Invention of telephone and national heritage

Sirio187: Telecom Italia telephone with caller ID and SMS - 2000

Who invented the telephone?

Yet we can't be sure at 100%. The problem is that an invention isn't only an artefact but often it is seen as a part of national heritage (similar thing about the invention of radio, i already wrote about it).

From Wikipedia:

the history of the invention of the telephone is a confusing collection of claims and counterclaims, made no less confusing by the many lawsuits which attempted to resolve the patent claims of several individuals

In the USA Alexander Graham Bell (1847-1922) for very long time was credited with inventing the telephone: patent 174,465 (see the 6-page patent here), including the claim on transmitting vocal sounds, was issued to Bell on 7 March 1876 by the U.S. Patent Office.
But things are much more complicated.

On 11th June 2002 the US House of Representatives passed the second version of bill number H.RES.269 EH

Whereas Antonio Meucci, the great Italian inventor, had a career that was both extraordinary and tragic; (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)

HRES 269 EH

H. Res. 269

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

June 11, 2002.

Whereas Antonio Meucci, the great Italian inventor, had a career that was both extraordinary and tragic;

Whereas, upon immigrating to New York, Meucci continued to work with ceaseless vigor on a project he had begun in Havana, Cuba, an invention he later called the `teletrofono', involving electronic communications;

Whereas Meucci set up a rudimentary communications link in his Staten Island home that connected the basement with the first floor, and later, when his wife began to suffer from crippling arthritis, he created a permanent link between his lab and his wife's second floor bedroom;

Whereas, having exhausted most of his life's savings in pursuing his work, Meucci was unable to commercialize his invention, though he demonstrated his invention in 1860 and had a description of it published in New York's Italian language newspaper;

Whereas Meucci never learned English well enough to navigate the complex American business community;

Whereas Meucci was unable to raise sufficient funds to pay his way through the patent application process, and thus had to settle for a caveat, a one year renewable notice of an impending patent, which was first filed on December 28, 1871;

Whereas Meucci later learned that the Western Union affiliate laboratory reportedly lost his working models, and Meucci, who at this point was living on public assistance, was unable to renew the caveat after 1874;

Whereas in March 1876, Alexander Graham Bell, who conducted experiments in the same laboratory where Meucci's materials had been stored, was granted a patent and was thereafter credited with inventing the telephone;

Whereas on January 13, 1887, the Government of the United States moved to annul the patent issued to Bell on the grounds of fraud and misrepresentation, a case that the Supreme Court found viable and remanded for trial;

Whereas Meucci died in October 1889, the Bell patent expired in January 1893, and the case was discontinued as moot without ever reaching the underlying issue of the true inventor of the telephone entitled to the patent; and

Whereas if Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the life and achievements of Antonio Meucci should be recognized, and his work in the invention of the telephone should be acknowledged.

After over a century Antonio Meucci (1808-1889) is credited with the invention of telephone ... but Alexander Graham Bell is a hero in Canada (he spent years in Canada and he died on 2 August 1922, at his private estate, Beinn Bhreagh, Nova Scotia, at age 75) and after 10 days we have news from canadian Parliament:

Friday, June 21, 2002

Oral question period

Canadian Heritage

Mr. Bob Speller (Haldimand—Norfolk—Brant, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

The minister must be aware now of the silly goings on in the United States capital where the U.S. house of representatives passed a motion claiming that somebody other than Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone.

I am wondering if the minister will take the time to inform the U.S. congress that indeed yes, Virginia, Alexander Graham Bell did invent the telephone.

Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, this is one planted question that will bear fruit.

The member for Haldimand--Norfolk--Brant has raised a very important point. It has also been raised by my colleague from Brantford and by members on all sides of the House.

I am very pleased to report that right after question period I hope we will be able to table a unanimous resolution of all members of the House recognizing the fact that the real inventor of the telephone was indeed Alexander Graham Bell.

and later the same day:

Routine Proceedings

Alexander Graham Bell

Hon. Sheila Copps (Minister of Canadian Heritage, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the House for unanimous consent on the following motion, which has been discussed with all parties, regarding Alexander Graham Bell. I move:

This House affirms that Alexander Graham Bell of Brantford, Ontario and Baddeck, Nova Scotia is the inventor of the telephone.

The Speaker: Does the hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some hon. members: Agreed.

(Motion agreed to)

Hon. Sheila Copps: Mr. Speaker, might I suggest that we forward a copy of this to the congress in the United States so they get their facts straight?

--
Not a word about Antonio Meucci, not a single evidence about the invention. Is the important thing to discover the truth about history or to save the national heritage?

There is even a second controversy about a race to the patent office between Elisha Gray (1835-1901) and Alexander Graham Bell (again!): I don't know who should be credited but I do know that Bell is a legend and Gray is completely unknown by the masses...

The battle of (mobile)phones goes on

pic from Flickr - iPhone

Last year i was writing about phone business: iPhone and Android, let's see what happened in the last 12 months.
On 14th November 2007, i wrote about Android Developer Challenge: a contest for the most innovative application for Android, 10 million US dollars distributed between two phases of the competition.

First phase - 12th May 2008 - The top 50 applications are announced, click here to know 46 of them (4 teams decided "to continue their efforts in secret"); each team received a $25,000 award to fund further development
Second phase - 25th September 2008 - 10 teams received a $275,000 award each and 10 teams received a $100,000 award each. Click here to know all the projects

The winner of $275,000 award are:
cab4me
cab4me enables you to easily call a cab to any location worldwide
CompareEverywhere
Compare prices, read reviews, and connect with local stores
Ecorio
Ecorio automatically tracks your mobile carbon footprint, suggests transit and carpooling alternatives and lets you stay carbon neutral by offsetting your trips easily
GoCart
Scan a product's barcode with your phone's camera and view all the best prices online and at nearby, local stores
Life360
Life360 uses a multi-channel messaging system and neighborhood-centric social network to keep you up-to-date and in contact with your family and local community
Locale
Locale is an advanced settings manager that automatically changes your phone's settings based on conditions, such as location
PicSay
Easy to use image editor that enables you to quickly personalize your pictures and share them with friends or photo sites
Softrace
With Softrace people around the world meet online to compete against each other in different physical activities
TuneWiki
TuneWiki Social Media Player, is an advanced player, featuring synchronized lyrics for audio or video, translation, music maps and a social network
Wertago
Find the hottest parties in town and connect with friends and others all night long

Since 21 Oct 2008, Android is available as open source, the source is approximentely 2.1GB in size

The first phone in the market running Android is the T-Mobile G1, released on 22nd October 2008, it came preinstalled with Android 1.0

pic from Wikipedia - T-Mobile G1 (made by HTC)

And what happened to the iPhone?
iPhone has been a big success but iPhone 3G has been a HUGE success:

picture from Wikipedia
Q1 Oct-Dec; Q2 Jan-Mar; Q3 Apr-Jun; Q4 Jul-Sep

iPhone was realeased on 29th June 2007, iPhone3G was released on 11th July 2008. Apple sold more iPhones in 92 days (July-Sep 2008) than in the previous 12 months!! 6.89 million of iPhones in July-Sep 2008 and 6.124 million from 29th June 2007 to 30th June 2008.
Apple might win the battle of business but isn't winning the battle for climate leadership.

From the site of Greenpeace:

The Guide to Greener Electronics is our way of getting the electronics industry to take responsibility for the entire lifecycle of its products. We want it to face up to the problem of e-waste and take on the challenge of tackling climate change.

First launched in August 2006, the Guide ranks the leaders of the mobile phone, computer, TV and games console markets according to their policies and practices on toxic chemicals, recycling and energy. Since June 2008, the Guide has ranked companies on five climate and energy criteria. In this current edition we're focussing on climate leadership - not only because the global climate needs it but because electronics firms have a big role to play in the low-carbon economy of the future.

Nokia is the best one: ranking 6.9/10
Apple ranking 4.3/10

Telecom Italia in trouble

ownership of Telecom Italia on August 2008

value of Telecom Italia stocks from january 1998 to 5th september 2008

Telecom Italia entered in Milan stock exchange on 27th October 1997, when the government (Prodi was PM) decided the privatisation. The highest

value was on 13th March 2000, during dot-com bubble. The last trade on 5th september 2008 was made at 1.037 Euro per stock, the lowest value since 12th January 1998 (1.009 Euro). Somebody thinks the Telefonica isn't unhappy about this: they'll be able to buy Telecom Italia at a cheap price... Anyway, something is going to happen soon...

Secret tool of iPhone

On 6th August, the site iPhone Atlas wrote:

iphone can phone home and kill apps?

Apple has apparently included a blacklisting mechanism in iPhone OS 2.x via
which the device can phone home, check for unauthorized applications, and
disable them. The OS includes a URL that points to a page containing a list
of unauthorized applications, specifically:

https://iphone-services.apple.com/clbl/unauthorizedApps

Jonathan Zdziarski said:
"This suggests that the iPhone calls home once in a while to find out what
applications it should turn off. At the moment, no apps have been
blacklisted, but by all appearances, this has been added to disable
applications that the user has already downloaded and paid for, if Apple so
chooses to shut them down. "I discovered this doing a forensic examination
of an iPhone 3G. It appears to be tucked away in a configuration file deep
inside CoreLocation."

That post was like opening Pandora's box: all conspiracy theorists were
happy, they had found a trendy scapegoat. The next day Zdziarski wrote in his
own blog:

So I post one little comment to a geek blog site about an "unauthorized
apps" list downloaded by the iPhone, and every wanna-be-watergate journalist
in the northern hemisphere emails me with conspiracy theories.

It's worth reading the whole page because he explains how it is possible to disable this infamous
functionality entirely.

On 11th August Steve Jobs (chairman and CEO of Apple) gave an interview to WSJ saying:

Apple raised hackles in computer-privacy and security circles when an independent engineer discovered code inside the iPhone that suggested iPhones routinely check an Apple Web site that could, in theory trigger the removal of the undesirable software from the devices.

Mr. Jobs confirmed such a capability exists, but argued that Apple needs it
in case it inadvertently allows a malicious program -- one that stole users'
personal data, for example -- to be distributed to iPhones through the App
Store. "Hopefully we never have to pull that lever, but we would be
irresponsible not to have a lever like that to pull," he says.

Hopefully, mr Jobs, we would never like to buy something that has secret
levers! How many other levers are built in iphone? Hopefully, are you going
to tell us or do we have to wait for the next geek?

Decline of payphones in Italy

Telecom Italia payphone in Vatican State, 2008

In Italy payphones are less and less used by people: in the last 10 years mobile phones have been a huge success.

How many millions of minutes were spent in payphones?

The answer is in the reports of italian authority.
It would be interesting (but they didn't write it) to know how many sms are sent from those payphones.

2005

800 millions of minutes (1)

2006

600 (2)

2007

300 (2)

If you go to worldpayphones you can see photographic pictures of payphones of all the world

1 report 2007 pag.50
2 report 2008 pag.48

In Germany: Vodafone 1 Apple 0

From New York Times:

IPhone Must Be Offered Without Contract Restrictions, German Court Rules
By VICTORIA SHANNON
Published: November 21, 2007

PARIS, Nov. 20 — Last month, French law forced Apple to promise that consumers could buy a version of its iPhone in this country without having to be locked into a long-term contract with Orange, the only mobile phone operator offering the new device.

Now, the same issue is tripping up Apple’s plans to sell the music-playing cellphone in Germany, the largest European telephone market. Last week, the Vodafone Group won the first round of a legal case against T-Mobile over its exclusive deal to sell the iPhone there.

A German court ruled that T-Mobile must offer the iPhone to everyone, even without the 24-month contract that it had required for buyers of the phone, which went on sale in Germany for 399 euros ($591) on Nov. 9. T-Mobile is appealing the ruling.

Vodafone of Britain had tried to secure its own pan-European exclusive deal with Apple for the iPhone. A spokesman, Simon Gordon, said the company was not trying to block the sale of the device but rather trying to level the playing field in Germany. Vodafone operates Vodafone Germany, the No. 2 German carrier. T-Mobile, a subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom, is the industry leader there, with 34 million customers.

Various European countries have laws that protect consumers from being forced to buy something else as a condition of buying a product. Britain does not have the same kind of restrictions, allowing O2, a mobile network operator owned by Telefónica of Spain, to sell the iPhone there with an 18-month exclusive contract.

Although Apple has announced sales plans for only the three largest European markets, restrictions on whether carriers can tie or subsidize phones also exist in several other Continental countries, including Belgium, Italy and Finland.

T-Mobile’s position is that tying a mobile phone to a contract with one provider is rare but not new in Germany, while Vodafone argues that all mobile phones sold there should be available for use with any provider. T-Mobile insisted that iPhone sales would continue uninterrupted, but warned that it reserved the right to seek damages from Vodafone.

The iPhone is scheduled to go on sale next week in France. The exclusive French carrier, Orange, a subsidiary of France Télécom, has not disclosed any details of the purchase, like the minimum length of the contract for locked models, or the cost of the unlocked model. An Orange spokeswoman, Béatrice Mandine, did not return phone calls seeking comment on Tuesday.

The iPhone competes directly with models from Nokia and Sony Ericsson, which have the widest offerings in phones that combine digital music players and cellphones, according to an analysis released this month by the consulting firm M:Metrics. The consultancy also said that the demand for premium phones and features was stronger in Europe than in the United States.

A year ago, a French court ruled against Sony’s requirement that songs sold in its online music store be played only on Sony devices. Apple faces a similar court challenge in France over its iTunes songs, which are tied to the iPod. The iPod’s music- and video-playing features are built into the iPhone.

Cellphones Get Cheaper, So People Pay More

From New York Times:

November 20, 2007, 12:07 pm
Cellphones Get Cheaper, So People Pay More

By Saul Hansell

There’s no place that the relentless reduction in prices for technology products is more visible than cellphones. It seems like only months between the time a phone is offered for sale at $300 and it is ready to be given away free in cereal boxes. (O.K. not quite, but that’s not a bad marketing idea.)

What’s odd about all this is that according to new data from the NPD Group, people are actually spending more on cellphones than a year ago. Americans bought 38 million phones in the third quarter up only 4 percent from the third quarter of 2006. But they spent a total of $3.2 billion on those phones, up from $2.2 billion a year earlier.

Doing the math, that means the average phone cost $82.81 this year, up 40 percent from $58.95 a year ago.

NPD doesn’t say whether the extra $1 billion spent on phones in the quarter was simply added to the nation’s credit card bills or whether people cut back spending on food, clothing or something else far less important than cellphones.

But the company does show that more people are buying phones that serve other functions besides making calls. Half the phones sold in the period could play MP3 music files, compared to one quarter a year ago. Bluetooth capability was on 72 percent of phones sold, compared to 50 percent a year ago. And 11 percent were those digital Swiss Army knives called smartphones, up from only 4 percent a year ago.

Speaking of smartphones, Apple’s iPhone hit NPD’s charts in its first full quarter of sales. NPD ranks the iPhone as the sixth most popular phone model in the quarter. The top seller remains Motorola’s Razr line (in all its configurations). Second was LG’s VX8300, a heavily promoted low-price flip phone for Verizon Wireless, with Bluetooth, an MP3 player and a host of other features, I suspect most people never use.

Anthropology and mobile phones

From The Economist:

Home truths about telecoms
Jun 7th 2007
Technology and society: Anthropologists investigate the use of communications technology and reach some surprising conclusions

SUCH is the social significance of mobile phones that when it comes to evaluating their use and planning new products and services, mobile operators and handset-makers cannot rely on the technology-driven, engineering mindset that has traditionally dominated the telecoms industry. Most famously, industry leaders expected people to embrace videotelephony, which flopped, but failed to anticipate the success of text-messaging. So they are turning to social scientists, and in particular to anthropologists, the better to understand how telephones are used.

One of Nokia's in-house anthropologists, Jan Chipchase, recently investigated how people carry their phones, for example. He and his colleagues carried out street-level surveys in 11 cities on four continents. They found that 60% of men carried their phones in their trouser pockets, whereas 61% of women carried their phones in handbags. (The difficulty of finding a mobile phone in a cluttered handbag meant that half of women reported missing calls as a result.) Belt pouches were particularly popular in China: 19% of men used them in Beijing, and 38% in Ji Lin City. But they were less popular in fashion-conscious Milan, where only 4% of men used them, and belt pouches were non-existent in Tokyo. Adding covers to phones was most widespread in Seoul and Kampala, and the use of decorative phone straps was most popular in Seoul and Tokyo. Findings like these can help handset-makers design new products and accessories that are appropriate to particular markets.

Meanwhile, Stefana Broadbent, an anthropologist who leads the User Adoption Lab at Swisscom, Switzerland's largest telecoms operator, has been looking at usage patterns associated with different communications technologies. She and her team based their research on observation, interviews, surveys of users' homes and asking people to keep logbooks of their communications usage in several European countries. Some of their findings are quite unexpected. Although mobile phones make it easier to keep in regular touch with a wide group of friends, for example, it turns out that a typical user spends 80% of his or her time communicating with just four other people.

Next, despite much talk of “convergence” within the industry, people are in fact using different communications technologies in distinct and divergent ways. The fixed-line phone “is the collective channel, a shared organisational tool, with most calls made 'in public' because they are relevant to the other members of the household,” she says. Mobile calls are for last-minute planning or to co-ordinate travel and meetings. Texting is for “intimacy, emotions and efficiency”. E-mail is for administration and to exchange pictures, documents and music. Instant-messaging (IM) and voice-over-internet calls are “continuous channels”, open in the background while people do other things. “Each communication channel is performing an increasingly different function,” says Ms Broadbent.

Another finding is that despite the plunging cost of voice calls, and the rise of free internet-calling services such as Skype, people seem to prefer typing. “The most fascinating discovery I've made this year is a flattening in voice communication and an increase in written channels,” says Ms Broadbent. Her research in Switzerland and France found that even when people are given unlimited cheap or free calls, the number and length of calls does not increase significantly. This may be because there is only so much time you can spend talking; and when you are on the phone it is harder to do other things. Written channels such as e-mail, text-messaging and IM, by contrast, are discreet and allow contact to be continuous during the day. “Users are showing a growing preference for semi-synchronous writing over synchronous voice,” says Ms Broadbent.

And although the rise of the BlackBerry has prompted concern about work invading private life, the opposite actually seems to be true: private communications are invading the workplace. Workers expect to be plugged into their social networks while at work, whether by e-mail, IM or mobile phone. Last year at a food-processing factory near Geneva, the workers revolted when the director tried to ban mobile phones from the factory floor, and he was forced to relent. Their argument was that they wanted to be reachable during the day, just as people who sit at desks are.

Of course, improvements to mobile networks and the spread of third-generation (3G) and Wi-Fi networks mean that you no longer need to be at your desk to get things done. But Ms Broadbent found that there is not, in fact, much appetite for working while on the move. Indeed, she calls this “the hypermobility myth”. After studying workers who spend more than half their time out of the office—salesmen, consultants, pilots, journalists and photographers—she found that they generally stick to communications while on the move, gathering information that they then work on when they get back to their desks. Hotel rooms and airports are, she says, “not seen as an appropriate environment for substantive work” and are mainly used for e-mail.

Finally, Ms Broadbent found that migrants are the most advanced users of communications technology. A family of immigrant workers from Kosovo living in Switzerland has installed a big computer screen in their living room, for example, and almost every morning they have breakfast with their grandmother back home, via a webcam. It is migrants, rather than geeks, who have emerged as the “most aggressive” adopters of new communications tools, says Ms Broadbent. Dispersed families with strong ties and limited resources have taken to voice-over-internet services, IM and webcams, all of which are cheap or free. They also go online to get news or to download music from home. In the case of a Spanish family living in Switzerland, the daughter often does her homework with her aunt—but over a free Skype video-link, since the aunt lives in Spain.

Mobile tv in South Korea

Interesting article from The Economist: mobile tv is a success in South Korea.
The journalist forgot to write the name of the standard of the terrestrial mobile tv: DMB (Digital Multimedia Broadcasting), a standard that was on trial for 6 months in Italy and it should be used soon by state tv Rai. DMB is an evolution of DAB-Eureka147.

Mobile television
Screen test
Sep 6th 2007 SEOUL
Lessons from South Korea's experiment with mobile TV

RIDE on the Seoul metro or take a bus around the city's streets and you will see passengers gazing at their mobile phones with rapt attention, earplugs firmly in place. They are watching television. Since the first services were launched in 2005, mobile-TV services have garnered over 7.5m customers. The signals are delivered via terrestrial and satellite broadcasts, a far more efficient approach than sending individual data streams to each viewer's handset, as is mostly done in other countries.

Of the 6.3m users of the terrestrial service, which is free, about one-third watch on their phones, and the rest on screens installed in motor vehicles or on other portable devices. Another 1.2m people watch the satellite service, which costs about $11 a month. The government predicts that by the end of next year the number of terrestrial customers will reach 10.8m and the number of satellite subscribers will grow to 2.8m. In other words, more than one-quarter of the population will be tuning in.

SK Telecom, the biggest mobile operator, has been pushing the satellite service, which is offered by its subsidiary, TU Media. It has spent about $435m on the service so far and needs 2.5m subscribers to break even, says Kwang Heo of TU. Its customers are mostly sports-loving young men. Soap operas and variety shows were at first available only with a time delay, but in July TU struck a deal with MBC, Korea's biggest private broadcaster, to provide a live feed.

Meanwhile SK Telecom's two main rivals, KTF and LG Telecom, have been pushing the free terrestrial service. Although it cannot charge for it, KTF hopes that mobile TV will bring in new customers and enable it to sell more expensive handsets and service plans. Soap operas and news bulletins are the most popular programmes, it says. Providers of the terrestrial service grumble that advertising revenue does not yet cover their costs. MBC says there need to be 10m terrestrial users for its dedicated mobile-TV channel to break even. The clear winners in all this are the handset-makers, Samsung and LG, which have been able to sell lots of pricey new phones, says Ahn Taegho of MBC.

But even if mobile TV does prove successful in South Korea, it does not necessarily bode well for similar services elsewhere. Its rapid rise in South Korea is largely due to the government, which set technology standards, allocated spectrum and insisted on a free terrestrial service to promote uptake, thus kick-starting the market—none of which is likely to happen in Europe or America.

Nokia-Vodafone against Google-phone

This is the answer to Google-phone: Vodafone and Nokia agree to launch integrated Vodafone services on Nokia handsets.

This is the press release from Nokia, November 07, 2007

This is NYT:

Nokia and Vodafone Team Up on Web Services
JO BEST, November 8, 2007
Nokia and Vodafone have announced a deal that will see the former's mobile Net services platform cropping up on the handsets for the latter in Europe.

Under the agreement, Nokia's Ovi platform--which includes music, maps, gaming and social networking--will be introduced on handsets for Vodafone next year. Handset giant Nokia will also produce a number of devices exclusively for mobile operator Vodafone.

The new platform will offer Vodafone and Ovi services side by side, including both companies' own music stores.

When Nokia first launched Ovi, some industry watchers questioned whether the handset manufacturer would be able to sell mobile Internet services and avoid risking the ire of its operator customers, which are themselves trying to exploit such services to drive up non-SMS data revenue.

Ovum analyst John Delaney said the Vodafone deal will come as a significant boon to the platform.

"Of all the European operators, Vodafone is in the best position to be able to embrace the Ovi brand without damaging its own. Vodafone has invested heavily in building and marketing itself as a content services brand, since launching Vodafone Live in late 2002. Of all the operator portal brands launched around that time, Vodafone Live is now clearly the strongest. As a result, Vodafone is able to encompass other strong brands without the risk of putting its own brand in the shade," he said in a research note.

Vodafone has announced a series of content deals with big Internet brands in the course of the year, including agreements to put Google Maps, MySpace.com and YouTube on its mobile phones.

Vodafone is not the first operator to take on Ovi; Nokia announced a pact with Spanish operator Telefonica Moviles earlier this year.

Google's alliance

Google decided to create an alliance to support a Google-phone.
Let's see who are the members of this "Open handset alliance":

Mobile Operators:
1) China Mobile Communications Corporation
2) KDDI CORPORATION
3) NTT DoCoMo, Inc.
4) Sprint Nextel
5) T-Mobile
6) Telecom Italia
7) Telefónica

Semiconductor Companies:
1) Audience
2) Broadcom Corporation
3) Intel Corporation
4) Marvell Semiconductor, Inc.
5) NVIDIA Corporation
6) Qualcomm Inc.
7) SiRF Technology Holdings, Inc.
8) Synaptics, Inc.
9) Texas Instruments Incorporated

Handset Manufacturers:
1) HTC Corporation
2) LG Electronics, Inc.
3) Motorola, Inc.
4) Samsung Electronics

Software Companies:
1) Ascender Corp.
2) eBay Inc.
3) Esmertec
4) Google Inc.
5) LivingImage LTD.
6) NMS Communications
7) Nuance Communications, Inc.
8) PacketVideo (PV)
9) SkyPop
10) SONiVOX

Commercialization Companies
1) Aplix Corporation
2) Noser Engineering Inc.
3) TAT - The Astonishing Tribe ABDdD
4) Wind River

The Times writes: "The mobile operators are divided. Although some big players such as China Mobile, Telecom Italia and Motorola have signed up to the Google project, others including Vodafone, Orange, the French-owned mobile operator, and Nokia have so far declined to join.
The problem, say analysts, is that while a more user-friendly mobile web is an obvious benefit, mobile operators also risk giving much away. “Giving Google access to their customer base is essentially like giving away the crown jewels,” Mr Wood said."

---

The CEO of Vodafone (Vodafone is a mobile network operator that has equity interests in 27 countries and Partner Networks in a further 40 countries), Arun Sarin, seems to understimate the power of Google.
He said: ""What is it that is missing in life that they [Google] are
going to fulfil? You can reach Google already through a number of devices.
You don't need a Google phone to do that."

Well, mr Sarin, today marketing and advertising are the driving force of the global market.
Don't understimate them and don't understimate the huge importance of the brand "Google".

We're jammin', and I hope you like jammin', too

Another interesting article from NYT: some people use illegal devices to stop cell phones.

Devices Enforce Cellular Silence, Sweet but Illegal
By MATT RICHTEL
Published: November 4, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 2 — One afternoon in early September, an architect boarded his commuter train and became a cellphone vigilante. He sat down next to a 20-something woman who he said was “blabbing away” into her phone.

“She was using the word ‘like’ all the time. She sounded like a Valley Girl,” said the architect, Andrew, who declined to give his last name because what he did next was illegal.

Andrew reached into his shirt pocket and pushed a button on a black device the size of a cigarette pack. It sent out a powerful radio signal that cut off the chatterer’s cellphone transmission — and any others in a 30-foot radius.

“She kept talking into her phone for about 30 seconds before she realized there was no one listening on the other end,” he said. His reaction when he first discovered he could wield such power? “Oh, holy moly! Deliverance.”

As cellphone use has skyrocketed, making it hard to avoid hearing half a conversation in many public places, a small but growing band of rebels is turning to a blunt countermeasure: the cellphone jammer, a gadget that renders nearby mobile devices impotent.

The technology is not new, but overseas exporters of jammers say demand is rising and they are sending hundreds of them a month into the United States — prompting scrutiny from federal regulators and new concern last week from the cellphone industry. The buyers include owners of cafes and hair salons, hoteliers, public speakers, theater operators, bus drivers and, increasingly, commuters on public transportation.

The development is creating a battle for control of the airspace within earshot. And the damage is collateral. Insensitive talkers impose their racket on the defenseless, while jammers punish not just the offender, but also more discreet chatterers.

“If anything characterizes the 21st century, it’s our inability to restrain ourselves for the benefit of other people,” said James Katz, director of the Center for Mobile Communication Studies at Rutgers University. “The cellphone talker thinks his rights go above that of people around him, and the jammer thinks his are the more important rights.”

The jamming technology works by sending out a radio signal so powerful that phones are overwhelmed and cannot communicate with cell towers. The range varies from several feet to several yards, and the devices cost from $50 to several hundred dollars. Larger models can be left on to create a no-call zone.

Using the jammers is illegal in the United States. The radio frequencies used by cellphone carriers are protected, just like those used by television and radio broadcasters.

The Federal Communication Commission says people who use cellphone jammers could be fined up to $11,000 for a first offense. Its enforcement bureau has prosecuted a handful of American companies for distributing the gadgets — and it also pursues their users.

Investigators from the F.C.C. and Verizon Wireless visited an upscale restaurant in Maryland over the last year, the restaurant owner said. The owner, who declined to be named, said he bought a powerful jammer for $1,000 because he was tired of his employees focusing on their phones rather than customers.

“I told them: put away your phones, put away your phones, put away your phones,” he said. They ignored him.

The owner said the F.C.C. investigator hung around for a week, using special equipment designed to detect jammers. But the owner had turned his off.

The Verizon investigator was similarly unsuccessful. “He went to everyone in town and gave them his number and said if they were having trouble, they should call him right away,” the owner said. He said he has since stopped using the jammer.

Of course, it would be harder to detect the use of smaller battery-operated jammers like those used by disgruntled commuters.

An F.C.C. spokesman, Clyde Ensslin, declined to comment on the issue or the case in Maryland.

Cellphone carriers pay tens of billions of dollars to lease frequencies from the government with an understanding that others will not interfere with their signals. And there are other costs on top of that. Verizon Wireless, for example, spends $6.5 billion a year to build and maintain its network.

“It’s counterintuitive that when the demand is clear and strong from wireless consumers for improved cell coverage, that these kinds of devices are finding a market,” said Jeffrey Nelson, a Verizon spokesman. The carriers also raise a public safety issue: jammers could be used by criminals to stop people from communicating in an emergency.

In evidence of the intensifying debate over the devices, CTIA, the main cellular phone industry association, asked the F.C.C. on Friday to maintain the illegality of jamming and to continue to pursue violators. It said the move was a response to requests by two companies for permission to use jammers in specific situations, like in jails.

Individuals using jammers express some guilt about their sabotage, but some clearly have a prankster side, along with some mean-spirited cellphone schadenfreude. “Just watching those dumb teens at the mall get their calls dropped is worth it. Can you hear me now? NO! Good,” the purchaser of a jammer wrote last month in a review on a Web site called DealExtreme.

Gary, a therapist in Ohio who also declined to give his last name, citing the illegality of the devices, says jamming is necessary to do his job effectively. He runs group therapy sessions for sufferers of eating disorders. In one session, a woman’s confession was rudely interrupted.

“She was talking about sexual abuse,” Gary said. “Someone’s cellphone went off and they carried on a conversation.”

“There’s no etiquette,” he said. “It’s a pandemic.”

Gary said phone calls interrupted therapy all the time, despite a no-phones policy. Four months ago, he paid $200 for a jammer, which he placed surreptitiously on one side of the room. He tells patients that if they are expecting an emergency call, they should give out the front desk’s number. He has not told them about the jammer.

Gary bought his jammer from a Web site based in London called PhoneJammer.com. Victor McCormack, the site’s operator, says he ships roughly 400 jammers a month into the United States, up from 300 a year ago. Orders for holiday gifts, he said, have exceeded 2,000.

Kumaar Thakkar, who lives in Mumbai, India, and sells jammers online, said he exported 20 a month to the United States, twice as many as a year ago. Clients, he said, include owners of cafes and hair salons, and a New York school bus driver named Dan.

“The kids think they are sneaky by hiding low in the seats and using their phones,” Dan wrote in an e-mail message to Mr. Thakkar thanking him for selling the jammer. “Now the kids can’t figure out why their phones don’t work, but can’t ask because they will get in trouble! It’s fun to watch them try to get a signal.”

Andrew, the San Francisco-area architect, said using his jammer was initially fun, and then became a practical way to get some quiet on the train. Now he uses it more judiciously.

“At this point, just knowing I have the power to cut somebody off is satisfaction enough,” he said.

Time: iPhone is the invention of the year

Time chose the iPhone as the invention of the year (it won also as gadget of the year).
This is why:

Invention Of the Year: The iPhone
By LEV GROSSMAN

Stop. I mean, don't stop reading this, but stop thinking what you're about to think. Or, O.K., I'll think it for you:

The thing is hard to type on. It's too slow. It's too big. It doesn't have instant messaging. It's too expensive. (Or, no, wait, it's too cheap!) It doesn't support my work e-mail. It's locked to AT&T. Steve Jobs secretly hates puppies. And—all together now—we're sick of hearing about it! Yes, there's been a lot of hype written about the iPhone, and a lot of guff too. So much so that it seems weird to add more, after Danny Fanboy and Bobby McBlogger have had their day. But when that day is over, Apple's iPhone is still the best thing invented this year. Why? Five reasons:

1. The iPhone is pretty
Most high-tech companies don't take design seriously. They treat it as an afterthought. Window-dressing. But one of Jobs' basic insights about technology is that good design is actually as important as good technology. All the cool features in the world won't do you any good unless you can figure out how to use said features, and feel smart and attractive while doing it.

An example: look at what happens when you put the iPhone into "airplane" mode (i.e., no cell service, WiFi, etc.). A tiny little orange airplane zooms into the menu bar! Cute, you might say. But cute little touches like that are part of what makes the iPhone usable in a world of useless gadgets. It speaks your language. In the world of technology, surface really is depth.

2. It's touchy-feely
apple didn't invent the touchscreen. Apple didn't even reinvent it (Apple probably acquired its much hyped multitouch technology when it snapped up a company called Fingerworks in 2005). But Apple knew what to do with it. Apple's engineers used the touchscreen to innovate past the graphical user interface (which Apple helped pioneer with the Macintosh in the 1980s) to create a whole new kind of interface, a tactile one that gives users the illusion of actually physically manipulating data with their hands—flipping through album covers, clicking links, stretching and shrinking photographs with their fingers.

This is, as engineers say, nontrivial. It's part of a new way of relating to computers. Look at the success of the Nintendo Wii. Look at Microsoft's new Surface Computing division. Look at how Apple has propagated its touchscreen interface to the iPod line with the iPod Touch. Can it be long before we get an iMac Touch? A TouchBook? Touching is the new seeing.

3. It will make other phones better
jobs didn't write the code inside the iPhone. These days he doesn't dirty his fingers with 1's and 0's, if he ever really did. But he did negotiate the deal with AT&T to carry the iPhone. That's important: one reason so many cell phones are lame is that cell-phone-service providers hobble developers with lame rules about what they can and can't do. AT&T gave Apple unprecedented freedom to build the iPhone to its own specifications. Now other phone makers are jealous. They're demanding the same freedoms. That means better, more innovative phones for all.

4. It's not a phone, it's a platform
when apple made the iphone, it didn't throw together some cheap-o bare-bones firmware. It took OS X, its full-featured desktop operating system, and somehow squished it down to fit inside the iPhone's elegant glass-and-stainless-steel case. That makes the iPhone more than just a gadget. It's a genuine handheld, walk-around computer, the first device that really deserves the name. One of the big trends of 2007 was the idea that computing doesn't belong just in cyberspace, it needs to happen here, in the real world, where actual stuff happens. The iPhone gets applications like Google Maps out onto the street, where we really need them.

And this is just the beginning. Platforms are for building on. Last month, after a lot of throat-clearing, Apple decided to open up the iPhone, so that you—meaning people other than Apple employees—will be able to develop software for it too. Ever notice all that black blank space on the iPhone's desktop? It's about to fill up with lots of tiny, pretty, useful icons.

5. It is but the ghost of iPhones yet to come
the iphone has sold enough units—more than 1.4 million at press time—that it'll be around for a while, and with all that room to develop and its infinitely updatable, all-software interface, the iPhone is built to evolve. Look at the iPod of six years ago. That monochrome interface! That clunky touchwheel! It looks like something a caveman whittled from a piece of flint using another piece of flint. Now imagine something that's going to make the iPhone look that primitive. You'll have one in a few years. It'll be very cool. And it'll be even cheaper.

Illustrated history of the cell phone

To mark the debut of the iPhone, TIME.com offers an illustrated history of mobile telecom, from WWII field radios to texting tournaments.
 
Here's the list of the pictures, the pic above is the number 8.

1 1922
2 1940s
3 1959
4 1972
5 1983
6 1988
7 1997
8 1999
9 2000
10 2005
11 2006
12 2006
13 2007

Freedom for iphone

On January 9, 2007, Steve Jobs was probably very happy to announce the iPhone at the Macworld convention; but i don't think that the buyers were as happy as he was: when you buy an iPhone, it works only with one carrier, Apple wants a percentage from your phone calls.
The iPhone is sim-locked and in the Usa it works only with At&T (anche you need at least a 2 year contract with them), in the UK with 02, in Germany with T-Mobile and in France with France Télécom's Orange.

Well, i'm sure that Steve Jobs knows that the reality is more complicated than you can imagine.
On July 3, 2007, Jon Lech Johansen (24 year old norwegian guy previously known for his work on reverse engineering data formats) wrote on his blog "iPhone Independence Day": "I’ve found a way to activate a brand new unactivated iPhone without giving any of your money or personal information to AT&T. The iPhone does not have phone capability, but the iPod and WiFi work. Stay tuned!" Following this procedure you don't need to get to register with iTunes in order to use the iPod and WiFi feature but you can't use it as a phone.

The story hasn't finished yet. On 29th July 2007 George Hotz (a 17 year old american student) wrote on his blog : "Thanks to jpetrie, who donated an iPhone to the cause, I have an iPhone to take apart. I will be posting to this blog as I take it apart and discover things."
On 21st August 2007 he wrote: "Yes thats right, we have an unlocked iPhone." And after 42 hours: "I finally achieved my goal of getting my phone working on T-Mobile." Obviously he meant T-Mobile USA, not the german one.

Do you really think that corporations are 100% in control of technology??

Google getting in phone business

WSJ writes: "Within the next two weeks, Google is expected to announce advanced software and services that would allow handset makers to bring Google-powered phones to market by the middle of next year"

Can a Google Phone Connect With Carriers?
By AMOL SHARMA
October 30, 2007

Google Inc. is close to unveiling its long-planned strategy to shake up the wireless market, people familiar with the matter say. The Web giant's ambitious goal: to make applications and services as accessible on cellphones as they are on the Internet.

In a move likely to kick off an intense debate about the future shape of the cellphone industry, Google wants to make it easier for cellphone customers to get a variety of extra services on their phones -- from maps to social-networking features to video-sharing. To get its way, however, the search giant will have to overcome resistance from wireless carriers and deal with potentially thorny security and privacy issues.

Google is trying to loosen the grip wireless carriers have over the software and services consumers can access on cellphones. Carriers have considerable clout, especially in the U.S., where they control distribution of phones to consumers through their retail stores.

Within the next two weeks, Google is expected to announce advanced software and services that would allow handset makers to bring Google-powered phones to market by the middle of next year, people familiar with the situation say. In recent months Google has approached several U.S. and foreign handset manufacturers about the idea of building phones tailored to Google software, with Taiwan's HTC Corp. and South Korea's LG Electronics Inc. mentioned in the industry as potential contenders. Google is also seeking partnerships with wireless operators. In the U.S., it has the most traction with Deutsche Telekom AG's T-Mobile USA, while in Europe it is pursuing relationships with France Télécom's Orange SA and Hutchison Whampoa Ltd.'s 3 U.K., people familiar with the matter say. A Google spokeswoman declined to comment.

The Google-powered phones are expected to wrap together several Google applications -- among them, its search engine, Google Maps, YouTube and Gmail email -- that have already made their way onto some mobile devices. The most radical element of the plan, though, is Google's push to make the phones' software "open" right down to the operating system, the layer that controls applications and interacts with the hardware. That means independent software developers would get access to the tools they need to build additional phone features.

Developers could, for instance, more easily create services that take advantage of users' Global Positioning System location, contact lists and Web-browsing habits. They also would be able to interact with Google Maps and other Google applications. The idea is that a range of new social networking, mapping and other services would emerge, just as they have on the open, mostly unfettered Web. Google, meanwhile, could gather user data to show targeted ads to cellphone users.

"The most likely scenario from a Google perspective is to build some, if you will, inspirational platform [applications]; but primarily focus on getting third parties to do it because that's where the innovation will come from," said Google CEO Eric Schmidt, speaking at the All Things Digital conference in May. He said that "the new model of these phones is going to be person-to-person" with people exchanging videos and other types of data.

While many software developers are likely to cheer Google's open wireless platform, there are some potential risks for consumers. If Google isn't careful, sensitive user information could end up in the wrong hands, leading to spamming, stalking or other invasions of privacy.

There is broad momentum already to make software development on mobile phones easier and more open. Apple Inc. initially limited the kinds of applications it allowed outside developers to make for its iPhone, but the company recently said it would release tools next year to broaden the range of features allowed. (Handset maker Nokia Corp. said its new Internet and multimedia platform, Ovi, is open to third-party applications.)

Microsoft Corp.'s Windows Mobile operating system already gives software developers access to a range of tools to build programs for consumers, though the company does put all new services through a certification process to screen for programs that could hack into a customer's phone or pose other risks.

Microsoft executives question what impact Google will have. "The idea that there are all these things software developers can't do -- it's just not true," said John O'Rourke, general manager of Microsoft's Windows Mobile unit said. "It's hard to imagine what huge breakthroughs [Google] is going to have."

Google's push comes as carriers are under pressure on other fronts to relax their hold on the wireless market. They face litigation over "locking" of phones, which prevents people from transferring devices from one provider to another.

Sprint Nextel Corp. agreed this month to unlock the phones of departing customers as part of a settlement in a California class-action lawsuit. Google and others, meanwhile, have criticized carriers for being a bottleneck on what software and services consumers can access.

Google helped push through controversial rules for a coming spectrum auction at the Federal Communications Commission that would result in a new cellular network open to all devices and software applications, even those not favored by an operator. Google has said it will probably bid for the frequencies.

For now, the company knows it has no choice but to work with operators to make its open platform successful. D.P. Venkatesh, CEO of mPortal Inc., which makes software for wireless operators, puts it this way: "There are a few things carriers control that will always keep them in charge at the end of the day."