Updated:  Today is the big announcement in New York by T-Mobile, which will show off its spiffy new G1 phone powered by Google.  The G1 is the first smartphone to run the Google Android operating system and is expected to work seamlessly with Google services like Gmail and Google Maps.  The G1 will support the relatively new T-Mobile 3G data network, and since not many are familiar with T-Mobile’s 3G, it’s a good time to take a look at four things you should know in order to get the most out of 3G.

Data plans.  T-Mobile is currently offering two 3G data plans.  The unlimited data plan is $29.99 monthly when added to a voice plan and allows full access to T-Mobile’s 3G network where available.  The unlimited data plan + hotspot will set you back $49.99 per month but adds access to T-Mobile’s vast Wi-Fi hotspots to the 3G to keep you covered. T-Mobile is expected to offer a special data plan to go along with the G1 and this plan may have special pricing.  UPDATE: in the press conference today T-Mobile outlined the two plans available for use with the G1 phone.  There will be a $25 unlimited data plan with 400 texts and a $35 plan with unlimited data and texts.

Tethering.  Mobile professionals working on the go with a laptop derive great benefit if they can “tether” their phone to the laptop for connectivity.  This is accomplished either through a wireless Bluetooth or a USB cable connection from the 3G-enabled phone to the laptop.  Tethering turns the 3G phone into a modem that accesses the high-speed data network so the worker’s laptop gains access just as if it was connected directly to the network.  Many U.S. carriers charge extra for tethering their phones to laptops but it is allowed currently on all T-Mobile data plans without an extra charge.  UPDATE:  T-Mobile stated during the G1 press conference today that tethering with the G1 is not possible.  It is not clear if they are simply forbidding it or if they are blocking the ability on the phone/ network.

Phones.  The T-Mobile 3G network may look like those in use by other global carriers, but it’s not.  T-Mobile uses a radio frequency band (1700 MHz) for 3G connections that is unique in the world.  The carrier claims it allows faster data speeds but the reality is it means that only phones specifically designed for the T-Mobile network will work at full speed.  You can’t just use any phone, which limits the consumer’s choices for handsets.  According to the T-Mobile web site there are only five phones that support 3G offered by T-Mobile, not counting the newly announced G1, which is not available yet.  These phones are the Samsung t639, t819, Nokia 3555, 6263, and the Sony Ericsson TM506.

3G coverage. T-Mobile has only begun rolling out their 3G network for the past few months and it is not yet available outside some of the larger cities in the U.S.  In the past week, the carrier has lit up their local 3G coverage maps that depict the coverage on a zoomable map based on the consumer’s zip code or address.  This makes it possible to determine what your coverage will be prior to committing to a 3G data contract with the carrier.

At the GigaOM Mobilize conference just now, Chamath Palihapitiya of Facebook just gave a little indication of what’s next on the company’s product roadmap. Palihapitiya, Facebook’s VP of Growth, Mobile and International was serving on a panel about mobile social networking, when an audience member commented that a phone’s address book is essentially its owner’s social network, Palihapitiya replied, “That’s a great observation. Stay tuned.”

Facebook PR wasn’t going to let him say more than that, but I for one think this is a splendid idea that could be revolutionary if implemented correctly. Facebook has all along said it wants to mirror real-world relationships. When you throw mobile into the mix, there’s no reason to even have to separate so-called offline and online contacts. The site already has a vast repository of cell numbers on its member profiles, as well as many mobile users through downloads of its applications for platforms like BlackBerry and iPhone as well as mobile browser access. I think this integration would be so useful — Facebook could even go so far as to co-launch a phone with a handset maker.

But anyway, I’ll post the full write-up of the session in a moment.

Mobile Internet adoption is still rather slow. According to Forrester Research, only 21 percent of U.S. adult mobile phone owners use the mobile Internet, and only 7 percent do so at least once a week. One of the main reasons for this is that browsing the Internet through a mobile phone is kind of like eating soup with a fork – that is, using the wrong instrument to get the job done.

To provide an adequate mobile Internet browsing experience, it’s not enough to shrink the web page into a size that fits on a mobile phone screen. A web site designed for the mobile Internet should consider the different keyboard, the lack of a mouse-like pointing device and the different context; if it can wait until a user gets home, it probably will. So, how do we make the mobile Internet work well on different handsets with different screen sizes and different operating systems?

One solution is offered by Israeli startup Moblica. Founded in December 2007 with a seed investment of $700,000 from angels, Moblica aims to bridge the gap between the richness of Internet services and the limitations of mobile devices to offer an iPhone-like experience on Java-enabled mobiles. Moblica takes relevant web sites and redesigns them to give customers a better mobile user experience.

After downloading the Moblica application, users are presented with an iPhone-like desktop that contains different mini applications, such as weather forecasts, RSS feeds, Picasa pictures and more. Navigating is easily done using the keys, and pages load very quickly. Currently only Picasa and RSS are available, but Moblica says many more are set to launch by the end of the September, along with a consumer web site. Moblica says it can work with content providers to develop a mini-application version of their site in one to two weeks. The downside is that the Moblica solution currently only works on Java-enabled phones. Still, seeing these efforts to improve the mobile web experience leaves me eager to throw away my fork.

Moblica’s competitors include WidSets by Nokia, which also provides a downloadable application that contains different mini applications. While WidSets currently offers many more sites, after seeing both applications in action, I can say that I definitely had a better user experience with Moblica. An additional competitor is Volantis, which provides automatic content adaptation services for mobile operators.

What a difference a year makes. It was only 10 months ago when the first true netbook, the original Asus Eee PC 701, hit the market. The Eee was a ground-breaking little computer but had a few flaws, the biggest being the limited 800×480 display. Today there’s an overwhelming array of low-cost but highly portable and efficient little laptops.

Each is a full-featured notebook with displays in the 7- to 10-inch range and all are easy to tote around. Nearly all offer several USB ports, a webcam, LED backlit screens, integrated speakers, Wi-Fi and more, so there are very few differentiators. But the many choices in this nascent netbook market can overwhelm, so below is a quick hit list of popular models along with some basic information to help you decide which one might work best for you.

• Asus Eee PC: The one that started it all has blossomed into over a dozen models, ranging in size and features. You can pick and choose between hard drive-based units or those that offer limited-capacity, Solid State Disk flash modules. Asus offers a simple and effective custom Xandros Linux build, but supports and offers Windows XP as well. Early models use Intel’s Celeron CPU but Asus is transitioning to the newer Intel Atom, which is becoming the de facto netbook standard. Expect to pay between $299 and $599 for a netbook from the Eee PC line.
• HP Mini-Note: As you can see in our video review, we were very impressed with this 2.8-pounder from HP. Although it’s the one non-Intel netbook available, the VIA C7-M processor handles most tasks fairly well. And while the Mini-Note comes in a single size, it’s not one size fits all: You can configure the hard drive capacity, processor speed, memory and operating system. SUSE Linux, Windows XP and even Windows Vista Business can be had. The HP stands out from the pack with its higher resolution screen; it fits 1280 x 768 pixels into the 8.9-inch screen. Current prices range between $499 and $829.
• Acer Aspire One: This 2.1-pound netbook approaches more of a sweet spot in terms of pricing: The Linux version is $329, while the XP model is only $20 more. Acer includes a lite build of Linpus Linux, which I found to be great for quick, out-of-the-box computing, but most people would be better served with the XP edition. The incremental extra price also includes twice the memory (1 GB vs. 512 MB) and a faster 120 GB hard drive instead of the slower 8 GB of flash memory. Even at this low price, there’s plenty to like about the Aspire One.
• MSI Wind: The 2.6-pound Wind from Taiwan is very similar to the higher-end Asus model; in fact, the specifications are nearly the same, as is the price. For $599, you’ll get a 10.2-inch display, Windows XP and a 6-cell battery, which should offer double the run-time over most other netbooks as they use a 3-cell battery. Only this model and the Acer Aspire One offer a full-sized and correctly placed Right-Shift key, something very important to touch-typists. I personally returned my Acer and ordered a Wind partly for this reason, as well as for the fact that the Wind includes integrated Bluetooth for my wireless mouse.

There are other netbooks on the horizon as well. Lenovo has already announced their Ideapad S10 and Dell is expected to enter this market with a small Inspiron model rumored to start at $299. Essentially, these models are very similar to what’s currently available. In fact, there are very few differentiators amongst the crowd. Price is probably the most compelling, followed by the feature set. In my own experience, I’m finding that the Linux implementations are a third factor. While many netbook makers are offering custom Linux builds for simplicity, they have to balance that with the ability for the everyday consumer to add, extend and customize their own experience. Regardless, after using a low-powered computer and just the web for 60 days, I’m convinced that netbooks are well on their way towards becoming personal cloud computers.

The mobile games market is a treasure chest, and with 49.9 percent growth in 2007 alone and revenue expected to rise to $6.3 billion in 2011 from $3.9 billion that year, everyone is looking for the map. Like the road to any treasure, however, there are potential pitfalls along the way. And in those pitfalls, Israeli startup Mo’Minis sees an opportunity.

It takes very advanced programming skills to develop even a simple mobile game. Moreover, enabling an application to run on the hundreds of available handset models is an endeavor fraught with technological barriers. The investment of time and resources needed to overcome these pitfalls keeps many individual mobile game developers from ever entering the market.

Help is on the way. Mo’Minis, which was launched back in January 2008 and has raised $400,000 in funding from a private group of investors, plans to offer a free end-to-end solution for both skilled and amateur game developers. The Mo’Minis Studio will include a graphical user interface for programming, allowing even non-programmers to create games from scratch. Once a game is ready, the Mo’Minis Studio will then port it to fit a wide range of handsets in real time — it will even have the option of being “packaged” with relevant characteristics (such as ads or language of the user interface) particular to the distribution channel and/or advertiser. The Mo’Minis Studio is still in stealth mode but according to co-founder Aviv Revach, is due to be available in the first quarter of 2009, together with an online community for game developers where they can co-develop games and receive support from Mo’Minis.

Mo’Minis is not the only company that’s recognized the opportunity to support mobile game developers. Playyoo and Frengo offer tools for customizing mobile games, changing levels or adding custom pictures, and Giant Steps and Base77 are among the companies offering outsourced porting services.

But the services that Mo’Minis plans to provide game developers range from development, through porting, all the way to distribution (which may be both on-portal and off-portal), a significantly more ambitious undertaking. And the Mo’Minis Studio will be offered for free to encourage the creation of a substantial amount of new mobile games; Mo’Minis plans to make its profits out of a percentage from the games’ distribution, whether if the game will be sold or will be supported by advertising.

Will this business model prove to be profitable? That remains to be seen, but successfully delivering such end-to-end solution would be a meaningful contribution to the entire mobile games ecosystem, one that could both make it easier for game developers to get their work to the mass market and result in a wider offering of mobile games overall.

Written by Jim Courtney, an associate editor of Skype Journal.

Having been trained as an engineer, scientist and business person, I’m always amazed at how the U.S., the self-assumed leader of free enterprise and democracy, seems intent on stifling their own economy and innovation ecosystem through ongoing government support of special interests whose business models are challenged by technological innovation and breakthroughs.

This week brought just the latest example. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin told an audience at the CTIA Wireless Convention in Las Vegas that he was dismissing a petition from Skype that would force operators to connect any lawful device to the telephone network provided it doesn’t do harm to the network. This in a world in which Japan, Korea and Europe are providing the infrastructure that has allowed open competition, that separates the pipes from the content — Stockholm is a prime example — and that clearly provides much lower cost and higher participation communications activity for both the consumer and the enterprise.

This decision demonstrates nothing less than a failure on the part of a U.S. government agency to comprehend the technology infrastructure available to enhance business processes, build effective hardware platforms and take advantage of today’s more cost-effective rapid software development tools. And it portends for a less competitive U.S.

As for the impact on Skype’s presence on mobile platforms, it’s negligible at best. There are significant wireless data infrastructure issues that need to be addressed before there can be true VoIP over wireless with a business model that’s acceptable to carriers. Several vendors, such as iSkoot, IM+ for Skype, Fring and Mobivox, have found ways to access Skype via any carrier; they may not always have the full feature set but often having voice and chat is sufficient.

iSkoot has started to develop some carrier partnerships as they have found a way to bring both market advantages and cost savings to carriers using lessons from a SS7-type algorithm. By building on this algorithm, they also provide a means to access Skype for those smartphone owners who are on carriers with whom iSkoot does not have a direct relationship. IM+ for Skype allows you to set up calls not only for your own mobile phone but also to have them sent to other phones, such as one at the office. Mobivox simply provides access to Skype contacts from any phone handset with the help of VoxGirl and her speech recognition capabilities.

Over 80 percent of Skype users are outside the U.S. When a broader U.S. public starts to realize that the communications offerings found in Europe and the Far East are far superior to what they’re being offered, a movement will arise demanding change. It just may take a few years.

By then, with the adoption and implementation of Wi-Fi in homes and offices and the spread of dual mode GSM/Wi-Fi phones, such as any WiFi-enabled Blackberry 8×20, there will be many ways to circumvent the carrier networks. Users will start to ask about applications that they can run over Wi-Fi networks, not carrier networks. Once there is broad user demand for more openness, the politicians will respond.

The Martin recommendation, however, will limit hardware innovation over the long term. It will limit innovation in services and applications and it will put the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage for both business and consumers. But will it also drive the carriers to invest in the infrastructure required to support and match the offerings, both services and applications, available in Europe and the Far East? Will it really encourage the carriers to really open up their systems through appropriate APIs and rewarding business relationships? Should the U.S. (and Canada) be striving harder to have an infrastructure based on the Stockholm model, whereby users have fiber to the end point — effectively built as a regulated utility providing the “pipe” — pay under $20 per month for unlimited very high-speed data (100 Mbps) and have their choice of service providers?

In the meantime, the best response for current users is to go into guerilla warfare mode:

• use iSkoot or IM+ for Skype to access your Skype and SkypeOut contacts from mobile devices such as Blackberry, Nokia and other smartphones
• encourage the implementation and use of readily authenticated Wi-Fi access points at your home, office and other frequently visited locations.
• use applications such as SlingPlayer for Mobile and Qik.com on devices where it is supported and cost effective for the end user.
• show the carriers they are losing significant business.

If a broader base of users than simply “in-the-know” technical geeks start to experience these applications and services, awareness of the issues raised by the Skype petition will be spread virally, and we all know that’s the most effective marketing available. Change can be driven, if enough are aware of the issues and are ready to speak their voice. And isn’t that the American way?

Tom Keating reports that the owners of Skype Wi-Fi phones and other standalone devices have been experiencing excruciating network problems, and points to the vitriol flowing freely on the Skype forums.

This raises the question: Why are these outages happening? And should Skype (EBAY) start to build its own network of super peers? After all, their big plan is to drive Skype’s non-PC usage, as indicated by their recent expansion into the mobile market. They have also been aggressively pushing the Skype brand, making money by licensing it to hardware makers who build devices like Wi-Fi phones and then sell them at mass-market retailers such as Wal-Mart.

Skype benefits from the increased footprint that comes from expanding into the non-geek markets. The problem is that many of these new buyers are using Skype over Wi-Fi and don’t contribute as much to the overall P2P network placing an extra load on some and letting others leech off the platform.

I think it is time for Skype to start buildinga network of company-owned supernodes to take the load off the consumer network. They have in the past built infrastructure to support expansion into the PSTN-connect business. However, the reason the company resisted expansion into the mobile domain was purely because it didn’t want to build its own supernode infrastructure, instead choosing to partner with startups like iSkoot.

Of course, such infrastructure comes with big bills, and one can understand Skype’s reticence. Some, like our good friend Aswath Rao suggested that the whole Skype economic model will break down if that it wouldn’t cost the company that much to build dedicated supernodes, but it would take away some of the P2P cachet. And while that might be, I think that when you pay for a device, you expect a higher quality of service, unlike us PC-people who settle for poor quality because it doesn’t cost us anything.

Maybe it is time for Skype to pony up!