Apple has responded to the FCC’s request for information around its rejection of various Google and third party iPhone applications for the iPhone.
In short, Apple denies that they rejected the Google Voice application, but they go into great detail about how the Google Voice application hurts “the iPhone’s distinctive user experience.” All of those statements are either untrue, or misleading, or both.
The first part of Apple’s argument, that they never rejected the application, is “a total lie,” according to many sources with knowledge of the Google Voice application process.
The second part of Apple’s argument, that the Google Voice application hurts the iPhone’s distinctive user experience, is seriously misleading. I know this because I’ve become intimately familiar with the Google Voice service and applications over the last few months. See here, here, here and here, for example. I haven’t used the Google Voice app for the iPhone specifically, because it never launched. But I have been briefed by the Google team on two separate occasions on how the app would work over the last couple of months. Also, I’ve demo’d the Blackberry version of the app, and now use the Android version of the app.
Here’s the key language from Apple’s letter, with my comments:
Apple: “Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it.”
Reality: One third party Google Voice app developer disclosed to us in July that Apple SVP Phil Schiller told them that Google’s own app would be or already was rejected. Google also confirmed this to us later. There is overwhelming evidence that Apple did in fact reject the application.
Apple: “The application has not been approved because, as submitted for review, it appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voicemail. Apple spent a lot of time and effort developing this distinct and innovative way to seamlessly deliver core functionality of the iPhone.”
Reality: This strongly suggests that the Google Voice app replaces much of the core Apple iPhone OS function. This certainly isn’t accurate, and we believe the statement is misleading. More details below, but in general the iPhone app is a very light touch and doesn’t interfere with any native iPhone apps at all.
Apple: “For example, on an iPhone, the “Phone” icon that is always shown at the bottom of the Home Screen launches Apple’s mobile telephone application, providing access to Favorites, Recents, Contacts, a Keypad, and Visual Voicemail. The Google Voice application replaces Apple’s Visual Voicemail by routing calls through a separate Google Voice telephone number that stores any voicemail, preventing voicemail from being stored on the iPhone, i.e., disabling Apple’s Visual Voicemail.”
Reality: Not true and misleading. The Google Voice application has its own voicemail function, which also transcribes messages. But it only works for incoming Google Voice calls, not calls to the iPhone. The Google Voice app in no way “replaces” Apple’s voicemail function.
Apple: “Similarly, SMS text messages are managed through the Google hub—replacing the iPhone’s text messaging feature.”
Reality: Not true and misleading. The Google Voice app doesn’t replace or in any way interfere wtih the iPhone’s text messaging feature. If someone sends a text message to your Google Voice number, the Google Voice app shows it. If it is sent directly to the iPhone phone number, nothing is different.
Apple: “In addition, the iPhone user’s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways. These factors present several new issues and questions to us that we are still pondering at this time.”
Reality: Complete fabrication, way beyond misleading. The Google Voice app can access the iPhone’s contacts database, like thousands of other iPhone apps. But the Google Voice app never syncs the contacts database to their own servers. There is no option for users to do this. However, Apple offers the ability to sync iPhone contacts with Google via iTunes. So not only is Apple’s statement untrue, but they also provide this exact feature themselves via their own service.
So how did Google answer the same question in their own separate letter to the FCC, also made publicly available today? We don’t know, because Google requested that the answer be redacted. But my guess is that the answer, which the FCC has and can compare to Apple’s response, tells a significantly different (approximately the exact opposite) story:
Our sources at Google tell us in no uncertain terms that Apple rejected the application. And we have an independent third party app developer who tells us that an Apple Exec also told them back in July that the Google Voice Application was rejected.
In other words, there is strong evidence that Apple is, well, lying.
Which also is the easiest way to explain Apple’s long rambling letter to the FCC. Why go into so much detail about the problems with the Google Voice application, and then say that it was never rejected? If the app does actually replace all of those core apple phone, contact and SMS features, why not reject it out of hand? I don’t believe anyone would say Apple made the wrong decision if that laundry list of nonsense had any truth to it (we have an answer to that, below).
Multiple sources at Google tell us that in informal discussions with Apple over the last few months Apple expressed dismay at the number of core iPhone apps that are powered by Google. Search, maps, YouTube, and other key popular apps are powered by Google. Other than the browser, Apple has little else to call its own other than the core phone, contacts and calendar features. The Google Voice App takes things one step further, by giving users an incentive to abandon their iPhone phone number and use their Google Voice phone number instead (transcription of voicemails is reason enough alone). Apple was afraid, say our sources, that Google was gaining too much power on the iPhone, and that’s why they rejected the application.
Apple seemed to be fine telling Google and others that the real reason they wouldn’t accept the Google Voice app on the iPhone was a fear of being turned into little more than a hardware manufacturer over time as users spent more and more time on Google Voice and less time on the competing native iPhone apps. Or simply letting people believe that AT&T was behind the rejection. Until the FCC got involved, that is. Then Apple denied the rejections and directed the FCCs attention to misleading or simply untrue factual statements about the App.
Of course, now both Google and AT&T are required to tell their side of the story to the FCC, too. And those stories aren’t adding up.
What Happens Next?
Here’s what we believe Apple is preparing to do next. Their statement that they haven’t rejected the app, along with the long laundry list of complaints (none of which are true) tells us that they’re backtracking, and fast. Sometime soon, we guess, Apple will simply accept the Google Voice application. They have to – any serious investigation into the app by the FCC will show that the complaints around the app are unfounded and that it does none of the things Apple accuses it of doing. So Apple will save face by simply asking Google to ensure that the App doesn’t take over native phone, sms and other functions, and doesn’t sync the contacts to Google’s servers. Google will comply (they already have), and Apple will graciously accept the application.
But we’ll all know exactly where Apple stands – jealously guarding control of their users and trying to block Google and other third party developers at every turn from getting their superior applications in front those users.
This isn’t about protecting users, it’s about controlling them. And that’s not what Apple should be about. Put the users first, Steve, and don’t lie to us. We’re not that dumb.
great write up. nice job tc.
“Put the users first, Steve, and don’t lie to us. We’re not that dumb.”
Good on you. “Misleading” being the buzzword, I thought you would make it all the way through that whole article without bringing the fact that this just might be just another corporation lying through the skin of its teeth.
If you consider goog voice as a service provider, the 2 year contractor doesn’t allow you to defect from AT&T. So you should challenge that 2 yr compulsory, by asking for unlocked iphone for 600bucks. And after contract is over you can switch to goog or verizon or whatever
As long as the owner of the iPhone fulfills their contract by paying the minimum charges for the length of that contract, why does it matter how they use the device to make and receive phone calls?
Apple denies that they rejected the Google Voice application, but they go into great detail about how the Google Voice application hurts “the iPhone’s distinctive user experience.”
>>>>>> Its seems funny. This denial statement would never help Apple to hide that happened actually. No way Google voice app will disturb the iPhone unique features. Its simply looks like a lame explanation that Apple give to FCC.
Apple will save face by simply asking Google to ensure that the App doesn’t take over native phone, sms and other functions, and doesn’t sync the contacts to Google’s servers.
>>>>>> The attitude of rolling back by Apple proves they had made a wrong decision by rejecting Google Voice.. Apple to show its statements true, will soon accept and approve the Google Voice app. At least Will Apple take right decisions and provide strong reasons for rejections of various apps??
How would using Google Voice threaten ATT or any user contract. Wouldn’t a user have to use the ATT network to route Google Voice calls, or is Google planning to offer a competing network?
AT&T is still your service provider, all data for Google Voice still has to go through AT&T’s network.
More specifically, I think it uses the phone to dial a number, and will thus count towards your alloted minutes (not the unlimited data plan). That’s how it works on my bberry at least.
SMS is a different story though, and all texts to a google voice number would be free to anyone with an unlimited data plan. See collusion, oligopoly pricing and margins on SMS charges and this could hurt AT&T
Agreed, great analysis Mike! Apple’s letter is total BS. I really enjoyed reading the responses from all 3 companies today. The fact that the only “censored” part was Google’s story of why Apple said they rejected shows there’s some serious shit going on behind the scenes.
Also enjoyed the article and agree with Michael.
Business is full of decisions like this where making the right decision isn’t easy. To be a great company you have to admit when you fucked up, do the right thing, and people will forgive. Apple: you owe us all an apology.
Brian
You guys enjoyed this article? I found it teriable, like a whinny five year old…not quite the technology journalism I would expect. More like strong guesses that you hope turn out right, yet you’ll never be able to prove otherwise (almost like what you’re saying apple is doing…you are no better than them)
The tone in this article was less than professional, and downright annoying.
It helps, when you’re criticizing a writer’s style and tone, if you can at least spell and construct sentences at a fourth grade level. Just FYI.
Perhaps he was typing on a virtual keyboard?
I don’t see how you further the convo by critiquing his the replier’s writing. Straw man… and all that.
There is a ton of pile on from that simmering, seething Apple haters crowd. You know you’ve been waiting, just like the “death panels” crowd, for the right moment to seethe amidst continuing AAPL success. As a shareholder I’m like a pig rolling in mud.
As a user and early invite to GV I’m upset at the entire affair. I don’t fully believe @marrington here, only b/c until full disclosure of sources his report may as well be conjecture. The FCC can not tell Apple how to run the AppStore approval process, they are not regulators of business in that respect. The FCC may be able to tell Apple what kind of application not to reject simply b/c AAPL believes it destroys some zen like UX they have designed and own in the iPhone, or, b/c it introduces new telephony features.
The AppStore is a serious problem, but only in terms of its success. The statement from Apple states that they are managing 8500 new apps/updates PER WEEK. That’s a lot. What’s the solution? You say “open it up” — but admit it, this would have been a giant fail whale had this been the sourceforge or shareware.com model. Buggy, crashy, incomplete! applications would have been thrashing your little pocket phone/computer to hell and back. You anti-fanboys just will not admit this point. The AppStore approval process is messed up a little due to extreme growing pains.
How Apple does their internal business will not be changed forcibly by a government panel, period. What the future of the telephony model is, and, how that competition plays can be directed by enforceable regulations the FCC creates. This is the place we can have hope because as much as we are all bummed about not getting that fart app update, what we are really troubled by is the notion that Apple might stifle meaningful progress.
Apple could be a harbinger for change in the area of telephony along with Google. All the pain they took by being the only company to ever be allowed to control what gets installed on a device other than a telecom will pay off IF they do the right thing.
“I don’t see how you further the convo by critiquing his the replier’s writing. Straw man… and all that.”
No, a straw man is when you invent a false version of a person, and attack that instead of them. It’s perfectly valid to demand simple sentence cohesion from anybody who deems himself worthy to loudly and proudly denounce anyone’s writing ability.
And I mean anybody – you, me, anybody. If somebody comes at you about how you suck as a writer, and they haven’t even got subject-object shit down right or don’t know how to spell “customize,” you have every right to laugh and laugh and laugh. It’s like having a naked, drunk whore lecture you because she caught you holding hands.
Robert N. Lee has this one nailed. And, for the record, you shouldn’t attempt to criticize someone for using fallacious reasoning when you don’t even understand how the fallacy works.
Let’s all pile on and demonstrate our intellectual superiority…
Yes, fine, perpetuitas misused the term “strawman”. But it’s funny how Robert Lee and Jim Pict failed to address any of the actual substance of perpetuitas’s argument.
Have to say I don’t see what you are. I think this did an excellent job of pointing out how laughable Apple’s response was here. Plain and simple they lied.
Not sure what it is these days. Just because you say it is or isn’t true that makes it real? I don’t think so.
And everyone seems to be doing it. Say it over and over again with a tone like even you believe it and others are supposed to buy what you are selling?
People need to realize that things are on tape or on line and ae easily checked.
Fake you resume… people are going to find out.
Politicians claim they never said this or that… reporters pull out the tape of them saying EXACTLY that.
Did Apple not think people would check the veracity of what they wrote?
Sad truly sad… I AM an iPhone-using, MacBook Pro writing Apple fan and I am disgusted.
And he can prove they lied how? Sounds like an Apple hater to me. Google didn’t deny anything Apple said. In truth I found their reasoning for the native app being better was the economic advantage offered by the popularity of the Apple’s App Store. U know the one that Apple built and spends a great deal of money promoting.
This stream of articles is missing the whole point: why is the Government involved inthe first place? Apple invented the iPhone, it isn’t open source technology, why should our government care why apps they choose to make available? Google developed android and bought Google Voice (Grand Central), so they are welcome to integrate those two as much or as little as they like. These technologies were developed by capitalistic companies in a democratic society that is supposed to protect rights to property and intellectual capital. FCC, WTF?
Well, it is mostly a question of where you draw the line. I hope we would agree that you would not like anyone to tell you which websites you can visit. Like comcast might claim proprietary cable technology coming to your house and other than great financial difficulty caused by all the random websites being opened it also makes bad user experience when unapproved sites are accessed. If there was no net neutrality I guarantee you there would be an awesome business model in telling google I want half of everything if you want access. But it’s illegal. Which means the state is interfearing. Now whether the same should apply to mobile apps, and whether you can claim to have a dominant platform and not be subject to anticompetitive scrutiny is the question. I would consider this an extreme FCC flattery for now.
you mean interfering. Interfearing is a HORRIBLE typo in this context
Really? Seems to me you guys weren’t defending Microsoft with the whole ie debacle. This is much worse than that. MS was never saying Netscape or firefox are banned because they interfere with user experience. But you fans are all the same. Pick a political party, a sports team, or a company. They are your team now and consequently are incapable of doing anything wrong.
Well said. I used to just quote people “Microsoft is the devil” Then I went deep int Microsoft, and Apple. Microsoft are angels compared to Apple! I do love Apple products, but hate their mentality so much.
I’m glad FCC got into this.
DanB:
The basic question is whether AT&T can restrict the kinds of applications offered by other companies on their networks. Apple and the App Store are involved because the iPhone is the mechanism for the apps to run, but the government is involved because AT&T is one of the largest carriers, and they’re exerting control to restrict other carriers (i.e., the Google Voice service) from being on the iPhone.
Apple, on its own, probably wouldn’t care about Google Voice, and thus wouldn’t have attracted this attention.
So would it be OK if Microsoft prevents installation of Firefox on their Windows OS?
You completely missed the point. If Bell South (my ISP) said I could only use Windows or IE over my dsl connection, then that would be similar to the situation that he pointed out.
No, I think I am very much on the point. It was Apple (not AT&T) who reject the App, wasn’t it?
The government is “interfering” in this case because of the numerous complaints it received from consumers alleging unfair business practices. In this case, they are attempt to protect the consumer, which is the whole point of oversight.
The FCC is involved because of AT&T. The FCC regulates communication CARRIERS. That is the whole “net neutrality” debate – it is about CARRIERS limiting access to certain uses of their network.
Apple is not a CARRIER. The invented a proprietary application execution platform (they aren’t even an application service provider) and are free to control what executes on that platform.
General anti-competitive practices are investigated by the Justice Dept. (vis a vis Microsoft). Notice the conspicuous lack of involvement by Justice?
That’s because they are really investigating AT&T. C’mon, people, Apple is just collateral damage here – but to hear the “haters” you’d think the case is actually about Apple…
You work for apple too?
I would have to agree. It’s horribly one-sided and not at all what I would have expected.
First off, the author claims that Apple has rejected the app based on what people have said within the developer team of Google Voice. If he chooses to believe that these are more trustworthy than Apple, so be it, but that doesn’t prove that this is indeed what happened. Apple might have given Google feedback on how to change the app unofficially before taking any official action, for instance.
Second, the author seems to be missing the point about Voicemail, SMS and so forth bypassing the built-in apps. The fact that they don’t disrupt Apple’s apps is not the problem. The fact that they in effect displace those apps, is. If you want a solution where using Google Voice for SMS, Voicemail and phone calls, use another platform.
When it comes to the sync of contacts, again, we’re left to trust based on nothing at all that the app doesn’t send contacts to Google’s servers. There is no more proof presented that this is the case, than that it’s not. Either way, choosing to believe one side doesn’t prove that side of the story correct without proof.
Lastly, using the fact that Google had their comments to the FCC redacted, isn’t proof of anything at all — more than that they don’t want people to see what they were saying.
You might prefer to believe the sources at Google more than you believe Apple. That’s fine. But pretending like any of this is proof of anything, more than that the author has it in for Apple for not approving the Google Voice app is just make-believe.
impressive to see how much ‘explaining’ is done for each “evil” thing Apple does!
for the cult follower the leader has ALWAYS a good reason! ALWAYS!
I never though Apple would ever be in this position. They’re officially no longer the underdog.
the underdog depends on which product we’re talking about. They were never an underdog in the smart phone business.
Apple’s appstore and nazi ways are what piss me off the most. You have to jailbreak your phone to get any of the good apps like spoofapp for instance. All because Apple wants to be in control of what can or can not go on your iPhone. If it’s your phone why can’t you put whatever the hell you want on it without a ton of software restriction.
If you don’t like Apple’s game there are plenty of great smart phones on the market that do more. I have never really understood why people are willing to put up with all the shortcomings of the iPhone just because of the sexy interface.
I’d rather have Apple watching over the App Store than to see it taken over by porn and the likes. Most mobile phones have NO parental controls to speak of – even the iPhone.
If you want apps that Apple doesn’t make available, break your phone – at least you have an option.
But for 99% of the people out there, it works just perfectly out of the box.
I think you forget that you are in the minority on this one. Apple doesn’t have to cater to you – get it?
Apple sucks more than what people know or can see… it’s another MicroSoft with more pain in the ass.
Steve Jobs is a liar, and anybody who comes to Apple defense when their lies are so blatant is a spineless kool-aid drinking retard.
I have a macbook, an iphone and i’m truly shocked @ Apple’s deceit.
Apple is the new Microsoft.
Disgusting, Apple, Disgusting
What’s wrong with kool-aid?
It’s so black I can SEE myself in it…
it’s like a mirror
Black? You must have a bad ratio of Kool-Aid to water. Too much grape mix would make it look black. Try a different flavor, or just add more water.
He broke through my parents’ living room wall when I was, like, 9. What a mess.
LOL!
“Don’t drink the Kool-aid” -
This phrase comes from the 1978 “Jonestown massacre” in which members of the Peoples Temple cult committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid..
http://www.word...thekool-aid.asp
That’s why
Apple is the new Microsoft? You have some things to learn about Microsoft…
Cant wait to see what happens with Spotify then …..
If the Google Voice incident is any indicator, they’ll reject Spotify, and retro-actively kick Pandora and Last.fm out for competing with iTunes.
I don’t think that will actually happen, I’m just saying that Apple’s App Store policies are so off-the-wall that we have no idea what will happen. They could reject it, and make them use Wi-Fi only. Then they could backtrack a month later when the FCC gets involved, like they’re doing here. We just don’t know.
“Apple is the new Microsoft? You have some things to learn about Microsoft…”
Yeah, Apple’s actually worse. I don’t remember MS flat out telling Netscape they couldn’t make browsers for Windows. Or Opera. Or Apple.
Apple’s done precisely that on the iPhone.
MS almost got broken up and now every version of Windows has to pass an extensive federal legal review to ensure *they aren’t including software they make that would drive third party vendors off their platform.*
So is there some reason Apple can do worse and never expect any consequences, beyond “Apple is magic?”
interesting perspective.
“So is there some reason Apple can do worse and never expect any consequences, beyond “Apple is magic?”
Well… there is no similarity at all.
apple is not a monopoly in the smartphone market.
microsoft was a monopoly in the OS market and it used that monopolistic power to kill netscape.
apple is not involved in practices that are intended to kill competition.
what apple IS doing is closing its products for third party apps that conflict with its own interests. it may be a shitty thing to do (which it is) but it isn’t against the law.
LOL that’s laughable, while you could grant that Apple has worse polices than Microsoft; however, without market power it simply does not matter b/c the consumer still has broad choice available..
Beyond that, MSFT was not broken-up and still put Netscape out of business.
Your whole argument is policy based rather than based on market-position and policy.
I don’t see how you have succeeded in countering R.N. Lee’s points. Market position has improved and continues to improve, the issue under discussion is how Apple’s policies are similar or worse than MS’s when they were (are) being lynched.
Besides, in the case of the smartphone, I think you should revisit the stats on market position. Mr Blah Blah, your name says it all.
Arjun when you are comparing the actual affect on a consumer market size makes all the difference in the world.
When it comes to the smartphone market there are plenty of competitors, and as a result plenty of choice for consumers to choose a phone they want, and the features they want to use on that phone.
EVEN in the case of the iphone — the phone itself can be jailbroken and any app can be used.
If a company does not have market power their draconian policies don’t undermine competition in that sector. That’s the key difference between M.S. policies and Apple’s — the outcome.
In Apple’s case consumers are free to choose and the MARKET not intervention from government can dictate the outcome.
If you don’t like Apple’s policies, switch phones or jailbreak your iphone. During the M.S. phase there were very few alternatives to M.S. software on the desktop.
http://mobile-t...stics-2008.html
Q4 2008 — apple 2.4%
Q1 2009 –~10% (v. 5.3% Q1 2008)
http://arstechn...are-doubles.ars
I think you need to go back and look at the stats in comparison to M.S. dominance of the desktop ~90%+
Mr. Arjun I’d advise you spend more time following your own advice and less worrying about my name or Apple’s tiny market share and outsized influence on opinions.
Everyone is free to complain, but the comparison of Apple’s iphone influence (just influence and fanboism, not actual market share) to M.S. desktop dominance in the 90’s is absurd.
I agree with you .. and someone has written that Microsoft has monopoly in OS .. I think there are others as well like linux, unix.. though MS has large number of users.
Panasonic won’t let me install Firefox on my microwave oven… I’m hoping to get class-action status.
Absolutely the best comment on here!
And why, though I find Apples actions annoying as a consumer, it cannot be compared in anyway whatsoever to Microsoft’s actions.
Microsoft put Netscape out of business, I am pretty sure rejecting the Google Voice app won’t be doing the same to Google Voice, or Google.
Having a monopoloy IS the reason why Microsoft policies were so reprehensible and illegal, you cannot disconnect the marketshare from the policies.
Quite funny to see such statement. I think apple is apple an google is microsoft as an analogy to the early 80’s.
Apple was clearly ahead, but microsoft came with an “open” alternative called windows. The rest is history. Today, the iPhone is ahead, with the same closed model. Google will just take it all with the next iteration of openess: android.
I agree that this is a very possible scenario. Apple wants complete control of everything, but there are only just so many people who are willing to stay confined within the walls of Apple’s garden. Apple’s been here before, so why haven’t they learned?
The reality we learned from Microsoft is that open, uncontrolled is really cool for the .05% of the world that are first adopters and technology geeks. The rest of the world doesn’t want all the problems that go with openness. Apple learned out to serve the other 99% of the world. I could care less if Apple keeps Google off the phone as long as what is on the phone works as close to flawlessly as possible. Go ahead… wall my garden, kick apps out of the app store.. do whatever you have to do to make the phone just work and not confuse my grandmother or my mother or my father. Keep everything off that even might confuse them so they can easily use the things that remain without confusion. Apple built this piece of genius and now they should have the right to protect it. If you are in the < 1% that want complete openness, quit complaining and use Android.
Robert…you are hogging the conversation. We hear you, you use the android platform and are happy with it…that’s great we are happy for you.
You can tell us as many times as you want all the features that Android has. It will not change the fact that the iPhone is a superior platform. The only things the Android has up on the iPhone are the apps that Apple has not yet approved. This in NO way makes a platform better over the other.
The reason is this: Apple is not a monopoly. While it may be dumb, Apple can do whatever they want in terms of software they allow/disallow on their phone. If and/or when they become a monopoly, THEN they will be subject to all of the regulations that Microsoft is subject to.
Did Apple do the wrong thing?
Yes
Did Apple break any laws?
No
Yeah, you have a real head for this stuff. What do you do for work?
Thank god for this summary, cause I just couldn’t read past the BS headings of the other posts:
Apple: we didn’t do it
AT&T: we didn’t do it
Google: we’re awesome
actually, that’s a pretty good summary you have there.
awesome post!!!!
Apple is the new Microsoft… google is the new apple
QFT
I don’t think any of that is helpful. Apple isn’t “the new anything,” they’re behaving exactly as they always have, and Google’s just plain not a company at all like Apple. Or Microsoft.
I’m really tired of the “IS APPLE NOW EVIL?” nonsense, of late. That “good/evil” garbage is Apple branding message – none of these companies are good or evil. I’m certainly not adopting it – it was stupid, the last twenty years of Macheads yelling it at MS, and it’s stupid now when it’s yelled at Apple.
Developing a personal relationship with a corporation is seriously brainless – and this is coming from a long time marketing guy. Longtime metric of mine: any company that makes it personal should immediately be regarded with suspicion. You aren’t being dealt with honestly, ever, in that position.
As a matter of fact, publicly held corporations in the US are required by law to act solely in the financial interests of their stockholders. They aren’t allowed to be your friends, practically, so they’re always pitching something underhanded when they act like they are. *Always.*
Wow.
@Robert N Lee speaks the truth!
Thank you. Amidst the silliness of haters (why burn cycles like that?) and simplifiers (no different thanthe “birthers” and the “death panel” ppl) it’s nice to see one person speak reasonably.
Look, as Jamie Zawinski pointed out:
He was talking about AOL, but the same applies to Apple (and Microsoft) as well. And Google, for that matter, “Don’t be evil” mantras notwithstanding.
You just ruined all the fun out of it.
Oh yeah? Well, I *still* say, Apple is the new Apple, and GoOgle is the new GoOgle, and AT&T is the new AT&T. And we should shiver our timbers. Arrrrg
This is a little too easy and convenient in my opinion. Yes companies will generally act in the interest of the shareholders, however there is no doubt that companies develop “cultures”. This is defined by a lot of things, but it has a clear impact on how business decision are made.
I see no issue with a certain amount of brand loyalty if you respect the culture of a certain company. No they are not trying to be your friends, but you might appreciate the way they do business.
Well said — i’m older even than you, sir Michael (and nearly woz and steve vintage), so my sense of irony is well-honed. the doublespeak play of the commercial we all saw live in january of 1984 comes full circle. Only ma bell (like IBM) is not big brother in this one
WTF are you talking about ?
AT&T Unequivocally DENIED they had anything to do with it.
Apple said they’re “still studying it” <– LIARS
Google’s response hasn’t been made public
looks like all this AT&T lobby and Apple PR do pretty much well-done job for them – making idiots from public, and public eats all this crap
@Sami –
How the frack do you know they are liars?
I get the feeling that talking to a lot of you is like arguing with my dining room table.
How? Read the fucking article. Seriously, Apple is for profit corporation ruthless tending to its interests and treating us absolutely like rabid iTards who think they are infallible.
Apple fuckin lie. Steve Jobs fucking lies. It’s not shocking. Pull that mighty mouse out your behind and take a walk in reality.
sounds about right.
Google actually is pretty awesome. With their app stack on my garden variety Blackberry I have more functionality than an iPwn or a standard Blackberry with a BES server. They write some of the best mobile apps on the planet and they are free. What else could you ask for? They even continue to support competing platforms like the iPwn and Blackberry even though they have their own android mobile OS.
My Macbook Pro will be pried from my cold, dead hands, but I might actually blow another dude just to get out of my AT&T iPhone contract. What a miserable f**king phone service. 3G? Puh-lease. “3-F**k You Customer” is more like it…
You’d rather blow another dude than pay $175? Wow. That’s all it takes to break an AT&T contract, and it’s pro-rated $5 every month (so if you’ve been with AT&T for a year, it’s only $115 to break that contract).
Diamonds became FREE – before it was 1$.
http://itunes.a...967307&mt=8
Maybe that’s how he plans to earn the $175 to cancel his contract. Better be a damn good bj.
I’m sure someone will jailbreak your phone in exchange for that.
You’d blow another dude anyways, the AT&T is just a cover up.
Where r all those Apple fanboys? I’m pretty sure MG will respond to this post lol; This is the real Apple being EVIL.
wow you nailed that one.
Hey looks great, I’ve just recently started a gadget blog. Aspiring to get the kind of response you are, great post.
What looks great?
Apple is Just Afraid of Anyone that can make the Iphone units FUNCTION at all. I have a NEW Apple iphone 3GS with 32 gig of Memory. The Device Freezes if you look at it funny. I need to reboot it 4 Times a Day! The Mac Store People say “That’s Normal”! NORMAL!
That should be put right on the Front of the Box that it NORMALLY Freezes or Crashes 4 Times a Day! I’m going back to the Mac Store AND RECORDING them saying that So I can put up a YouTube video about it!
I’ll bet that the Google Voice App will correct INFERIOR Programming. Apple’s “Experience” will be Ruined!
well it is normal for Microsoft OS’s isn’t it?
(ducks)
whew, just got here. what did I miss? are we talking about M$ bashing? yay
(sarcasm)
I’ve never had that freezing experience with my iPhone and that’s certainly not normal.
Maybe you should restore it and get rid of the apps…start over and see what’s causing it. Wouldn’t that be better than whining about it like a helpless newbie?
Reset it as a new phone in iTunes (so no apps, no syncing, nada). If it still freezes up, take it to an Apple store, they’ll replace it on the spot.
@JeepersMedia …
Come on, you look like a mature individual from your YouTube video.
Do you really, really believe this issue with GoogleVoice has anything at all to do with your iPhone potentially needing some troubleshooting?
Ever met a company, who does not try to control their users?
Noe?
Many try, Very few would qualify for the Apple control freak award.
Uh, yeah. Microsoft. That’s not one of the company’s particular problems. In fact, having done software design there in the past, I’d say they could use a healthy dose of control freakism.
In fact, I’m not really aware of any companies that control and manipulate their users like Apple does. I certainly don’t know of any others that send consistently insulting and degrading messages about any competitor’s customers, and actually encourage conflict between people in real life to reinforce brand and marketing messages.
Sadly, I can think of a bunch of *churches* and whatnot like that, but…no, Apple’s unusual, that way. I have to admire the total lack of ethics, too, as well as cajones, in selling that level of control as greater freedom.
Wow, that’s just like churches, too. Huh.
@robertnlee nails it
You don’t have to look far, Google engages in the exact same behavior, particularily in regard to the IP of other companies.
Oh, except Apple with whom Goog had plenty of deals with.
Both Apple and MS want to control their customers.
The difference is that Apple is GOOD at controlling them and good at making them like being controlled… so they become good little followers and do just as they’re told and defend Apple.
MS on the other hand is bad at controlling customers and bad at making them like it… so customers just ignore them and ignore their clumsy attempts to control customers and instead customers do whatever the hell they want to on the machines they own.
Both Apple and MS want to control their customers.
The difference is that Apple is GOOD at controlling them and good at making them like being controlled… so they become good little followers and do just as they’re told and defend Apple.
MS on the other hand is bad at controlling customers and bad at making them like it… so customers just ignore them and ignore their clumsy attempts to control customers and instead customers do whatever the hell they want to.
Nicely said, thanks a lot for the analysis.
Why was the red X over the iPhone image removed?
yeah I second that question…
Cut him some slack. I bet he begged a framed picture of Jobs for forgiveness before having to write that up. Kid Gloves for his precious corporation but at least he didn’t spin anything this time around.
Not to mention apple’s flat out lie that it gives developers clear explanations on why their apps were rejected and how they can be fixed. That statement is a slap in the face to anyone who knows.
Developers… Quit crying like a bunch of babies about the app approval process. We are tires about hearing from you. Apple is making you tons of money, or at least giving you the option to. If you don’t like it go home and go play for another team.
You guys are ungrateful.
No, I think “ungrateful,” pretty definitively, is telling the people who make the software you rely on to STFU and go away to another platform if they’re going to be big babies.
Unfortunately, you aren’t the only Apple fan I’ve seen saying this lately. Fortunately and increasingly, you’re getting your wish.
Markus, I’m an iPhone developer and actually this statement is entirely correct. Whenever I’ve had apps rejected (which happened several times because of bugs or violations of user interface guidelines), I have gotten very clear descriptions of the problem from the app store reviewers and sometimes also suggestions on how to fix them.
Agreed on your projected outcome.
Well written, and to the point. Apple is lying, period. I hope they either pull their heads out, or have them pulled out, and soon.
Your right Apple best not play dumb with the FCC – they should aprove the app and consider themselves lucky for not getting in some real trouble.
Wouldn’t the consequence be severe if FCC can determine Apple lied? If Apple really rejected the app can they really hide it from FCC if it want to investigate?
1. Probably not.
2. Likely.
I’m surprised that a company so aware of the many informed people waiting to butcher their claims would be so haphazard in their response.
I’m just an average iPhone user with no in-depth info or any real preference on outcome, and I can see it’s bullshit. Clearly they consider the FCC a bunch of gray haired D.C. types who they can fend off with some “you wouldn’t understand” language. If there’s a single iPhone user on the committee, these claims just killed any chance they had at coming out ahead in this battle.
Agreed it will be approved at some point soon. Equally due to the fact that Apple is finally realizing their responsibility in the App approval process, has heard the outcry of unhappy AT&T customers, and had their hand forced by the FCC.
Good piece of reporting. Apple is clearly (in my opinion) just trying to maximize the terms of whatever deal they strike with carriers in 2010. Of course they won’t get as sweet a deal if a carrier has to worry about Google Voice eating into their precious minutes.
Apple – we bought your phones and we continue to drink you’re kool-aid in all flavors. Now you’re just pissing us off!
Not to mention Google Voice is the only thing that will keep me on the iPhone. AT&T has ZERO service in my new home (downtown Chicago). If this thing isn’t un-bricked by GV, I have no choice but to go with something else.
You might as well go somewhere else now. If you don’t have voice service then Google Voice will do you no good, since it isn’t a VoIP service, rather a dialer / redirector system.
It is when you pair it with gizmo5.
You know what I really love about my T-Mobile Android phone and Google Voice? If I add my GV # to MyFaves, I can call anywhere in the US for free through it. Doesn’t seem to bother T-Mobile.
I don’t use it all the time, because it’s relayed through another service and can have resulting fuzz, lag, whatnot. And…you know, I’m still paying for the minutes I signed up for. May as well use those, too. T-Mobile loses nothing, I gain a lot, and…Google provides all of this, to them and me, for free. I’d imagine that rates with T-Mobile similarly to me.
AT&T is maybe just a company that wants a buck every time you fart, and T-Mobile isn’t. Not like my carrier’s “good” and yours is “evil,” if that’s the case, but I appreciate not getting nickled and dimed to death, and that’s one of the reasons I went w/T-Mobile.
@RobertNLee-Didn’t you come down real hard on a comment earlier, because they couldn’t spell better than a ‘fourth-grader’… well maybe you should check your own spelling…
hint: nickled (?)
Also, maybe you shouldn’t be so foul-mouthed in your attempts to sway people against Apple… They might actually believe your BS.
Full disclosure- long AAPL, and very proud of them… Don’t be too quick to Apple they ‘lied’…
No one really knows exactly what Google and Apple have discussed.
I am certain that Apple have many thousands of examples of initially rejected apps that were finally accepted once the developer addressed their “legitimate” concerns with the initial submission.
Sure and all they’re lying out their ass, but its not like they have suddenly broken a history of consistency. They have enough examples that they can wiggle out of it.
That’s my 2c, anyway.
I think Apple gave Google a competitive advantage by placing their maps, youtube, etc as ‘default’ apps.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Google maps or youtube dropped as a default app that comes with the iPhone.
Apple did this before Google seriously got into the mobile game. I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple starts acquiring software companies to compete with Google maps, youtube, etc, and then place those as default installs instead of letting Google control everything.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple starts acquiring software companies to compete with Google maps, youtube, etc, and then place those as default installs instead of letting Google control everything.”
So…let me get this straight. Allowing Google to put software on the iPhone is “letting (them) control everything?”
That makes no sense.
Btw the maps application is not Google’s application, its just that Google helped Apple develop it. Apple controls that app, not google.
But the point is the maps come from Google and there is code in the Google APIs they hook into that they would have to recreate (I’m not a programmer though, I don’t know the specifics). Then with their new map API’s they may need to rewrite a little.
Any fool can whip up the app but it’s just the packaging. They would still need to do some work and the point still stands that might want to buy a company so they have their own map data.
I think Apple gave Google a competitive advantage by placing their maps, youtube, etc as ‘default’ apps.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Google maps or youtube dropped as a default app that comes with the iPhone.
Apple did this before Google seriously got into the mobile game. I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple starts acquiring software companies to compete with Google maps, youtube, etc, and then place those as default installs instead of letting Google control everything.
Just jailbreak your phone and install gvmobile. Done. It’s apples device and they run the show. It’ll be allowed eventually on a lite version due to the bad press both companies are getting.
People want to complain, not solve problems
I think it’s pretty funny that you continue your unsubstantiated tirade after admitting you’ve never actually seen or used the iPhone app. Oh and if Google says their app was rejected, it must be true because they swore to do no evil.
There is no doubt that Google is attempting to develop a ubiquitous computing platform, and frankly it seems very plausible to me that they have or are attempting to create an integrated, multi-functional user interface. It makes sense and sounds like good UX to me.
At the same time, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Apple wouldn’t be cool with this, any more than Microsoft would be cool with the notion of Chrome OS or even a browser-based Google OS that runs on Windows and eliminates the need to ever launch any application besides Chrome.
Unfair is unfair, I wouldn’t expect Google to play nice if Apple developed Safari for Android.
Given that I ported my phone number to google voice, use it every day on two phones and have used or been briefed on every version of the app out there, I may be the only blogger or journalist who can give their own educated opinion on this. Plus, I trust my sources.
How did you “port” your number to it? It’s not a feature yet unless you port you number to another provider and just forward to GVoice right now that I can tell…
They let him in early on a feature they haven’t quite yet released for the masses.
EZ. You create a blog about start-ups and technology and you get let’s just say a lot of readers (more than a million visitors ?). To make sure, you may want to become a sort of reference blog for sillicon valley news and try to have quotes in all the main newspapers over the world.
Then You simply ask Google.
i sort of like testing new stuff, even when it’s really raw.
If you ported your number to gvoice isn’t it correct to say that gvoice would have functionally replaced your use or experience of core iPhone apps with another app and service?
It’s not at all misleading for Apple to say they are concerned about that. It’s actually seems quite understandable. Any company would want to give some consideration before potentially helping a competitor.
It’s also reasonable to be noted that this set of circumstances is unprecedented. They are legitimately trying to sort out what is the best approach for them to take given the competitive landscape that they anticipate. So what that they don’t feel inclined to rush to allow google voice on the phone. That’s their prerogative. And the Google Voice is not even fully publicly available so it is not as if many people are inconvenienced by this delay.
Additionally, you keep saying Apple is lying, that seems like an overstatement in a lot of cases. It’s reasonable to think while they have not admitted Google Voice they have not officially rejected them either. It is possible for both of those things to be true and for a third party to have the facts wrong. Why you conclude that Apple is lying is unclear to me. If Google Voice was in fact formally rejected as you say then it would be very easy for them to document that fact at any time and we would not need to rely on hearsay.
I can understand objecting to Apple’s position or a concern that it is potentially anti-competitive. I can’t understand the hostility or venom directed at them for taking their time here.
Google can’t do anything about Safari on the Android, anybody can install anything they want on Android, that’s called not being a “control freak app store nazi”
“Unfair is unfair, I wouldn’t expect Google to play nice if Apple developed Safari for Android.”
Microsoft would not be cool with Chrome running on Windows but as of today, they have not forbidden it.
The standard Internet response to the above quote would be: “Hey dude, can I have some of that stuff you were smoking when you wrote that?” It would still not be nearly as funny as your original comment.
“Unfair is unfair, I wouldn’t expect Google to play nice if Apple developed Safari for Android.”
Actually, the last time Microsoft tried to play unfair with Internet Explorer, they were busted not once but twice for monopoly abuse.
“I wouldn’t expect Google to play nice if Apple developed Safari for Android.”
That’s funny, because Android’s web browser uses the WebKit engine, which Apple created, and is what powers Safari.
Wrong.
http://en.wikip...org/wiki/WebKit
What specifically was wrong with my statement? Posting a link to some huge article without pointing out any specifics is not an argument.
Here’s some choice quotes from that article that back up my statement 100%:
“WebKit was originally derived by Apple Inc. from the Konqueror browser’s KHTML software library”
“the Android mobile phone platform uses WebKit as the basis of its web browser”
If you’re saying I’m “wrong” because Apple originally based it on KHTML, that’s inconsequential. They’ve made thousands and thousands of changes and additions to the codebase, which is what became WebKit.
Just because it was based on KHTML originally, which IMHO was a horrible piece of junk (one of my friends used to use Konqueror and it made me cry it was so bad), does not mean anything. It has become its own product.
wow wow……..so Apple invented everything……dude even apple tweaked KHTML to make webkit……a hint fo u….webkit is opensource……and there is a reason…..apple doesn’t make their technology opensource normally.
So if it all came from linux….it is also going back to linux(android is linux remember).
Welll said…at the end of the day this is a business, and Apple needs to protect that. You can’t fault them for that.
This author is just lusting after the app so much that he can’t see past anything else and is willing to call anything and everything (by a guess) along the way.
“At the same time, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Apple wouldn’t be cool with this, any more than Microsoft would be cool with the notion of Chrome OS or even a browser-based Google OS that runs on Windows and eliminates the need to ever launch any application besides Chrome.”
Uh, the Chrome browser IS a mini-OS and the basis for the real OS that’s going to hit MS broadside Real Soon Now.
People seem to refuse to get that *Microsoft has no choice in these matters, way less than they used to before they got busted, way, way, way less than Apple in the desktop space. I run Linux on top of or alongside Windows all the time, too, and ain’t nothin’ MS can do about that.
“Unfair is unfair, I wouldn’t expect Google to play nice if Apple developed Safari for Android.”
I would, because Google isn’t arrogant like Apple and doesn’t have a similar history of serious and ongoing antitrust issues.
I couldn’t see Google keeping the browser out of the Market. Why? To get the FCC and maybe Justice Department sniffing up *their* ass? They haven’t done anything like that, at this point, ever, and Apple does it all the freaking time.
You know, speaking of sinking in, how do so many people in these discussions refuse to acknowledge that this – doing this kind of stuff with browsers, specifically – is what got Microsoft taken to the woodshed, finally? Do you know what would have happened to MS if they’d told everybody they couldn’t make browsers for Windows, because they’d compete with IE? There wouldn’t be any Microsoft, anymore. There’d be one company that made IE, and another that made Windows, and another that made Office…
That almost happened, anyway.
But it’s different when Apple does it because Apple is *good.* I guess.
“I would, because Google isn’t arrogant like Apple and doesn’t have a similar history of serious and ongoing antitrust issues.”
Oh, like Goog’s polite treatment of booksellers and other IP holders.
“Uh, the Chrome browser IS a mini-OS and the basis for the real OS that’s going to hit MS broadside Real Soon Now. ”
Why then is Chrome OS going to use the Linux kernel?
“The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. ” — Pichai, Sundar: VP Product Management and Linus Upson, Engineering Director; “Introducing the Chrome OS”, July 7, 2009: http://googlebl...-chrome-os.html
Android is open source…
So yeah, Apple is welcome to develop Safari for it if it so pleases. That said…who the hell would *choose* Safari?
Who would choose IE?
Bottom line google voice will be approved by apple very shortly. This really doesn’t matter to me bc I have been using it for awhile after I jailbroke and downloaded via cydia. People you have choices who cares if apple doesn’t have it in the app store. There is a work around. Just Another reason why jail breaking is a must.
You know what else I love about Android? You’re allowed to run unauthorized apps. Never mind “jailbreaking” or risking your warranty in any way, I don’t even have to get root access on the thing to download and run a tethering app, even though T-Mobile doesn’t want me to.
There is at least one serious alternative Market with its own app I use, several alternative listing/sorting/rating services, and all I had to do to get that was check a box in the system settings.
Yeah. They let you do that, over here.
And this is why I read techcrunch. Very very nice post.
Just submitted this post to digg.
http://digg.com...T_T_and_the_FCC
dugg
Two new theories;
1. Steve Jobs actually had a brain transplant.
2. Apple to announce Spotlight search engine as revenge for Android.
That brain transplant was interrupted halfway.
Awesome! Keep writing such brave articles that stop worshipping Apple. Only then they will come to their senses…. Also, Get your folks to write more on Android and Palm Pre apps (ofcourse not the Apple fanboy Siegler).
You didn’t mention Latitude. Google developed Latitude, I believe as the next version of Google Maps, and Apple rejected it. If what you said is true then there’s even more scandal around the Latitude/Maps rejection. Apple is crippling Google because it is meeting the users needs more effectively than they are. That is anti-competitive more than anything Microsoft has ever done.
I also think apple should be financially hit with some kind of fines from the FCC for all there bullshit. The money should go towards everyone of their iPhone customers phone bill. Did you know that if an app gets taken out of the app store after it has been approved. They make the developer reimburse their customers 100% after apple still keeps there 30% cut. That is unbelievable. What a way to treat the developers that are helping your company grow.
It amazes me that Apple can publish a response like they did, one that misinforms and treats their customers like Windows users (it’s a joke, relax). Given all the bad press Apple has gotten (and, is continuing to get) it still saddens me that they haven’t gotten the message.
I hope you’re right, I hope Apple realizes they’ve made a mistake and releases the Google Voice app.
Great article, one of TechCrunch’s best.
This is exactly why I never purchased Apple products until the iPhone came out. Apple is like an abused animal – it can’t be trained, and it doesn’t play nice because Microsoft has been giving it a beating for the past two decades. This is not the 80s anymore. There is no “covering up”, the social zeitgeist has shifted giving voice and power to people who consume your products. If we smell dirty shit, we will scream about it, and people will listen.
http://twitter....atus/2878645623
From one of the GV developers: “Google had no part in this gang…their app won’t be on the App Store either…from the mouth of Phil Schiller”
No he won’t because an Android phone can do a lot more than an Apple iShit. How’s MMS working out for you? Or multi-tasking? Oh wait, you can only do what the dark emperor Jobs allows you to do. Apple fanboys need to grow some iBalls and learn to think outside their shiny aluminum prison walls.
Wow that was amazingly juvenile.
The truth is sometimes painful, Mactard.
Apple and AT&T both scared..in Simple words they both can’t digest the compilation from Google
But T-Mobile & Google also did the same to Skype, Right !
I think you mean competition. Google has a tiny sliver of the mobile device market and unless they improve their OS and third party hardware is unlikely to get more.
“A tiny sliver?” Did you miss it when Android already passed Windows Mobile? Or when HTC sold a million of just *my* phone in a few months?
BTW, you did hear, right, that the myTouch is so popular T-Mobile bought another Asian phone to rebrand and push out, with almost the same specs but prettier? They’re going after more women, because a buttload of them bought myTouches. (Also, interestingly enough, black phone customers here in the SE. This makes sense – T – Mobile’s got better coverage here than some places and it’s very popular in the SE. Anyway, black guys in particular adopted the G1 in droves down here and the myTouch is becoming a must-have phone around here.)
You’ve never used the OS or touched the hardware, and you’re talking out of your ass. It’s a better OS than the “rocks on a table” UI approach on the iPhone, that’s for sure. Oh, and it had Copy and Paste at launch, like the iPhone got over a year later. And sends MMS like every other phone on the planet, including dumb phones.
Oh, and even the homeliest models have magnetometers, which feature Apple swiped only for the 3GS. Dang, you gotta spend all that money just to use Sky Map and Layar. The first hundred dollar and below Android phones’ll be hitting six or eight months from now, and I’m pretty sure they’ll do Sky Map.
Of course, by that time, the HTC Hero’ll be long out from Sprint, along with *their* hundred-dollar range model. Hero’s going to make the 3GS cry, because the only advantage that thing’s got is a great camera, and Hero’s is 5 megapixels.
In fact, by that time, I think like eighteen Android phones are supposed to be out, from every carrier, including AT&T. HTC and at least one other manufacturer are also working on a year or so out model to *give away* with entry-level service plans.
Oh, and that’s just in the US. I can’t even remember how many Android phones there’ll be in the world by the end of 2010.
If you’re really lucky by then, maybe Apple will haver released the iPhone Nano, and there’ll be FOUR IPHONES IN THE WHOLE WORLD.
But other than that, yeah, you make excelllent points.
Wrong. Skype is VoIP. Google Voice is not VoIP. Completely different ballgame.
Also wrong because that’s a total lie – the same limited Skype app you can use on iTunes is in the Android Market, along with other apps Apple listed for the FCC, and a few Apple doesn’t carry.
There’s a *really* nice VoIP monitor app, if you’re into doing that. Me, I can call anyplace in the US for free via Google Voice, and I have a phone I can run more than one app at a time on. Why would I want to use my data pipes for phone calls when I can text or tweet or stream music or whatever with that and make a phone call at the same time?
Where is that MG fanboy saying that Apple has been right all along and that it is the only thing that get save the world from evil?
I hear he’s spending the weekend in rehab. Too much Apple juice in the system.
Nobody cares about GV
Ha! Still waiting for your invite huh?
hhahahhahah. GrandCentral rocked an GV is even better. Been using it on and off for over a year now.
What would be so wrong with an iPhone device that utilized GV for it’s service? They rely on AT&T for terrible service already. I imagine there are some hurdles to going completely to internet based service but that is the future, that is where we are heading. Why not get a jump on this now?
Nice summary… It’s obvious that Apple is full of crap, and hopefully the FCC will see this too.
However, I disagree with ‘What happens next’. I’m guessing that Apple will do- Nothing. They are too arrogant to just roll over and let GV play in the sandbox. They rejected the various GV apps, and they won’t want to show weakness by reversing their decision. Now that they’ve complied with the FCC’s Q&A request, the ball is in the FCC’s court, and Apple will likely do nothing until the Feds force them by issuing some form of court order.
Very good post!
I’m completely baffled by the “contact syncing” complaint from Apple. I do this very thing through Google Sync. If someone has privacy concerns about putting that info in the hands of Google, they can make that decision on their own. Apple has no right to decide how I store my information, and like you pointed out originally, they don’t seem to have a problem building that kind of sync functionality into iTunes.
This whole thing reeks. Nice write up; I enjoy a good cremation!
It’s been interesting watching the evolution of smartphones and drawing a comparison to desktop computers. Because a mobile device like the iPhone is really just a pocket sized computer that can make phone calls. Yet Apple wants to keep it a closed platform and take a slice of all profits that are possible. The app store was pretty genius on their part — let developers create tons of apps, doing the work for apple, and letting apple collect 30% for doing almost nothing. 30% is ridiculous.
Imagine creating an application for desktop Macs or Windows machines and paying a 30% fee to Apple or Microsoft with each sale?
Ultimately, mobile platforms like the iPhone, Android, Palm OS, etc will have to be opened up like PC’s. Otherwise this political bullshit and controversy will continue forever.
I have an iPhone and it’s a good device. But I hope other platforms like Android (for example) really open up to developers, allow Flash and Silverlight web applications, and allow innovation to thrive. Closed, controlled environments like the iPhone can’t last forever.
Apple pisses me off but I think the 30% cut is completely reasonable. You, the developer, don’t have to deal with hosting, marketing, payment processing fees, etc. I would guess only about 1/3 of their cut is profit, or 10% of the actual price of any purchase. That’s a small margin and seems completely reasonable.
Yeah, Google takes that, too. But that’s also the only thing they monetize on the system, and they don’t make people money up two month’s beer money to develop, either. It’s frickin’ twenty-five bucks, like God intended it.
Ungrateful developer crybaby.
Michael,
Perhaps you have been lucky enough to benefit from the App store and NOT have to deal with unclear policies.
Or, you don’t develop for the iPhone and are talking out of your a%$.
Either way, ungrateful would be one way to look at it, the more reasonable way to look at it is that people in an ecosystem have a right to redressal. When that recourse is taken away, they do things that you call ‘whining’. That’s just the way things happen.
Apple is the new Microsoft. Wake up sheep, Apple has been the evil sadistic corporation you’re seeing all along.
At least we don’t need to worry about desktop market share domination by Apple. Microsoft might be a crap company, but Apple is catching up to them.
Apple is just a company too big for it’s boots, they need to be taken down a notch. I hope for the day an audio player and phonw is released that wipes the revenue of the iPod and iPhone from underneath Apple’s nose.
I think you’re analysis is pretty good. One thing I do wonder is: why Apple would care if Google Voice takes over native applications (even though it doesn’t)? It made its money just by selling the phone, it’s not making money off these native apps. If allowing apps like GV to take over native apps doesn’t degrade the user-experience, but actually creates the best user-experience possible, doesn’t it encourage people to convince their friends to buy an iphone, and also to upgrade to future versions? If this is the case, why would apple blanketly prevent the take-over of native apps, like they seem to be suggesting in their FCC response?
Dude, they did this for AT&T – it’s the only thing that makes any sense. Apple pushes its own competition off the iPhone, yeah, but…they don’t offer anything close to GV, AFAIK.
Both companies are lying. That crap about how they worked so hard to make phone buttons and nobody else’s phone buttons can ever show up is the funniest Apple legal response since they boldfacedly claimed a whole pile of Xerox and Doug Englebart’s inventions as their own *under oath.*
Apple makes money on the user experience. That’s not just the design, despite what people missing the point seems to think. It’s about having a consistent user experience that’s well thought-out.
If that user experience stops being consistent, the iPhone turns into something churned out by Microsoft or Linux. It might look awesome, and be freakishly cool… But if the user experience isn’t the same, and differs, the consistency and easy-of-use suffers. Apple doesn’t want that, hence, they care about the apps on their platform.
This is why apps that look like Windows apps aren’t successful on the Mac, apps that look like Mac apps aren’t successful on Windows. They each have different user experiences, and unless the developer respects that, the program will fail.
I just wish Apple rejected more apps on the store, since it’s harder to find well-designed, useful apps next to 10-15 ugly and unintuitive ones. Of course, for people that don’t understand the point of consistency, that would fuel the fire of whining about it even more.
Great analysis and summary. While I’m not a fan of AT&T Wireless, I’ve been saying for years that Apple is the “new Microsoft.” Which is ironic considering that Microsoft never even attempted the level of control that Apple does.
Maybe now all the fanboys will stop drinking the kool-aid…
Disclaimer — I love my iPod Nano, so I’m not an Apple hater.
Michael,
Are you pretending to not understand or what? I have read Apple’s statement and I’m sorry but it is your rant that is almost completely untrue and misleading.
Here are some of your statements from your piece:
“[T]he [Google Voice] iPhone app is a very light touch and doesn’t interfere with any native iPhone apps at all.”
Nobody said it ‘interfered’ with the original phone functionality. Apple said it ‘replaced’ it. That is absolutely not misleading and is very accurate. Installing and using the Google Voice app means that you will use their phone dialer, their voicemail system, their SMS system, instead of the ones built-in in the iPhone.
You are not forced to use GV 100% of the time, but if you buy into the idea, it’s likely that you intend to use it frequently.
(about voicemail)
“Not true and misleading. The Google Voice application has its own voicemail function, which also transcribes messages. But it only works for incoming Google Voice calls, not calls to the iPhone. The Google Voice app in no way “replaces” Apple’s voicemail function.”
Again, that last sentence alone is completely misleading. It would ‘replace’ the iPhone voicemail functionality. As in: *you would be using the UI of the google app to receive your ‘voicemails’*. Again, the whole point of using Google Voice is to use it as your main number.
(about SMS)
“Not true and misleading. The Google Voice app doesn’t replace or in any way interfere wtih the iPhone’s text messaging feature.”
Again, nobody talked about interference, and any intelligent person will agree that it’s perfectly reasonable to say it would replace the SMS functionality on the phone. A user would install Google Voice to be able to send SMS for free and therefore would more than likely make it its primary mode of sending/receiving SMS messages. Let’s stop the bullshit.
I could go on and on.
The basic point of Apple is that they are very protective of the user experience on their device ; this is not something that is new, anybody that follows Apple knows that this is something that they hold near and dear to their heart.
They go into insane levels of detail to ensure that they can provide a certain quality of interaction between the user and the device, and it’s perfectly in their right to be wary of losing this control.
Let’s stop the ridiculous assertions.
By saying “replace” the suggestion is that the native apps are deleted or overridden and replaced with new Google apps. That isn’t the case at all, which is why I say that it is very misleading.
For example, there are lots of photo apps for the iphone, none of which delete or override the native apps. Under your logic, those could be construed to “replace” the native app because user may choose to use the third party app instead.
What Apple did in those paragraphs wasn’t a “lie” because of the squishiness of the language. But they clearly mislead the reader into thinking that the Google app is doing something it isn’t.
Well, the whole point of installing and using Google Voice is to replace the native dialer, the native SMS functionality and so on. Let’s drop the semantics: Hugo has a valid point, those that install Google Voice do it exactly to replace the same services offered natively, even though it obviously doesn’t delete them.
Would you use Google Voice another way than this?
I agree that Apple’s language is slightly misleading. But even when you dig through the FUD, they actually have a point.
no, it isn’t. On the android that is the point. On the iPhone it sets up parallel apps, like all those third party camera apps.
Mr. Arrington, I have read that in your past you used to be a lawyer. That makes a lot of sense. If you read Apple’s response not as a lawyer but as a normal human being, you would not make such a fuss about “misleading” statements. While there may be a grain of truth in your accusations about misleading language, the point remains that Apple seem (in my own eyes at least, and I am a professor of mathematics and generally believed by people who know to me to be a very sensible person with a good sense for bullshit) to be acting in good faith and to honestly be acting in what THEY perceive as the (ultimately) best interests of their users – maybe not those of each individual user, but those of the user community as a whole. Obviously the language in their response is carefully phrased and crafted to maximize its impact and its positive effect on the public’s opinion, and this is probably what led them to use the particular language which you perceive as “misleading”. But get real – your tirade really comes across as tiresome lawyer-ese whining by anybody with a bit of sense.
As for accusations of outright lying on Apple’s part, you have shown no evidence of that other than some “sources” at Google and a hearsay quote of Phil Schiller from an unnamed third-party developer. Well, IMHO if Apple can lie, so can Google, and as for the comment from Phil Schiller, even if true it counts for precious little in my eyes in terms of evidence value. The next time that you stake your reputation (or parts thereof) on such accusations, I suggest that you arm yourself with more compelling evidence.
Mike’s read on this is really good. As a current lawyer at a well known consumer electronic company I can tell you that a response to the FTC on an issue like this would have been written primarily by Apple’s attorneys at the highest levels and written very carefully so that it was as truthful as possible without being extremely negative for Apple. The fact that the best they could do in a response to the FTC is to be absolutely misleading (and in some cases actually lie) to protect their brand, means that something absolutely smells like sh$$ at Apple on this one.
Great post Mike!
Meant FCC. Weekend…lawyer cap was off
Mike: ‘By saying “replace” the suggestion is that the native apps are deleted or overridden and replaced with new Google apps. That isn’t the case at all, which is why I say that it is very misleading.’
Apple: ‘…as submitted for review, it appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface…’
Doesn’t sound very misleading at all to me. Replacing core functionality != deleting or overriding apps.
I can see where you are coming from with your point about camera apps… that being said, the key and instructive difference is that taking pictures is a peripheral function of the phone, not a core functionality. GVoice replaces the functionality of the dialer, contact manager, messager, and voicemail app. That’s a lot of the iPhone’s core user experience. Apple has been very clear that it is very protective of this, and it’s high standards in this regard for all of its products are the only reason Apple is popular today.
I HAVE a Google Voice account, and I think that it’s great. But I also understand Apple’s position here. Personally, I expect that Apple and Google will put their heads together and work this one out, perhaps with Apple asking Google to collaborate with them to bring Google Voice functionality to the iPhone. The convenience of having a single, portable phone number is one of those ideas that I expect Apple will get behind.
So we disagree, but this is the right way to do it without personal attacks.
Boooooo….. we want FIREWORKS!!
Drop the civilized crap and start throwing fists like real men!
What most are missing is that no one buys the iPhone for voice. ERGO: IT IS NOT CORE. The sad truth is that everyone needs to carry multiple devices to suit 100% of their requirements. I mean 100%; not 95%. Lack of competition in access leaves us all frustrated (and wanting).
I don’t get the logic at all. Sure, it can replace those things once you choose to click on the GV icon. It’s self contained. It doesn’t replace the phone, contact structure or VM in any way, unless a user chooses to use it that way.
That’s like saying a browser infringes on the core user experience of an OS. Further, what does Apple give a damn if I don’t want to use their phone feature, it’s not a revenue source and I already paid for the damn phone. It’s arrogance. It’s the same reason I can’t delete the useless Apps that come pre-loaded on the phone.
It’s all posturing for the 2010 carrier contracts. They want to show up to the Verizon/T-Mobile negotiations without having to explain what GV will mean to carrier profits.
I agree with you Hugo because what you describe as happening when one uses GV is exactly what happens when I use it on my non jail-broken iPhone.
What Apple is saying is that it replaces some of the iPhone’s core features, in a sense that Apple can no longer control the user experience in the basic functionalities of the device; in fact, so basic that consumers experience these functionalities as a core part of the device, as the device itself. Any problems in user experience with the GV functionalities will result in a bad experience of the entire device, and a breach in the perception and trust consumers put in the iPhone and Apple brands.
Controlling the user experience is a key part of Apples philosophy as a company, and has been a key part in their success. It makes a lot of sense that they are very careful about losing this control.
” Installing and using the Google Voice app means that you will use their phone dialer, their voicemail system, their SMS system, instead of the ones built-in in the iPhone.”
And you’d know that, since you’ve clearly never even looked at it, never mind used it. I use it all the time, because I can on my phone. That’s not how it works. At all.
And even if it did replace the dialer, I dialed out with it instead of the system default dialing pad or something, who the hell cares?
I mean, except Apple, obviously.
“It would ‘replace’ the iPhone voicemail functionality. As in: *you would be using the UI of the google app to receive your ‘voicemails’*. ”
Yeah, that’s not how it works, either. You get your Google Voice voice mails using Google Voice – or you can send the calls through and collect messages on your phone and get your telco-hosted voicemails the same way you always did.
So, in fact, Google Voice, the app, retreats when calls are pushed through to your phone and lets the default system take over.
And now you know that, too.
“Again, nobody talked about interference, and any intelligent person will agree that it’s perfectly reasonable to say it would replace the SMS functionality on the phone. A user would install Google Voice to be able to send SMS for free and therefore would more than likely make it its primary mode of sending/receiving SMS messages. Let’s stop the bullshit.”
Uh, no. The only SMS I ever send via GV, really, are test messages to my phone. I got unlimited texts for like a dollar ninety-nine a month for being a good customer. Again, it’s nice being with a phone company that doesn’t shake me upside down to see what falls out of my pockets every time I pick the damn thing up.
“They go into insane levels of detail to ensure that they can provide a certain quality of interaction between the user and the device, and it’s perfectly in their right to be wary of losing this control.”
Yeah, that’s clearly why they’re lying to the FCC this week.
Robert,
with all due respect, I doubt that you’ve used the Google Voice app for iPhone either. So just because it works a certain way on your Android phone doesn’t mean that it’ll work the same on the iPhone.
Second, you made several points that confirm what I said:
1. “I use it all the time” – thank you. hence the “it would ‘replace’ the iphone functionality.
2. “You get your Google Voice voice mails using Google Voice – or you can send the calls through and collect messages on your phone and get your telco-hosted voicemails the same way you always did.”
- thank you. since most everybody is going to use the first option (to get search, transcripts, etc…), this pretty much confirm that you are going to replace the built-in voicemail.
let’s not nitpick on the details of an app that nobody has seen. My point was that Apple’s language of “replacing” their core functionality is not misleading or a lie, it’s a reasonable claim.
I’m as enthusiastic about Google Voice as anybody else, and I think it’s great that Google is pushing the envelope and shaking the status quo (as did Apple with the iPhone btw). I just hope the discussion would remain reasonable instead of turning into a healthcare-style misinformation fiasco.
This “replacement” rhetoric is ridiculous. If anything, it should be described as giving users a (parallel) choice. To say it “replaces” something simply because users make their own choice to utilize it “more frequently” or “instead of” is ridiculous. That could be said of some appstore apps which-have-been-approved.
Having the Google Voice app on the phone doesn’t replace the need for the carrier; it’s still essential.
The bottom line is this: Apple is clearly attempting to squash this in prep for future carrier negotiations. THAT is what is going on here.
Everything else is just side commentary.
If anyone wants to add some “extra” conspiracy icing on top of all this, you can add that Apple has become paranoid over Android and Google’s aspirations and wants to tighten the reigns. That is almost certainly the case deep inside the Apple core.
Guys, 99% of the world could not care less about any of this, including the hordes of iPhone Moms that you wrote about earlier.
It’s fine to debate Apple’s motives here, but just keep in mind that the mass consumer market is thrilled with Apple’s excellent-yet-controlled user experience. They don’t know what GV is, nor do they want it. Apple is a business that needs to stay focused on their customers, not the Digerati.
sure, but that observation isn’t interesting. Looking ahead, Google Voice becomes very interesting. And clearly threatening to the carriers. That’s why Apple cares so much. Not for 2009, but for 2011.
“And clearly threatening to the carriers”, Bingo!
So honestly, what do you expect them to do? Put yourself in ATT shoes and see how ridiculous this is. Would you allow GV on a phone that you subsidize? Get real.
btw – what’s the rush. sooner or later all carriers will have to get creative/innovative…or die. Just take a look at the other side (Nokia↩).
I for one, look forward to the day when all mobile carriers are merely “dumb pipes.”
That said…I’m very willing to pay a premium for reliable, speedy, non-intrusive pipes!
Why are you paving the way for Google to take over even more, Michael?
two reasons. 1., Google is the “good guy” in this particular situation. 2. It’s inevitable. 3. Google Voice is so much better than what we have today.
Google Voice is a bit of a pain to set up. But it’s like Tivo in the 90s. Once you do, you can’t imagine not having it.
I think this is one of the most interesting stories of the year. Tech blogs don’t write for soccer moms. They write for people who care about tech. This fiasco has shed a lot of light into the relationship between Apple, AT&T, and Google. I give props to TC for the great coverage.
” They don’t know what GV is, nor do they want it.”
Oh, everybody I’ve told about it has signed up for an invite, including my parents, the two most tech-phobic people in my life.
They especially get excited when I give them tips on how to search out a decent corresponding word or phrase people will remember, and that the best thing about Google Voice is *you can give the whole world your phone number.* It’s on my blog. Anybody can call me, anytime. Can’t promise I’ll call back, but duh, I will if I know you or whatever.
There’s no threat. Nobody can harass me via the number. I’m in total control, always. It costs me nothing. I can scan pages of written transcripts of messages instead of listening to any of them.
This completely changes the social dynamics around phone numbers. Forever. Getting her digits is…over. Kinda sad, in a way.
Anyway, BOBSBIONIC. Hello, world.
And I would recommend giving yourself a couple of days, when you first get in, if you’re intending to do a word match. It takes a while, and it’s pretty frustrating.
You could have slanted this article either way but you choose to call Apple liars. Your headline may as well read: “Apple sucks and they are liars.”
You can safely assume Apple’s attorneys and their Board of Directors would not let them risk the entire business, nor even be a part of a company that lies to the FCC. Apple knows that the FCC is going to go to Google and AT&T and ask for their views on Apple’s filing. GIve them a break. You can also safely assume that they are not going to call Google liars. The ties between the companies are still way too close and they have many symbiotic arrangements to get into a public feud so no doubt Apple would rather take the heat then ruin relations with either Google or AT&T. For instance Google Voice involves at least some elements of VoIP and probably a great deal of VoIP and this would affect Apple’s contract with AT&T which is already has an inadequate network in some areas for the bandwidth demands of the iPhone, as many of us well know.
There is no doubt that Apple wants to maintain the quality of the user experience. By doing so they have sold over 45 Million iPhones/iPod Touches, over 200 Million iPods, over 1.5 Billion apps downloaded from the App Store, 6 billion songs sold from the iTunes Store and changed the music and the mobile phone landscapes forever. They could not have attained those numbers if they simply created a hardware device and let anarchy prevail as to use of the device and further AT&T’s wireless network would have crashed in flames in some areas. There has to be a superb system for attracting developers and delivering software but also rules for what software will be available to protect the user from viruses, buggy, crashing software, young users from pornographic and violent content and the carriers from further degradation of their network due bandwidth intensive apps. They clearly have to err on the side of being overly strict.
But as Apple pointed out, there is competition and consumers can buy an Android phone or a Palm Pre or Blackberries or whatever phones Microsoft supports. What they didn’t point out is that people can jailbreak their iPhones and have the Google Voice App on it. There are certainly alternatives now and there will be a lot more even this year if Google’s claims materialize.
Kind of, but not really off topic: If all the Android phones really do hit the streets this year as Google predicts there are going to be a lot of carriers besides AT&T with major bandwidth issues.
I chose to slant the article towards my actual opinion.
“young users from pornographic and violent content”
how dare you or apple deprive me of my right to watch porn or violence on the iphone, lol jk
“If all the Android phones really do hit the streets this year as Google predicts there are going to be a lot of carriers besides AT&T with major bandwidth issues.”
No problems here in Florida so far, but T-Mobile’s actually pretty good. And they got screwed hard by the fed on the 3G, they’re grateful for customers who stayed, anyway, and…they try harder.
It’s been great – been all over the area, never felt a pinch when I needed data fast.
I will say that Locale is perhaps *too* good.
Apple policy does suck, and they ARE liars.
“We’re not that dumb.” Huh? How dumb should we be to
(1) keep feeding a company that can no longer hide their contempt for their customers;
and
(2) idolize a cell phone (as in “one of a zillion devices; a combination of metal, plastic, and visual appeal that helps people keep in touch”) marketed by the said company?
If people keep up the good job of paying them, they’ll keep getting more and more cynical.
God – what sort of legal team does apple have ?
“user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality”
Why not use “replicate” or “reproduce” or “imitate” instead of “replace” it would give them more room to move in “interpretative language”. And more so, this would mean that Your Comment mike wouldnt be as valid for example – because they are merely pointing to “replication” or “reproduction” which may infringe the TOS as opposed to “replacement” which is pretty clear that the Google App doesn’t do.
I think Spotify will get the go ahead with all the media attention on this ….
“God – what sort of legal team does apple have ?”
A brand new one after that nonsense, I hope. Apple’s never had to deal with anything like this before in the US, really, not in this position. They got a nice eight-year Republican ride on a near-vertical monopoly, got busted wildly in Europe, and dropped the DRM in the US after and just in time for the Democrats to come in and start regulating business again, for real.
That was exactly the wrong stuff to say to the FCC, in Apple’s position. They need to start acting like they’re a majority company in a couple of important spaces and the fed just got serious again about corporate malfeasance. Because that’s what’s happening, and Apple only gets to play by special rules in the minds of Apple and its customers. To everybody else, they’re just another company.
Google voice is great shame there going through all this trouble to get it out, would of been great app.
Michael,
You say you’ve never used the Google Voice app for iPhone but have been ‘briefed’ on how it would work by people on the Google Voice team.
Did they show it to you during those briefings, or show you screenshots? If not, why not?
I’m not saying you’re wrong about your conclusions, but without anyone other than Google and Apple having first hand knowledge of the program, isn’t this still just a war of words and speculation?
I…you know, I can’t remember if I saw it or not, I have to check my notes on Monday. But the briefing was in July, and there was no motive for Google to lie to me about features, they thought it would be accepted based on talks they had with apple. It would be extremely odd and completely unprecedented for a large company to simply lie about the core way an app works. Most of the discussion was around how deeply they integrated with android, and other phones less so.
also, if the app actually did delete or override the native apps, apple would have said so clearly in the letter. and they also would have admitted to rejecting the app.
in other words, the truth of the situation is glaringly obvious.
Fair enough – I agree it would be very odd for Google to be deliberately misleading you.
On the other hand, if the GV app is a very comprehensive solution designed to look like the native apps – with dialler, voicemail, SMS & contacts, simply replacing the ‘phone’ button on the iPhone dock with the GV app could very easily be interpreted as a ‘replacement’ by the majority of non-technical users in the simple sense of something that goes in the same place, does the same thing, and works similarly.
I’m not disputing your analysis of the strategic motives, but that applies equally to Google’s desire to produce something that can serve as a replacement.
You say use the Google Voice app yourself on Android as a replacement for the regular dialler.
Number portability aside – is there any reason why the GV iPhone app wouldn’t function as a replacement in the same way?
Because it’s a standalone app, and can’t replace the native dialer app, only stand alone, in addition to it. For instance, when another app wants to dial a number, it would go through the native dialer. When you choose a number to dial from the Contacts app, it would go through the native dialer. Apple is making it sound like the GV app replaces the native dialer. It doesn’t.
Yes it does.
When another app wants to dial, it doesn’t show you the dialer. It just shows the call screen. You never see the pre-call interface. That’s not the native dialer you just saw and used. The user just saw the GV dialer and used that one. It’s replaced the native dialer (from a user perspective, any other way of looking at it is insanity).
If GV was as simple as saying: “Dial 123-*number you want to call (including area code)* and it all used the iPhone interface and apps, then all would be well and good, because you’re getting Apple’s design and experience, as well as Google’s functionality. Texts could have that prefix attached to them as well, and are then forwarded through Google to the appropriate places (dunno the complications on that being free). The GV app on the iPhone would be one to contain settings and so on, not to actually do the calling and texting.
Of course, that’ll never happen, because the only way for it to work would be for Google to own every single possible phone number after than 123 prefix, which would probably cost quite a bit xD
You’re right and mhenr18 is another person who has clearly never even seen the software, and yet describes it with such confidence.
And yet “confident” does not mean “correct.” Google Voice doesn’t even *have* a dialer. It lets you do two things, basically: read/listen to messages, and send SMS. And do setup for how you want to handle calls.
If you want all calls going through Google Voice, all you see in addition to the normal UI is a small notification that you are calling through Google Voice.
If you want to be asked each time, you get a pop up box after you dial or select a contact or spoken a name or however the hell you normally dial numbers. You use the same UI elements you always do.
Just FYI, from somebody who uses it every freaking day.
Oh, and I use a third party app, because I’m allowed to, in place of Google Voice, actually. I never see *anything* different with that one, not even the notification.
“You say use the Google Voice app yourself on Android as a replacement for the regular dialler.”
You can’t, actually. If you want to dial calls through Google Voice, you have to press a lot of buttons or use a third-party app to do so.
GV isn’t a “replacement” for anything, not on Android, not on iPhone. Even if Apple wasn’t lying from the get-go by claiming they never rejected the app, that’d be a screamer.
Also, Apple’s too dominant w/iTunes/iPod/iPhone (and the expansion plans make that even more subject to increasing regulation) to play the same way they always did with the 5% market share on desktops. That’s…grotesquely simplified, but how antitrust law works, basically. The bigger you get, the less you can do to compete w/smaller companies. I didn’t notice any Apple fans talking about how MS owned Windows and could do what it liked with it over IE/Netscape.
But nobody in Apple Land is going to believe that until and unless the JD finally has to curb the company, and even after that, the story will probably always be that Apple was wronged, wronged, by a jealous, thieving world. That’s always The Apple Story.
It’s a replacement for an expensive phone bill on any software platform.
For getting soaked, maybe. I pay for a package including a crapload of minutes, which I use, because frankly, the calls sound better. Also, I’ve got four MyFaves left after Google Voice #, so I call straight through on those.
My phone bill’s the same as it would be, anyway. I have a service, now, like Mike Hammer. I can do a buttload of stuff through, and one of those things is make phone calls.
It really sucks that anybody, any company, would keep that from you. It’s really kewl. Hey, everybody can have a SERVICE, now!
no, on android it does take over. It uses the native dialer, but it’s all google voice, which is exactly what i want so that outbound calls show my google voice caller id.
so it doesn’t replace the native dialer on android, but it completely takes it over. I wish it did that on the iphone, but it doesn’t.
It won’t take it over on the iPhone, namely because it’s bound to Apple’s TOS for devs, and the sandboxing of the app would make it impossible.
Ofc, a jailbreak and a rewrite of every app to use GV would be rather interesting
No dialer you say?
Funny, these screen shots seem to show both a dialer, and a distinctly similar interface to Apple’s own interface. After seeing these images I’m a moved to give Apple a break on this…
http://paulstam...ile_process.jpg
http://paulstam...obile_page1.jpg
(From a review of the app by Paul Stamitiou:
http://paulstam...ns-google-voice )
Marco, did you miss the part about “or use a third-party app to do so”? The screenshots you linked to are from the GV Mobile third-party application that builds upon the Google Voice API and that application was approved and available on the App Store until Apple pulled it. So I’m not inclined to give Apple a break on their claims against Google Voice itself.