Goona
macrumors 68020
So don't buy their phones if they are so goddamn controlling instead of running crying to the government, is it by force to own an iPhone?
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.
FCC Investigating Apple's Rejection of Google Voice iPhone Application
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So don't buy their phones if they are so goddamn controlling instead of running crying to the government, is it by force to own an iPhone?
Very different from Vonage. Vonage is a VOIP provider, GV is not VOIP. GV is most similar to a calling card service, in that you call google, enter the number to call and they connect you. You can do this from your landline, cell phone or initiate through you browser on pc or phone. You are still charged by your carrier for the call itself, just not the long distance...exactly like a calling card.
Everyday there is garbage at the App Store now. This has got to be stopped. I am starting to move from just being angry to just being anti-iPhone.
From Daring Fireball:
"Two years ago I linked to a web site called Ninjawords — a fast, simple online dictionary backed by a good data source (Wiktionary)."
"But Ninjawords for iPhone suffers one humiliating flaw: it omits all the words deemed “objectionable” by Apple’s App Store reviewers, despite the fact that Ninjawords carries a 17+ rating.
Apple censored an English dictionary.
A dictionary. A reference book. For words contained in all reasonable dictionaries. For words contained in dictionaries that are used every day in elementary school libraries and classrooms."
"In other words, not only must the dictionary be censored — a dictionary — but even after being purged of “objectionable” words it would only be considered with a 17+ rating"
The list of omitted words includes some which have utterly non-objectionable senses: ass, snatch, pu**y, cock, and even screw. (Ass and cock appear throughout the King James Bible.)
From Daring Fireball:
"Two years ago I linked to a web site called Ninjawords — a fast, simple online dictionary backed by a good data source (Wiktionary)."
"But Ninjawords for iPhone suffers one humiliating flaw: it omits all the words deemed “objectionable” by Apple’s App Store reviewers, despite the fact that Ninjawords carries a 17+ rating.
Apple censored an English dictionary.
A dictionary. A reference book. For words contained in all reasonable dictionaries. For words contained in dictionaries that are used every day in elementary school libraries and classrooms."
"In other words, not only must the dictionary be censored — a dictionary — but even after being purged of “objectionable” words it would only be considered with a 17+ rating"
The list of omitted words includes some which have utterly non-objectionable senses: ass, snatch, pu**y, cock, and even screw. (Ass and cock appear throughout the King James Bible.)
rhett7660
macrumors G5
Why because apple is rejecting x% of the apps? I have a feeling it is going to change. But lets be realistic here. Apple has ventured into something that is still relatively new to not only them but to everyone. Yes they have done some bonehead moves.....
What they need to do is tell the developer in writing, black and white, why the app was not approved. I also think they need to set down a set of standards that clearly state what the app can and cannot have.
But really, getting upset because of x amount of apps out of how many are not being approved?
I think the 17+ to be fair was just implemented with 3.0 wasn't it? This is coming from two years ago....
AidenShaw
macrumors P6
Reminds me of a wonderful line from the comedy play "Greater Tuna"
http://florence-arts.com/Burney/index.htm
This is not two years ago. Ninjawords started two years ago. The iPhone app approval has been happening for the last two months. Since you're talking about %'s, what % of those apps getting approved are actually useful and high quality? I don't care about fart apps and tip calculators. One developer was just kicked out of the App Store and he had 900 apps. He was only ranked third for the most apps by a developer.
It's not an excuse to say the App Store is the first going down this road. There are already similar ratings for movies and video games they could learn from. Instead they are creating their own ratings system. The story mentioned above had words that exists in Apple's own Dictionary app on the Mac. It makes no sense. They are even censoring book apps.
In this case they did tell the developer the problem. Does that make it any less absurd?
Ha! It seems that life is imitating art... or at least the Nazis.
Goona
macrumors 68020
Who are you to decide what apps are quality or not, if there is a market for an app, it should be offered. That developer has every right to sell his apps just like Google voice. There must have been a market for them since people were buying them. The only reason Apple took them out is for infringment. If somebody wants to buy a fart app, how does that concern you? This app store whining is getting tiresome. 96 percent of apps that are submitted are approved, Apple never said they would allow 100 percent of submitted apps to be included in the store. If an app you want was blocked, deal with it. If Apple's solution was so crap, why haven't any of other companies brang a store that has attracted developer and a user base like the app store.
Who am I? I'm the guy that wouldn't use brang. I'm with the post-pubescent majority of iPhone owners that don't buy fart apps. I'm with the majority of people who believes there is a problem. Don't believe me? Go check the positive to negatives for this story or any other website saying there is a problem. Who are you?
It's better to be a "whiner" than bending over to Apple and saying "Thank you sir, may I have another?"
It would be nice if Apple published better guidelines regarding what will be denied. It is a waste of resources for a business to pay developers to create an app, only to have Apple tell them their users can't buy it. Worse, is when Apple denies it and doesn't give them a reason so that they might go back and 'correct' their egregious 'errors'. Without a reason, the developer either swallows the lose of their time and toss the app, or they guess at their their violations were and try to change the app and resubmit.
Mattie Num Nums
macrumors 68030
Goona
macrumors 68020
I guess you feel big because you corrected me. So bloody what if somebody buys a fart app, what is it to you? There must be a market for them which is why they are being developed, other platforms also have fart apps, people are buying them, live with it.
You're with the majority of which people? iphone OS owners? All millions of them, so I should use this forum as fact that the majority of iphone owners have a problem? A few blog postings means a majority of iphone believe there is a problem. I know you're not serious when you see the negative votes on this thread as an indication that the majority of iphone owners have a problem with this thread.
Goona
macrumors 68020
Vercingetorix
macrumors regular
I'm with you. I think I've reached some sort of tipping point. Six months ago I wouldn't have imagined every wanting a different phone again, and now I'm not sure that I'd buy another iPhone if I had to buy a new phone tomorrow. If this process isn't improved by the time my contract is up next year, then I'll abandon the platform. The iPhone is an amazing device, but it's becoming clear that the App Store is too poisonous a system to support.
I'll tell you one thing -- all this has reduced my interest in the upcoming Apple tablet to basically zero.
LethalWolfe
macrumors G3
Pretty much. Many markets are changing and established companies will typically fight tooth and nail to keep their tried and true business models intact for as long as possible.
Lethal
You keep bringing up the fart apps. My problem is that these apps get easily accepted while dictionaries and novels has a hard time getting on the iPhone and when they do it is censored. I feel like I'm in the movie Idiocracy.
A few blog postings? You show me any website or a well respected tech journalist who believes what you do. I don't need to prove my point. This problem with the App Store is all over the web. You prove your point. I haven't seen any people like you except on Apple forums that are pleading Apple's case with quotes that have come literally out of Phil Schiller's mouth.
I'll never touch the tablet either when I can get a Mac for a little more. I'm not getting an $800 device that is locked into a carrier and the App Store.
rhett7660
macrumors G5
iBlue
macrumors Core
It's such a good thing I have you. Gee, wow, why didn't I think of that? Oh right, I did 🙄 that's why I am not buying an iPhone. And I'm not going running crying anywhere, but I am going to go with Android (just like my husband did) because I like to have some degree of control over what I put on my own phone.
You carry on though. baaa-aaaa-aaaa!
Goona
macrumors 68020
Thank goodness, go and enjoy your Android phone. That's how the world is, you don't like something, you don't buy!
Does it really matter?
It seems that Apple is facing similar problems with the likes of AT&T and Verizon in having to adjust in a new set of circumstances. On the one hand we have an antiquated telephony industry bend on preserving its high profit margins by clinging onto a charging system from the years of analogue. They sell you data in packages but they want to charge you for voice calls, which are also data, on a per minute basis. On the other hand we have a company that for decades has operated within a locked up hardware-software system suddenly venturing into a world which demands openness, flexibility, interoperability and so forth. I would like to know how will Apple and AT&T react if Google, Skype and other voice providers decide to implement an internet based service being accessed directly through your browser. Are they gonna block those sites? Another China syndrome? Where it boils down to is leaving behind the litany of "this is a free market economy" and start thinking rationally beyond the hype companies produce. The mere fact is this: Marriage between a company that is bend on making as much as possible out of you and a phone which is generally speaking very good looking but underperforming, overpriced and locked. The last one believe me is very important especially if you are traveling constantly. Maybe as consumers we should become more independently thinking and set our own principles.
It seems that Apple is facing similar problems with the likes of AT&T and Verizon in having to adjust in a new set of circumstances. On the one hand we have an antiquated telephony industry bend on preserving its high profit margins by clinging onto a charging system from the years of analogue. They sell you data in packages but they want to charge you for voice calls, which are also data, on a per minute basis. On the other hand we have a company that for decades has operated within a locked up hardware-software system suddenly venturing into a world which demands openness, flexibility, interoperability and so forth. I would like to know how will Apple and AT&T react if Google, Skype and other voice providers decide to implement an internet based service being accessed directly through your browser. Are they gonna block those sites? Another China syndrome? Where it boils down to is leaving behind the litany of "this is a free market economy" and start thinking rationally beyond the hype companies produce. The mere fact is this: Marriage between a company that is bend on making as much as possible out of you and a phone which is generally speaking very good looking but underperforming, overpriced and locked. The last one believe me is very important especially if you are traveling constantly. Maybe as consumers we should become more independently thinking and set our own principles.
Post of the month.
I sensed Apple didn't take the app store "seriously" when it was using Monkeyball and other stupid videogames in its advertisements, but couldn't quite place my finger on it.
Since then I've vaguely considered the whole thing a joke, but now its much more crystallized.
kdarling
Contributor
Yes, voice is digital instead of analog nowadays, but that doesn't automatically give it the same loose quality requirements as say, data for web browsing.
Voice is still circuit switched to maintain quality, and thus it still has to be charged by the minute.
This can finally change with the coming 4G networks, and THEN voice could be charged by data amount instead of minutes... but would anyone WANT that? Can you just imagine if you didn't have an "unlimited voice data" package?
Theoretically, people who talked more, could have to be charged more, in a packetized world. Lovers, who just sigh a lot and have more quiet space, would pay less. Those making calls from a noisy environment would pay far more, because of using far more data packets.
Be careful what you wish for 😉 The whole idea of how to bill packetized voice must give carriers the willies. If it were me, I'd still charge a fixed minute amount, wouldn't you?
Google Voice (formerly GrandCentral) is a free and innovative service that uses voice over internet protocol to link customers phone numbers together. Users of Google Voice are able to select a single U.S. phone number, from various area codes. When a Google Number is called, any or all of the user's phones may be set to ring based on the calling number or on the contact group (e.g. Family, Friends, Work, etc), and/or based on time of day (e.g. disabling a home phone during business hours and routing calls to mobile or business number).The service also features centralized voicemail and indexable, automated voicemail transcription, accessible by PC or phone.Unfortunately, Apple decided to reject all Google Voice related iPhone apps including Google's official Google Voice application from the App Store. It is widely speculated that Apple rejected the apps due to pressure from AT&T.
The rejection has caused an uproar among iPhone users and app developers and looks like FCC isn't happy about it either. They have sent letters to Apple, AT&T and Google to find out the reason why the iPhone apps were rejected. FCC seems to be interested in AT&T's role in the decision-making process and has given the three companies until August 21 to respond to their letters.According to the Wall Street Journal, this is part of a broader investigation by FCC on exclusive deals between carriers and handset manufacturers.It will be interesting to see the outcome of FCC's investigation and get some insight into the actual reason for Apple's rejection of Google Voice related iPhone apps.
The rejection has caused an uproar among iPhone users and app developers and looks like FCC isn't happy about it either. They have sent letters to Apple, AT&T and Google to find out the reason why the iPhone apps were rejected. FCC seems to be interested in AT&T's role in the decision-making process and has given the three companies until August 21 to respond to their letters.According to the Wall Street Journal, this is part of a broader investigation by FCC on exclusive deals between carriers and handset manufacturers.It will be interesting to see the outcome of FCC's investigation and get some insight into the actual reason for Apple's rejection of Google Voice related iPhone apps.
John.B
macrumors 601
You revived a thread that's been dead six days to repost what everyone already knew?
Some people's kids will do anything to generate a few clicks for their lame websites...
So all parties have to respond in a few hours.
Will we be able to view their responses? It says blanket requests for confidentiality are unacceptable in the letter. Does someone have to go through a FOI request first.
Will we be able to view their responses? It says blanket requests for confidentiality are unacceptable in the letter. Does someone have to go through a FOI request first.