With increasing attention from both online and traditional media, the prospect of a Google Phone (or gPhone, or whatever the legal teams can agree on) is raising questions around to what extent the search company might be moving out of their software comfort zone and into hardware. Opinion is already split over how successful Google could be if left in charge of a section of the wireless spectrum, and with little in the way of a track record the naysayers in some quarters seem to be becoming more vocal in their doubts.

Reading a MEX analysis of Danger, however, I was struck by the similarity in the potential models between the company and Google. Danger, the developer behind the perennially popular Sidekick devices on the T-Mobile network, takes its revenue not from the distinctive handsets (which are constructed by Sharp and sold in the US, UK and Germany) but entirely from software and services - the device/server platform which makes the Sidekick unique.

“Hardware development, like much of the rest of Danger’s business, was a necessity to help the company achieve its objectives rather than a core function” MEX

Although Danger initially had to design and oversee the hardware devices its platform would utilise - since there was no other handset suited to its needs - production is now sourced from entirely OEM suppliers. Danger instead markets its expertise as a software and interface specialist, profiting not only from a per-user licencing fee but from a percentage of third-party application sales.

It’s not hard to see the potential for parallels with Google’s upcoming entrance into the telco market, only with the added benefit of potentially managing the frequency band the gPhone uses. Many doubt the company would introduce a handset of their own, instead preferring to supply a so-called Mobile OS, but perhaps Google will merely plant the seeds of compatibility - as Danger did with their built-for-purpose initial devices - with preliminary handsets and reference designs before relying on OEM and third-party manufacturers to produce interchangeable hardware tailored to the Google service backbone.

Looking at the services Danger currently offers - continuous server-based backup of phone content, seamless IM and email - it’s not hard to spot parallels in Google’s own catalogue. Indeed, many users are already relying on the company for their email, their scheduling and their document creation, as well as their entertainment, in addition to the core search functionality. Adding the 700MHz band as a wireless bridge between any number of handsets instilled with the “Google DNA” (and here we borrow - and adapt - Danger’s own term for their services) would not, then, be the huge leap some commentators are predicting but instead an evolution of Google’s ever-growing ubiquity.

MEX conclude by flagging Danger as a prime acquisition target “for companies keen to build a consumer messaging business around software and services”, and finger RIM as a good potential partner. What might be even more exciting, however, would be to see Google bring Danger into the fold; freed from the compromise of a traditional carrier, the possibility is there for third-party open access to seamless server/client connectivity. A Google Sidekick? Now that could spell Danger to the old-school telcos.