I've been watching the liveblog from Verge. So far...

- Nexus 7 tablet, 1280x800 screen, front-facing camera (but not back-facing). WiFi. GPS. $199 or $249 depending on storage.

- Nexus Q home theater doodad. It's somewhat like an AppleTV, in that it can drive video and audio, with your phone/tablet as the UI. It also has a two-channel amp to drive speakers. Costs $299. The built-in amp is an intriguing feature, though. You can pair this with some bookshelf speakers and get a fairly discrete solution. They also play NFC games to let me visit your house and pair with your system without having to muck about with all the security settings.

- Android 4.1. Lots of new stuff here. The high points seem to be a ton of engineering to get a higher frame rate and buttery-smooth animation. They also seriously souped up the notification system, rolled out a predictive keyboard (similar to SwiftKey), along with offline voice recognition, and a fancy Siri competitor. They also added a location-prediction gizmo that will sort out that you're about to head to work and might say that your meeting got canceled and you've got time for your usual gym visit.

- Google+ got fancier and more integrated with other Google things. In particular, they're trying to kill Evite, with integration into Google Calendar. They even have "party mode" so all the pictures taken by anybody at an event gets dumped into the same online gallery.

- They're talking about Glasses now. Looks swank, but I still don't see myself walking around with a video-camera thing on my head, and I'd be hesitant to have a real conversation with somebody wearing one. Some things just don't want to be recorded. On the other hand, there's something to be said for having that sort of cyborg integration of the Internet without having to futz with your phone.


And... for $1500, U.S.-based devs who attended Google I/O can buy an initial prototype. Every attendee gets goodie bag with a Galaxy Nexus (GSM/HSPA edition), a Nexus 7 tablet, and the Nexus Q home theater thingie.

At $300 it's somewhat like the price of 3 AppleTVs but potentially without the functionality of 1. This device isn't a GoogleTV, which is just about the strangest thing I could possibly imagine here.

I'm not sure who Google thinks they'll be marketing this paper-weight sphere to. I expect it will no longer be available by this time next year.

What it adds, over a GoogleTV, is an integrated amp. If you want to do a Sonos-style whole home audio solution, this lets you do it with fewer boxes. At $150, it would be competitive. At $300, I don't think so.

Even at $99, I don't think anyone in the market for a Sonos would be buying this. A random box with a tiny amp and WiFi doesn't a Sonos replacement make.

$300 is too much, but I think Google has the best chance of being left standing as the multi-dimensional tug-of-war between content providers, ISPs, and hardware manufacturers gets more heated. The current situation where you access dozens of different content silos with dozens of different applications on many different devices is not consumer-friendly, and I think people are going to demand something better. Customers want to view streaming media, local content, and live broadcast television on the same device with the same interface. The original GoogleTV tried and failed to make this happen, so It looks to me like Google's trying to get another bite at the apple with this thing. I don't know if this device will make it happen, but it shows they're committed to making it happen, and there's definitely room for a company not named Apple to succeed.

I do like the looks of Jelly Bean, though. For an x.1 release, it seems to pack a lot of punch.

The Nexus tablet isn't for me since we have a couple of CM9 Touchpads, but I think it'll sell pretty well at that price point. I wholeheartedly endorse the Nexus concept of Google getting more hands-on when it comes to hardware and pushing specific devices instead of just writing the OS and hoping the end result works.

I see the G+ events thing as a sneaky way to suck people into using G+, and I bet it'll work for a lot of them. So many people have Google profiles but haven't joined G+, and the workflow of responding to an event and then viewing pictures from the event would probably be compelling enough for a lot of those folks to join, even if they aren't the kind of people who are going to post a lot of status updates.

Glasses... Well, I think society has warmed to that level of connectedness in recent years, but I think it's a bit much for me.

I've just ordered myself a Nexus 7 tablet, given that I do some iOS development, it is long past the point that I should have taken some time to see what it is like on the other side of the wall.

I've only ever played with Android devices for a few* minutes at a time until now.

At that price it is into impulse buy territory for a lot of people. I suspect they'll sell quite a few of them. Whether the people will buy them will actually make use of them or ever buy another Android tablet is another question entirely...

* just long enough time to find places/times where the lags started being noticeable...

I don't think Google's chances in TV are as good as Apple's and Microsoft's are now or ever were. And the only reason they even have an inkling of a chance is because it seems that Apple and MS have been all but disinterested in doing anything significant in that space.

The XBOX 360 is already the most widely used box for media streaming, yet MS barely pushes that aspect of the device.

AppleTV has been a hobby not because of its slow adoption, but because Apple have not put significant resources into developing nor maintaining it. I'll give you one word which will lay down the hammer: Apps.

If Apple opens iOS on AppleTV to its full suite of Apps and the app store, not only will that all but assure Google will never make it in TV, it will leave MS, Nintendo and Sony shaking in their boots. Honestly, if those three have not had AppleTV on their radar as a threat for some time, I'd really have to question their sanity.

I just read Engadget's run-down of the Google orb thing and it sounds as dumb-ass as I first anticipated. They say it can't play local content. All the press images show a bunch of huge cables sticking out the back - what's that about, analog video? 6 f*cking wires. Nice!

And the major point they're making, which is that it can play content from the cloud using an Android device as nothing but a remote can already be had with pretty much every other device on the market today, including an assortment of Roku boxes starting at $50.

Just another example of Google throwing stuff at a wall to see what sticks - no focus, no attention to detail no basis in reality. Reminds me of their glasses actually.

Yes, IOS apps will be great for all those people that love standing a foot away from their touchscreen TVs. 0_o

That's right, because developers won't see the potential in adopting whatever new APIs Apple releases to support additional input methods/devices. And of course they won't see the potential for controlling the on-screen action from an iPhone or iPad or iPod. No one would ever think of that. It's not like that hasn't been a pretty standard control mechanism for a few years and that Nintendo would possibly take the idea for their next console.

That's not what you said, though. You said if they open it to the full suite of apps, that would be the final straw. As it is, though, IOS has no widely available facility for input other than by touch, and virtually all apps rely on touch input. If they opened up IOS apps for AppleTV today, it would be totally irrelevant.

You're being a little unfair on the cabling issue. Those 4 big chunky cables are speaker cables, it has a builtin amp. And they've opted for decent bannana plug sockets rather than those nasty clip things.

Ok, speaker cables makes some sense. They don't however look like speaker cables, nor do they look like any banana plugs I've ever seen. I've never heard of a device with a built-in amp coming with speaker cables in the box either, mostly because speaker placement is going to vary a great deal.

Bitt, sorry you misinterpreted what I wrote. I thought it was pretty obvious in mentioning the store that developers would be able to take advantage of developing specifically for the AppleTV. Most games wouldn't require that much work to port over to the AppleTV platform with alternative input - or using another iOS device for a controller.

Who said it came with the cables in the box ? It doesn't.

The cables are and option extra:

https://play.google.com/store/devices/de...3FfY2FibGVzIl0.

as are a pair of bookshelf speakers:

https://play.google.com/store/devices/de...3BlYWtlcnMiXQ..

They look like perfectly normal banana plug sockets to me.



I really like the design of the Nexus Q and the volume control built into the top of it is clever (the whole top rotates). I doubt it can do half of what I do with my Squeezeboxes though, understandably.

I'm surprised it doesn't have a set of RCA/phono sockets for analogue lineout, but then if it did Bruno would be even more upset by the number of cables

Now we know why it is so cheap, Google are selling it cost !

http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/28/3122811/nexus-7-manufacturing-cost-design-time

"When it gets sold through the Play store," says Rubin, "there's no margin, it just basically gets (sold) through."

Sounds like a plan. Last time I looked Google were making a tiny amount of ads and services for each Android device (and making more on iOS devices).

When asked if he thinks this cost structure will make life difficult for other Android manufacturers to sell tablets, Rubin insisted there is "plenty of room left for Android tablet innovation."

Yeah, right. Not only have they screwed their partners, they've also screwed their own hardware arm, Motorola.

In terms of who's screwing whom, it's hard to point fingers accurately.

It's easier to argue that Microsoft is screwing its partners, since they've been doing business with Microsoft forever under the assumption that Microsoft wasn't going to go into business against them.

With 7" tablets, the gorilla in the room is Amazon's Kindle Fire. Google clearly had to hit the same price point as the Kindle Fire, and they appear to be pursuing a similar strategy, not unlike the classic shaving kit model ("give away the handles, sell the blades"). Without market share numbers, it's hard to say how much the other vendors are hurting, but I seem to recall that Amazon is leading the market with Barnes & Noble not too far behind. If the future of the 7" tablet market is all about media consumption on at-cost or subsidized devices, then this is simply Google acknowledging reality.

Also, part of what seems to be going on here is a "share the love" approach. The original Nexus phone was made by HTC. The next two by Samsung. The closest thing to a 10" tablet Nexus would be the Motorola tablet (or perhaps the Samsung they gave away at last year's Google I/O). Then this 7" tablet by Acer.

The new Google tablet is by ASUS. Not sure why they didn't go elsewhere, but...

WRT to Kindle and Nook performance, take a look at this article from author Andrew Hyde: http://andrewhy.de/amazons-markup-of-digital-delivery-to-indie-authors-is-129000/

Sampling only his one title, Nook accounts for around 1% of sales. The article is mostly about how Amazon rips off authors however, not a study on market share.

The Kindle fire sells so well (relatively speaking) because it's a Kindle, not because it's an Android tablet. I don't think Google is going to sell many of these Nexus tablets by comparison, so I don't expect it to be any kind of challenger in terms of sales or market penetration.

Anyway, I've read through pretty much all the coverage of this Google event and I'm left with: "so what?" - all completely boring and irrelevant. It's either geek pipe-dream BS (Glasses) or something we've already seen in much better form from someone else. Android keeps getting better, but like iOS it's progressing an an insanely slow pace. They're still trying to do core/fundamental work Apple had accomplished prior to the iPhone release in 2007.

About the only thing I want to see from Google right now is what they've done with the IP/people they acquired from SageTV. The current GoogleTV products aren't at all interesting, so I'm eager to see if SageTV's PVR expertise is ever going to make it into something new. I can't think of another reason for the acquisition honestly.

I finally found a nice clean bulleted list of what Google Q is/does.



So yes, it's like an AppleTV without all the functionality and three times the price. It's also like a Squeezebox without all the functionality and the same price. ANd it's like a Roku streaming box at six times the price. But it has a 25 watt amplifier and doesn't work with standard HDMI cables and may have difficulties with standard banana plugs and speaker cable.

Google need to add a chicken with its head cut off to their logo. I think that best embodies their broad strategy.

The market is in dire need of a better media playback device after being continually let down by existing products, but this is far from it.

Here's a review of the Nexus 7 with fancy charts.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6054/google-nexus-7-mini-review

Wait, it actually says ASUS on the tablet? So this isn't a Google tablet at all, it's just another ASUS tablet being sold at a low price exclusively on the Google online store. No one is going to care about this thing.

My Nexus One says "htc" on the back. What's the big deal?

It's no big deal, I think that's my point. The situation here isn't at all like Apple (or others) designing 100% of their product and having it contract manufactured. Google are just putting the Nexus name on someone else's design. This product, apart from its retail price, doesn't have anything non-commodity about it. It could have been built by anyone. Which will also piss off other OEMs if it weren't going to be restricted to Google's online store. I'm sure the guys at Motorola, which Google acquired, are scratching their heads.

My Nexus One said HTC on the back, and my Galaxy Nexus says Samsung on the back. Google has always allowed the manufacture of their Nexus devices to have their name on it as well.

At this point it feels like you're just looking for things to rant about with Google/Android.

Personally, I care to know a bit about what I'm speeding my money on. Someone shopping for a tablet might want to know it's an ASUS tablet. Google is a reseller. This isn't a Google tablet any more than any other ASUS tablet is "by Google." If anyone doesn't care about that, I suppose that's fine for them too.

Google have been acquiring companies at a steady rate for years. They have enough people in house right now to do all this stuff on their own. I've already mentioned SageTV. This is the stuff I want to see. Every time I hear about a new "Google Product" I never actually see a Google product at all.

The orb thing looks like it's finally in this space, but it's also destined for the dustbin. An opinion which I'm surprised is starting to be echoed by a lot of others as well, even long-time Google fans.

Tons of electronics manufacturers outsource both manufacture and design. It just that most of them don't tell you that. One that springs to mind is this little company called "Twisted Melon" that sells a USB IR transceiver.

Isn't the Motorola acquisition pretty recent? In other word too recent for Motorola to have created a table for them, other then a re-spun Xoom.

Prior to this did Asus, or any other OEM mfg, have an equivalent tablet? Granted, I don't think there is anything unique about this table that can't be replicated by others. It is likely the the next version is already in process at Motorola.

Another example: iPhone, manufactured by Foxconn, not Apple. Apple might have done the design, but they don't build them. Apple also doesn't allow the manufacture to put its name on the device, unlike Google.

I'm also willing to bet that Google has a lot of input on the design of the Nexus products, not just leaving it to the manufacture to make all the design decisions.

Apple comes up with many of the processes being used by Foxconn. Apple designs pretty much down to the last details of every product, including custom screws as it's been reported. Foxconn are a contract manufacturer, an off-site plant as far as Apple are concerned. But that's getting away from the point now and not the issue I had with this tablet.

The issue here is that the product in question is an ASUS tablet and is labeled as such. Google isn't even using ASUS as an ODM here, which is what I find strange as hell. They could have gone to a number of places to build/assemble a Google tablet designed by Motorola people or designed by an ODM. Hell, they could have branded this tablet as their own. They're not rebadging this design beyond the "Nexus" monicker. These Nexus products do insignificant volume and do very little to build the Android brand. They also don't make Google any money when they're selling them at wholesale/cost.

If they were reference platforms then you'd think they'd be called such. As it stands it just all seems very confused and, as many are pointing out, a big "F you!" to other Android licensees.

Google announced almost a year ago they were acquiring Motorola - plenty of time to create a new tablet

Bitt: contract manufacturing isn't the issue. It's the fact this is just some other tablet that's the issue. The novelty, from Google's perspective, is that it's being sold pretty much at cost. But who will win the race to the bottom? Samsung? ASUS? ACER? I'm sure they'll love people comparing their other products to the price of the Nexus. The consumer? Not likely when the tablet is abandoned in a few months.

Look at the other Nexus products. Who has a bonafide long-term stake in them? Google? Samsung? Google doesn't have proper customer support. They don't have a sales channel. Samsung, ASUS, HTC or the flavor of the month aren't' going to give a rat's ass because they know they probably won't be picked for the follow-on device. There's no upgrade path, no continuity, no stability.

IMO, Google is wasting bucket loads of cash running in circles instead of concentrating on core strengths.

Announcement of a merger doesn't mean the companies magically merge that day. The actual merger date is May 22, 2012, so just a little over a month ago. Nowhere near enough time to have a tablet designed and ready to hit the shelves.

There are pretty strict regulations for pending mergers, requiring the two separate companies to still remain separate. When Compaq and HP announced the intent to merge, some people left both companies to form a new independent company. This new single company drew up all the merger plans, which products would be kept, etc. It all had to remain highly confidential, and Compaq and HP still had to carry on as normal. Once the merger was official, that separate company was also merged in and the plans were announced. Action on those plans took a few months to fully take effect.

Indeed. And who's to say they even want to work so tightly with them? It's pretty clear that they mostly bought it for patent defense. Anything else is mostly icing. Personally, I'm one of those pie in the sky optimists who wants them to turn all those disgustingly awful Motorola set top boxes into Google TVs (if they have enough power). Sadly, I'm also a pessimist who thinks that will never happen.


As for the announcements here, I think the Nexus 7 is a huge deal. No, I don't think it'll make a huge dent in the Kindle Fire, but it'll make enough of one. Think of all the people out there with a family member who knows tech. Are any of them going to get advised that a Kindle Fire is a better deal than the Nexus 7? Is anyone here?

The great thing is that someone could, with no problems at all, simply move from a Fire to a Nexus 7. They can then install the Amazon App Store, and have access to everything they had on their Fire PLUS the much bigger Android Play store, PLUS have all the great Google proprietary apps that they're missing so greatly. My wife hates the email experience on her Fire. This would eliminate that problem.

I think the Nexus 7 is going to be a huge deal, as long as Google can get enough word out.


But that's kind of where my praise of this set of announcements ends. The rest was kind of blah, and there is no chance that the Nexus Q will sell enough to stick around long. That thing is a failure right out of the gate (wow, I sounded like Bruno there!). But it's okay, I feel like every company gets their own "iPod HiFi" (there, I'm back).

Other than that, I wasn't blown away by the other announcements. I really don't think we're quite "there" yet when it comes to those usage scenarios they were showing off, like when they showed how your phone would know your meeting has been cancelled so you could go for your usual workout. These kind of "features" assume two things: that the signals are there/reliable enough (always updated and in the correct format), and that you have a life that can be predicted like this. My schedule is so erratic that my phone wouldn't have a damn clue what to tell me. I'd end up sitting at my computer in the morning, having my phone warn me about traffic on a road I didn't plan to drive on that day.

I was hoping we'd see a stronger competitor to Siri. What happened to Majel?


Ah well, at least that Glass video was pretty rad...