GTalk - Yahoo! Messenger Interoperability

The big news from Google this morning was the agreement to provide Yahoo! with access to Google's AdSense for search and AdSense for content in US and Canada. The Google press release and the Google blog post on this topic had another interesting tid-bit:

In addition, we will work to enable interoperability between our respective instant messaging services allowing users better, broader communication online.

.
.
.
And with interoperability between IM services, users will have easier access to even more of their contacts.

I hope they implement this interoperability soon. The previously announced interoperability with AOL and Skype messaging platforms has not materialized yet. The facility for GMail users with AOL accounts to login with their AOL IDs and chat with their AOL contacts from within GMail does not count as interoperability.

I wonder why IM platforms were not designed in the first place to function like email platforms: with the ability to message contacts on any other network. Now that IM platforms started out as walled gardens, what is taking the big IM platforms so long to implement interoperability with all other IM platforms, or at least with the major ones. Are they afraid that this will make their competitors stronger? Don't the big IM platforms realize that giving their users the ability to chat with friends on other networks is the best way to keep them on their own networks?

If I could use Yahoo Messenger to chat with my friends who are on GTalk, I might never use the GTalk client because I find the YM client to be more full-featured. Think about it Yahoo and get working on interoperability with GTalk ASAP! And while you are at it, don't forget to include voice chat in the interoperability mix.

PS: I'm not going to ask GTalk for anything here because my wishlist for GTalk would form a complete post in itself.

Adword Conversion Tracking Challenges on Mobile

Effectively advertising on mobile phones without alienating the user is a challenge that is far from being solved by anyone right now. I am quite surprised to learn that Google has a more basic challenge right now: it can't even track Adword conversions on mobile phones! In other words, when someone clicks on a Google ad on a mobile phone, Google might not always know about it and so may not get paid for it. This is a serious flaw indeed!

Accuracast talks about how a large number of Adword conversions on mobile devices can go undetected because many mobile browsers do not allow JavaScript or cookies, the basic essentials for Google to track ad clicks.

When Accuracast questioned Google, the response they got from a Google Adwords account manager not only confirms this, it even suggests that disabling images on a phone browser can prevent tracking Adword conversion:

A significant percentage of mobile browser and carrier combinations do not support cookies. Google adds cookies to a user’s mobile device when he or she clicks on an ad to track conversions. Therefore, if users are using mobile browsers or carriers that do not accept or support cookies, they will not be included in your conversion tracking statistics.

Additionally, cookies on mobile phones expire faster than the ones created for PCs. Therefore, a significant number of conversions for your site may go unrecorded after a certain period of time. When viewing conversions for a specified time period, note that conversions are assigned to the date on which the ad click occurs, not the date on which the conversion occurs. In addition, we will not be able to report conversions for users who disable cookies.

Conversion tracking is also not supported when users disable images on their mobile phones.

Although Google cannot record every conversion due to the reasons mentioned above, your conversion rate, cost-per-conversion, cost-per-transaction and value/click are adjusted to reflect only those sites from which we can track conversions.

I am also surprised that this is not bigger news.

[via Accuracast]

Links: GTalk translator bots, CallFreq Android app, Google's speech recognition training, UK spectrum auction, Google Mobile in Africa & India

• Translation bots available for Google Talk - Just add a bot as a GTalk contact, send a message to it in one language and it will echo the message back in another language. For example, if you add en2es@bot.talk.google.com as a GTalk contact and send it a message in English, it will echo the same message back to you in Spanish. Check the link for a list of other language-pair bots available from Google right now.
  Tip: If you have an IM app on your mobile phone which can communicate with your GTalk contacts, this could be used as a handy pocket translator. Be warned though, translations by these bots are not very accurate.


• New Android App: CallFreq - Described as a "new generation of a phone dialer", which "intelligently analyzes the calling patterns of an Android communicator user and provide you only with the contacts that you currently need most". The current release sorts your contacts into those you call most frequently.


• Google's speech recognition software is being trained by GOOG-411 phone service users. We can expect this training to be put to good use in future targetted mobile advertising algorithms as well.


• Might Google be interested in bidding for the broadcast spectrum in UK? For those of you who might not know, UK is also planning on auctioning off the spectrum that is/was by analog TV service there. A spokesman for Google UK said that FCC restrictions meant that the company was not allowed to comment on its plans in this area anywhere in the world.


• Google partners with Safaricom in South Africa to offer Google services on mobile phones there. Interestingly, it sounds like these services are being offered through the Google Apps route. Safaricom customers will have email addresses which are their mobile numbers followed by @safaricom.com and those who cannot access Google services such as Gmail through their mobile phones can access it via Safaricom's website. Sure sounds like Google Apps to me. Good move there by Google - offering Apps to Safaricom and in turn extending its reach to their customers' cell phones.


• Search Engine wars on mobile phones are sure heating up in India. There are seven times more mobile phone users in India than PC-owners. So, it is natural for Google, MSN and Yahoo! to fight it out for mobile users in India.

Rumor: gPhone debut in Mobile World Congress?

The latest rumor to hit the blogosphere is that the godPhone might debut at the Mobile World Congress in February 2008. Why all the hoopla? Apparently, Google has booked two stands on the expo floor, which is making everybody wonder why Google needs so much space.

It will be interesting to see what Google has to show off at the expo. Whether or not any real gPhones are shown at the expo, one thing is for sure - there will be lot of publicity for Google's mobile apps and the mobile versions of their services.

Google Mobile Updater for BlackBerry

Google has released a one-click app to update all the Google Mobile products on your BlackBerry.

This might seem a little pointless right now. Google has only two phone-installed mobile apps (as opposed to web apps) which may need updates to be installed on your phone. These apps are of course, GMail and Google Maps. Almost all other Google mobile apps are web-based, always loading their latest version on your phone's browser.

So, what does the Google Mobile Updater do? Apart from updating GMail and Google Maps apps on your phone, it puts handy short-cuts to the other web-based mobile apps. Creating short-cuts right there on the phone might seem like a small change, but it could lead to a huge surge in the usage of these apps due to the ease of access. In the absence of these short-cuts, users had to type in the URL of the apps on their phone's browser.

When I installed the Mobile Updater on my BlackBerry, I chose to install all the products it would install. Apart from installing the Mobile Updater itself, it updated my GMail and Google Maps apps, and created shortcuts for only the following mobile apps/services: Search, Picasa, Docs and News. Whenever there is an update to be installed, the Mobile Updater icon on the phone will change to show a green arrow:


You can get the Mobile Updater by visiting mobile.google.com on the BlackBerry's web browser. The Mobile Updater is only available for BlackBerry right now. No doubt, there will be versions available for other phones soon enough.


[via Official Google Mobile Blog]
[Image courtesy: Official Google Mobile Blog]


Related: Google Mobile: Products and Countries Lists

Harold Feld's 4 reasons why Google intends to win the 700 MHz Auction

So far we have seen fanboy optimism that Google will bid in the 700 MHz spectrum to win, cycnical suggestions by analysts and bloggers that Google will not bid to win, and even a pseudo-psycho interpretation of Google's words on its intent to win.

Finally, we have something a little more reasoned: Harold Feld, Senior Vice President of the Media Access Project, snorts some oak leaves and gives Four Reasons Why Google Will Bid To Win in the 700 MHz Auction. The reasons listed are (in the words of Harold Feld):

1. Google Has A Different Vision For the Wireless World It Can Only Achieve By Owning Licenses.
2. Google Has No Desire To Be A Network Provider. But It Wants To Be A Network Architect.
3. Anonymous Bidding Changes Everything.
4. When Google Commits, It Does So All The Way.

Harold Feld offers excellent arguments supporting each reason. Just one example:

For Google, more than wireless is at stake. Google can read the writing on the wall for wireline, even if dumbass regulators in DC can't. Given enough time, the cable/DSL duopoly will gradually morph away from the existing open internet model to become more and more like wireless is today: you buy a basic contract for the core service and everything else costs extra. The provider bundles everything, controls the nature of outside attachments, applications, etc., etc., always taking its chunk off the top and driving up the price to everyone else. But if Google is successful in transforming the wireless world, it will also stop the transformation of the wireline world. By contrast, if Google can't stop the transformation of the wireless world, it is probably screwed on the wireline side as well.

.
This is the type of well-thought analyses we'd like to see more often in the blogosphere, as opposed to the usual tech blogging at warp speed. Needless to say, I have long given up hopes of any real tech analysis of good value coming out of the MSM*.



[via Wetmachine]


Related:
Google announces participation in 700 MHz Auction
Does Google intend to win the 700 MHz Spectrum Auction?


*MSM = Main Stream Media

More speculation on Google's plans for the 700 MHz spectrum

The Digital Home blog on CNET.com speculates that after winning the 700 MHz spectrum auction, Google will change this industry forever.

The author Don Reisinger thinks Google will do two things with the 700 MHz spectrum (he pretty much assumes that Google will win it):

1. Offer VoIP calling over the spectrum which will "destroy the cell phone industry as we know it today".
2. Offer free nationwide Wi-Fi, giving "serious problems" to current ISPs, and resulting in almost every device ("HDTVs, for example") having WiFi connectivity options.

Sounds like Brother Reisinger's faith in Google is huge, unshakeable and total. And to think it is people like these that Google might disappoint, almost make us cry!



[via The Digital Home on CNET]

Related: Will Google do an Android with the 700 MHz Spectrum?

Does Google intend to win the 700 MHz Spectrum Auction?

Suppose three different players of a team tell you right before a big match, "Whether we win or lose this match, the game and spectators will always be the winners!" Now what would you think of that team's chances of winning?

That is correct: not much. I have heard similar statements from commentators in the media after India lost big cricket matches. But I never thought I'd hear such words from Google. But this is exactly what Google's official line seems to be, with only a few more weeks to go before the 700 MHz spectrum auction.

Google's CEO Eric Schmidt in the press release announcing Google's intentions to bid:

"No matter which bidder ultimately prevails, the real winners of this auction are American consumers who likely will see more choices than ever before in how they access the Internet."

Google's co-founder Larry Page as quoted in Fortune magazine's Techland blog:

“I don’t think we feel like there is a desperate need for us to have to bid to win or anything like that,” Page told analysts during the company’s quarterly earnings call last month. “We have many, many different options available to us as a company in terms of spectrum.”

Finally, the very title of the Official Google blog post by Chris Sacca, Google Head of Special Initiatives, announcing their auction entry, pretty much seems to say it directly:

Who's going to win the spectrum auction? Consumers.

Even if Google did not intend to bid in the auction to win, why would its official stand be so blantantly obvious? Is this a deliberate ploy to convey the message that Google is not all that desperate to win (which is quite true, anyway)?

I wrote in the previous post that I don't believe Google will not bid to win. Now that sounds like fanboy optimism even to my own self. The above quotes from Google are not very encouraging. There are a lot of fanboys out there who have high hopes that Google will ride in like a knight in shining armor and rescue American consumers from the tight clutches of incumbent evil telcos. They are going to be mighty disappointed if Google does not win the 700 MHz auction.

And, if Google does not even put up a sincere and honest fight? Could be a bad PR move, which would bring down Google's image a few notches down.

Google announces participation in 700 MHz Auction

Google has ended all doubts (there were indeed some who doubted) and announced that it will indeed participate in the 700 MHz auction.

Here's the Official Google Blog making this announcement: Who's going to win the spectrum auction? Consumers.

And the press release: Google Will Apply to Participate in FCC Spectrum Auction.

The blog post is more detailed than the press release, giving a basic primer on the auction process for the next few months. After this announcement, Google can talk no more about the auction until the auction ends. This is explained in the blog post as well:

Monday, December 3, is the deadline for prospective bidders to apply with the FCC to participate in the auction. Though the auction itself won't start until January 24, 2008, Monday also marks the starting point for the FCC's anti-collusion rules, which prevent participants in the auction from discussing their bidding strategy with each other.

These rules are designed to keep the auction process fair, by keeping bidders from cooperating in anticompetitive ways so as to drive the auction prices in artificial directions. While these rules primarily affect private communications among prospective bidders, the FCC historically has included all forms of public communications in its interpretation of these rules.

All of this means that, as much as we would like to offer a step-by-step account of what's happening in the auction, the FCC's rules prevent us from doing so until the auction ends early next year.

Another interesting point about the auction process: the auction will be completely anonymous - nobody will know what anybody else is bidding and who has won each block of the spectrum until the auction ends probably in March 2008.

Now that the question of whether or not Google will participate in the auction is settled, there are still some people who are speculating that Google will not bid to win. They claim that Google will only participate as a formality, since it has made so much noise about this auction already. There are few others who say that Google will bid upto the reserve price of $4.6 billion for the C Block spectrum, in order to ensure that the pre-conditions of allowing any application and any device to use the network will remain safely in place. The FCC has mentioned that if there are no bids which at least match the reserve price, these pre-conditions will be taken off and fresh bids welcomed.

That last point makes a little more sense, but I don't believe that Google will not bid to win. Google knows the worth of this prime spectrum. Billions of dollars is not small money. But compared to the value of what can be done on this spectrum, it is fair money... may be even a low price! So, I believe that Google will bid to win... unless something totally unexpected or outrageous happens. I cannot even speculate on what that could be.


[via The Official Google Blog and Google Press Center]

Google Maps mobile with "My Location": Privacy Loophole

I had quoted earlier from the Google Help page on Google Maps mobile's My Location feature, that it was totally private and Google did not record or store any person's or phone's identifiable information, tied to a particular location.

The New York Times' Bits blog has this to say about a loop-hole when you use Google Maps mobile which has the My Location feature to do a search for say a close-by business:

The payoff for Google from building out its mapping service is to get people to conduct searches from their cellphones. This is a nice feature. Push a button on the map software, type “Starbucks” and it will display a map of the closest source of a latte fix, based on the cell tower or GPS data. The catch, is that this query, with your location, is entered in Google’s log files along with your phone’s unique ID.

So, the "My Location" feature itself will not uniquely identify you. But doing a search will uniquely identify your phone, and tie it to a location. That is a damned good catch by the Bits blog, I say!

Needless to say, if Google wants, it can tie your uniquely identifiable phone to the uniquely identifiable Google login ID you might use on the phone. I am not saying that Google does that. I am saying that Google can do that. Perhaps, under pressure from a subpoena or the Chinese government?


[via the The New York Times' Bits blog]

Google Mobile: Products & Countries Lists

Google has a mobile-friendly page which lists its mobile products available in your country:
http://www.google.com/m/products.

Each product is presented as a link and clicking on it takes you to that product. In mobile format, of course.

Tip: You can bookmark that always up-to-date products page on your phone's browser, to quickly access all the Google mobile services available to you. Neat.

At the bottom of the products page is a link which reads: Not in [country name]? That takes you to another mobile-friendly page:
http://www.google.com/m/products/countries.

This page lists all the countries where Google has some mobile service available. Right now it lists 56 countries. Doesn't that number appear a little on the low side? There are about 192 or 194 countries in the world. Would you not be able to access at least Gmail (or Google Mail - it's not called Gmail in all the countries!) on the phone in any of these countries, if you could access the Internet on the phone? Don't tell me you cannot access the Internet on the phone in 136 or 138 countries in the world!

Official Google Mobile Blog launched!

Yesterday, Google launched the Official Google Mobile Blog!

Get the Google Mobile Blog's Atom feed here or the Feedburner feed here.

Google Maps for Mobile: Now location aware without GPS!

Google Maps for mobile phones has announced a new feature called My Location (still in beta). This feature brings an approximate location information to Google Maps on your mobile phone, even if the phone does not have GPS functionality. Google uses cell tower identification to provide the location information. So, a lot depends on the number of cell towers at the location. The accuracy could be off by as much as a couple of kilometers (over one-and-a-quarter mile).

Here's a video from Google explaining how this feature works:


The My Location feature is available on a few selected devices right now.

Regarding the all important question that lot of people would have, this is what Google Help says:

Will Google always know where I am if I use My Location (beta)?

No, Google does not know who you are when you use Google Maps for mobile. All handsets are anonymous. When you use our product, we do not collect personal information like your username or phone number, so we do not know who owns or is using the handset. Therefore, when we identify approximate location [as part of the My Location feature], all we can determine is the approximate location of the handset. This location information is also only in our system when a user has opted-in to the My Location (beta) service. If the My Location (beta) feature is disabled, we will not continue to send radio information back to Google servers to determine your handset's approximate location while you use Google Maps for mobile.

Good job answering that question upfront!


Android Update: This feature is sure to be available in future versions of Android (if it is not already). This means, any Android application which needs your location information would work, kind of, even if your Android cell phone does not have GPS! Wow!


IMPORTANT "My Location" Update: Google Maps mobile with "My Location": Privacy Loophole


[via the very new Official Google Mobile Blog and Bits blog]

Will Google do an Android with the 700 MHz Spectrum?

Will Google do an Android with the 700 MHz Spectrum? That is, give it away for free to multiple carrier partners who promise to play open?

I came across this excellent analysis on Google’s True Agenda with the 700 MHz Spectrum auction. It was a delight to read, despite the less-than-perfect grammar.

Granted, it is all speculation and conjecture at this point. But to gauge the quality of that post you should compare it to the Wall Street Journal article Google Has Even Bigger Plans for Mobile Phones, which is just a hash of rumors from "people familiar with the matter". The Guru of tech bloggers Om Malik described the Wall Street Journal article as a report about Google’s big mobile plans is one that covers all bases, and leaves you where you started from: scratching your head.

I don't know who has written the Penny College article, but I bet s/he is an engineer. S/he presents coherent and convincing arguments for its conclusion, which is:

So what is Google’s true intent then? How could it participate in the auction while still preserving its goal of rapid development while guaranteeing user access to its services and software? The solution is simple, yet it has been overlooked by most business analysts and technology pundits - Google will be purchasing the spectrum and open it to all providers free of charge under one condition, that providers allow any software and services (Including Android) to run on it without further interference or extra charges. Basically, Google is intending on preserving or creating telecom democracy through financial incentives.

That's just a teaser. You should visit the original article and get all the juicy details there. Couple of points about this article's conclusions:

• Although it makes sense that Google will allow many different carriers to use the spectrum it might win, I don't believe that Google will just give away prime spectrum for free to any carrier.
• I am not sure how multiple carriers can technically use the same frequency in the same place as this article suggestions.

[via pennycollege.com]

Is Google's clear vision short-sighted?

Fortune magazine has a dramatically titled article: Is Google spinning out of control?:

Google has just announced two extraordinarily ambitious strategic gambits in the span of a week, and I'm not convinced that it can pull either of them off.

First the company announced OpenSocial, a hasty attempt to smother social-network phenom Facebook by pulling together an alliance of more than 50 of that upstart's peers and competitors. The idea is twofold: to make it easier for software developers to build universally compatible applications and to open up social websites to newfangled forms of targeted "social advertising," something Facebook actually started offering the next week.

Then Google (Charts) took the wraps off something even bigger: a grand plan to redefine the cellphone. Through the so-called Open Handset Alliance, Google will provide software and programming protocols for others to employ in building a new class of smartphone handsets and cellular information services. Once again, the unspoken goal is to create handheld billboards for blasting even more ads at us.

The article acknowledges that Google is trying to create a platforms in the online social networking and mobile communications space. But then, it says that the author is not convinced Google can pull it off simply because "this kind of software is hard"! Okay, thanks for stating the obvious. Anything more? The article concludes with the following statement about Google's "clear vision of the future" :

Google doesn't seem to take into account the most fundamental rule of high tech: Don't mistake a clear view for a short distance.

Seriously, does anybody really think that Google is so short-sighted?