Showing posts with label technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label technology. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Netflix is a bandwidth hog. Who will pay? (Hint: You.)

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Netflix is clogging up the Internet. There's a debate raging about who should pay for it -- but ultimately, it's going to be you.

The latest skirmish is a fracas between Comcast, which connects users to the Internet, and Level 3, which signed a deal three weeks ago to host and deliver Netflix's streaming videos to networks like Comcast's. Comcast ultimately delivers those videos to its paying broadband customers.

Here's the quick blow-by-blow:

After Level 3 (LVLT) inked the deal, it went to Comcast and asked permission to send twice the amount of traffic to the cable and Internet provider's network as it had done before. The data spike isn't surprising: Netflix represents more than 20% of download traffic during peak hours, according to a new study by Sandvine.

Comcast (CMCSA, Fortune 500) scoffed. That's a whole lot of bandwidth that Level 3 is asking for, and it's expensive for Comcast to constantly beef up its network to support additional traffic.

Typically, content delivery networks (CDNs) like Level 3 have what's called "peering" agreements with Internet service providers (ISPs) like Comcast. The two sides figure that a roughly equal amount of traffic will be driven to each of their networks, so neither charges the other a fee for use.

But Comcast says that with the new Netflix load, Level 3's traffic to Comcast's network would be five times more than the cable company is driving to Level 3's network. So Comcast demanded that Level 3 pay for that traffic increase.

"Level 3 wants to compete with other CDNs, but pass all the costs of that business onto Comcast and Comcast's customers, instead of Level 3 and its customers," Comcast said in a blog post.

In response, Level 3 lashed out at Comcast. It called the new fee unfair and accused Comcast of abusing its "dominant" position as the nation's largest cable provider.

"By taking this action, Comcast is effectively putting up a toll booth at the borders of its broadband Internet access network," Level 3 said in a press release.

Still, it says it grudgingly agreed last week to pay up. "After being informed by Comcast that its demand for payment was 'take it or leave it,' Level 3 agreed to the terms, under protest, in order to ensure customers did not experience any disruptions," the company said.

Somebody's gotta pay

The explosion of online video -- especially the movie-length content Netflix (NFLX) spotlights -- isn't an easy problem to fix. The amount of video watched online has nearly doubled in a year, to 15.1 hours per user per month, according to comScore. It is costs increasingly more to host and serve that content, and to build the infrastructure for the bandwidth that allows users to download it.

Someone has to pay for that. But who should it be?

That's where it gets sticky: Both Comcast and Level 3 are playing on both sides of the fence.

In addition to being one of the world's largest CDNs, Level 3 is also a so-called "tier 1" Internet backbone. It's one of around a dozen companies that provides major routes for data to flow between networks like Comcast and content networks (including its own) that host websites and videos.

Level 3 squawked loudly about Comcast's fee demand, calling it a "clear abuse" of Comcast's market position and an act that "threatens the open Internet."

Yet Level 3 found itself in Comcast's shoes back in 2005. Feeling its peering agreement with fellow Internet backbone Cogent Communications (CCOI) unfairly taxed its network, Level 3 made the exact same argument that Comcast is making today, and even temporarily pulled the plug on its connection to Cogent, cutting off some parts of the Internet for millions of Cogent customers.

Comcast is also playing on both sides of the argument, since it is a competitor to Netflix. It owns several cable channels and is in the process of buying NBC Universal.

Level 3 played up that conflict-of-interest. "With this action, Comcast is preventing competing content from ever being delivered to Comcast's subscribers at all, unless Comcast's unilaterally determined toll is paid," the company said.

Comcast denied that its role as a content provider has anything to do with its decision to charge Level 3 a fee.

'A series of tubes'

To make some sense of this, we can pay tribute to the late Sen. Ted Stevens, who famously called the Internet "a series of tubes." It's not, but it's actually a pretty good analogy.

Picture the Internet as a city. Level 3 operates the massive plumbing pipes under the roadways, but it also runs the mechanism that collects and pushes the water through. Comcast is the company that connects your home plumbing system to those massive water pipes -- but it also makes some of the water.

Kind of complicated, right? So the debate isn't as clean-cut as it would appear.

Even Net neutrality advocates are backing away from the strong language they had initially used in shunning Comcast.

"The Net neutrality argument isn't saying that everything should be free -- someone needs to pay for all the infrastructure that provides that traffic," said Matt Wood, associate director of Media Access Project, an advocacy group that wants regulators to mandate "open Internet" policies.

"Netflix will have to raise its costs, because Level 3 has to raise costs to carry Netflix, and Comcast has to raise its costs to increase its bandwidth," he said. "But ultimately, that means the customers will pay for it."

It's possible that Comcast is singling out Level 3 because it serves content from one of its chief competitors. It's also possible that Level 3 is being duplicitous by changing its argument when it's on the other side of the fence.

But cutting through all the bickering, one harsh reality is becoming clear: Everyone's going to have to pay. Comcast will have to raise its fees and Level 3 will have to pay more for its traffic demands. Those fees will be borne by Netflix and Comcast -- and ultimately, they'll be passed onto you.

Fed up with ICANN, Pirate Bay cofounder floats P2P DNS system

Peter Sunde of Pirate Bay fame has had it with ICANN. Now that the US government is ordering the Internet governance body to remove domain names of copyright infringers from the global DNS, Sunde has sounded a call to arms to create a new Domain Name System to help pirates remain masters of their domain. The new DNS would forego a centralized root—too attractive a target for meddling governments—and use peer-to-peer technology instead.

In recent years, the Pirate Bay has successfully applied this strategy by turning off its widely used BitTorrent tracker. With BitTorrent, users share files directly between them, without the need to store the file on a central server. Hence the term peer-to-peer. However, the coordination of who downloads what from whom was originally still a function performed by a central server. Eventually, the Pirate Bay started to see their tracker that coordinated millions of (mostly) illegal downloads every day as a liability. So they got rid of it, telling people to use a peer-to-peer system to coordinate the downloads, too. This of course rendered useless all old BitTorrent client applications that didn't support the new Dynamic Hash Tables (DHT) mechanism. But the need to download is a strong one, so people upgraded or moved to other trackers that are still in operation.

If executed successfully, the effort to create a peer-to-peer based DNS would be a boon for websites hosting content off-shore that is illegal in countries that have influence over ICANN—most notably, the US. This includes sites that may or may not be considered to facilitate illegal downloading, such as torrent search engines, but also sites that host illegal content themselves. And Wikileaks could conceivably find itself included in the crosshairs of the US government.

There are a number of obstacles standing in the way of P2P DNS. First of all, today Google has a huge array of enormous DNS servers to serve up all the *.google.* domains, while I have an aging Pentium 4 box running DNS and mail for just me. In a new system, people looking for Google may hit my server—as well as the other way around, of course. So I'll have to invest in a bigger server. With a peer-to-peer system, people also have to depend on the kindness of strangers: random people around the Net have to send people in your direction. This is hard to make secure, and it's much slower than the existing DNS.

But the biggest problem of all is the ownership of domain names. In a DHT, information is found through hashes of the desired object. With file sharing, this is a hash over the file to be shared. If two people want to share the same file, you actually want to find them both, and download pieces from both of them—that way, the download goes faster. But with the DNS, things work much better if a domain name only maps to a single destination. On a brainstorm page, some solutions are discussed. One idea is an Internet Relay Chat-like fix, where it's necessary to hold on to a domain name like holding on to a name and operator rights on the distributed chat network.

Today, ICANN and the TLDs decide who gets which domain. The Pirate Bay proposes to replace them with an algorithm, one that would reside in the P2P DNS software. The stakes are high: even a small fraction of the traffic of a popular site, or even just an interesting search term, can be worth a lot of money. It's hard to imagine that with such high stakes there wouldn't be any abuse of such an open system, or at the very least, widely diverging points of view of what's best.

There have been many—be it non-peer-to-peer—alternative/complimentary DNS hierarchies in the past, going back to 1995-1997 with AlterNIC. None of them ever gained mainstream acceptance, even though anyone can easily point their DNS settings towards the alternate nameservers without losing compatibility with the regular DNS.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Why You'll Give Up Gmail for Facebook Mail

Why You'll Give Up Gmail for Facebook MailAccording to Techcrunch's sources, a full webmail client integrated with The One and Only Social Network will debut next Monday. This is why it may become your favorite webmail service.

If I were Google, Yahoo or Hotmail, I'd be very nervous. Facebook Mail could be a killer not only because of its potential instant size, but because of its natural advantage at making mail more useful.

That's the important thing for Facebook users and everyone else. This may become the only 100% useful mail service out there, only showing you the emails you are actually interested in. To me, if they have the right user interface, that's enough reason to switch from Gmail.

Why use Facebook for email?

Facebook has 500 million active users. Gmail is estimated at 170 million registered users, while Yahoo has 303 million and Hotmail is still king of the hill at 364 million. Of course, not every Facebook boy and girl will jump on its mail bandwagon, but chances are that a huge percentage of you will. In fact, it's not a crazy assumption that almost everyone will, even if that means having yet another mail account added to your computer, phone or tablet.

The fact is that it may be just too convenient to ignore. Facebook users are already used to its internal messaging system. For many, this will be a nice upgrade that will let them add these messages to their mail boxes. Remember that Facebook's mail is rumored to have external mail client access as well as its dedicated webmail interface. It will be easy to have it in every single gadget you own.

But, most importantly, Facebook's users would probably jump in because the social nature of Facebook fits perfectly with the social nature of mail. The irony here is that their mail system could be a raging success because of what many people criticize: Facebook tracks all your moves.

Your playground

Since Facebook knows how you interact with all your contacts, they would be able to perfectly separate what is important from what is not. Having used Gmail's Priority Inbox for a while, I have the feeling that Facebook could do much better at given all their data and some clever, but not overly complicated logic.

Moreover, it's not only about separating what is important and what is not. Their data tracking and analysis could allow them to do many other things. For example, they just have to analyze who is tagging you in photos, who is with you in those photos, to know who are your real friends, and categorize mail accordingly. They can automatically classify mail from the person who just became your fiance or lower the priority of that ex who keeps mailing you. The possibilities of using your social interactions to enhance the mail experience are endless. I have no doubt that Facebook will exploit this information to your advantage—and theirs, I'm afraid.

Ultimately, that's what people—especially younger generations—like about Facebook. It's always prioritized communication, a closed playground where only your friends and contacts get to interact with you. If they can provide a mail system that will allow the controlled entry of external people while keeping the playground fun, clean, and safe, they'll have a winner.

Friday, November 5, 2010

FBI watching Oracle-SAP trial

IDG News Service - An FBI agent has been in the courtroom each day this week watching the Oracle-SAP trial, suggesting U.S. law enforcement continues to take an interest in the case.

SAP said in 2007, when Oracle filed its civil lawsuit against the company, that the Department of Justice had requested documents related to the matter from SAP and its TomorrowNow subsidiary. SAP said at the time that it would "fully cooperate."

In a court filing in August, SAP said there was an "ongoing investigation" by the DOJ and the Federal Bureau of Investigation into "some facts and circumstances that are involved in this matter."

Oracle originally filed 10 complaints against SAP, including copyright infringement, violation of the federal computer fraud and abuse act, breach of contract and unfair competition. It agreed to pursue only the copyright claim at trial after SAP accepted some liability.

It's not unusual for representatives from the DOJ or the FBI to listen in at civil proceedings to learn more about a case or help them determine if they wish to file criminal charges.

"We have an interest in the case," the FBI agent said in court Thursday. He declined to comment further or provide his name. A spokesman with the FBI office in San Francisco would not confirm or deny it is watching the case.

Kyle Waldinger, an assistant U.S. attorney in San Francisco, was also in court observing the case this week, Bloomberg reported.

SAP spokesman Bill Wohl declined to comment beyond reiterating that his company would cooperate with any requests. A spokeswoman for Oracle declined to comment.

SAP has admitted that its now-closed TomorrowNow subsidiary stole support materials from an Oracle website, and the trial is to determine how much damages SAP should pay.

Charles Phillips, a former Oracle president, testified for Oracle in the case this week, and Oracle Chairman and CEO Larry Ellison is due to take the stand Monday. SAP will begin to present its defense in about 10 days, and the trial is expected to wrap up before the end of the month.

Friday, October 8, 2010

AT&T increases upgrade fee to $200 for some smartphones

If you're still feeling the sting from AT&T jacking up its early termination fees earlier this year, then you aren't going to like this latest bit of news. AT&T will now charge $200 for anyone that upgrades to a new smartphone model "early," before their original two-year contract term is up. This fee will definitely affect those that change handsets more often than every two years.

Previously, the company typically charged $75 to upgrade early if you qualified, though it has charged many iPhone 3G users the equivalent of $200 to upgrade to an iPhone 3GS after one year. In some cases, however, the company made exceptions based on how long a contract had been in effect or whether a customer had a more expensive voice and data plan. For the launch of the iPhone 4, AT&T even allowed some customers to upgrade without any fee at all.

In a memo to AT&T sales staff, the company noted that the change was necessary due to the increasing prices of smartphones like BlackBerrys and Androids. The pricing change does not apply to feature phones, which will still carry the $75 fee for early upgrades. It also doesn't apply to the iPhone, which, as we mentioned above, AT&T often treats as a special case.

"This change to our exception pricing is necessary to maintain our ability to provide customers with the best selection of devices," the company wrote in the memo. As long as consumers still expect to get smartphones for $200 or so with carrier subsidies, we'll have to expect these kinds of fees for the foreseeable future.

FBI busted tracking student, demands GPS spy gear return

Several days ago a 20-year-old Santa Clara, Calif. student discovered a GPS tracking device hidden on his car. After his friend posted a picture of it online, speculating about its its ties to a secret FBI investigation, the feds themselves came a-knockin', according to Wired.com. They wanted their toy back.

Based on the discussion with the six FBI agents who arrived at his doorstep, Yassir Afifi believes he'd been under surveillance for three to six months. When Wired asked an FBI spokesman about the case, he did not acknowledge ownership of the device, but said that there was an "ongoing investigation."

Afifi says that he cooperated with the FBI and, according to Wired, "did nothing to merit attention from authorities." He is a U.S. citizen who attends Mission College in Santa Clara.

Afifi's father, an Islamic-American activist, died a year ago in Egypt. It is not clear what the circumstances of his death were, or if this was the reason for the FBI's investigation of Afifi.

The gadget itself — a GPS receiver identified as a police-issue-only Cobham Orion Guardian ST820 tracking system, connected to a battery pack and radio transmitter — was magnetically attached to the car. A shot of it made its way around the blogosphere on Monday, after appearing on the community news site Reddit. After Afifi spotted an antenna sticking out during an oil change, the garage owner offered to yank it out. It apparently popped off quite easily.

The question of whether or not sticking a GPS on a car is legal is actually in the middle of a hot debate right now. One federal court recently said that it was legal, while another said that tracking for an "extended period of time" would in fact require a warrant. (For more on this, here's a great piece in Time written by lawyer and tech journalist Adam Cohen.)

Legality aside, the tactic itself might have been carried out with something less than precision. Simply put, tracking devices shouldn't be so easy to find. Wired talked to an agent who said that not only is the tracking device out of date, but state-of-the-art snoops hardwire the stuff directly to the car's electrical system, avoiding the need for a battery.

What's impressive is how quickly Afifi got an identification of the gadget by crowdsourcing it on the Web. On the flipside, that kind of exposure isn't good PR for the FBI. Surely the revelation of the magnetic tracker will cause many people to check under their own cars. Like many noble efforts to keep us safe from terrorism, this one may be turning out to not be so effective. After all, those who already know they're involved in illegal activity probably check their cars every day, rain or shine.

For more details on the Afifi story, read the report at Wired.com.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Apple returns to ‘normal’ return policy: no more free cases

iPhone 4 Case Program

Trying to close a chapter on the "Antennagate" controversy, Apple will stop giving away free iPhone 4 bumpers at the end of the month.

Calling the Antennagate problem “even smaller than we originally thought,” Apple has officially decided to end the free iPhone 4 case program on Sept. 30. After Sept. 30, users still needing the free bumper will need to go through AppleCare.

“We are also returning to our normal returns policy for all iPhone 4s sold after September 30. Users experiencing antenna issues should call AppleCare to request a free Bumper case,” Apple said on the bumper giveaway’s site.

Apple offered free cases and bumpers this summer after users complained of the death grip problem on the iPhone 4. The phone was dropping its wireless signal depending on how it was being held. Along with the free cases, Apple instituted a no-restocking-fee return policy, in case users wanted to return their phones. Apple also extended the normal 14-day return policy to 30 days to give users time to decide.

After Sept. 30, the window for returning the phone returns to 14 days, and users wanting to return the phone will go back to paying a 10-percent restocking fee.

While free bumpers will still be available, there is a catch. Instead of using an app, you have to prove there really is a problem with the phone’s antenna. You can either call into AppleCare and convince the phone representative over the phone, or head into your local Apple Store to talk to the employees directly. If AppleCare or the store’s employees decide your phone is suffering from antenna issues, Apple will happily supply you with a free Bumper case.

If Internet speculation is right, and Apple has been quietly adding a nonconductive coating to the metal band on the sides of the iPhone 4 to prevent the death grip problem, or that there is a redesigned iPhone 4 on the way, then users with phones sold after Sept. 30 shouldn’t need to call AppleCare. Apple looks good by not ending the support program entirely, and users wind up not needing the bumpers. Who wins? The shareholders, who don’t have to weep thinking about all the lost revenues from giving away the bumpers.

It's Shit Like This Steve Jobs

New Set of Change: 7 Coins Designed to Make More Cents


At first glance, concept coins designed this differently from the historical coinage we are use to carrying are bound to look more like fake ‘funny money’ than real currency – but think of the simplified usefulness of breaking out of the (circular) box of standard coin shapes around the world. In short: these cents just make more sense.

creative coin design concept

Simple visual cues tell anyone who can or cannot readily understand the local language what the relative value of each ‘pie piece’ coin is. While other security features would clearly be needed, the simplification of overall style also increases legibility and ease of comprehension. This change would be good.

creative futuristic non round coin idea

These so-called ‘infographic coins’ by Mac Funamizu have obvious benefits to the blind, much like the Euro, as sizes, shapes and textures all play a role in the legibility of coins. Impaired or not, anyone reaching into their wallet or purse would likewise be able to more easily identify each coin denomination by touch. Are we likely to give up on our standard circles? Perhaps not, but at least rethinking our (United States) hodge-podge system with inconsistent sizes,  colors and weights might be worth doing after so much time with so little design change.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Ring! It's Gmail's new voice feature calling


courtesy of computerworld

Computerworld - Google announced today that it is offering the ability to make phone calls over the Internet via its popular Gmail service.

Unlike Google's nearly two-year-old Gmail voice and video chat feature, which gives users an audio and visual experience online, the new calling feature allows users to dial phone numbers. With this move, Google is competing with Skype, which has long dominated the market for Internet phone service.

"Starting today, you can call any phone right from Gmail," wrote Robin Schriebman, a Google software engineer in a blog post. "We've been testing this feature internally, and have found it to be useful in a lot of situations, ranging from making a quick call to a restaurant to placing a call when you're in an area with bad reception."

Schriebman explained that making a phone call through Gmail works just like using a normal phone. Users can click "Call Phone" at the top of their chat list and enter a number or a contact name. She added that calls to anyone in the U.S. and Canada will be free "at least for the rest of the year." She said "very low rates" have been set for calls to other countries.

So, does Google have the muscle to make Gmail a Skype-killer?

Skype, a seven-year-old service, is used by individuals and companies to make video and voice calls over the Internet. According to Skype, its users made 6.4 billion minutes of calls in the first half of 2010.

While Google may be starting out behind in this race, it has the benefit of its large Gmail user base.

"Skype could get hurt by this," said Dan Olds, an analyst at Gabriel Consulting Group. "Skype has been offering the ability to call land lines and cell phones for years now. But having it integrated into Google's Gmail and, assumedly, their other offerings down the road, is quite an extension for Google."

Olds added that Google, always on the lookout for new revenue streams, is aiming to expand its reach over its customers and to move into complementary markets that will generate more sales.

"Adding voice calls to their existing product set enhances the user experience and keeps people using Google apps longer and more frequently," Olds said. "It also keeps people from using another service like Skype, and it certainly may prompt some defections from Skype. Google definitely has the scale and reach to put a big dent in Skype if Google can deliver on the service side."

The voice calling feature is expected to be rolled out to U.S.-based users over the next few days, according to Google. Users will need to install Google's voice and video plug-in and watch for the "Call Phone" button to appear on their chat list.

Friday, August 6, 2010

NPD: Android is now top-selling OS in American smartphones

58diggsdiggStep aside, BlackBerrys and iPhones, the American consumer has voted with his wallet and picked Android as his favorite flavor in the quarter just gone. NPD's number crunchers have just announced their findings for Q2 2010, concluding that 33 percent of phones sold during the period had Android on board. This marks the first time in eons (Q4 2007, to be more precise) that RIM has not held the crown of most purchased smartphone OS on US soil, with its BlackBerrys accounting for 28% of the market and Apple's iPhone occupying third spot with 22%. Motorola and HTC are the key suspects fingered for Android's continuing ascent, with the "large screen allure" of their handsets playing well with the buying public. Skip after the break for a more detailed breakdown.

Sunday, August 1, 2010

Hackers release browser-based iPhone 4 jailbreak

(Credit: Steven Musil/CNET)

The unlocked iPhone 4 is now technically legal and technically possible.

Just days after the U.S. Copyright Office ruled that bypassing a manufacturer's protection mechanisms to allow "handsets to execute software applications" no longer violates federal copyright law, the iPhone Dev Team on Sunday released a jailbreak for the iPhone 4 at JailbreakMe.com.

Unlike previous jailbreaks, which required the device to be connected to a computer to run the update, the latest jailbreak is accomplished completely via mobile Safari loaded on the device. The browser-based software bypass reportedly works on all iOS devices, including iPhones, iPads, and iPods running iOS 4 and iOS 4.01, but it will reportedly not work on devices running the iOS 4.1 beta.

Also, some users report the jailbreak disrupts FaceTime and MMS functionality on the device.

However, as of this writing, demand for the jailbreak is apparently so popular that the site's servers can't keep up, and many visitors report difficulty in getting through.

Jailbreaking allows devices to run apps not approved by the company producing the operating system--such as Apple, the main target of such bypasses. Jailbreaking also allows devices to run devices to run on nonauthorized networks.

While the U.S. Copyright Office has declared the software legal, Apple discourages users from loading the bypass, reminding them that doing so will void their device's warranty. "As we've said before, the vast majority of customers do not jailbreak their iPhones as this can violate the warranty and can cause the iPhone to become unstable and not work reliably," Apple said in a statement earlier this week.

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Flashlight app secretly lets you enable iPhone tethering

courtesy of macworld

Handy Light, a newly-available flashlight app for the iPhone, isn’t actually a flashlight app at all—it’s a sneakily disguised tethering utility that lets you share your phone’s Internet connection with your laptop. In other words, it’s an app that’s surely not long for this world.

It’s not surprising that Handy Light managed to trick its way past Apple’s App Store reviewers. To enable tethering, you need to configure an ad-hoc wireless network on your Mac, connect the iPhone to it, tweak some network and proxy settings, launch the app, and then literally tap a coded sequence of flashlight colors. No one could possibly discover the hack by exploring; you need to read detailed step-by-step instructions to get it to work.

Of course, now that the instructions are live, the app surely soon won’t be. Like the $10 NetShare app—which was axed by Apple nearly two years ago, the $1 Handy Light shares your Internet connection without AT&T getting a cent (unless, with all that tethering, you go over your new data cap).

The only question now is when Apple will pull Handy Light from the store, and perhaps whether Steve Jobs will send some heavies to the developer’s house to deliver a knuckle sandwich.

Handy Light requires an iPhone running iOS 4.0 or later, and at least mildly lax moral standards.

Friday, January 29, 2010

Monday, December 14, 2009

First Look: Google Phone - Nexus One


courtesy of engadget

Well here you have it folks, honest-to-goodness pics of the Google Phone... AKA, the Nexus One. As you can see by the photos, the design of the device is largely similar to those we've seen, but the graphic on back is slightly different, and that piece of tape is covering a QR code (how very Google of them). Just like we've heard before, the updated OS features new 3D elements to the app tray, as well as an extended amount of homescreens, though it looks like the lock screen / mute is the same as in Android 2.0.1. Additionally, there's now a new grid icon at the bottom of the homescreen, which when pressed brings up a webOS card-style preview of all homescreen pages -- which raises some interesting possibilities. Apparently there's been a new software update for the device pushed tonight, and sure enough the phone is identified as the Nexus One on the system info page. Quite clearly this device is running on T-Mobile, and is also using WiFi, so there's two other questions you've got answers to. The phone also appears to come loaded up with Google Navigation (a bit of a no-brainer) and the brand-spanking-new Google Goggles. Hardware wise, the Nexus does look incredibly thin and sleek, and while there's not a slew of buttons (those four up front are clearly touch sensitive), there is a dedicated volume rocker along the side. Oh, and note this... no HTC logo anywhere to be found. We'll update the post as / if we get more info, but for now, feast your eyes on the gallery below!

Update: One item of interest. In the packaging there's a quick start guide which points users to a "questions" page at google.com/phone/support. The page is a dead end right now, but it certainly gets an eyebrow raise from us. If there is a real Google Phone in the offing, that seems a likely landing page for support.

Update 2: In case you're interested, here's Android 2.1's boot animation for Nexus One. Eerily familiar, no?

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Use Your Own Number With Some Google Voice Features

courtesy of PCWorld

Google Voice users can now use their existing phone numbers with the service, which will come as good news to people who don't want to give out a new number to all of their existing contacts. But there are some catches.

First off, this isn't quite the same as transferring a phone number from one carrier to another; your number still works with your cell phone or landline. Instead, Google Voice will intercept calls going to voicemail, thereby providing you with transcription, e-mail integration, and the other goodies that Voice users have come to rely upon. Secondly, if you want to use call screening, forwarding to any phone, or other features of the service, you'll still need to give out your new Google Voice-assigned number.

In either case, all Google Voice users can place outgoing calls, free to the US and Canada, and cheap elsewhere (but you'll still burn cell minutes if you use your handset).

You'll need an invite to get access to Google Voice, but invites have gone out to many existing subscribers, so ask your friends. If you want to use Google Voice voicemail, check Google's supported carriers to make sure that yours is included (all major providers are).

Google has published a help page with details on how this will work after you activate the feature. Sadly, iPhone users won't be able to use the handset's Visual Voicemail feature if they activate this service, but apparently, you can turn the feature on and off on the fly, in case you find you prefer your phone's integrated voice messaging.