Video: Introducing the Gphone
posted at 8:55 am on November 13, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
It’s an open-source iPhone, capable of running even more tricked-out crap applications you’ll show off to your friends once and then never use again. Attention, chump suckas: the line forms to the left.
The clip’s worth watching, though, for Sergey Brin, whose performance here perhaps reveals the inspiration for the name of this software platform. He’s like Keanu but with even less poise around a Teleprompter. And 100 times as much money in the bank.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
If by Keanu, you mean just rolled out of bed with a “8 gig in my head” hangover, then sure.
mojowire on November 13, 2007 at 8:58 AM
You’d think someone with so much money could get a decent haircut…
ballz2wallz on November 13, 2007 at 9:00 AM
Word. Has there ever been anyone worth $10 billion with hair that bad?
Jaibones on November 13, 2007 at 9:07 AM
Bill Gates is no “Silky” for sure…George Soros either.
JetBoy on November 13, 2007 at 9:13 AM
I love pickin on rich people.
ballz2wallz on November 13, 2007 at 9:15 AM
Android? Free?
No G-strings attached?
BTW, poor Erin! I think she’s going to be unexpectedly popular over the next few hours.
Days.
Weeks.
As for me, I’ll now hold off on buying a WiFi enabled smartphone and see where Andoid is going. Many apps may be nonsense but if the kernel’s foundation is solid, why would anyone want any of the proprietary OS’s out there today?
Shy Guy on November 13, 2007 at 9:25 AM
Oh, come on…the hair helmet is making a comeback!
Along with filming commercials in ratty grey t-shirts, not shaving for public appearances, and Star Trek sideburns way below the tragus.
James on November 13, 2007 at 9:31 AM
Thanks. I needed that little nap.
drewas on November 13, 2007 at 9:35 AM
It’s all part of the package, baby. Rich geek = bad hair. Oddly enough, for some reason reversing that equation doesn’t work. I’ve received many bad haircuts and I’m still just a moderately wealthy cool guy. Oh well.
Weight of Glory on November 13, 2007 at 9:37 AM
I’m sure the chicks are repulsed by him…probably can’t get a date…poor guy.
right2bright on November 13, 2007 at 9:47 AM
Well, at least Sergey has the excuse that English isn’t his first language.
Then again, Keanu sounds like it isn’t his, either.
The Monster on November 13, 2007 at 9:50 AM
Well Allahpundit, there you go again.
“Because, in order to create a great product, you actually have to live with it.”
Yeah,
That’s why I lived with Catherine Bell for a year.
Thpppt!
BDU-33 on November 13, 2007 at 10:03 AM
This is just a software package, though – not a phone. Rather, you can download a Software Development Kit and load the software onto, conceivably, whatever phone you want. For those of you ambitious Java programmers, just go to http://code.google.com/android.
The android emulator program is very nice.
joe shmoe on November 13, 2007 at 10:05 AM
Ha! that’s great!
Weight of Glory on November 13, 2007 at 10:05 AM
Wow. He DOES seem excited, doesn’t he?
Way to emote for the camera, tool.
ej_pez on November 13, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Allah:
Just for that, I’m not going to let you play with the sweet apps I write for it. Have you written any cool apps for the iPhone? What’s that? You can’t write any cool apps for the iPhone? I’m sorry. I didn’t know.
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 10:18 AM
With all that money you’d think he could afford a decent haircut.
BJ* on November 13, 2007 at 10:23 AM
How many video games could you want to play on your phone?
Kahuna on November 13, 2007 at 10:38 AM
Wow. Awesome. All the cool Apple is striving for but in an OS that can be loaded onto numerous phones. This is to Apple what Apple is to Microsoft.
I guarantee you that Steve jobs is taking this seriously. For all the cool tht the iPhone brings flexibility is not its strong suit.
Expect people to replace the iPhone OS with this. What is not to like? iPhone cool package and a OS customized to your specifications. As long as it works, it could take a chunk out of those lucrative contracts that Apple signed. And fill the gap. Considering thosands of iPhones have not been activated.
Theworldisnotenough on November 13, 2007 at 10:41 AM
Sure, but Microsoft is probably taking it even more seriously. Microsoft has a much larger share of the mobile market than Apple, but more importantly they are probably thinking…
“If they can rebrand Linux to threaten us in the mobile market….”
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 10:51 AM
And then there’s this, from May of this year:
Who’s making the prototype Android phone, again?
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Heh. “I’d like to tell you about something I’m really excited about.” Sergey delivered that line with his eyes half-open.
My guess is, Sergey wrote this himself. It’s 8th-grade term-paper quality.
Please. Flexibility is not the most important thing to most phone users. Most important is ease of use, and the two are, to a large degree, mutually exclusive. Apple gets that; you and all the other phone manufacturers apparently don’t. Phones based on the gPhone platform will sell mainly to power users, which are a small percentage of the total, and not Apple’s target demo anyway. So the gPhone will take sales from RIM and others, not from Apple.
It’s similar to the Zune. More “features” than the iPod, but the entire hardware/software/store combination is significantly less easy to use. Zune grabbed market share from everyone except Apple.
Yeah, I’m sure Steve is sweating this. /sarc
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Absolutely.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 11:01 AM
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 11:00 AM
I beg to differ. Fans of Apple and fans of Google are VERY commonly the same people, and it is particularly true to say that fans of Google tend to be fans of Apple. This has a lot of potential to harm Apple, particularly since you get the “cool” without the price and without having to jump through hoops to avoid being locked into a single carrier.
Where are you getting that idea? If there’s any one word that best sums up what Google provides to the world, it would be–in my opinion–”accessibility”. They are VERY good at making things available to and usable by the masses.
I see no evidence that the Linux based OS will be less usable than OS X on the iPhone, and no reason to think that will be the case.
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 11:13 AM
I agree. Remember that OS X is actually based on Unix itself; BSD, to be specific.
The question is whether or not manufacturers/software bundlers will be able to make Android easy to use for non-power users.
joe shmoe on November 13, 2007 at 11:30 AM
I imagine that there will be a “core” interface with some accessible functionality built in, and then an easy way to install and launch other apps–which will be used by the “power users”.
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 11:46 AM
hah, for reals. Okay, the super-geeks will get pumped over seeing this guy, “oh my god, it’s really HIM!”. I have no friggin’ clue who this guy is, so the whole thing looked sucky.
RW Wacko on November 13, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Yep, and the TANG memos were never proven to be false. Google knows how to make web apps, definitely, and I’m a fan. But a phone OS/platform is something else again. Google may surprise me, and I truly hope they do, because Apple needs competition, but at this point, there’s no reason to believe they’ll do any better than Microsoft.
What I expect from Android is a great platform. What I expect from individual developers is lots of slick apps. What I don’t expect is actual products whose end-to-end user experience is any better than Windows Mobile — which is to say, icky. To quote Steven Frank, “A 34-company committee couldn’t create a successful ham sandwich, much less a mobile application suite.” (Read the whole thing before responding.)
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 12:09 PM
A friend of mine hacked his iPhone and is running a web server on it.
- The Cat
MirCat on November 13, 2007 at 12:17 PM
We already got that. Google jailbreakme.
triple on November 13, 2007 at 12:17 PM
What you imagine? Yes, there will be a basic interface supplied, but Google has stated that everything — everything! — in Android is customizable, including the basic UI elements (buttons, etc.). Congratulation, Google: we’re back to DOS, where everyone creates their own UI.
Okay, I’m exaggerating, but there will be very real incentive for every company to make their own “improved” version of the UI, because if they don’t, they can’t differentiate from the cheapo product from Company A that dumped in “basic” Android and didn’t change a thing.
Again, I’m not saying nobody will buy phones based on Android. I’m just saying Android won’t magically allow companies to make a great product that will compete with the iPhone. The same challenge will still exist: create a powerful, easy-to-use product. Very few have risen to the challenge before Android’s arrival, and there’s not much reason for optimism now. Again, I hope some company surprises me; as much as I admire Apple, they can only get better with some competition.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Are you not aware that Microsoft dwarfs Apple in the mobile market? I know you are talking about human-factors issues, but if anyone needs competition–in market terms–its Microsoft, not apple.
But to address that point… it would take a LOT of effort to create something as non-cohesive and confusing–in a word, “crappy”–as Windows Mobile. I don’t think we need to worry there.
The post you linked was linked well before the video was made available, and I think the video did a nice job of rendering virtually all of his points (re: ease of use for maps, etc.) irrelevant. And the consortium involves a lot of hardware people… Google is, at a glance, the only major player in the software side, so this looks good to me. In fact, Android was already well under development before google acquired them and formed a consortium.
I think we have a potentially formidable player here.
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 12:27 PM
I think it opens a door that will allow us, the US, to catch up with the rest of the world on electronic gadgets. It’s not just a phone. One of the things Apple never learned and still refuses to learn is to make their system an open architecture for developers. Allow the freedom of using multiple carriers. I give it five years and I’ll bet Android becomes a standard, or something that morphs into it.
The only thing in it’s way are the regulatory agency’s.
The government is still using rotary phone standards.
Kini on November 13, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Open source is wonderful. Even greater, to give it WiFi capability. All the applications are written by other people…which means that there are going to be awesome incentives for spyware, viruses, trojans, malware, and the like. When your 3 mbs web speed starts to look like 22k dialup, that is the reason.
otcconan on November 13, 2007 at 12:41 PM
G-PHONE: Hits the spot.
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on November 13, 2007 at 12:43 PM
A friend of mine hacked his iPhone and is running a web server on it.
- The Cat
MirCat on November 13, 2007 at 12:17 PM
And one of my co-workers has hacked his iPhone and is running Linux on it.
otcconan on November 13, 2007 at 12:48 PM
But your friend is more impressive….after visiting his phone.
otcconan on November 13, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Hmmm, Erin lives at Google headquarters!
This could work out really well. I’m not an early adopter, so I’ll be sitting on the sidelines for some time to come.
Snidely Whiplash on November 13, 2007 at 12:52 PM
MORE COWBELL!
Is he kidding, or are both of these guys doing bad Christopher Walken inpersonations?
wordwarp on November 13, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Steve and Woz started Apple with a big head start over Bill and Paul at MicroSoft. But they went with their own hardware and kept it closed. MS teamed with IBM, and reserved the rights to the OS on other hardware. When other companies hacked BIOS and made IBM clones, MS was still in the game. As a result, MS crushed Apple, and there wouldn’t still be an Apple except that MS needed to keep its competitor alive or else it would have become a regulated monopoly.
This is a replay of that. There are 30 companies that will make Android phones, and Apple will not be able to out-innovate them all on the hardware side, plus the software side compete with Google and every big and little software company in the world. Maybe one of them will keep Apple alive.
pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 1:17 PM
Considering that “her” phone number is the information line for the 650 area code and her address is Google HQ, that really shouldn’t be a problem.
That’s because it already has all the cool apps you’ll ever need. Apple Knows what you need, and if you think you need something else, you’re mistaken.
calbear on November 13, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Sergey sounds like he’s the red-headed, b@st@rd stepchild of Christopher Walken.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 13, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Heh. Where have I heard that before? coughipodcough.
Within their markets, Apple has been out-innovating everyone else for years. There’s a reason for it.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 1:36 PM
Ancient history. Remind me: which way are Apple’s numbers going? Which way are Microsoft’s numbers going? Seen Apple’s mcap lately?
That’s good. I’ve got an equally good one about the Tooth Fairy.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 1:41 PM
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 1:36 PM
This isn’t really a comparable situation to that of the iPod market. And I don’t think Apple has been “out-innovating” everybody for years… they have been out innovating Microsoft for years, but even they adopted FreeBSD as the backbone of their own operating system. And it would be hard to make the case that they have been “out-innovating” Google, specifically, as I’m unaware of any situations where they openly competed.
Even here they aren’t directly competing. People who go to Apple do so with the knowledge that they have very little flexibility and that there is almost no interoperability with the rest of the world… but, in exchange for those limitations, they get a very refined product. Android is shooting for openness, to empower the end-user. It is conceptually aimed at eliminating the you-get-what-we-give-you mentality in the mobile industry.
And re pedestrian’s comment, there is no indication that there are 30 companies that will make Android phones. There are 4 handset manufacturers that are involved in the consortium (HTC, LG, Motorola, and Samsung), and I’m not sure that we know that even they will all manufacture phones for it… I think–but am not sure–that HTC is the only one we know of for sure. Of course, it will probably be possible to put it on a number of phones after market.
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 1:51 PM
Same way IBM’s are going. That’s not the point. Apple’s desktop is a branded version of Unix running on Intel hardware. They eventually adapted, but only after getting a $100M cash infusion from MS years ago.
iPods are well done, but it’s a different engineering world from cell phones, where Apply is a new-comer and 34 companies are adopting a uniform standard to compete against them.
pedestrian on November 13, 2007 at 1:57 PM
Gawd. As long as we’re all talking about Google, how about actually using Google to confirm that load of BS? First, it was $150M, not $100M. Second, Apple had $1.2B in cash at the time. Third, Apple’s problems were huge at that point (1997) — $150M was a drop in the bucket. To turn Apple around (after being run into the ground by a series of clueless CEOs), Jobs almost literally flipped the company on its head. He could have and would have done the same thing without the paltry $150M investment.
CW says the investment was a combination of a gesture of confidence (to soothe nervous AAPL investors) and a preemptive strike on the DOJ monopoly investigation.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 2:15 PM
Wow all that money and he can’t afford a decent haircut, or a shirt that doesn’t look like it came off the rack at Wal Mart.
thegreatsatan on November 13, 2007 at 2:16 PM
Another commenter who doesn’t let his complete ignorance impede his desire to opine.
Apple sells integrated hardware and software. They make the hardware, the OS, and best-of-breed apps. Nobody else does this. Yet.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 2:23 PM
that dood seems brain dead… he can hardly read and looks like he just got out of bed 3 minutes ago…
the phone software looks kool… looks like I have new features to be designing for on my website.
Kaptain Amerika on November 13, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 2:23 PM
That’s because nobody wants to. In fact, I see Apple moving away from that. I can envision a very near future where Apple releases a very cheap (if not free) version of their OS for installation on non-Apple hardware.
thegreatsatan on November 13, 2007 at 2:16 PM
I’m don’t see how that’s a problem. It’s all part of a carefully crafted image.
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 2:30 PM
Can you see purple snorklewackers flying around the moon, too?
Sigh. That’s almost the oldest rumor on the books, and survives only in the minds of the ignorant and/or terminally dense. Apple’s entire strategy, as you admitted in your first sentence, is based on an integrated, controlled platform. One of the many reasons Windows sucks so hard for the average user is because MS’s “open” strategy forces them to support their software on a million flavors of hardware. Apple’s sales, market share & mcap are going up, up, up — only an absolute moron would abandon a winning strategy, and Jobs, I hope you would agree, is no moron.
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 2:46 PM
That was my first thought too.
And would it kill him to wear a freakin’ suit and tie? Looks like he just rolled out of bed.
The Ugly American on November 13, 2007 at 3:57 PM
What? No… it would be a VERY smart predatory business move (vis-a-vis Microsoft) and the move to Intel lends support for the idea that they have that sort of strategy in mind.
Anyway, you’ve become increasingly juvenile, and decreasingly substantive over the course of the thread, so I think we’ll leave it at that.
DaveS on November 13, 2007 at 4:38 PM
It would be very smart despite the fact that it would be a complete reverse of their current strategy — which is responsible for their huge success, enviable stock performance and rising market share? There it is again: the sickly-sweet odor of “unemployed business major”.
Hmmm. Any other less suicidal theories you might consider? Such as, oh, I don’t know — maybe the PowerPC chips were becoming more and more sucky?
Splashman on November 13, 2007 at 5:20 PM
Did this guy borrow the rug from Sil?
Wade on November 13, 2007 at 5:26 PM
Comment pages: