I agree that the FCC needs to do what it was initially set up to do but understand that nobody in this government is going to do anything about anything especially if it were to cause job losses, reduce tax revenues, or the limit the opportunity to meet someone famous for a drink. Expect a token slap on the wrist if there is any wrongdoing.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Publicly Responds to FCC Inquiry, Comments on Google Voice App Status
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree that the FCC needs to do what it was initially set up to do but understand that nobody in this government is going to do anything about anything especially if it were to cause job losses, reduce tax revenues, or the limit the opportunity to meet someone famous for a drink. Expect a token slap on the wrist if there is any wrongdoing.
Is this a big deal??
It's glorified call forwarding.
I'm having the same conversation on two different forums, obviously. Why would I write different responses for the same issue?? And what I write is ALWAYS intentional.
Apple regards their platform as their house. Software developers are guests, and they can't rearrange the furnishings. The iPhone is not a completely open platform. And AT&T, as a carrier, also has interests in the matter, naturally.
It's no secret that the Google application threatens the very existence for the need of something like AT&T. Allowing this would be completely absurd, that's a given.
Apple essentially went to bat for AT&T here. They decided to take the fall for them in order to cover up a very uncomfortable truth: mobile carriers are the ones halting the evolution of mobile apps/functionality. It's a money issue for AT&T. As a result, AT&T, with their weak 3G network, is limiting which apps the rest of the world and other better networked carriers can have.
Yes, AT&T bans using VoIP apps on the iPhone over their cellular network. But they allow VoIP apps on Windows Mobile to use their cellular network. So what's going on here? It's not about network congestion, it's just about money.
The terms in AT&T’s exclusive US contract to provide connections for Apple’s iPhone give them the power to veto online store applications that use AT&T to launch cheap calls through the Internet.
Further, as a result, Apple might be missing out on a huge opportunity with just a single software add-on to potentially quadruple their earnings. But we're all hamstrung by the current state of mobile carriers, at least in the US.
Apple really isn't the one to blame here. It's AT&T.
I could not agree more!
I assume they sell unlimited data because they know that on the average, they make more money because a lot of people won't use that much. Guess they guessed wrong. It's like "all you can eat" and then the college football team shows up and screws up the formula. So change the formula.
I would very much like to be able to choose my data usage max and then use it however I wish. The fact, for example, that data tethering is not allowed is more about faulty pricing policy then anything else. If I had a 1 gig monthly cap and exceeded it by using tethering too much, what's the rub? But for me not to be able to use it in the rare instance when I really needed it is ridiculous.
The pricing scheme needs to be changed. Give us several cap options and raise the unlimited price so that only data hogs would even think of having it. But don't tell me how I can use the data I buy. And don't make me pay ridiculous surcharges for individual apps I might want to use. Keep it simple, stupid.
You're kidding right ? Let go of the Apple kool-aid for a minute and let's put aside this FCC business.
You're saying Google Voice is not a good service ? That's it is "glorified call forwarding" ? Yes, it's a pretty big deal. One phone number, just one. It rings on every phone you want it to ring, and you can even set preferences on which phone it rings depending on the source. It can be your landline, it can be your cell phone, it can be your work phone, it can be your friend's cell phone since your battery just died.
It basically makes managing your contacts much easier since you now have 1 number to give people instead of 3. Maybe Apple didn't come up with the concept, but it is a very good service nonetheless.
Google innovates just as much as Apple. You like saying Apple is an innovator and that others aren't. At least try to realise that other companies do innovate and try to see it when they do. Google Voice doesn't replace your iPhone as Apple seems to state, they consolidate all your phone services into 1 and make switching providers much less of a pain if you can't port your number.
Now you're being delusional. Apple has admitted publicly that AT&T had no say in the decision. Worse, Google Voice is not VOIP. It uses your voice minutes when you place and receive calls with your cellphone. Google is just serving as an operator until the last mile where it connects your call through the standard voice networks.
If Apple truely had a chance to blame this whole thing on AT&T, they would've. The fact is, you can use customized GV apps on AT&T's network, because the thing is available on other phone platforms that are supported by AT&T. Blackberry comes to mind.
Don't think this is anything other than Apple being Apple. They don't want the iPhone to be an open computing platform. They want it to be their way or the highway (clearly says so in their response). The problem is the highway is getting mighty crowded what with Android, Maemo, Windows Mobile and Blackberry all offering the same product with more openness.
Get your facts straight.
Before you comment any further, read the official response from AT&T (link below). The agreement between Apple and AT&T (and remember an agreement is a contract that BOTH sides agreed to) was signed BEFORE THE APP STORE was ever created. AT&T has nothing to do with the APP STORE approval process. Go ahead and use GV right now on your iPHone.....just use the Web Ap. AT&T is not stopping you. If you had a Blackberry Phone on AT&T's network, AT&T is not stopping your from installing and using the GV App.
You Apple Fanboys continue to amaze me.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/pdfs/att.pdf
Before you comment any further, read the official response from AT&T (link below). The agreement between Apple and AT&T (and remember an agreement is a contract that BOTH sides agreed to) was signed BEFORE THE APP STORE was ever created. AT&T has nothing to do with the APP STORE approval process. Go ahead and use GV right now on your iPHone.....just use the Web Ap. AT&T is not stopping you. If you had a Blackberry Phone on AT&T's network, AT&T is not stopping your from installing and using the GV App.
You Apple Fanboys continue to amaze me.
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/pdfs/att.pdf
You Can't Be Serious?
95% of Google's revenue comes from pop-up ads and banners...this is not an exaggeration. They really don't sell anything. They force their sponsor paid results to our search requests. They are nothing more than a giant billboard that continuously shoves ads into our faces as may times as they can.
Google's VoIP is just another iteration of a technology that has been around since the mid 1990's. Google did not invent it. The only "enhancement" that Google offers is the addition of the ads that they shove in our face when we use their service.
95% of Google's revenue comes from pop-up ads and banners...this is not an exaggeration. They really don't sell anything. They force their sponsor paid results to our search requests. They are nothing more than a giant billboard that continuously shoves ads into our faces as may times as they can.
Google's VoIP is just another iteration of a technology that has been around since the mid 1990's. Google did not invent it. The only "enhancement" that Google offers is the addition of the ads that they shove in our face when we use their service.
GAH! For the Nth time...Google Voice is NOT VOIP! It's nothing remotely like VOIP...I don't even know how people could confuse Google Voice with VOIP...
What does Google's revenue stream have to do with their innovation ? Oh right. Nothing at all.
Google Voice is not VOIP. It's not just an iteration of a technology that has been around since the mid 1990s. They don't shove ads in your face when you use the service either.
At least get your facts straight if you want to bash them. Google has innovated a lot in the last 11 years they've been around. They have brought forth a lot of products, some that have failed, some that have been very successful.
To simply bash them because their revenue comes from ads is ludicrous at best.
Go Apple
GO APPLE way to make google look like a bunch of tards
As noted earlier today, Apple was expected to file comments with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission regarding their purported rejection of the Google Voice iPhone application. Apple has complied and published their response to the FCC in the Hot News section of Apple.com.
Starting off with background information on the iPhone and the App Store, Apple notes that the App Store now "offers over 65,000 iPhone applications, and customers have downloaded over 1.5 billion applications" and that it has "fostered competition as other companies (e.g., Nokia, Microsoft, RIM, Palm and Verizon) seek to develop their own mobile platforms and launch their own application stores." In describing the App Store approval process, criteria that serves to "protect consumer privacy, safeguard children from inappropriate content, and avoid applications that degrade the core experience of the iPhone" are listed and most rejections are based on bugs, with attempts made to provide feedback to the developer to help them improve it and increase the chances of an app's approval afterward.
In response to the question about the rejection of the Google Voice app, Apple states:
Additionally, the response describes how the Google Voice application fails to make use of the Visual Voicemail feature and the native Messaging app, as well as the fact that it uploads a user's Contacts list to Google's servers with no "assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways." Apple commits that it is still "continuing to study the Google Voice application and its potential impact on the iPhone user experience."
Regarding the role of AT&T in relation to the Google Voice app, Apple clearly explains that AT&T has no role in the app approval process, nor does anything in Apple's contract with AT&T have any bearing in this situation. It is noted, however, that the agreement with AT&T does require Apple to not "include functionality in any Apple phone that enables a customer to use AT&Ts cellular network service to originate or terminate a VoIP session without obtaining AT&Ts permission," which clearly provides the reasoning behind the Wi-Fi-only functionality of the Skype VOIP app and other similar apps.
Apple's response to Question 6 provides further details on the app approval process, describing that there are "40 full-time trained reviewers" and that "at least two different reviewers study each application so that the review process is applied uniformly." Apple also reveals there is also an executive review board that oversees policies and procedures and reviews apps escalated because they "raise new or complex issues."
Article Link: Apple Publicly Responds to FCC Inquiry, Comments on Google Voice App Status
GO APPLE way to make google look like a bunch of tards
FIXED.
Seriously, all this says is that Apple once again reiterates that the iPhone is not an open computing platform and never will be.
I don't see how you can say Google looks like a bunch of tards, they submitted an app and it hasn't been approved. Does that mean that everyone with a pending submission to the app store is a tard ?
If Apple weren't lying in their letter to the FCC I'd be celebrating right with you...but unfortunately they did lie and now they look like anti-competitive a##holes.
Sooner or later Apple will have to give in.
They won't be able to deny an application anymore as ong as it doesn't violate any of their guidelines. So far they did what they want, but when it starts raining law suits they will give in before it gets to costly. after all ms lost in europe their anti-trust violation suit and paid billions, because they failed to extract the internet explorer out of their OS, giving people a free choice.
Apple was never big enough to be a concern, but with their iphone and itunes they are getting damn close of having a monopoly field. And monopolies get broken apart, to allow competitors to enter the market.
For example windows can not deny me designing an app for their mobile or os platform. they only can deny me their certificate, that's about it. And you don't need that anyway.
Shortly said i can design apps what i want for on windows but not on apples. Maybe it is due the reason an apple is round and hard to draw on vs. a window being flat.
They won't be able to deny an application anymore as ong as it doesn't violate any of their guidelines. So far they did what they want, but when it starts raining law suits they will give in before it gets to costly. after all ms lost in europe their anti-trust violation suit and paid billions, because they failed to extract the internet explorer out of their OS, giving people a free choice.
Apple was never big enough to be a concern, but with their iphone and itunes they are getting damn close of having a monopoly field. And monopolies get broken apart, to allow competitors to enter the market.
For example windows can not deny me designing an app for their mobile or os platform. they only can deny me their certificate, that's about it. And you don't need that anyway.
Shortly said i can design apps what i want for on windows but not on apples. Maybe it is due the reason an apple is round and hard to draw on vs. a window being flat.
They aren't lying. Google Voice probably does also implement Visual Voice Mail and a dialer in all probability. And that's fine, that's how you use the service. Also, AT&T probably doesn't care at all what happens to GV. They permit it on the their network with other phones.
Apple is simply saying, once again : "The iPhone isn't an open computing platform, it's a Apple platform. We control the user experience and won't accept things that modify what we have chosen as that user experience".
There is no anti-competitiveness here. They even say that if users want the full Google Voice experience as presented to them, they can buy a product made by a competitor, including Google's own Android platform.
Wait what ? iphone and itunes are a monopoly ? You mean the Apple iPhone with its barely 5% market share world wide is a "monopoly" ?
Seriously people, Apple is far from being in a monopoly position, competition in the smartphone market is very fierce and there are very varied offerings. No one has a complete lock on that market and that is a good thing. There is no anti-trust here, since there is no monopoly.
Right now, if I want a Google Voice enabled phone (without having to resort to the Web interface), I have choices available in the form of RIM and Android. And if this keeps up, I'm pretty sure Google will have no qualms making a Windows Mobile and a Maemo port of their app.
Oh but they did lie. They said in that statement that Google Voice App replaces the Dialer, SMS Texting, and Visual Voicemail...which it doesn't, it simply ADDS functionality for the Google voice number, not take away from the iPhone interface.
And to say that this is the reason for denying the App entrance into the App store is bogus.
This line is the one that concerns me the most :
I don't let google mail see my contacts, I don't like information being taken from me, especially without having a binding agreement at to what it will be used for.
I don't let google mail see my contacts, I don't like information being taken from me, especially without having a binding agreement at to what it will be used for.
And again, they haven't denied the app entrance, they said they are still "considering it". Yes the dialers are probably independant, because you can't replace phone.app on the phone has others have stated. However, Apple probably still sees this has modifying the experience, because once you want to use your Google Voice phone number, you can't use Apple's phone.app.
Maybe Apple would prefer it if Google gave them the means to implement GV functionality straight in their own phone.app ?
And again, when you subscribe willingly to Google Voice and other Google services, you have a binding agreement presented to you that indicated what it will be used for. Let's no forget that this is not something that Google is trying to ram down your throats, it's simply an application that connects to a subscription based service, one you have to willingly adhere to.
Apple aren't protecting you at all, they are protecting their closed eco-system.
There are a bunch of lies in this one too. What comes to mind specifically is netshare. Netshare was a 3rd party thethering app that was pulled from the App Store. At who's request? AT&T doesn't even mention this app.
I'm glad you are concerned. I recommend not using/downloading this app/service. Let everyone else make their own decision.
But they lied about that too...there was an official rejection of the App and then after the FCC got involved all of a sudden they're "still considering it". The whole document is a load of half truths and malarky.
As for adding GV into Phone.app that would be ideal and I'm sure if Apple wanted to they would do it....but I don't see that happening.
And as for the GV dialer confusing people thats utter bull. It's located within the App...not as a separate App called Phone with a similar icon to the phone.app....I just don't get what Apple is trying to accomplish with all this lying and double talk.
I really love how people glaze over certain facts. I think the most concerning questions are What does Google want with personal information and who really brought the FCC into this.
I know the FCC is trying to make a new name for itself but it seems silly that they are stepping in on something like this. Apple is not required to approve Google Voice. The iPhone is their platform and it is not an open platform that has a majority out there. Comments regarding what people would do if Microsoft said what you could run on your computer are absurd. Microsoft has a majority of the OS market so they can not restrict what you can run even if they want to (and they most likely do) without it becoming an anti-trust issue since they have such a stranglehold on the market by numbers. iPhone is still a relatively small percentage of the hand hold market so they can remain a closed environment. Personally I think the FCC involvement says one of two things. Either someone at Google has a lot of influence there and has asked them to get involved, which no company should have enough influence over a government office to get them to poke their noses where they normally would not or the FCC is trying to expand their area of influence, which should be a concern to more people as the more the government gets involved the more likely things are going to go down hill wrapped in red tape.
This whole thing does not make much sense. From a marketing standpoint Google actually benefits more from their App being rejected. After all if people want it bad enough I am sure there is a version on Google's Android. What it basically says is that Google has very little faith in either of their products. If Google Voice is not that important to people that they would move to a phone that allows it then it is not that great a product. If Android is not good enough to lure iPhone subscribers away then why are they not working on that? They should in all rights be ignoring the iPhone and focusing on marketing what they are making.
For a item to sell in todays market it has to have a killer feature that is a draw. iPhone has a great interface and though it has other great features thats the biggest seller to most. The way the device integrates with other Apple products and how smooth it responds and works. So I can see Apple being concerned if people are using another interface most of the time in that Apple has always been a big believe in word of mouth advertising. They want people to show others their iPhone and attract people that way. That does not work as well if people are always showing their iPhone running the other interface. And I do not think Apple is actually trying to say the Google voice overwrites files on the iPhone to replace an interface. What they are saying is it replaces key functions of the iPhone interface, and yes that is offering an alternate to customers which is already there in the form of other smart phones. People will use the GV application instead of the normal dialer, messenger and voice mail, so it becomes a duplication of functions already on the phone which Apple before any App got on the store said it would not allow. Apple is about the end user experience and while some people might want choice Apple is not restricting that at all since there are other phones out there. If Apple feels the GV application does not provide the user experience it expects then they can and from a business stance should reject it out right.
Chief concern to me is Googles obsession with gathering personal information and their track record regarding it. What is Googles driving force behind its desire for that information? Why do they need to download the contacts information from the iPhone when their App is ran? Are we really expected to believe that Google can not produce an application that can interact with the other iPhone applications as well as other companies? I use Beejive and it access my contacts in address book just fine. QuickOffice accesses email and contacts seamlessly. So again why does Googles application need to upload the contacts to their server? Doesn't seem to me like there is a valid reason since other programs do not need to. I give my address to a friend who uses GV and it uploads that contact details to Google without my permission and this is somehow right? Should I now have to ask every person I give my details to if they are using GV? I didn't sign up for GV or provide them the right to have my details yet because their App uploads the contact list the will have that information. And yes as far as priority of why Apple is delaying this or if they reject it I am sure protecting my information is the least of their concerns, but from the sound of it they are at least a little concerned and for that I am appreciative.
I know the FCC is trying to make a new name for itself but it seems silly that they are stepping in on something like this. Apple is not required to approve Google Voice. The iPhone is their platform and it is not an open platform that has a majority out there. Comments regarding what people would do if Microsoft said what you could run on your computer are absurd. Microsoft has a majority of the OS market so they can not restrict what you can run even if they want to (and they most likely do) without it becoming an anti-trust issue since they have such a stranglehold on the market by numbers. iPhone is still a relatively small percentage of the hand hold market so they can remain a closed environment. Personally I think the FCC involvement says one of two things. Either someone at Google has a lot of influence there and has asked them to get involved, which no company should have enough influence over a government office to get them to poke their noses where they normally would not or the FCC is trying to expand their area of influence, which should be a concern to more people as the more the government gets involved the more likely things are going to go down hill wrapped in red tape.
This whole thing does not make much sense. From a marketing standpoint Google actually benefits more from their App being rejected. After all if people want it bad enough I am sure there is a version on Google's Android. What it basically says is that Google has very little faith in either of their products. If Google Voice is not that important to people that they would move to a phone that allows it then it is not that great a product. If Android is not good enough to lure iPhone subscribers away then why are they not working on that? They should in all rights be ignoring the iPhone and focusing on marketing what they are making.
For a item to sell in todays market it has to have a killer feature that is a draw. iPhone has a great interface and though it has other great features thats the biggest seller to most. The way the device integrates with other Apple products and how smooth it responds and works. So I can see Apple being concerned if people are using another interface most of the time in that Apple has always been a big believe in word of mouth advertising. They want people to show others their iPhone and attract people that way. That does not work as well if people are always showing their iPhone running the other interface. And I do not think Apple is actually trying to say the Google voice overwrites files on the iPhone to replace an interface. What they are saying is it replaces key functions of the iPhone interface, and yes that is offering an alternate to customers which is already there in the form of other smart phones. People will use the GV application instead of the normal dialer, messenger and voice mail, so it becomes a duplication of functions already on the phone which Apple before any App got on the store said it would not allow. Apple is about the end user experience and while some people might want choice Apple is not restricting that at all since there are other phones out there. If Apple feels the GV application does not provide the user experience it expects then they can and from a business stance should reject it out right.
Chief concern to me is Googles obsession with gathering personal information and their track record regarding it. What is Googles driving force behind its desire for that information? Why do they need to download the contacts information from the iPhone when their App is ran? Are we really expected to believe that Google can not produce an application that can interact with the other iPhone applications as well as other companies? I use Beejive and it access my contacts in address book just fine. QuickOffice accesses email and contacts seamlessly. So again why does Googles application need to upload the contacts to their server? Doesn't seem to me like there is a valid reason since other programs do not need to. I give my address to a friend who uses GV and it uploads that contact details to Google without my permission and this is somehow right? Should I now have to ask every person I give my details to if they are using GV? I didn't sign up for GV or provide them the right to have my details yet because their App uploads the contact list the will have that information. And yes as far as priority of why Apple is delaying this or if they reject it I am sure protecting my information is the least of their concerns, but from the sound of it they are at least a little concerned and for that I am appreciative.
Keep in mind that Apple has a long-term strategy to morph what you see into something more and more. Google's CEO sitting on Apple's board may have sniffed out where Apple is headed and beat them to the punch. Apple, without admitting to their own strategy, is shutting Google down based on other points.
There's a very large building being plunked down in N.C. that may be part of the future iPhone business plan and approving the Google apps may be counter to that strategy.
Don't do all your thinking based on where Apple is, you need to consider where Apple plans on being.
MyPhone+ does that exact same thing PLUS it's icon is identical to the iPhone's (just blue instead of green).
I didn't misinterpret. In fact, I mentioned that possibility and MyPhone+ in my original response.
Read the ENTIRE response next time.