Verizon and Google to team up on Android flavored tablet as iPad challenger

Verizon and Google to team up on Android flavored tablet as iPad challenger
Verizon Wireless CEO Lowell McAdam said on Tuesday that the carrier is teaming up with Google to offer an Android powered tablet to take on Apple and AT&T's iPad. "What do we think the next big wave of opportunities are?" Mr. McAdam said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. "We're working on tablets together, for example. We're looking at all the things Google has in its archives that we could put on a tablet to make it a great experience." Apps like Google Maps, YouTube and Android Market can join together with Big Red's VCAST audio and video products to offer streaming video and e-reader capabilities. With Android 2.2 quite possibly under the hood, Flash-enabled browsing could be a feature of the product. Marquett Smith, a Verizon spokesman, said that more details will be released later this week just before the Google I/O show, which means that Google itself might let some details about the tablet slip. You might recall that about a month ago, we reported that Google CEO Eric Schmidt spread the word about an Android tablet during a dinner party.

One comment made by McAdam that might make the hair on the back of your neck stand up has to do with unlimited price plans on his and other firm's new 4G networks , "The old model of one price plan per device is going to fall away." The Verizon exec says that he expects carriers to charge a monthly rate that targets a "bucket of megabytes," and "it's not out of the question" to see customers with multiple devices paying more to connect to the next-generation network.

source: WSJ



1. jtucker1987

Posts: 89; Member since: May 06, 2010

Wow....there is no need for tiered pricing. When the next generation network comes about the speeds will be faster and I think that the so called "congestion" will be much more manageable. It's funny that everyone on this site raves about verizons network (and I'm not disputing that) but somehow there is data congestion from these data hogs. Now if there were all these data hogs, wouldn't the network suffer from it? Obviously it doesn't so there is no real impact from these data hogs. We cannot be moving backwards with our technology. It's obvious that there isn't a problem and it's all about making more money off data since calling rates have gone down. Adding tiered pricing and data caps will not only hurt the consumer but it will hurt the business of websites believe it or not. From here this will lead to restrictions from going to certain websites without a "package.". For example, only being able to use YouTube, google, or eBay and paying ten extra dollars a month to access them. In my opinion, the government needs to step in and control these Internet providers before they end up hurting everyone. If you don't agree with me then that's fine it's only my opinion but unless we do something, Internet providers will bleed us dry and eventually make us pay for certain websites like we do when we pay extra to access HBO on tv.

11. fishpower187

Posts: 88; Member since: Feb 22, 2010

-1. If that isint a comment from someone who has no concept of business I don't know what is. You realize, carriers spend BILLIONS of dollars to reinvest in their companies and produce a better product that gets better. What you are suggesting is that carriers spend more and more money and sell their services for less and less. Your solution if the carriers decide they actually want to make a profit, have the government intervene. jtucker1987, you have a sad, twisted understanding of business. Good luck carving out a living for you and/or your family with that mindset.

16. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

Jt, you are obviously warped by ur government education. In the free market services are worth exactly what the market will bear. If vzw says "it will be 60 per phone for lte data services " and everyone buys it, that's what the market will bear. If noone buys it, vzw will lose money and quickly drop its price until consumer demand is enough to profit. There is never a need for government regulations like what u propose. Competition in the marketplace keeps things fresh, fair, and lower cost than anything the government can provide with its beaurocacy and YOUR Tax dollars. ... yes this also directly applies to health

18. jtucker1987

Posts: 89; Member since: May 06, 2010

First off, don't judge my intellect that's rude unless you want criticism back. I am a chemistry major and take much harder courses than your bs business, accounting, and finance. Try taking some quantum mechanics or quantum chemistry smart a** and then we will see who will be making a better salary ten years from now considering what I'm doing is much harder and more rewarding than your bs business. Thats why the average finance major makes $50,000 and an average surgeon makes $1.2 million. Science pays. Second off, all I was saying about the government stepping in was making sure that internet providers don't restrict access to websites and keep it open like it is. I know they spend billions and they have the right to charge for certain Internet speeds. This I do not argue. What I do argue is them charging 60 bucks a month for basic Internet and then charging another twenty dollars a month extra to access sites like YouTube or ebay. All I'm saying is that the Internet should not be restricted and cut into packages like tv is where you pay extra for certain channels. I did not mean to insult anyone by this comment and I apologize to everyone in advance. I just don't like being called dumb when I spend 20 to 30 hours a week in a lab to earn a degree.

20. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

Congrats on ur science major. But being intelligent in one area does not automatically lend itself to another. Pointing out that u lack knowledge on the free market and business vs government has nothing to do with your love of science so don't get ur panties in a

22. BlackberryUser

Posts: 609; Member since: Jun 26, 2009

Wow... So I'll jump into this too... Intellect and education are two different things. That said, I imagine the tiered pricing will be geared to offering internet to the user that wouldn't want to pay for an unlimited plan. Say someone checks there email and exceeds the current alternative option, a tierd pricing would give them extra options. I'm all for tiered pricing as long as an unlimited option always exists. I don't like the lack of an unlimited option for an air card currently.

26. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

Tmobile is completely unlimited on their aircards. they just throttle you down after 5 gigs of usage. Also, if your a Tmobile customer the aircard is only 30 a month.

30. plyfulgentleman

Posts: 43; Member since: Jul 17, 2008

JT...take it easy bro! I think somebody may have ruffled ya feathers a bit. Dont take it personal when people in here speak their minds but rather take it in stride. Since we never discussed education, I'm a nursing major and have a high respect for everyone. JT you have a point. With that said, they (for the sake of argument, anyone replying to your comment) also has a point. Dude we live in US of A, which means you have choices. I agree if Big Red does come out with LTE they will milk it for every penny its worth. On the other side though you can argue that techies like ourselves creep in here to see the latest and greatest. I, myself would pay extra to have blazing fast several MB speeds to tether multiple devices, wouldnt JT? Of course you would. Guys Guys we can all speculate and draw our own conclusions to how we see this cellular service will go. But i pose a question..."aren't we the same people who will step in line and and buy it regardless of the price!" The bottom line is here what we mainly want is convenience, simplicity, connectivity. remixfa said it best its what the consumers dictate as to what we're willing to pay for. Sidenote... I got a C+ on basic chem... it was needed for my BSN...

2. phoneguy

Posts: 213; Member since: Jan 08, 2009

the reason for tiered pricing is due to future bandwidth contraints. Although Verizon won alot of Spectrum they only have about 25MGHZ of it. Sprint doesnt need tiered pricing and will not have bandwidth problems as they have between 100-150 MGHZ of available spectrum. Before you jump all over me, this is pure fact and approved by Sprint legal as so. Verizons CTO even said that in an ideal world Verizon would love to have in the neighborhood of 100 Mghz of spectrum more than what they have. 8mbps sounds good in theory but thats all it is . Thats why they wont have LTE phones for some time. My point is not to knock LTE or Promote WiMax, as they both have their advantages. Just do some critical thinking. And why should the government step in to make the internet cheaper. Infrastructure is expensive plain and simple. If we gave the shit away for free your phones wouldn't work.

6. jtucker1987

Posts: 89; Member since: May 06, 2010

I'm not saying for the government to regulate pricing and I do agree with different pricing for different internet speeds. These things I don't have a problem with. The thing I have a problem with is companies like ATT, Verizon, and Comcast eventually putting caps on home internet use and then eventually restricting certain websites and then charging access to them. Thats part of what net neutrality has to deal with. The government doesn't need to regulate pricing but it needs to regulate how the companies conduct their business. They cannot be allowed to restrict certain sites and then sell them off in packages or put data caps on home internet. Thats why companies like Google and eBay are for net neutrality. That's all I'm saying about government restrictions is that.

17. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

Can u tell me which sites vzw fios and. Comcast are restricting without paying extra? Sounds like a bunch of big government loving free market hating conspiracy theorys. Comcast will only ever send a threatening email about usage if u use a massive amount of data, and that's mostly because people that use that much are normally pirating large chunks of media.

19. jtucker1987

Posts: 89; Member since: May 06, 2010

Remixfa, you don't understand what I'm talking about. Just drop it all together. I'm sorry I brought it up. I'm all for free enterprise. It's just articles from papers I had read before saying that it's a possibility bc of what happened to tv and radio. That's all.

21. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

I understand - but it is 2 different things going on - AT&T places a cap on usage because it cost the company more when you use your laptop connect more, for example. The charges for watching TV on the internet have nothing to do with AT&T. YouTube may cost extra to watch because GOOGLE may charge for us to watch it. COMCAST charges us for online TV watching (or will) because those channels are owned by a different company who bills COMCAST. Now, if COMCAST buys out NBC, maybe those channels owned by COMCAST will be free or packaged for a great with other channels.

23. BlackberryUser

Posts: 609; Member since: Jun 26, 2009

jtucker, I think you've read about the FCC's current internet initiative. If I understand correctly ISPs are not charging for certain web sites, but throttling the speed of certain web sites.

25. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

TV and radio are seperate beasts compared to internet. each tv channel is owned by some corperation that charges comcast/directtv/whoever so much per month to allow u to see the channel. thats how they figure ur billing and channel packages. you dont get charged "per site" that you visit on the internet. i think you missinterpereted the article you read. i completely understand what your trying to say, i just dont think you have the right idea about it.

27. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

the only concern i have with wimax is i think its a short term solution. Both sprint and clearwire have said that they will eventually move to LTE and drop the wimax. So what then?? Is it the next "Nextell"? They are launching both wimax and tmobile HSPDA+ here in the next month or so.. imma get whatever is cheaper and unlimited for home use. LOL

3. belve14

Posts: 113; Member since: Mar 31, 2009

Some one was bound to step up and challenge the seems to be will be blackeberry. I wonder what could be the next crazy thing they come out with. Who would have thought that cellphone companies would have expanded to the point of tablets lol...I love it

24. BlackberryUser

Posts: 609; Member since: Jun 26, 2009

Blackberrry with a clicking screen, I can't wait ... ** note the sarcasm ** I am a fan of Blackberries, but don't like the Storm.

28. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

i love the storm. i had that one magic one that worked flawlessly no matter what i did to it. android and windows have had tablets out before the ipad came out, but they werent by major manufacturers (or in windows case.. well thought out.. lol)... so really its ipad challenging android and windows. Both blackberry and WebOS are slated to have tablets out shortly, so every major mobile platform will have a pad in probably a year or 2.

4. belve14

Posts: 113; Member since: Mar 31, 2009

Some one was bound to step up and challenge the seems to be will be blackeberry. I wonder what could be the next crazy thing they come out with. Who would have thought that cellphone companies would have expanded to the point of tablets lol...I love it

8. Truth

Posts: 62; Member since: Jul 15, 2009

This was bound to happen. Technology is going mobile and it started with the internet cards for laptops. Tablets are the new way of consuming media and print while on the go and having a data connection gives the user the ability get what they want wherever they are. They really should have a display that you can fold up and just plug into your smartphone to enlarge the display for reading print media and keeping it compact at the same time.

5. iHateCrapple

Posts: 734; Member since: Feb 12, 2010

Things are getting VERY interesting in this mobile market....

7. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

Great, another useless hunk of junk to keep the iPAD company....

9. wade1968

Posts: 224; Member since: Apr 12, 2010

if google and verizon are going to do this they need to look at the ipad and put into there device what the ipad didn't. why buy a tablet device if you have to carry 20 plug in perifirals and carry it all in a giant back pack. the idea was everything in a small light package and to me Ipad fell well short of making a giant leap on there next gen devices.

10. iHateCrapple

Posts: 734; Member since: Feb 12, 2010

With the advertising campaign they have going, "Droid Does", I wouldn't expect anything less! I'm sure it'll have everything the iPad doesn't, and then some...

12. fishpower187

Posts: 88; Member since: Feb 22, 2010

+1. Amen wade. It would be an absolute waste to create a iClone without addressing many of its shortcomings. Unlike SOMEONE else in this threat, it seems you have a good understanding of business. Thank you for your insight!

13. VZWtrainer

Posts: 50; Member since: Jul 24, 2008

Please, please, PLEASE have non-proprietary I/O ports on the device such as USB and HDMI.

15. theman414

Posts: 132; Member since: Jun 08, 2009

Apple is usually a step ahead of the competition. By the time this comes to market, they would have already addressed all of their shortcomings and be the premier device like the iphone. If they don't beat the second generation ipad to market... they'll be playing catch-up for years.

29. iHateCrapple

Posts: 734; Member since: Feb 12, 2010

They wont be able to address the short comings unless they release another model. Proprietary connectors wont change, lack of adobe support wont change, forcing you to use iTunes to sync anything wont change, they cant add a webcam to an existing model, memory is not expandable, and the battery is not replaceable.... Those are the short comings that I see and are important to ME.

14. Mateo8326

Posts: 472; Member since: Jul 15, 2009

Is goes to show that Apple is still and will probably be for a while on top in the industry...Good luck guys but your compeititing with the wrong company wait til blackberry and palm throw there tablets first lol

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.