Rumors circulated for years that Google would be entering into the mobile space with its own revolutionary device, the "GPhone." Fast-forward to a week ago Monday, when Google announced it will not actually be making a phone, but rather an open-source mobile operating system called Android.
For the average person, this announcement was a disappointment, a confirmation that a new sleek and ultra-hip device will never exist. Coming off the high of nine months of iPhone hype, techies and trend-watchers were preparing to see a similar device from Google, Apple's co-orbiter of cool.
But it was completely irrational to expect a phone from Google, since the company is not and has never been a hardware company. It is a software company through and through, and as one might expect, Google introduced a software platform that should be more useful than just another sexy cell.
Consider the most popular phone in the United States today: the Motorola Razr. People were willing to pay as much as $399 for the Razr when it was introduced because it was thinner than the rest, with a large display and sleek lines. The incidental problem was that the phone offered little technological advancement.
Ask Razr owners about their phone, and they will complain about the keyboard, the easy-to-damage external screen and, most importantly, function-crippling software loaded onto the phone by major service providers. The software that comes with the phones is so unintuitive and challenging that you can forget about using the phone for something mildly advanced like surfing the web.
Put an iPhone next to a Razr, and it will be obvious that Apple's product is light years ahead. The iPhone offers a vast number of easy-to-use and advanced features, though it is a bit buggy and limited to the problematic AT&T network.
So how does Google's new product fit into the mobile industry? Android, which will be officially released in mid-2008, is free and easy-to-use software focused on browsing and multimedia. Its features will include an advanced web browser, music player, email and other programs like Google Earth.
The company is taking a very different approach to the mobile industry from Apple, Palm or RIM, the maker of the popular Blackberry devices. Instead of constraining its operating system to its own devices, Google is unleashing it to thousands of independent devices. Microsoft has tried to do the same with Windows Mobile, but the software is expensive and requires a powerful phone to run optimally. Android will make an especially large splash with the lowto medium-end phones that currently lack good user experience. These phones make up the vast majority of the international mobile device market.
Google CEO Eric Schmidt '76 said last week that because there are three billion cell phone users worldwide, "getting people access to information is very important" for Google. The ever-growing search giant wants more people to use its services — whether on a standard computer or a remote device — to increase its advertising revenues.
Through Android, Google will be able to integrate advertising into many of the phone's applications outside of the search engine. When a person listens to Maroon 5 on a phone, Google can stream related ads to the application that entice the user to buy related artists. The advertiser wins, and Google makes a profit. But does the user win? Yes, if Android ends up being the fun, reliable, easy-to-use operating system that Google is promising. And for those who won't tolerate ads, there will still be other mobiles operating systems available at a cost.
Google is working to ensure that Android will have a profound impact by forming alliances with 33 other major companies that will integrate the system with third-party software and hardware. The alliance includes major carriers like Sprint-Nextel, software developers like eBay, hardware developers like Motorola and component makers like Intel.
Perhaps the greatest challenge Google will face is getting U.S. networks like Verizon to use Android software rather than its own homegrown replacements. Currently, Verizon replaces or severely impairs the software bundled with many of the phones on its network so as to have better control over the user. This means that consumers have limited features or have to pay extra to unlock special features from their phone. Verizon, which is the second-largest wireless provider in the United States, is not part of the Google alliance, so there is nothing preventing it from continuing to replace Android with its own operating system. Google acknowledges this but nevertheless believes that it will find a large consumer base for Android.

The wireless industry is set to get even more interesting before Android is released to the public. The national 700 MHz spectrum auction is set to take place in late January, which will auction off the airwaves that have been vacated by television broadcasters in their transition to digital television. Interestingly, Google has vowed to commit at least $4.6 billion to this auction. This frequency is ideal for national, wireless broadband internet because it can travel long distances and easily penetrate walls.
During the Android introduction, Schmidt was questioned about the possible relation between the new operating systems and the wireless spectrum. His reply: "We think the 700 MHz network auctions are a matter of public policy and for public benefit, but Android will run well on it." Interesting response.
With such a spectrum, Google would be able to provide a possibly free, ad-supported, wireless network. That would mean quite a bit of extra revenue, not to mention good publicity. The national wireless spectrum would be able to support calls and broadband internet, bringing Google face-to-face with the powerful network providers like Verizon and AT&T. Who's to say that Google will not challenge the titans who have dominated the industry and exploited consumers for the last decade? One can only hope that Google will rise to the occasion.