Best thoughts on the Google phone I’ve seen…Re: Google’s Nexus One phone:
You’ll pay $529 without a two-year contract for service with T-Mobile, or $179 with one.
But the truth is, the Google news this week isn’t quite as earthshaking as Google seems to think it is.
This is all supposed to be a huge break from the current way of doing cellphone business, but plenty of phones (from Nokia and Sony Ericsson, for example) are already sold this way: over the Web, unlocked, to be outfitted with cell service later. Google’s system makes this much easier — you do all of the choosing on one Web site, and your phone comes in the mail already activated — but it’s really not such a new idea.
State of the Art - Google Shakes but Doesn’t Upend the Cellphone Market - NYTimes.com
If Google really wanted to be disruptive, they’d sell T-Mobile’s version for $179 alongside an unlocked GSM version for ~$179 (discount/subsidy courtesy of Google)
This unlocked / subsidized version could be tweaked to more aggressively display ads on maps, email, text, etc. until Google makes back the $300 they ponied up to give you an unlocked phone at such a discount.
Or if they wanted to be *really really* disruptive they could sell you the phone for $179 (or heck, just give it away for free) bundled with *free service* too! But in exchange for that, there would be 75 pixels cut out of the bottom of the screen showing local ads All Day Long (think Gmail) and maybe even some audio ads to listen to before/after making calls. (cue link to UK operator who was doing this a year ago… I can’t remember the name / find the link).
Google subsidizing this phone out of their own pocket - either just hardware or both hardware & service - would be disruptive. Selling a full price (aka too-expensive-for normal-people-to-buy) phone alongside one subsidized by a carrier is not. For some reason it really bugs me that they’re talking up how revolutionary this is supposed to be.
(via dpstyles)Source: dpstyles
