You Go Google

From today's front page story in the New York Times about Google's $4.6bn wireless bid.

In the Internet giant’s view of the future, consumers would buy a wireless phone at a store, but instead of being forced to use a specific carrier, they would be free to pick any carrier they wanted. Instead of wireless carriers choosing what software goes on their phones, users would be free to put any software they want on them.

Hell yeah!  This is the way it must be. Open devices, open services, open spectrum.

What would be really cool is if Google paid $4.6bn for the spectrum and then opened it up for the world to use as we see fit, just like Facebook opened up their platform.

It's gonna happen. I can feel it.

Comments

[Steven Livingstone]

This is somewhat cool. However, in the same way that FB, Google Maps etc own your data and make it difficult for companies to use commercially, i see a similar situation developing in the wireless market were this to happen.

I love the idea though and Google are the right people to be looking at it (!), but would it not work better through some open co-opetition? A few of these guys can buy and open the spectrum - but there are loads of opportunities for everyone. But it is currently domainated at a wire level by many of these telcos - anyone can make a phone call, so long as you live by their costs etc (and half the time they need to be enforced by Government!).

Google taking over would only do the same thing at the data and services level. You'll be able to use their services and data - but so long as you followed their rules. Same rules, different level of abstraction.

I hope it progresses, but i think it's going to get complicated.

[Tinu]

Thumbs up and fingers crossed to the prediction. Do you know that I read your posts more often when they're twitted and I'm on than I do from your feed? Crazy.

[Felix Van de Maele]

Interesting.

Actually, in Belgium it's already like that. The law states that "coupled sale" is not allowed. As such, carriers are not allowed to add a phone to their different plans and we can put the sim card of any carrier into any phone we buy.

Of course it makes our phones cost way more then in other countries and i wonder when (if every) we will see the iphone :)

[Robert Dewey]

I'm along that same train of thought.

However, I can't wait for the day that most wireless devices work on some sort of WiMax-like technology. I buy an iPhone, input my network key, and I get my allotted bandwidth. Or, I fire up my digital camera, input my network key, and I'm able to upload to Flickr or a web-based hard drive and skip the tethering junk.

I can connect as many devices as I want, but just like traditional broadband, bandwidth is limited.

Well, that's my perfect world of wireless :-)

[Niko]

Echoing Felix here, it works like that here in Finland and in many (most?) parts of Europe. I can get an S60 "smart" phone, install it full of software, and change my carrier contract at whim. I understand this is not the case in US, but I fail to see what's so cool about this "future" we're living here already?

[Dan Buell]

I keep going to Facebook and trying to understand it's allure but it escapes me every time. It doesn't seem well organized. Any good tutorials? I have been blogging 10 years and I guess I just don't get it...

[Robert Dewey]

While I'm not personally a Facebook fan (yet), the allure is the fact that they were the first ones to allow developers to build applications for their service, openly.

Yes, you can build applications for MySpace already... but, you don't have the tools that are available, and MySpace is most likely to shut you down if you become too popular.

MySpace fights developers, Facebook embraces them.

/off-topic

[Darren Herman]

Certainly an interesting idea. It hits home to a lot of ideas that we've talked about w/you.

My main thought to this is will the carriers come around and provide the service? Does Google have "that" much weight?

[phil]

in goog's own words...

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/our-commitment-to-open-broadband.html

[Chris H.]

Saw this all over at TechDirt yesterday and I have to say I'm stoked. If this happens, it gives me some faith that good may overcome evil when it comes to maintaining the open, neutral standards of the internet. I don't think this step alone would sway Lessig yet but it's a positive step in the right direction.

You can feel it happening, the old dinosaurs of the Old World are finally starting to feel the serious repercussions of the internet dismantling their business models.

[brian]

Fred, why don't you and all your like-minded friends in VC/HF/PE cooperate and bid yourselves for a slice of the airwaves and not need Google or another white knight to rescue the wireless industry? If an open platform is such a no-brainer opportunity I'd think that the likes of Blackstone, TPG, Goldman Sachs, Sequoia et al would do almost anything to outbid the incumbent carriers and build the future as they see fit.

[markus941]

For just under a $7 Billion investment, Google could have the biggest disrupting technology of the decade, the Google Phone.

[Adrian Blakey]

Wireless Network Neutrality is indeed the nirvana. But the forces of evil (the big 4 existing services providers) have deeper pockets and better lobbyists than Google, and the VCs and lobbyists have more vested interest in preserving the status quo.

I'd love to see Google get behind OpenMoko. The FIC hardware platform will need a huge distribution network to be successful and a big name like Google could be key to its success.

If we can open up wireless networks innovation and opportunity would surely follow quickly. The worldwide market for devices, software and service would be close to equal the world population. And maybe the dream of being able to carry around just one device that did everything that cost close to dirt could become a reality.

[eBooksBay]

That's cool.

http://www.ebooksbay.org

[Tom Evslin]

Fred:

I think your enthusiasm for Google's proposal is right on but your optimism is well... optimistic. It's unlikely the FCC will grant Google's request using the excuse that the "market can sort this out" and that less restrictions will mean higher bids at the auction.

Given the existing duopoly, this spectrum is worth more dead than alive (and competitive) to the incumbents. They WILL bid more to keep it closed than if they had to open it up. They will try to outbid anyone who tries to open it up unless the FCC agrees to require the winner to be open in which case they may not bid at all.

I blogged more on this at http://blog.tomevslin.com/2007/07/googles-good-ba.html

Pessimism is no reason for inaction. Anyone with a scrap of political influence should use it on the issue of open rules for the 700MHz auction.

[Michael Ossareh]

Jason Devitt had a great piece on this:

http://skydeck.com/blog/thisisbroken/the-xphone/

supported by him burning up congress :)

http://www.brash.com/brash_dot_com/2007/07/mr-devitt-goes-.html

[Bill Seitz]

The best answer is not to auction the spectrum at all, but leave it an open commons like Wifi.

But that's $5B less to pay for Georgie's War.