Just as happened with the iPhone, the prophesied Google cellphone is causing pre-emptive waves across newsrooms and blogs as various agencies sift through the scant evidence and clamour to have their say.  Today it’s the turn of the New York Times, who are keen to differentiate between the “revolutionary” and “customer experience redefining” iPhone and Google’s potential next-step into the mobile marketplace.

No longer is this step a rumour; it’s become a matter of when and not if.  NYT’s Miguel Helft is quick to label the search giant’s intent: using mobile ads to broaden their market share.  If anything, Helft makes it sound like, where Apple planned a revolution in the cellphone industry, Google aren’t particularly bothered what industry they’re entering, just as long as it caters to their role as advert and search provider.

“Google wants to extend its dominance of online advertising to the mobile Internet, a small market today, but one that is expected to grow rapidly. It hopes to persuade wireless carriers and mobile phone makers to offer phones based on its software” Miguel Helft, NYT

In fact, it’s Microsoft whom Helft - and others - believes has most to fear from Google.  A Linux-based, open-source and, maybe most important, licence-fee-free OS could prove a popular alternative to Windows Mobile and the demands Redmond place on its implementation.  Yet, again, the OS itself is very much a means to an end: Google don’t appear to be focused on creating the “perfect” cellphone operating system, rather the perfect ecosystem for their services outside the traditional PC.  It’s a stance that has left many in the industry confused.

“What is it that is missing in life that they are going to fulfil?  It is not a no-brainer. You can reach Google already through a number of devices. You don’t need a Google phone to do that” Arun Sarin, CEO Vodafone UK

Perhaps, then, what’s missing is not an application or service for the consumer, but something for Google themselves: the opportunity to push adverts and sponsored links to the millions of people who wouldn’t dream of going out without their cellphones.  Cynical, yes, but the majority of the company’s previous negotiations over the upcoming wireless spectrum auction have been focused on securing not ownership but opportunity within the band.  Many analysts have cast doubt on Google’s potential for success in managing the 700MHz region, but at its core their threatened $4.6bn bid succeeded in persuading the FCC to cater to their “open-access” provisions.  If Google then failed to win - or even failed to bid at all - then they’d still have carte blanche to push their OS in the area of the spectrum required to be freely accessible.

The expectation - and no small amount of hope - of the consumer world has leaned toward Google sweeping in and bringing their “do no evil” brand of free, easy to use and cleverly designed online magic to an industry maligned for over-branding, complexity and arcane pricing.  Yet with details in short supply, the most obvious path for the company would be to leverage their programming team and leave the established carriers to manage a new spectrum in at least parts of which they would be forced to allow Google free reign.  Not the device many are hoping for, and not the solely altruistic stance even more are so willing to attribute to Google.