My source was very firm about no photography, and I didn't want to jeopardize anything on my source's end, so there are no photos, hence these photos are ones we've already shown you. But, based on all the leaked shots this week, plus the very pretty and very clear one last week from Boy Genius, everyone knows what the phone looks like already. Hell, there's even a complete UI walkthrough today that's on YouTube. So I'm going to focus on the experience, and how it compares to the Droid and the iPhone 3GS.

How it feels

The Nexus One is slightly thinner than the iPhone 3GS, and slightly lighter. No hard specs were thrown around, unfortunately, since Google didn't even let people who they gave the phone to know that. The back is definitely not cheap and plasticky, like the iPhone's backing, and feels like some sort of rubbery material. So, not smooth like the iPhone, but not as rubbery as the Droid. It's halfway in-between.

You can call the design the antithesis of the Droid: smooth, curved, and light, instead of hard, square and pointy. It feels long and silky and natural in your hand—even more so than the iPhone 3GS. There are also three gold contacts on the bottom designed for future docking (possibly charging?) use, but there aren't any accessories available for the phone now. It plugs in via microUSB at the moment.

That screen is damn good

Even though the screen is the same size and same resolution as the Droid, it's noticeably better. The colors are much more vibrant and the blacks are blacker, as evidenced by putting both side by side and hitting up various websites and loading various games. The pinks on Perez Hilton and the blues on Gizmodo just popped a lot more on the N1, and made the Droid (which was actually considered to have a great screen) seem washed out. The same feeling carries over when you compare the Nexus with the iPhone 3GS. And it's pretty damn bright, compared to the other two phones.

This is probably the best screen we've seen on a smartphone so far. Probably.

Why is it so fast?

Google just gave Motorola (and Verizon) a swift shot to the TSTS, because the Nexus One is astonishingly faster than the Droid. The speed dominance was most evident when we compared the loading of webpages, but even when you're just scrolling around, launching apps and moving about the OS, you could tell that there's a beefier brain inside the N1. I don't know the specs for sure, but there's talk of a 1GHz processor being inside, which would push it quite a ways above the 550MHz Arm A8 in Motorola's newest toy.

When comparing the three phones in loading a webpage over Wi-Fi, the Nexus One loaded first, the iPhone 3GS came in a few seconds later, and the Droid came in a little while after that. This was constant throughout many webpage loads, so it's indicative of something going on inside with the hardware.

I ran all three through a Javascript benchmark engine for some quantifiable numbers, and while the results were similar between the Nexus One and the iPhone 3GS, the Droid still came up at about 60% of the other two. Surprisingly enough, Mobile Safari on the iPhone scored better on the Javscript benches than the Nexus did, even though the Nexus was able to pull down and render actual web pages faster. Note that I didn't list actual numbers here, for privacy reasons.

That crazy video background

You've no doubt heard about the animated video backgrounds, but they're actually more than just animations: you can interact with them.

The default background is the square/8-bit like one shown above, where lines of colored squares come in from different sides of the screen. What's neat (even if it is superfluous and battery draining) is that you can tap anywhere on the desktop in a blank space and trigger dots to spread out from your tap. Basically, press anywhere to cause blocks to fly outwards. The same thing happens in the "water" background, except instead of blocks, you cause ripples in the water.

What's also neat are the two virtual sound meters, which act as a visualizer for whatever music you're currently playing on your phone. There's one analog one that looks like one of the old ones with a red needle, and a "digital" one that looks similar to ones you see elsewhere. Sorta neat in itself, but it shows that the interactive backgrounds can actually interact with apps, as long as one knows the other's APIs.

Other bits

The 5-megapixel camera is nice, and the flash works well enough for a flash on a phone, but it's not spectacular, as seen by early photos taken and uploaded online by Googlers. There is autofocus, and you activate it with the trackball on the face of the phone. There is no tap-to-focus as see on the iPhone 3GS.

There's no multitouch in the browser or in the map, but I think at this point that's more of a legal consideration than a technical one, since many phones that run Android have the capability of supporting multitouch on a hardware level.

Playing back music over the speakers sounded decent, but not great. It's definitely in need of a dock—like all smartphones—if you want to listen to music for a sustained period.

I didn't get a chance to call on it, because I wanted to keep this as anonymous as possible, and didn't want any sort of way to trace when I used the phone. From what other people say in their time with it, it functions fine as a phone, and should work as normally as other Android phones in the SMS/MMS department.

So what's this all mean?

If Google's planning on releasing this phone as their official Google phone, it'll certify them as the premium Android phone brand out there right now. Even though it doesn't have a hardware keyboard, it basically beats the hell out of the Droid in every single task that we threw at it. And face it, some people didn't like the Droid's keyboard because it was too flush and the keys were too unseparated with each other. N1's onscreen keyboard felt fine, and the speedy processor made sure that each key was interpreted well.

But in the end, it's still an Android phone. If you want Android phones, this is the one to get, provided Google goes ahead with the rumored plans of either selling it themselves or partnering with T-Mobile in a more traditional role. Droid, shmoid; Nexus is the one you're looking for.

Image courtesy anonymous tipster

They already had the January 5th date a few days ago, so this second confirmation of the same date might make it a bit more legit.

"In the long term Google will become a seller and get commission from operators," the source said, adding that other operators are expected to follow T-Mobile's lead eventually and agree to Google's terms.

Reuters also quotes Baird Research analyst Will Power on how Google's choice to market their own phone shakes up the smartphone market, but mostly screws other Android makers:

"We expect the launch of a new competitive device to be directionally negative for most of the existing smart phone markers, including Apple, Research in Motion, Nokia Oyg, HTC, Motorola Inc, Palm Inc, Samsung and others, while perhaps most negative for the existing Android partners."

If Google's choice to go the traditional route with carriers is true, it would, of course, dash any possibility that they might be giving this thing away for free. Let's just hope the unlocked version comes cheap. [Reuters]

Let's just start with the numbers. Google has a gigantic $22 billion pile of cash. Just sitting there. It had profits of $1.64 billion last quarter, on revenues of $5.94 billion. It has a lot of money.

Now let's look at the Nexus One. There aren't any good cost breakdowns of the closest phone to it, the Droid, but iSuppli's teardown pegged the iPhone 3GS at a build cost of about $180 to build about six month ago, so it's not a bad assumption that today, the Nexus One would run around $200, maybe a little more. Selling the Nexus One direct to consumers at cost—in other words, the exact same amount it costs Google to build them—by definition costs Google nothing. Even if Google were to take a massive $100 hit on every phone to sell them at $200 (or less) and wanted to push 5 million of them, it would cost Google $500 million. That's a pretty tiny of chunk of $22 billion. I mean, Sergey Brin spends millions on companies without Eric Schmidt even noticing. Point being, Google, even in the most drastic scenario, doesn't need a phone company to subsidize the Google Phone.

Now, let's look at how Google makes all that money, considering all the crap they give away for free, like email, finding stuff for you, browsers, turn-by-turn navigation and, lately, operating systems. Advertising. $5.75 billion of its revenues—97 percent—came from advertising. Whenever you go on the internet, essentially, Google makes money. It's why they give away all that stuff, because, they want you online a lot.

So, that doesn't quite explain why Google would want people to have a Nexus one that badly. Until you look at stuff like Morgan Stanley's 424-page tome, 'The Mobile Internet Report,' which says things. Things like mobile internet will be "at least 2x size of Desktop Internet" and that smartphones will beat out notebook and netbook shipments next year. And remember that by purchasing AdMob, Google became the biggest mobile advertiser on the planet (that's with just 24 percent marketshare, meaning they have plenty of room to grow and conquer). It works out even better for Google if you're using an Android phone, because it's completely tethered to Google services, driving you to the internet that much more. (Both on your Android phone and your big computer.) Bottom line: More people using smartphones, especially theirs, going on the internet, makes Google money not just immediately, but long term, since you're not going to go back to a dumbphone.

And that's not even considering some of the more offbeat rumors or speculation, that'll it be subsidized by ads built into the phone, or go full-blown VoIP (Google just bought a VoIP company called Gizmo5) instead of voice plan, on top of using a weird online rebate through Google.

We're just saying, it's totally reasonable Google can sell the Nexus One for cheap, without help from the carriers, and it's not so crazy even, for Google to give it away, just like turn-by-turn navigation. That's what might be worth getting a little breathless about.

Android's most serious problem right now is fragmentation: with each new phone, it seems, comes a different version of the OS. In theory, these differences are superficial, and come down to handset manufacturers' and carriers' custom interfaces, which sit atop a mostly unchanged Android core. In practice, it's much worse.

Just look at the current top tier of Android devices. The Motorola Droid runs Android 2.0. The HTC MyTouch 3G and G1 on T-Mobile run Android 1.6. The HTC Hero, a newer phone than the MyTouch and the G1, is still stuck on 1.5, along with the even newer Motorola Cliq, which shares one parent—Motorola—with the 2.0-loaded Droid. Why is this something to worry about? Remember Google Maps Navigation, the free turn-by-turn app for Android? It only works on Android 2.0 and 1.6. An app written by Google doesn't even work on every new Google phone. Imagine how things are with third party apps. (Spoiler: it's a shitshow.)

Google's been fairly diligent about updating the free, open-source heart of Android moving forward at a steady pace, and supplying handset manufacturers with the tools they need to keep their handsets running the latest software. That said, Google still deserves some of the blame here. That their software updates include new, exclusive functionality is fine on its own. And yeah, their eagerness to allow for Android to be skinned and deeply customized by handset manufacturers is fine on its own—in fact, it's implicit in the project's open source ethos. But mixed together, these ambitions create a gurgling software slurry of incompatibility, user experience inconsistency and general frustration. (See: Samsung Behold II) So what happened?

The problem is in the model. Android updates seed out through carriers, over the air or with special installers. This is because the updates are their responsibility: once handset manufacturers (and carriers, through handset manufacturers) have built their own version of Android, they've effectively taken it out of the development stream. Updating it is their responsibility, which they have to choose to uphold. Or not! Who cares? The phones are already sold. And there's very little to motivate a carrier or handset manufacturer to update their Android phones, because the consequences tend to fall on Google: If Android fragments, the App Market doesn't work. The public sours. Android starts to suck. This is where the Nexus One comes in.

Sold without a carrier, software updates for the Nexus One will be in Google's hands. They will be able to keep it up to date as Android develops, without having to depend on some other company—or companies—not to drop the ball. Users won't have to bother learning Google's esoteric dessert-themed version codenames, and life will be better. This approach to software updates already has a case study: the iPhone. There's a good reason Apple didn't entrust AT&T with keeping the iPhone up to date, and that they didn't want the company that actually manufacturers the phone—Foxconn—to have any responsibility for its software. Smartphone software is finicky and complicated, and so is the experience of using it. It needs to be tightly controlled to remain consistent, and because apps are the most important part of a smartphone platform nowadays, consistency is life or death.

Without totally changing what the Android project is, Google can't put an absolute stop to fragmentation. What they can do is provide an example of how an Android phone should be done. With the Nexus One, Google probably isn't getting into the business of making hardware; they're just trying, in their passive, Googly way, to regain control of a project that's spiraling toward chaos.

Update: Some input from someone who works in a major carrier's device development group:

There is TONS of incentive for carriers to update their
software. Take a look at Verizon hosting the only Android 2.0 device.
Are you going to tell me that Sprint and T-Mobile wouldn't love to
have their Android devices on 2.0 yesterday?

The truth is, there's very little incentive for the Handset maker to
provide an update. All those phones are already sold and in the
carrier's inventory. Any investment in updating those models will
bring them no additional cash flow. However focusing on their next
model will.

He's partly right: carriers have a motivation to keep their software up to date, in that they are the ones who have to deal most with customers. Handset manufacturers are the one's with the least motivation, since their sale has already been made. But in branding a handset with their name, effectively selling it as their product, and assuming responsibility for seeding updates, a carrier becomes responsible for making sure their customers have up-to-date software, and exerting pressure on handset manufacturers if they don't hold up their end. —Thanks, David!

Android.in writes that the application was filed on December 10th, a bit before all the excitement about Nexus One began, which they speculate could mean that there'll be little involvement by carriers, but who knows at this point? I'm just going to keep staring at mysterious countdowns. [AndroidOS.in]

A January release date sounds reasonable based on what we know about the phone so far, and the information gleaned from the FCC details also makes T-Mobile a potential carrier, should Google take that route. A $199 subsidized price seems like the standard we are seeing elsewhere.

What I really want to know is how much this thing will cost without a contract. [HTC Source via Android and Me via ABC—Thanks, Steven!]

Thin is in, folks.

BGR features the latest tech news, mobile-related content and of course, exclusive scoops.

And I don't mean to say that I don't understand what the Nexus One is, or what Google's trying to do. Nor am I saying that Google plan for the Nexus One—to offer a different type of cellphone buying experience than US customers are accustomed to, and to provide a model for future Android handset—is a particularly bad one. I'm saying that I don't get the hype: Google's Nexus one is an interesting experiment, not some kind of heroically disruptive Google coup, as many people, changes everything">including us, have implied. Consider the facts:

It's an HTC Android handset. This means that on a material level, it's barely more of a Google phone than the G1—which Google passively oversaw—or the Motorola Droid—which Google actively helped design. And hey, people remember: Google still isn't a hardware company. Not even close.

The hardware isn't revolutionary. It's the third (at least) Snapdragon-powered Android phone we've heard about. It's got a 5-megapixel camera. It's got dual microphones, to help with noise reduction. It's fairly thin. These are nice features for a new phone, but they're more or less exactly what we'd expect HTC to be working on next.

It's pretty much running Android 2.0. People are talking a lot about how Google had full control over the Nexus One user experience, and how it's going to be unlike any other Android we've ever seen before. But we've seen other builds of 2.1, albiet covered in the Sense UI, leaked for the HTC Hero (spoiler: not that impressive), and combined with the early glimpses we've caught from spy shots, they give the feeling that 2.1 isn't much of a step up from 2.0, which is what the Droid ships with, which, mind you, Motorola doesn't seem to have touched almost at all. As far as I can tell, the Nexus One will have some pretty new UI flourishes, and maybe a few UX changes. Again: this is typical, paced progress, not a drastic overhaul.

The new business model isn't really new. Even the most breathless commentary on the Nexus One admits that what it means is more important than what's on its spec sheet. And yeah, it'll be the first phone marketed as the Google phone, and Google's sales strategy—to offer the device without contract first, and probably unlocked, with a (hardware limited—possibly just to T-Mobile, if you care about 3G) choice of carriers—is foreign to the US market. But it's far from unheard of—you can buy unlocked phones at Best Buy, for God's sake. Oh, and Nokia's been handling their US smartphone releases like this for years. It hasn't gone well.

Google doesn't have superpowers. Using their unmatched internet superpowers, Google can do more to convince the general public that an expensive, unsubsidized phone is a good idea than Nokia, whose marketing efforts have been wimpy and ineffective. But they can't do anything crazy, like give this thing away. They can sell it for cheap by relying on their own advertising network—or hell, their homepage—for advertising, as well as the massive press coverage they're already getting, and selling it at little to no profit. To be able to match carriers' prices, though, will be a stretch: A Verizon or a T-Mobile can absorb the cost of a phone in month-to-month fees and overage charges. What does Google have? Theoretical future Adsense revenue?

Even if what we see now is exactly what we're going to get, the Nexus One is something worth paying attention to—it will be a way for Google to demonstrate what their vision for Android is without carrier interference. They'll control the software experience on the phone; they'll control how it's updated; they'll control what software is and isn't allowed on it. And they could use it to convey an vision for Google Voice, in which Google supplies your number, your nonstandard calling rates and your texting allowance, while carriers simply supply a neutral, dumb and ultimately out-of-sight cellular connection. But even if that is what they're doing—we don't know!—the Nexus One is a first step. It'll be an early product to guide the progress of an industry, not the product that'll define it.

Whenever we talk about Google, we need to factor in a little windage. They're buzzy, they're huge, and they've thrown plenty of other industries curveballs before. This phone sits at the hype nexus (for lack of a better word) of Google Voice, Android, Google's online services and HTC. For now, to say that the Nexus One has somehow changed everything is to buy into these company's hype too earnestly, to ascribe to Google mystical qualities, and to take for granted a series of future actions that Google hasn't even hinted at fulfilling yet. Apple isn't the only company tech watchers recklessly project onto.

Or, to compress it to 140 characters or less: "The Google phone matters as much as Google makes it matter." For now, people, calm down.

Which is what matters at this point, really. The WSJ continues to insist it'll be sold "directly to consumers" (emphasis mine) and Google will "market" it, so let's assume it isn't just a dev or template phone, but a genuine consumer play. Even with Google's enormous weight, a $600—or even $400—unlocked phone does face some harsh realities, even if it does send a strong kind message as The Google Phone. If Google subsidizes it themselves, though, making it actually affordable in a "we just want everybody to use the internet (and therefore, Google)" kind of play, it'd be as huge as everybody panting about it says it would be. If not, well, you know.

Sprint saying they'd support this business model is interesting, BTW—my guess at this point, is that Verizon said no because it likes being deeply involved in, and tied to, the phones on its network. In Verizon's world, it's all about the network, not the phones, so it's easy to see where being reduced to a mere contract service wouldn't sit well with its sense of self.

Still curious, though, are these two bits, that "Google focused more on designing a phone in the past year, one person familiar with its efforts said, as the company battled to get some partners to accept its software" and that "Google designed virtually the entire software experience behind the phone, from the applications that run on it to the look and feel of each screen, they added." 'Cause, uh, haven't they designed the experience and applications on every stock Android phone? And it's weirder still, cause Engadget's close-up photos show 2.1, which, on the face of it, looks a whole lot like 2.0, just with a few new interface elements (more desktops displayed using a webOS card-like interface above, and 3D flourishes). The only thing "more Google-y" is that it comes with Goggles by default. So, um, "huh," I say to the WSJ.

We keep hearing first quarter of next year is when Google's loosing this thing, so even if Google's brilliant plan—a sekrit phone in the hands of a thousand people—holds tight, we'll know soon enough what's really going on here. [WSJ, Engadget]

With the model number PB99100, the HTC-built "NEXUSONE" (as it's listed) is apparently quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE, as we heard yesterday, with UMTS/HSUPA on the 850/1700/1900 frequencies, according to the FCC-digging Engadget. This means that the Nexus One will be capable of 2Mbps upload speeds and 7.2Mbps download speeds.

Other specs discovered amongst the FCC jargon include a microSD card slot, 802.11b/g Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 2.1. Got any more details for us? Hit us up on tips@gizmodo.com now. [Engadget]

The EXIF data on the sample photos pulled from Picasa all say that they were taken with a Nexus One, manufactured by HTC. Though sizes vary, the resolution max appears to be 2592×1944. The ones we were emailed obviously show the phone in action, though supposedly they were also taken by the Nexus One.

Oh, BTW, does anybody think that a "secret phone" that a thousand people (or so) are walking around with is like, dumb?

If you haven't already, be sure to check out why this phone means everything has changed as a result of this upcoming phone. [BGR, TechCrunch]

• The Wall Street Journal says it's made by HTC and called the Nexus One. It'll be sold online, directly by Google. You'll have to get your own cell service (which suggests it's an unlocked device). Curiously, the WSJ says, "unlike the more than half-dozen Android phones made by phone manufacturers today, Google designed virtually the entire software experience behind the phone." Sounds weird, since they designed the look and feel of the software on the Droid and G1 too, except that our source had told us before that the current Android we know isn't the "real" Android. Also odd sounding: that name, Nexus One. But maybe not that odd.

• Google confirmed they handed out "a device that combines innovative hardware from a partner with software that runs on Android to experiment with new mobile features and capabilities and we shared this device with Google employees across the globe."

• A bunch of Google employees tweeted stuff like the phone is "like an iPhone on beautifying steroids."

• It probably looks like this:

• It's supposedly an unlocked GSM phone running Android 2.1, powered by the crazyfast Snapdragon processor, with an OLED touchscreen (no keyboard), dual mics (for killing background noise), and enhanced voice-to-text powers. It's gonna be alllll Google branding. And it's probably coming out in January. Which jives with what our source saw a couple weeks ago, a huge screen running a brand new version of Android unlike anything out there.

• We heard it was referred to, at least in some capacity in the staff meeting where they were handed out, as the "Passion."

If Google really is going to push this as The Google Phone (and it's not just a dev phone), it's hard to overstate just how radically this changes the landscape not just for Android, but what it means for Google and their relationship to the cellphone industry. The Google Phone would be a radically different model, a shift from the Microsoft one—make the software, let somebody else deal with the hardware—to the Apple and BlackBerry one—make the software and the hardware, tightly integrated. And Google's even taking a step further, by selling it directly, bypassing the carriers, at least initially. (Google would not be the first to sell a high-powered unlocked phone—see Sony Ericsson and Nokia—but neither them are, um, Google, and their well-known failures with that approach makes it even ballsier.)

It's a powerful message: to the companies making phones running Android, to the carriers, to developers, to consumers. Google is in this, to win. Everything has changed. You know, unless it hasn't.

Google isn't saying much, but the way the post ends with "We hope to share more after our dogfood diet" suggests that there's something coming. It's much more coy than their usual outright denials (by the way, Google, what about those?).

TechCrunch is reporting that the mystical Google Phone is indeed the HTC Passion we saw leaked a few weeks ago (pictured above). Our sources are calling it the Passion, too. Update: Now the Wall Street Journal is calling it the Nexus One.

Update: TmoNews is also saying that the device will be sold directly by Google, but supported by T-Mobile at launch. No word on if T-Mobile will be the exclusive carrier.

Everything keeps lining up. Judging by how fast this news is coming, I wouldn't be surprised if this thing pops up in the wild soon. [Official Google Blog via TechCrunch, TmoNews, thanks Travis]

Update 2: Google speaks!

Update: We're hearing from our sources that it's the HTC Passion. We're not sure if it's the same Passion we saw a few weeks ago, but we're on the lookout for pics.

Assuming this isn't some sort of coordinated Twitter joke (trust me, it happens), here are the details we can extract:

• It's running Android 2.1 on HTC hardware (the Passion, see above)
• It should be coming out in January
• Employees were given unlocked versions
• "It's beautiful," "a sexy beast."

No one grabbed any concrete hardware details, but hopefully those are the next to come around. Great White Snark elaborated on his original tweet in the comments over at TechCrunch:

Yeah, it's a hot, sexy mess. And I mean that in a good way. Similar form-factor to the iPhone, but with a smooth-brushed-metal-looking shell instead of a glossy one. And perhaps a smidgen lighter.

Super fast, speech-to-text in EVERY app, awesome "live wallpapers" in the background that respond to touch in really beautiful ways. Like water ripples that emanate out from a touch.

Confirmation, or mass hysteria? It's confirmed, see above. Whatever it is, we'll be on the lookout for more details. [TechCrunch]