I ran across yet another article about the rumored Google Phone this morning, this time from The Washington Post.  Folks have been talking about this thing for a while now.  Just about every website and blog that covers Google, technology, gadgets, or the mobile market has had something to say about it.

So I decided I'd better give my take, too.  You know.  To have it on record.

The Washington Post article is great in that it illustrates exactly why Google should not waste its time with a mobile phone.  As the article points out several times, Google is primarily in the software business.  Enterprise solutions aside, Google isn't what I'd consider a hardware company.

It just doesn't make much sense for Google to produce a mobile device.

The best ways for Google to compete in the mobile market are by forging deals with mobile and network providers, leveraging its YouTube content for mobile consumption, and creating mobile software (which the Washington Post says may be what all this chat is really about).

The reason for that is simple:

If you can't make something much better than existing products you shouldn't try.  I'm not just talking about mobile phones here, either.  It's pointless to enter any market unless you can provide a service or a product that does something different than the competition.  Otherwise it's best to focus your efforts on something else that you can improve on.

I don't think Google has anything innovative or different to offer mobile users hardware-wise.  They've got some content and applications that offer value to mobile users.  But you can already get all of those things on existing phones.  Unless Google has been holding out on us, and has some killer hardware up their sleeve, a Google Phone would be… just another cell phone with Google as the start page.

If that's all they have to offer… they shouldn't even try.

- Matt