Showing posts with label google. Show all posts

A Small Glimps behind the Veil of the Google + Verizon Tablet

Five burning questions about the Verizon-Google tablet

Posted on May 13, 2010 10:35 pm by Ian Paul, PC World

Editor’s Note: The following article is reprinted from the Today @ PC World blog at PCWorld.com.

Verizon and Google are working on a tablet that will compete with Apple’s iPad, Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam told The Wall Street Journal. McAdam didn’t provide much in the way of device specs, pricing, or even a launch date, but the Verizon chief’s statements have inspired speculationabout a potential rival to Apple’s iPad.

But with so little information available about this device, many questions remain—including whether or not it will ever see the light of day. With that in mind, here are five things to consider while we wait for more information about the Verizon-Google tablet.

Why isn’t Google talking?

So far, Verizon is the only partner talking openly about a possible Google-Verizon tablet. CEO Lowell McAdam told The Wall Street Journal that Verizon was working with Google on the tablet as part of a “deepening relationship” between the two companies. Later,Bloomberg News quoted a Verizon spokesperson confirming the tablet project, and said more details would be coming later this week. However, Google has not made any public comments—not even a confirmation that it’s working with Verizon on a tablet device, or that it will be making an announcement later this week. Nothing. Perhaps Google is just sticking to an internal no-comment policy when it comes to product development, or maybe...

Is it a plot?

An interesting theory put forward by Silicon Alley Insider is that the whole Verizon-Google Tablet is a false product cooked up by the carrier to get a sweeter deal from Apple in current negotiations to bring the iPhone and iPad to Verizon. Of course, this theory assumes that Verizon and Apple are in negotiations over the iPhone and iPad, which at this point is still just a rumor. Nevertheless, it’s an interesting theory.

Who would make the Verizon-Google tablet?

The Verizon-Google tablet would supposedly run the Android OS, according to Bloomberg News. That suggests either HTC or Motorola would be the most likely candidates to produce the device since these two companies are the leading Android manufacturers on Verizon’s network. Interestingly, this is not the first time Motorola has been associated with an Android tablet. In December, photos leaked online showed an Android-based MID device from Motorola with a 3.7-inch screen, 5 megapixel camera, and 3G connectivity.

But in January, Verizon used a version of Innovative Converged Devices’ Android-based 7-inch Ultra tablet to test the carrier’s 4G LTE network . So perhaps Verizon’s familiarity with that device will prompt the company to adopt ICD’s handiwork.

How far will Verizon's influence go?

If Verizon wants a tablet for its network, what would the pricing and technical details be? Would Verizon sell a subsidized version with a two-year data plan, similar to the Mi-Fi ? Would the device be locked into a Verizon-only App Store or would it be free to use Android's Marketplace like the Motorola Droid can? Also, what kind of connectivity would the device have: Wi-Fi, 3G only (like the Kindle), 4G?

What will we find out later this week?

A Verizon spokesperson reportedly told Bloomberg News that the carrier would be releasing more details later this week. So what will Verizon announce? Does it have a product ready to go, or will Google and Verizon simply be announcing a partnership agreement of some kind? According to Verizon, we should find out in the next few days.

High-resolution satellite launched

A super-sharp Earth-imaging satellite that can detail an area the size of a baseball diamond's home plate from space has been launched into orbit from Vandenberg Air Force Base on the Central California coast.

A Delta 2 rocket carrying the GeoEye-1 satellite lifted off at 11.50am on Saturday. Video on the GeoEyewebsite showed the satellite separating from the rocket moments later on its way to an eventual polar orbit.

Arizona-based General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems, the satellite makers, say GeoEye-1 cost more than $US500 million to build and launch.

The satellite will orbit 681km up and circle the Earth more than a dozen times a day. In a single day, it can collect color images of an area the size of New Mexico, or a black-and-white image the size of Texas.

In black-and-white mode, the satellite can distinguish objects on the Earth's surface as small as 41cm, GeoEye said.

The company says the satellite's imaging services will be sold for uses that could range from environmental mapping to agriculture and defence.

GeoEye-1 will also provide images to Google for exclusive use on its mapping services.

Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin were on hand to watch Saturday's launch of the satellite - which was carried in to space by a Delta II rocket emblazoned with Google's logo.

Google "unknowingly?" wants everything about you...

Google has made an embarrassing back down after it was revealed the company would have rights to any information entered into websites by people using its new Internet browser.
A day after the Google Chrome browser was released, a controversial clause in its "End User License Agreement" (EULA) has been removed following concerns it breached people's privacy and copyright.
Users who downloaded the free browser yesterday were asked to agree to a clause that gave Google a "perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly, perform, publicly display and distribute" any information they typed into a website.
Part of the same clause allowed Google to share the information with "other companies, organisations or individuals with whom Google has relationships".
David Vaile, executive director of the cyberspace law and policy centre at the University of NSW, described the clause as "unprecedented" with "massive privacy and copyright implications".
"On the face of it, this does give Google a licence to do almost anything they want with content you 'submit, post or display' through the browser," Mr Vaile said.
The clause has now been changed to allow users to retain their copyright over information.
Senior product counsel for Google Chrome, Rebecca Ward, said in a statement that the company used the same set of legal terms for all its products to "keep things simple for our users".
"Sometimes, as in the case of Google Chrome, this means that the legal terms for a specific product may include terms that don't apply well to the use of that product," she said.
She said Google had moved quickly to respond to users' feedback and make changes to the agreement that would apply retroactively to people who had already downloaded Chrome.
Mr Vaile slammed Google for asking users to agree to a "nonsensical licence" that didn't actually apply to Chrome.
"It is very sloppy legal work if it was not Google's intention to gain such rights from users, and borders on treating users and their legal advisers with contempt," Mr Vaile said.
Monash University law lecturer Rebecca Giblin said buzz about the clause had spread over the Internet within an hour of the browser's release.
She said Google's back down was "clearly in response to public opinion".
"I think the people who drafted the agreement were doing the best to protect the company's interests without thinking about the users' interests," she said.

"So the users stood up for their own rights and made it clear to Google that the wide-reaching clause was not acceptable."
"From the users' perspective, the fact that Google immediately backed down is a great outcome."
Dr Giblin said the clause would have given Google rights to any information typed by a person into a website while using Chrome, including bank details, passwords and emails.
"It gave Google the right to that content, to display it elsewhere, display it to other people, modify or adapt it. That's why the clause was so controversial," she said.
She said many Internet users inherently trusted Google, whose unofficial company motto is 'do no evil', despite privacy concerns raised about some of its other products including Street View.
"The thing is Google is at heart an advertising business. It does not have a focus on security like a bank does. So even if you trust Google with your secrets there is no guarantee that information will not come out in other ways," she said.
Dr Giblin said Google's core business was to gather information that could be used to target advertising to Internet users, which had been one of the company's motivations to release Chrome.
"Everything you've typed into a browser (could be filtered) through by Google to decide what sort of products to target at you, it raises significant privacy concerns," she said.
"Most Google services are paid for by advertising, it is their core business, and the better they know their users, the better they can target advertising to them."
She said she was not surprised Google had removed the clause as it placed a high value on its reputation as a "good company".
"Every time a controversy like this arises it puts another chink in their armour," she said.
Google has touted Chrome as a faster, more user-friendly and safer Internet browser than Microsoft's dominant Internet Explorer.
A Google Australia spokesman said the company took users' privacy "very seriously" and information shared with Google through Chrome was "similar to the information that is shared when you're using a different browser and search on Google".
Google has released a You Tube video which explains features on Chrome that can be used to turn off functions that store users' information, including cookies, records of downloads and web history.

source : the age

time stops now