at simplifying features to make it more usable for consumers, they're going to continue this and develop software for the new platform as well. It's still too early to say exactly what type of hardware will be inside and what kind of software will run on top of these phones made by HTC, but they did say there was no mandatory hardware spec. This means each manufacturer can choose to go nuts and put loads of feature in their phone, or gimp it and load it with meager beaver features as well. It's essentially Linux for your phone.

The Dream looks like the iPhone, and is five inches long, three inches wide, touch-sensitive, swivels, and hides a full-sized QWERTY keyboard below. It also switches to landscape mode when it's tilted. On the software side, it's got Google's own YouTube, plus email, text editing, and a virtual machine to ensure all applications work on all the various types of hardware. HTC's even considering developing a real version of this reference design in the same second half of 2008 that they're going to be releasing their Open Handset Platform phones. [Forbes]

HTC's CEO, who makes lots of Windows Mobile phones for business users, says the resulting phone by Google and its 34 friends will be targeted toward consumers. The SDK for developers will be available by November 12, which will then enable people to hit that 2H 2008 launch date. The software's actually been in development for three years, starting from the Google acquisition of a company called Android Inc. The most important part of this is that the platform will be free for handset manufacturers to load onto their phones, beating out other operating systems like Windows Mobile, Palm, and Symbian in terms of price. [NYTimes - USA Today - CNN]

Final worthwhile bits: Spring is the worldwide ship date, and a weird mention that the "Google Phone...could blow open this model by providing easy access to the Internet at PC-type speeds." Juicy, pertinent info or random hypothetical? We'll know soon. [USA Today]

The NYT is confident referring to the gPhone as a "software" package, rumors of which we have heard countless times. According to the extensive report, the gPhone will be made available by the middle of 2008 and is being produced by Google's partners (HTC, among others?) Google's contribution will be an open OS that shall be distributed freely and will earn revenue via advertising links. Interestingly, the model of bundling free software has been pretty successful in the past, as exemplified by Internet Explorer.

It seems Mr. Rubin is the right man for the project, as one of the founders of Danger Inc., the company behind the excellent Sidekick smartphone series, he seems well qualified to deal in the competitive market. That is not the only experience he is bringing to the game either; back in 1990 Mr. Rubin worked with Apple on a project called Magic Cap, which focused on a groundbreaking platform for portable devices. The venture fell through, as it was apparently too far ahead of its time. (Is this how the gPhone and the iPhone inadvertently cross development paths?) Mr. Rubin went it alone, he blew his entire savings on producing his vision of a mobile platform that would be open to all software developers. The name of Mr. Rubin's project? Yup, you guessed it—Android.

Whatever the gPhone is officially confirmed to be—phone/software suite or both—the potential impact Google will make to the way we communicate will be definitively game changing, if successful. With all this information seeping through, it is only a matter of time before the covers are dropped on the big G's big plans. For now, the wait goes on. [Valleywag]

What has been amazing to watch is that investors keep bidding up the share price and the company responds by earning so much money as to bring each new dream back into the not-preposterous range.

Tight integration with Google Apps:
• Picasa: A 2MP camera with decent color and low light performance should take a shot, and upload it directly to your Picasa web storage as a mirror. Likewise for YouTube uploads.
• Google Talk: Both IM and VoIP makes this a fancy web communicator. The carriers may not like this, but we've got a feeling Google will sell this sans carrier. Oh, and other IM client support.
• Google Video and YouTube: To at least match the iPhone, they have to have their video sites ready for mobile usage. Uploading
• Google Earth: Google Earth for 3D maps, with GPS and app integration.
• Google Docs support with full read like the ones for iPhones, Windows Mobiles and BlackBerries, but real with full editing right on the phone, and support for multiuser editing.
• Google reader for RSS.
• Product Search, including camera phone barcode reading for quick price comparisons.
• Google Transit, Google Ride finder (taxis, limos and shuttles) integrated into maps.
• Third-party Support: Allow an open platform for other people to develop for. Even a company as big as Goog can't do everything by itself, and with niche apps developed by end-users, you can service minor target segments that wouldn't otherwise be cost-effective for you to cover.
• Those apps should be native, or at least widgetized for performance reasons. Native apps just run faster. We don't mean Java apps either, because those are even worse in terms of battery usage.

• This thing is going to be a data transfer hog while it swaps info with all Google's online services. A 3G connection that toggles on for heavy downloads and uploads, but reverts to Wi-Fi or 2G for background email checking, etc. (To save battery.)
• Push GMail and exchange server support.
• A music player that doesn't suck: It's not going to be an iPod, but it's gotta have something in terms of media features that can top Windows Mobile phones. Try Rhapsody support. Stay away from WMPlayer as a load program, please.
• Search from the home screen: Bring Google's search-centric features to your phone, letting you search contacts, the web, your emails, and every other bit of data right from your home screen, much like the Helio Ocean does.
• Hardware Keyboard: The iPhone's virtual keyboard is passable, but we still love the solid feel of a key clicking. Our favorite is HTC's slide-out QWERTY keyboard, which is great because HTC is the rumored contractor for the Google Phone's hardware.
• Touchscreen: Since it's probably going to be an HTC-made phone, a 3-inch touchscreen on par with Windows Mobile phones is the least they can do. While it would be nice to have multi-touch gestures, it's not completely necessary.
• Long Battery life: We don't mind sacrificing some portability for a battery that can last an entire day, even with heavy screen and 3G usage. Nokia's are known for optimizing battery life without sacrificing too many features, but the Google apps may be too processor intensive—especially when combined with 3G.
• Form-factor: We love the slide-out form factor that HTC usually uses, which gives us a spacious keyboard as well as a big screen on top. A Treo-like shape with keys on the front wouldn't be too bad either, but would sacrifice screen space.

Funny thing is, Helio's Ocean and Nokia's N series phones do a lot of this. The UI needs to be slicker than what either of those companies have done so far, though. (Maybe they should hire some ex-Apple software people.) Anyhow, we don't even know if this phone is real, for certain, so I'm not sweating it.

Photo Credit: T3

According to the story:

Richard Doherty, research director at The Envisioneering Group, says Google is driving toward getting device makers to produce basic handsets equipped with a "Gbutton" that takes users right to a Google texting screen. The goal: Get GPhone texters in the habit of querying its vast databases for directions, phone numbers, movie times or restaurant tips and woo advertisers to sponsor GPhone-delivered answers, Doherty says.

While we're excited to see what the Gbutton is all about, we're a little afraid of how involved the carriers might be in GPhone rollout. Of course, when Google does sign a deal with a carrier, it will be a little hard to tell who is selling their soul to whom. [USA Today/Yahoo]

It's Linux-based, runs Java apps (the entire UI is in Java, as well as possibly the browser), plays multimedia files, and the OS is running on "3-to-5 devices, most of them likely made by HTC." Slightly disappointing is that the UI is "typical of mobiles phones," meaning it's not groundbreaking. But, the browser might be based on the same engine that's in Safari the iPhone (WebKit), and Google's supposedly been tweaking it to make it speedier, which sounds kind of hot.

What do you guys want in a Google Phone? [GigaOM]

On the software side, they're going to build a special version of Google Maps (complete with GPS), as well as have Gmail and Calendar compatibility. It's most likely going to have Google Docs compatibility too, but that wasn't specified. What's even cooler is that Google Talk, their free VoIP app, will be part of the suite. The OS could be Windows Mobile 6, or it could be a Linux-based OS, which would be even more interesting. [Crunchgear]

• "ads in the mobile phone is that they are twice as profitable or more than the nonmobile phone ads because they're more personal" says Eric Schmidt (from AllthingsD)
•In Europe, T-Mobile and Orange are believed to be partners. Verizon rejected their plans in the US because they wanted to share ad revenue.
•Taiwan's High Tech Computer Corp to design a Linux software-based phone for launch in the first quarter of 2008

Regardless of the reputations of both the WSJ and Reuters, take all of this with a grain of salt.
[Wall Street Journal via Reuters, gorgeous rendering from T3]

But the subtext, if there is one, could be that the 3g phone, 2MP camera phone with chocolate stylings is a sign of a budding Google and LG relationship.

Previously, HTC and Samsung were the suspected partners for the Google phone. I suppose we can add LG to that list. But let me be clear. This is just watercooler talk. I place odds at less than 5% that anything like a fullblown Google handset will come from LG.

LG locates Google phone in Europe [The Register via My iTablet]

Personally, I'm not counting on it, and I'll side with the guys at Gadget Lab who think it'll be another Google service that never makes it out of beta. Not to say I wouldn't mind a Google phone (if such a thing existed). Any guesses out there as to what we can expect tomorrow? – Louis Ramirez

Is Google About to Unveil the Google Phone? [Tech.co.uk via Gadget Lab]

Google has gone so far as to build a prototype phone with its own software inside, according to one person who has seen it.

Big Money in Little Screens [NY Times, thanks Mac P.]

The phone will support 3G Edge, but not HSDPA nor will it have GPS. It will, however, have built-in GMail and Google search. DigiTimes isn't the most reliable source (as we've seen in the past) so I wouldn't buy this just yet. – Louis Ramirez

HTC to Ship Google Handsets by Year-End [DigiTimes via Mad4Mobiles]