At the Nokia World 2008 conference, Nokia CEO Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo waxed eloquent about the N97 handset, its highest-end phone and described it as “world’s most advanced mobile computer” He went on to say, “We are, in fact, transforming the Internet. Putting in your hands the power to be more in tune with the world around you.” The device has finally launched, and those bold claims by Olli-Pekkas aside, the N97 is barely making a wave in this summer of the superphone.

I have had this device for nearly three weeks and my response to the device every time I use it: meh! Since it is the US version of the device, it works fine with the AT&T’s 3G Network (if you can call it that), but the device is underwhelming. After having used the iPhone, Google G2 (or T-Mobile MyTouch) and Palm Pre — the N97, its outstanding hardware features not withstanding feels outdated. It shouldn’t: it has every known software a regular modern mobile phone user wants – Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, Maps. And yet, it feels from a different era. Like a baseball player, long retired trying to make a comeback. (Related post: NewTeeVee Reviews N97 with focus on its video recording capabilities and is unimpressed.)

If you have been a regular reader, you know I have had a soft spot for Nokia devices. Actually I still do. The Nokia N73 and Nokia 8800 continue to be in my top five favorite phones of all time, and when opportunity arises, I still carry them around. Why? Because when it comes to quality, Nokia hardware is always top notch.

The N97, however doesn’t measure up. And that is very surprising for it had been one of the most anticipated devices, for most know the Nokia is world’s largest handset maker and with this device it could compete with new entrants such as Apple.Still I wanted to see what others thought, so earlier this morning I asked my twitter followers if they had any thoughts on N97 and how it was doing around the world. I was surprised by the downbeat responses. The one that was most telling was from @jonfingas who wrote back: “The N97 to me is Symbian’s inertia coming home to roost. Nokia’s dominance gave it a free ride for the past few years.”

So what do you think about Nokia N97?

The biggest Android news by far this week actually dealt with the release of another platform from Google. The search giant announced Chrome OS, an operating system targeting netbooks and desktops. As part of the announcement, Google made it clear that Android will stay around and will be separate from the new OS, clearing up questions of whether Chrome would mean the end of the smartphone operating system. Android had been discussed as a platform for netbooks, but it seems that Chrome will get that role, at least next year.

And those who can’t wait to put a Google OS on the netbook can do so now, as the LiveAndroid project is alive and kicking. A new version was released this week that enables mouse control over the interface. Development is continuing on the project, which is a port of Android 1.5 onto the x86 platform for use on netbooks. A LiveCD distribution that can be burned onto a bootable CD lets it be used without impacting anything already installed on the netbook. Google is planning a USB stick version, allowing LiveAndroid to be booted from the stick, a concession to the fact that netbooks don’t usually have optical drives.

Also this week, T-Mobile opened up ordering for myTouch 3G, its next-generation Android phone. The myTouch 3G is $199.99 with a two-year contract, and deliveries are guaranteed for August 5. The myTouch is made by HTC and is sold under the Magic name outside the U.S. At its press event for the myTouch launch in New York, T-Mobile surprised folks by saying it “has no plans to bring the HTC Hero to market.” The HTC Hero is the upcoming Android phone with the innovative HTC Sense interface.

Google is looking to make future versions of its Android operating system more social, said Andy Rubin, one of its creators and Google’s vice president of engineering (platforms), at an event in San Francisco earlier this morning. The event was held with T-Mobile USA to announce the launch of its newest Android-based phone, the MyTouch.

Frank Meehan, CEO of INQ Mobile, a speaker at our Mobilize 09 conference, must be really proud. He was the first to develop a device that specifically marries social networking to mobiles. And now everyone is doing it — including Google.
When I asked Rubin today why the self-described open platform doesn’t feature a native Facebook app, he said that social networking would be a key feature in future versions of Android. Google recently released Android’s latest version — code-named “Cupcake” — and will soon follow with Donut, Eclair and Flan. (What’s with the pastry fetish?)

Rubin said that Google doesn’t believe that applications should be silos and wants to help develop ones that deeply enmesh various mobile experiences — Internet, voice and location, for example. It’s taking a similar approach to social networking. “We are making a social push and we are looking at a more integrated experience,” he said. He declined to give any more details, including which future release of Android will carry these features, but I suspect we’ll be seeing them sooner than later.

The reasoning is pretty simple — that nature of communications is changing from just voice to many different modes. “Address book needs to be redefined,” Rubin said. Absolutely. As I wrote earlier, “Like email and instant messaging, Facebook (and soon Twitter) are what we use to stay in touch with our friends, colleagues and family.”

Anyway, to make a long story short (or is it too late for that?), someday there will be a Facebook app for Android that is made by the Palo Alto-based social network and it’s going to be as good as the one it has on the iPhone.

Enough is enough. It’s time for Eric Schmidt to resign from Apple’s board. Sure, Apple and Google have a common enemy in Microsoft, so at one time it made sense for Google CEO Eric Schmidt to have a seat on Apple’s board of directors. But Apple and Google are competing on more and more fronts, Android and Chrome OS being among the most prominent examples.

The FTC apparently agrees, as it’s reportedly looking into whether the fact that Schmidt sits on Apple’s board is anticompetitive. When news of the inquiry was first reported back in May, Schmidt told reporters that he didn’t think “Google [saw] Apple as a primary competitor.” In Sun Valley yesterday, following the Chrome OS announcement, Schmidt said, “I’ll talk to the Apple people. At the moment, there’s no issue.” Google’s general counsel, meanwhile, has argued that there’s a “safe harbor” provision in the antitrust laws for companies that don’t have overlapping revenue.

Well, Google doesn’t really make any revenue outside of advertising, so there’s no risk of overlap there. But they are competing with the following:

• Android vs. iPhone
• Google Chrome OS vs. Mac OS X
• Chrome vs. Safari
• Gmail vs. MobileMe
• Picasa vs. iPhoto/MobileMe
• Google Calendar vs. iCal
• Google Docs vs. iWork.com

Schmidt began recusing himself from meetings at which the iPhone was being discussed after Google launched Android. Does that mean he’s going to start recusing himself from meetings at which the topic is Mac OS X? Or Apple’s Internet strategy? So what’s the point of him being a director? (C/Net has made these points in a post last week. Fake Steve Jobs does a great job of breaking things down in a classic and must read post.)

Come on, Apple. Being friendly with other companies is all well and good — but by having Schmidt on the company’s board, Apple is opening itself up to more antitrust inquires from an unfriendly Department of Justice and the FTC (even if Google and Apple employees overwhelmingly donated to the Obama campaign). Eric Schmidt, it’s time to go.

Or just merge the companies and get it over with. Goople has a nice ring to it, don’t you think?

Photo courtesy World Economic Forum

The Times this week, in a story about a new line of “stylishly designed” electronics from Memorex targeted at women, asks if women are getting the gadgets they deserve. I would answer no. Women (and really everyone) deserve gadgets that are easy to use. And a hot pink, handbag-shaped iPod speaker dock from Memorex wouldn’t change the fact that I have to spend hours tweaking my home network or updating my iTunes software in order to set up a music playlist for a party.

According to Kasia van Hall at Memorex, which surveyed 1,500 women, the company concluded that:

“Women want to know about technology, but only just enough to get a taste of it. Of course not all women feel alienated in the electronics market. However, the majority, even if they are up to date with technology, simple [sic] don’t have time or energy to read long instructions and play with cables.”

I think that describes more than just women. Right now, those dominating the conversation about gadgets are a unique breed of people (mostly men but women, too) who like playing with them. So the fact that they have to mess with cables, install the latest version of Java or go out and buy an adapter to get something to work isn’t a dealbreaker; for them it’s kind of fun. They’re problem-solving. I feel the same way about building model train tracks, but ask me to spend more than five or 10 minutes setting up my phone and I want to rip out my hair. I think many consumers are like me (some probably have a slightly longer attention span).

To be clear, I carry a pink BlackBerry. My 2-year-old picked it out for me, saying I should “pick this one, because it’s pink.” In the end I went with it because I don’t really care what color my phone is, and it made my daughter really happy to see me take her advice (so far I’ve ignored her recommendations on sparkly shoes and cookies for dinner.) But electronics companies that are simply slapping a coat of bubblegum-colored paint on their products are targeting people who think at the level of my toddler. She’s smart, but I’d like to think that the majority of gadget-buying women out there are smarter.

Women don’t want candy-colored gear. Like most people, they want gear that works when you pull it out of the box and continues to work, without constant updates, even when you bring a new device into the ecosystem. That’s hard for consumer electronics companies to do, so I can see why they instead hope women, who tend to buy a lot of the home electronics gear, simply view the gadget world through rose-colored glasses. Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to go update my iTunes software again.

Intel has “been working with Google” on the search giant’s planned Chrome OS, according to a report today in The Inquirer, which goes on to herald the end of the Wintel (Intel PCs running the Windows OS) hegemony. My feeling is that such a proclamation may be a little premature given that Chrome won’t be shipping on consumer netbooks for another year, but I’ve emailed Intel to ask about its involvement anyhow. The degree to which Intel is involved would indicate just how badly Microsoft is bungling this whole netbooks thing, despite the fact that most consumers really, really want their netbooks with Windows rather than Linux.

So what has Microsoft done to help such consumers embrace portable computing? It hasn’t ported the coming Windows 7 to ARM-based chips, which are expected to be in the next generation of netbooks (the really awesome Nvidia Tegra chips are tied to Windows CE — bleh). Microsoft’s pricing for Windows 7 will add at least $50 to the cost to a cheap netbook (Microsoft makes a less robust edition that sells for less). Meanwhile, plenty of other vendors are throwing netbook OSes into the ring while Microsoft dithers.

In other Chrome-related news, Eric Schmidt, Google’s CEO, apparently wasn’t keen on building an OS, according to the Financial Times. But now he gets it. “We benefit…when [consumers] put more of their life online,” he reportedly told a group of media types at a Sun Valley confab last night. “They do more searches, click on more ads. It’s a very straight-forward strategic initiative.” Google, it basically makes the gargantuan universe of the Internet relevant to you. All for the price of a few ads.

I just saw that Amazon has launched a new, special store — dubbed Amazon Wireless — that sells wireless service plans and devices from U.S. carriers AT&T and Verizon Wireless. Sprint and T-Mobile USA are coming to the store soon. To be fair, Amazon is playing catch-up with San Francisco-based specialty e-tailer, LetsTalk, which offers more options when it comes to plans, carriers and devices. It also has a 10-year head start.

Nevertheless, it is safe to predict that thanks to its dominating presence on the Internet, Amazon will be a formidable competitor to LetsTalk. The clean and easy-to-use design, description of devices and quality of reviews alone ensures the future of this offering. I wouldn’t be surprised if a few years from now it becomes a king-maker in this high-volume business. I am frankly surprised that it took Amazon until now to do this, considering that it’s been offering mobile plans and special deals for so long. Wireless retailers get a nice chunk of change from the carriers for the deals they bring to the party.

The big question is if this is a new strategy, that of micro-stores focused on specialist markets. It had launched Endless, a specialty shoe store back in 2007. And Amazon bought Dpreview.com, a digital camera review site, in May 2007. How about a digital photography-focused store, or a cooking-related store. What do you guys think?

Borqs, a Beijing-based startup that develops mobile software for handset makers and mobile carriers using Google’s Android OS, says it’s received $17.4 million in Series B funding from Norwest Venture Partners as an increasing number of devices using the platform are being readied for launch. Some 18-20 new Android-based phones are expected to be released this year, including the T-Mobile’s, the successor to the T-Mobile G-1.

Borqs’ investors pushed the 2-year-old startup — whose software allows mobile carriers to create a consistent user interface on their smartphones and thus a “branded” experience for their users — to procure additional capital backing as it faces more demand for its service, its president of international business, David Young, told us. He said the company will use the money to hire more engineers to enhance its product in-house, expand its infrastructure and boost its product portfolio, but that the majority of it will be sitting in the bank as an “extra cushion.” Borqs is currently working with the top carriers in North America and Europe, according to Young. It already has a relationship with China Mobile.

Updated: Sprint today said it will turn over the day-to-day management of its wireless network to Ericsson, and spend between $4.5 billion and $5 billion over the next seven years for the service. The two companies will host a conference call later in the day to discuss the agreement, which Sprint is calling Network Advantage. It looks like Sprint is doing this to benefit its balance sheet — switching the capital expense of running its own network to an operational expense. Here are the details so far:

• The deal encompasses Sprint’s CDMA, iDEN and remaining wireline networks.
• 6,000 Sprint employees will be transferred to Ericsson, but Sprint spokesman James Fisher says, “They’ll be doing the same jobs in the same places,” only now they will work for Ericsson.
• No layoffs are planned, and the Sprint personnel will shift over to become Ericsson employees in the third quarter.
• Sprint will still own its network.
• Sprint will continue to make strategic decisions about its network and will choose equipment vendors, etc.
• Consumers will still deal with Sprint for customer service and technical support.

Instead of dealing with network operations, Sprint will now focus on service and innovation, which sounds pretty similar to what it said to me when I asked what it would do after it gave up control of its 4G WiMAX network to Clearwire. At the time,  Todd Rowley, VP of Sprint’s 4G business unit, told me that a focus on services rather than managing the network was the wave of the future in the telecom world — the network is merely a pipe, and the service provider must become the purveyor of customized service packages and applications over that pipe. Other network operators such as India’s Bharti have taken similar steps, and it’s certainly a better option than some carriers have employed when faced with connectivity becoming a commodity.

If Ericsson can efficiently run Sprint’s disparate networks and Sprint can indeed derive cost savings from this deal, while investing in innovative products and services, it may prove to be a case study for future telecommunications executives to review. However, there’s a lot that can go wrong, and previous attempts to outsource operations in other industries have had a mixed track record.

Update: After the conference call this afternoon, there are only two points that really stuck out, other than the fact that both Sprint and Ericsson were cagey about how much money this deal would save Sprint. Item one is that anything Sprint saves from this agreement will be reinvested back into the network to improve coverage. Item two is that Ericsson expects this deal to be profitable over time, but an executive said it will likely have lower margins than some of its other outsourcing contracts.

Wireless dealmaking has remained a fairly bright spot during the recession, according to an overview of venture investment and M&A in the industry released today by Rutberg & Co. The boutique investment bank focuses on digital media and wireless deals, and says it’s seen the dollar amount of deals in the wireless industry fall to $1.2 billion, a 43 percent drop from the first half of 2008. The number of deals, meanwhile, fell 31 percent, to 121. The most active investors in the space?  Qualcomm and Intel.

Qualcomm is defending its mobile turf against Intel’s encroachment, and strategic investments appear to be a weapon both are deploying in an attempt to get an edge. Intel is placing bets on applications such as SoonR and Sense Networks, but is also betting on WiMAX semiconductors as well as a programmable radio for mobile television based on an x86 platform. Qualcomm isn’t placing chip bets, as it has plenty of radio technology on hand already. Rather it’s investing in applications that already use its chips, in an attempt to gin up sales of them. Examples include Zeebo, a gaming console, and Modu, a slim phone with multiple jackets — the mobile phone equivalent of the interchangeable bands for Swatch watches from the 80s. So if you have a mobile app or technology and are looking for VC investment, this may be a feud from which you can benefit.

Almost half of those currently subscribing to a mobile broadband plan are willing to cut such plans in order to make ends meet, according to research from Strategy Analytics (profiled at eMarketer). Two-thirds would keep their in-home broadband, while 48 percent would dump mobile data plans. Of course they would. Any thinking person who looks at the costs per megabyte realizes that like buying diapers in airports, you’re paying a premium for convenience. So it’s not as difficult to give these plans up when times are tough.

But those stats also make clear that the promise of ubiquitous mobile computing hasn’t become as important to the average consumer as it may be to us here at GigaOM. Simply put, plenty of people can live without constant access to the cloud. As much as we love our smartphones, mobile broadband access over a 3G network is still a luxury for most.

Indeed, paying up to $60 a month for 5 GB or $40 for around 250 MB isn’t for the faint of heart, or the thin of wallet. We’ve worried how the recession would affect mobile data plans, especially as employers stopped subsidizing them. However there are signs that wireless data may become less expensive. MetroPCS and Leap Wireless both offer cheaper mobile data plans, while Verizon recently introduced its MiFi device, which uses the 3G network to deliver a Wi-Fi signal.

Since it requires no software, multiple people could share the MiFi. My husband and I each have a data connection and are thinking it might make sense to consolidate down to one. As wireless broadband speeds get faster through HSPA or LTE network upgrades in coming years, more consumers may join the few folks out there who already use their wireless data plans as their primary web connection — eliminating a home broadband bill entirely. I don’t recommend that step for multi-user homes or for heavy video streamers, however.

The rules surrounding the release of $4 billion in federal funds aimed at providing better broadband and creating jobs announced last week have so far disappointed applicants hoping to deliver advanced broadband services such as fiber to the home. Instead, the rules associated with the first release of grant funds appear to be targeted at getting connectivity to rural areas – ignoring places where customers can get the minimum standard of broadband, which the government has set at 768 kbps. This means projects like a downtown fiber optic pipe in tiny Canby, Ore., aren’t going to get money, since that area of Canby already has service that meets the definition of broadband.

Keith Galitz, the CEO of Canby Telcom, who spoke to Om about his plans back in February, told me yesterday that he will still apply for grants to provide DSL to the fewer than 100 residents who live outside of Canby Telcom’s service area, a project that will result in service speeds of 10 Mbps or 20 Mbps to residents who have no access. But he’s disappointed, saying that so far the stimulus program doesn’t seem to give him the opportunity to improve access for most of his customers. If I were on the planned fiber route, I’d be more than disappointed, as 768 kbps was slow five years ago, and feels almost like dial-up today. The government so far looks to be spending $4 billion to push outdated technology.

Rich Wonders, vice president of strategic marketing for Alcatel-Lucent, a telco gear provider hoping to see a boost in equipment buys from grant applicants, believes that this first phase will not impress those hoping to see advanced broadband services. However he expects applicants trying to deliver rural coverage and wireless broadband to benefit under this set of rules. This first set of rules, announced on July 1, governs how $4 billion of the $7.2 billion will be spent. It releases almost all of the money allocated to the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service under the stimulus bill and about a third of the money allocated to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration program.

“I believe the object is by end of first round to produce a map of the United States that shows the entire U.S…as having 768 kbps service,” Wonders said. “This round has less to do with advanced broadband such as fiber and fourth-generation wireless, and is more binary — a place either has coverage or it doesn’t.”

He also said the rules are surprisingly favorable to wireless, something he wasn’t anticipating before the first round of rules came out. Given the speed criteria, he expects that cellular providers wanting to use grant money or loans to expand their 3G networks to rural locations might win under these grants. However, since those carriers would have to abide by net neutrality provisions if they accept federal grant money, it may not be something to which the larger carriers are ready to commit.

Updated: Today Google went wild and announced its plans to create the Chrome operating system, which it says will be designed to run on netbooks. But it’s really an attempt to keep Google relevant as an advertising powerhouse as consumers begin spending more time playing with web-connected apps than the web itself. It’s the search giant’s reaction to a wholesale change in computing driven by ubiquitous wireless access and mobility. The Chrome OS is another step in allowing Google to create what we’ve called the OS for advertising — an ad platform that extends across all devices and all screens.  So let’s break it down:

First the Features:

• Chrome OS will run on both ARM and x86-based chips and is designed for netbooks.
• The architecture is Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel.
• Apps developed for Chrome OS will run on Google Chrome OS, and on any standards-based browser on Windows, Mac and Linux.
• Designed to boot and get folks on the web in seconds.
• Designed so viruses and malware aren’t an issue.
• It’s not going to be out until the second half of 2010 on consumer netbooks.

What It Means:

• Google sees a browser-like experience being key to netbooks and believes that rather than just surf the web, consumers want to play and use the apps.
• Microsoft, which has not ported its Windows 7 to ARM-based chips that will be designed into the future version of netbooks, and which has priced Windows 7 for Intel-based netbooks fairly high, will be scrambling if Chrome OS succeeds.
• The fact that apps designed for Chrome OS will work anywhere should attract developers to the platform, and as we know, developers are the new kingmakers in today’s app-focused world.
• While the world was waiting for Google’s mobile Android OS on netbooks, Google has suddenly pulled Chrome OS out of its hat. James over at jkOnTheRun calls it a case of classic misdirection. Google explains that Chrome OS is for the web, while Android is for devices — from phones to set-top boxes. We wonder why Chrome OS wouldn’t be more appropriate for the so-called fourth-screen devices.
• Building a special-purpose, lightweight browser specifically for the netbook might address some of the difficulties that developers were having porting Android to netbooks, such as issues porting to a keyboard-based user interface rather than touchscreens and trackballs.
• This all follows in line with Google’s love of everything in the browser, such as its embrace of HTML5 that makes it easy to bring a desktop experience (especially with video) seamlessly to the browser.
• Chipmakers betting on ARM-based netbooks such as Qualcomm and Texas Instruments will win if the user experience is robust enough to wean people from their familiarity with Windows.

Why Computing Needs to Change

The promise of broadband everywhere is changing the way we can communicate online. Google’s Chrome OS may or may not make it, but the attempt shows how far the industry has come from a bulky PC chained to a desk by its power cord and Ethernet cable. The computer is evolving from those dinosaurs to a smaller, mobile model that is always connected to the web. The iPhone brought us apps that are lightweight so users don’t get bogged down by smaller processors and slower wireless web connections on mobile devices. Google’s Chrome OS attempts to keep that speed, while preserving a platform for Google to make money through advertising. But it’s far from a done deal.

Why We’re Not Going to Get Too Excited Yet

• It’s not coming out for a year. A lot can happen in a year.
• Launching a browser is one thing (and so far, Chrome has received mixed reviews) and building an OS is another, and right now this is an announcement, not a product.
• Does the world need a netbook-focused OS?
• Can Google convince carriers, which aren’t big fans of the search giant, that selling netbooks with Chrome OS is the way to go? Most analysts expect carriers to become a huge distribution channel for netbooks.

If Google wants to be the advertising OS, its products need to deliver the optimal web experience on every device. Judging from some of the Google blog post notes, the Chrome OS will have instant-on and act as an interface between a netbook and the web, rather than feel like a traditional OS. In fact, it almost sounds like a…browser. Which may be the point, since Om argues that the browser is where the action will be in the coming years, and as we consume more of our web experience through apps, a full-fledged browser seems a little clunky.

Chrome OS isn’t expected to land on consumer devices until the second half of 2010, but by designing it for the new model of computing, Google has the potential to affect the netbook market like the iPhone did in the cell phone world. And since Microsoft decided not to port its Windows 7 software to ARM chips, which was going to be a thorn in the side of Qualcomm and Texas Instruments as they tried to design netbooks that could attract consumers already familiar with Windows, Google’s Chrome OS has an opening. TI has already lauded Google’s efforts. So while we’re not getting too excited, we’re definitely going to watch this develop. In the meantime, check out what everyone else is saying around the web in our handy compilation above.

Update: Google has added some information noting that the Chrome OS will be free, and listing a few of their partners in this endeavor, including several notebook makers and chip companies making ARM-based application processors for netbooks and smartphones.

Additional reporting by Jennifer Martinez.

When it comes to designing intuitive, compelling user interfaces, Apple is hands-down the best. Starting with the Mac but most evident with each new generation of “i” products — iMac, iPod and iPhone — the company has demonstrated time and again what so many other device makers and mobile operators have failed to understand: It’s the UI, stupid! So when Apple features Voice Control in commercials for the newest iPhone 3GS, the mobile industry should sit up and take notice.

For those under a rock over the last month, Voice Control is Apple’s VUI (voice user interface) that allows you to make calls and control the iPod features on the iPhone 3GS by speaking, rather than pressing numbers or navigating via the touchscreen. None of the functions of Voice Control are particularly new, and their implementation on the iPhone has been met with mixed reviews. Still, Apple has an uncanny ability to recognize and deliver features that consumers find compelling — witness the incredible success of the touchscreen.

Apparently, Apple believes — as we at immr do — that speech recognition is the sound of things to come for mobile devices and applications (subscription required). Apple’s attention is a welcome development, and will undoubtedly accelerate the shift that began with the success of Goog411, Vlingo and other speech-enabled mobile apps. Despite the fact that mobile devices are well-suited for speech recognition — they do, after all, have microphones already built in — no OEM or operator to date has delivered a speech solution that is easy to use, much less promoted the feature to users as a key distinction. Apple is changing that, and other device makers and mobile operators that fail to keep up will be left behind in the competition for users who value simpler, more intuitive UIs.

User-friendly interfaces, such as the touchscreen, have fueled adoption and use of mobile apps. So why is speech likely to be the next big innovation in mobile user interfaces? Several factors are driving developments:

• While UIs are much improved, mobile devices and apps still demand considerable user attention — for example, viewing displays, entering text, navigating through the UI, etc. Speech-enabled solutions free users from hands- and eyes-on distractions.
• Platforms such as Spinvox are opening up APIs, making it easier for developers to incorporate speech into their applications.
• Companies such as Vlingo and Google have taken advantage of sophisticated technology and an enormous user experience base to dramatically refine speech-recognition results.
• Synthesized speech, which once sounded “computer generated,” can now be produced in a natural-sounding way; book publishers recently sued to prevent Amazon from including it on the latest-generation Kindle.

While the marriage of speech technologies and mobile is under way and irreversible, the transition won’t be a smooth one. First, many undoubtedly remember past speech applications that didn’t work very well. That perception will need to be overcome; implementing speech with simple applications, as Apple has done with Voice Control, is a good way to start. Secondly, some applications are more compatible with speech than others. Selecting and listening to music, for instance, is a natural application; the number of songs and artists is limited, which improves accuracy of speech recognition, and users typically listen to music in a closed environment or with a headset — hopefully with a built-in microphone — which reduces ambient noise and makes it easier for voice commands to be understood.

Much as RIM has carved out a loyal following by developing solutions optimized for email, there is a significant opportunity for operators and OEMs to incorporate speech into mobile devices and applications in a comprehensive way. Apple is leading the way, and others will likely follow suit.

Phil Hendrix is the founder and director of the Institute for Mobile Markets Research and a member of the GigaOM Analyst Network. His complete discussion of the impact speech technologies will have in mobile is available in the latest GigaOM Pro report, “How Speech Technologies can Transform Mobile Use” (subscription required).

One of the most oft-cited benefits of netbooks is how much they cost, in that they offer much of the basic computing power of a laptop or desktop for a much lower price. This week, however, the focus shifted to how the prices for these handy devices compare to one another.

It emerged back in May that Intel offers preferred pricing for its Atom CPU, but netbooks are just now seeing the effects of such pricing. According to Liliputing, Intel charges $45 if a netbook maker purchases just the Atom CPU, yet the Atom paired with Intel’s 945GSE chipset and GMA 950 GPU (which provides a graphics boost) costs just $25. Essentially, the CPU and GPU together are far less to buy than the CPU alone. Nvidia’s Ion platform, meanwhile, is a more capable combination of Atom CPU and $30-$35 GeForce 9400M GPU. Since Nvidia doesn’t quality for Intel’s preferred pricing, the CPU and graphics combo costs manufacturers $30-$35 $70-$75.

The bottom line for consumers? If they’re looking to buy a netbook and are set on one powered by Intel, they may want to look for one with the graphics-boosting GMA 950 GPU, since they’ll be getting more for less. If they’re not set on having Intel inside, however, Nvidia’s Ion platform offers a comparable solution, price-wise. they’ll pay less but suffer in the graphics department. If they’re not set on having Intel inside, however, Nvidia’s Ion platform offers better graphics performance at a $50 price premium.

With certain companies, however, a higher-than-average price is practically synonymous with the brand. A good example is Sony, which finally jumped into the netbook market this week with the $499 VAIO W. The device isn’t much different from the cookie-cutter models we’ve seen over the last year, most of which start around $300 — 10.1-inch display, 1.6GHz Intel Atom chipset, 160GB hard drive, webcam, Wi-Fi and nearly full-size keyboard. The VAIO W does offer one relatively unique quality: The display is capable of 1366×768 resolution, allowing for native 720p video. Unfortunately for consumers, that feature would be better suited with the Nvidia Ion but it isn’t an option on the VAIO W. And if it were, it would likely cost even more.

Clearwire is launching its Clear WiMAX service in Las Vegas on July 21. That’s great news for conventioneers (especially the numerous tech-focused shows in the area every year) and casino attendees, never mind the locals, who will get to play with the new 4G technology. Day passes are available for $10, with mobile plans starting at $30 for 2GB of usage, and $40 for unlimited use at home or on the go. Clear claims it provides download speeds of up to 4Mbps and upload up to 500Kbps. But how will the network hold up when the gadget-heavy Consumer Electronics Show comes to town next January?