McClatchy-Tribune Newspapers | Verizon Wireless said it is working with Google on a new tablet computer to compete with
Apple’s iPad, whose early success has sent rival tech companies
scrambling to catch the next big wave in mobile computing.
Dell and Toshiba have also said they’re working on tablets that would
run on Google’s Android software. Hewlett-Packard, meanwhile, recently
announced plans to buy Palm and use that smart-phone maker’s software
in its own line of tablets and similar devices.
“Other vendors are not going to stand by and just cede that market to Apple,” said Michael Gartenberg, a tech industry analyst with the Altimeter Group. “We’re going to see more competition in this space.”
The move could also intensify the competition between Google and Apple, two former allies who have butted heads recently as Apple has expanded into the mobile advertising business, and Google has promoted its Android software for smart phones and portable computers.
It also shows that Verizon wants a share of the business that rival wireless provider AT&T has been enjoying with its exclusive arrangement to support Apple’s iPhone as well as the iPad.
Verizon Wireless CEO Lowell McAdam said he believes tablets are part of “the next big wave of opportunities” for his company. His comments were reported first by the Wall Street Journal and later confirmed by a Verizon spokeswoman.
Verizon now carries several smart phones that run on Google’s Android operating system. Verizon also provides wireless service for several models of “netbooks” — highly portable, down-sized notebook computers made by other companies — but it has not yet come out with a tablet.
Apple says it sold 1 million iPads in the first month since the product was introduced. Before those results were announced, the IDC research firm had projected that 7.8 million iPads and similar devices will be sold this year, and more than twice that number next year.
“Apple has most certainly validated the tablet market, with the iPad in conjunction with AT&T, so it’s not surprising that other carriers are going to be looking for other partners to bring other devices to market,” said Michael Gartenberg, a tech industry analyst with the Altimeter Group.
Google declined comment Tuesday, except to say that Android is “open source” and therefore can be used by anyone who wants to incorporate it into a smart phone or other mobile device.
But Google executive Andy Rubin said in a recent interview with the San Jose Mercury News that Android, which was originally developed for smart phones, is a good match for tablet devices.
“We haven’t produced a tablet version of Android yet, but I think it could be pretty interesting,” said Rubin, who oversees mobile technology for Google. He noted that software developers could write applications that would run on both Android phones and tablets, just as developers now write apps that can run on both Apple’s iPhone and the iPad.
“All the developer has to do is write one app,” he added. “It’s an extremely powerful concept.”
Verizon’s McAdam did not elaborate on what role his company would play in developing or selling an Android tablet, who would manufacture the device or when it would be available. He also didn’t say if Verizon would subsidize the retail price of an Android tablet as it does with mobile phones. AT&T subsidizes the price of the iPhone, but it does not provide a subsidy for the iPad.
But analysts say that wireless carriers like Verizon want a piece of the profit to be made from the growing popularity of lightweight, mobile computers.
“The wireless carriers are all trying to figure out ways to make money, beyond being stupid pipes” for transmitting data, said Bob O’Donnell, an IDC analyst.
Verizon’s announcement also left some analysts and tech bloggers speculating on what it means for the growing rivalry between Google and Apple. By aligning with Google on a tablet, some wondered if Verizon may be sacrificing its chances to someday carry a version of Apple’s iPhone.
But Gartenberg noted that tech industry partnerships and rivalries are constantly shifting. “The industry moves so fast,” he said. “There are deals, and renegotiated deals, and renegotiation of renegotiated deals.”
Here’s an idea, try innovating for once – rather than just copying Apple every time. First they came out with their crappy version of the iphone copy & now they are going to try and copy the ipad. Pathetic.
Eaton,
In case you didn’t know, Apple isn’t the first one to create a smart phone or tablet device. But you can continue living in your fantasy land.
Eaton Meesters said “Here’s an idea, try innovating for once – rather than just copying Apple every time. First they came out with their crappy version of the iphone copy & now they are going to try and copy the ipad. Pathetic. ”
Hmmm – let’s see – the GUI used by Apple in Lisa was first used by the Xerox Star; the mouse was developed by Xerox as well; pad computing has been around for years (Motorola and IBM developed a portable computing device in the early 1980’s in a joint venture known as ARTIS).
Android is a wonderful OS – going to get one on my next phone from at&t – choosing it over the iphone.
Apple surely isn’t the first to do a tablet, but it IS the first one to SUCCESSFULLY do it. It has the hardware, the software with a UI that makes sense, and it has the polish that previous tablets were simply missing. Previous pc tablets were simply 10 inch touch screens with Windows XP slapped on it. No thought as to how to optimize the user touch experience. Apple was the first to do that. And of course, now that Apple did it, Google has to do it too. Android is a nice little software that’s a great iphone alternative, but I’d hate to see it in its current iteration on a tablet – unless you enjoy buggy software and a tablet that would last 2 hours (Android is power hungry).
Ed and Eaton, Apple wasn’t the first. yes it polished the products and released them when there was more demand for it than previously; however, I’m more than happy others are entering the market place, it’s known as competition and is NECESSARY for innovation to continue and to keep prices in check. If there was no one to compete against, why would there be any need to keep improving on a product? I own an iPhone and the more I see people with android phones, and have tried them myself, the more I actually regret the iPhone purchase, but now I’m stuck for another year and a half.
I’m all for competition when it spurs innovation, but I just haven’t seen that with Android. Its a perfectly capable phone OS, but hardly a game changer. I’d love it if Google CAN produce a gamechanger, but I’m not seeing it yet.
Personally I’ve tried Android phones and they’re buggy, suck battery, and just not very easy to use. But that’s just me. I’ll stick with iPhone OS – to me, it just works and I don’t need to fiddle with task managers to make it work.
I think more options is a good thing. The more the merrier really, but lets bring something more to the table.
frick the iphooy, frick apple
And the world continues to play catch-up to Apple.
I don’t think anyone is knocking alternatives or competition or innovation, BUT for google having such deep pockets I think they need to invest more in android. I’ve sold phones and worked alot with android handsets and am not real thrilled with the market and open development. Least with apple’s market there are real games that were developed for purchase. With android market, you get what you pay for… Far as the interface, android’s neat but the novelty wears off just like an iphone. So really, much ado about nothing.
I have been an old school Windows and BlackBerry fan for years, always thought Apple products (phones, Macs, everything) were best for kids and their music.
For some reason I was drawn to the iPad…have had mine for a few weeks. Now I see why Apple sells the volume of products that they do. Innovative, intuitive, reliable, and simplistically effective are how I describe the product. I now feel like a dinosaur when I use my Dell netbook.
Still not getting the Apple tattoo on my arse.
I’m not a tech guy, not a trailblazer, but I’m not a technophobe either. I waited to get my iPod touch. It is with all thetime around the house. I like it because it just works and works quickly. Instant access for just about anything. All companies have written an app for it and I just like the interface.
I wanted to try a touch before I could justify an iPhone, but knowing how much I would use it for I can definitely see myself getting my moey’s worth out of it every month.
For me, I had to see if it was a cost beneficial. It is.
I am now trying to get an iMac for movie and photo editing for my wife.
I’m all for competition when it spurs innovation, but I just haven’t seen that with Android. Its a perfectly capable phone OS, but hardly a game changer. I’d love it if Google CAN produce a gamechanger, but I’m not seeing it yet.
Personally I’ve tried Android phones and they’re buggy, suck battery, and just not very easy to use. But that’s just me. I’ll stick with iPhone OS – to me, it just works and I don’t need to fiddle with task managers to make it work.
I think more options is a good thing. The more the merrier really, but lets bring something more to the table.
Wow, Kris Payne is really lucky! What do you think she’d get next year?
The iPad is so expensive so that I hope the Android Tablet is ready in the next month. I hope it will offer the same opportunities like the iPad.