Google Claims That Apple Did Reject Google Voice iPhone Application

[hanpa]

The answer from Google is very clear regarding how different the App Store and Android Market work. It's also completely obvious how transparent Apple´s explanations are. "User confusion" = no competition

I certainly hope that the competition from Android eventually will cause Apple to change. And also that the "non-agreement" between AT&T and Apple will become true and not just a bad excuse for a bad policy.

 

[w00master]

What good is talking about hypothetical going to do. We might as well ask what would happen if Apple halted all App Store development. Hypotheticals only have meaning if they are somewhat plausible. You are trying to introduce a scenario that only has a tenuous relationship. The two are not comparable at all.

Sorry, but I completely disagree. They are *absolutely* comparable.

Apple controls the OS, hardware for Macs.

Apple controls the OS, hardware for iPhones.

This is why we use the scenario. Again, if Apple decided to control all distribution of apps on the Mac platform (which they totally could), how would you feel if you couldn't install an alternative browser on the Mac?

w00master

 

[Mark Booth]

Apple is being proactive. Thing is, when you want to maintain the user experience, you need to keep things tight, integrated, and controlled.

Ah ha! That explains why I can download a dozen different FART applications for my iPhone!

Gotta keep that user experience TIGHT!

Mark

 

[madmaxmedia]

Apple delivering products people want, consistently, when no one else seems to be doing it. Apple is being proactive. Thing is, when you want to maintain the user experience, you need to keep things tight, integrated, and controlled.

Yeah, but can't you see the irony? Is that how you want your government too? Tight, integrated, and controlled? Or would you rather have sexy hammer-throwing girl?

 

[occamsrazor]

While it is true that they have approved VOIP apps on the iPhone, Google Voice not only has a dialer/Contacts UI but it does an end run around the carrier phone system.

And that would be bad for the people who buy Apple's products.... how????

 

[FakeWozniak]

Google is Evil

Google is evil, evil, evil.

I read the request from the FCC to Google and it looks like it was written by a Google employee.

And WTF is the FCC doing caring about applications for a particular cell phone? Do they care what applications are are allowed on other phones? It's clearly targetted at Apple and not the equipment manufacturers. They are only responsible for the POTS network and the airwaves, not applications on the phone

Notice how ATT is clearly left out of the fight... Ask yourself what the motivation is for the FCC to investigate this other then Evil Google getting all pissy about Apple rejecting them.

Google is evil.

 

[CylonGlitch]

I have nothing wrong with an approval process; and in fact, I think it is required. I do wish Apple had MORE people working it to move things along quicker. That being said, I do wish that they would only reject applications based on issues with the app. Reject if there is some spyware in it, or it is a virus, or stealing your contact information, or doing something funky to the system, or just damn buggy. I would prefer it if they stayed away from letting the consumers have options. If you download the GV app, most likely you know what you're getting and you're not going to be confused between it and the normal phone app. Let the customers decide. If their app is better and people want to buy it, great. If they start bitching at Apple, maybe they should update their phone app.

Now, if all of that is said and done, and every thing looks good; I still think that AT&T's contract may have a heavy hand in some of the decision making. Such as, don't allow apps that use more bandwidth then xx bytes/sec or whatever. I can see the fine print of the contract saying something like that.

Maybe AT&T is right, they never told Apple they had to reject the GV app. Maybe Apple read their AT&T contract and realized that if they didn't reject it, they would be in violation of that contract. Thus AT&T could have cause the rejection without telling Apple to do it. But if this is the case, couldn't Apple just say that? Unless, of course, their contract says they can't. We don't know.

Anyway, I say let competion reign and see who wins. Keep the approval process but reject based on threat not on content.

 

[*LTD*]

Fixed.

All of you that are OK with Apple disallowing GV seem to like to be told what you can and can not do. How did you all get so submissive?

This is the Apple way. You get to play in Apple's garden, and if you don't like it you can go elsewhere. It's just that simple.

Some of us just don't care. And really, we don't need the geek contingent on MR telling us what we should or should not care about or consider important issues.

You want to be that much in control? Just grab a copy of Windows. Enjoy.

If I'm unhappy with Apple I can always vote with my wallet and take my business elsewhere. I choose to allow Apple to "tell me what to do." Yes, I'm fine with it, and so far they've done just fine by me.

Enough with the geek tears, already.

 

[hanpa]

Vonage and Skype have apps for the iPhone. There are many VoIP apps that were approved.

Skype calls are not allowed on a cellular connection, only on Wi-Fi. This is because the user would otherwise be very confused...

 

[madmaxmedia]

I continue not to give a crap about Google's hurt feelings. I like that apple keeps control over the device and the entire user experience, the speed, the responsiveness, the whole look and feel. I like it because I have a phone which works in a consistent way, which feels like it was designed, not bodged together at an all-night pizza party. Innovation and design are not the same thing.

If the iPhone falls behind other offerings because they over-restrict creativity, then I won't buy another one when my contract is up and I'll switch and if enough other people do so, apple will change or lose (they can change, the appstore grew rapidly when the the 'only webapps for iphone' idea proved to be a flop).

It's their phone, it's their platform, they designed it, if they want it to have a certain consistency and be used in a given way and have core functionality restricted to the way they saw it, well that's their right.

It's not about right and wrong, I agree it's their 'right' since those are the terms of the App Store.

But is it a good decision to reject these Google apps? Most all of us think no. As you say, you may or may not buy an iPhone next time around based on the various product offerings. Does rejecting Google apps make the iPhone better or worse? Most say worse...

 

[benpatient]

I'm going to laugh my ass off when Google decides to block the iphone ports that connect to google maps...

I hope you guys like mapquest, because you can bet you won't be getting bing maps!

i hear mapquest is SOOOO awesome.

hahaha.

I can see the press release right now:

"Google maps access has been removed from the iphone because the iphone duplicates functionality already found in computers. Bitches"

 

[*LTD*]

Yeah, but can't you see the irony? Is that how you want your government too? Tight, integrated, and controlled? Or would you rather have sexy hammer-throwing girl?

One has nothing to do with the other.

 

[shindailoversDF]

Well...

If Google makes an app that takes away from the spotlight of the iPhone, and I were Apple, I'd reject it too. On the flip side, if a dev makes an app that would put the iPhone in negative light, I'd also reject it. I think Apple is in the right for wanting to tightly control what apps are allowed to reflect on its reputation. While some may see it as Apple becoming "the villain" as Microsoft did, I disagree. It's Apple taking care of it's customers, and I think some of you out there are just too jaded to see that. Just my two cents.

 

[outphase]

Some of us just don't care. And really, we don't need the geek contingent on MR telling us what we should or should not care about or consider important issues.

Isn't that what you are trying to do? You are trying to tell those who care to not care because it's not important to you.

 

[aristotle]

I'm sick and tired of all of the APOLOGISTS. Boo fricken hoo to you guys.

GV isn't there to save you money. It's there so you can manage your various phones and mobile devices better. Huge difference.

w00master

Your various mobile devices as in mobile phones? Why would you have more than one in your control? Wouldn't it be easier to manage by having one device and cheaper too? Do you always have to be within reach for all of your various numbers?

 

[pdjudd]

More companies should sue Apple for rejecting their products.

Please cite the terms that state that Apple guarantees that they will distribute all apps that are submitted to them. In other words, what can they be sued for?

Apple should really be more of finding reasons to accept applications vs. Finding Reasons to Reject them.

Possibly. I still have no reason to doubt that Apple approves far more apps than they reject.

[

Apple reminds me of elementary school where after a quiz you would give you paper to an other student who would grade your paper. Where kids would take joy in marking their peers papers as wrong. I remember getting an answer wrong because my C looked like an L (On a multiple choice quiz of A, B, C) This is how Apple seems to be about accepting their apps. Lets find a reason to reject vs. Reasons to accept the product.

I don't see it like that (and for what it's worth, the system you described never happened at any elementary school that I attended). It doesn't really work as an analogy though. First thing, we only hear about the failures. Obviously of a sample size in which there is not a 100% rate of success, some people are going to fail. Second, the scenario of student grading doesn't work - App Store rejections are done by Apple employees - not fellow developers. Third, the kind of exam we would be talking about is more like trying to grade an essay, not a multiple choice exam. Applications are not something that can be looked at the same way and get the same output.

 

[madmaxmedia]

This. This is the reality. It might be hard to see through all the geek-tears around here, but this is it.

Why is it not okay for people to voice their disapproval about Apple's App Store policies?

We get it- that's Apple's MO. Some of us think they are going to far, or at the very least not being consistent in enforcing their policies.

You think it's okay, that's fine too. But why are you criticizing other people for simply having a different opinion?

 

[VoR]

This is the Apple way. You get to play in Apple's garden, and if you don't like it you can go elsewhere. It's just that simple.

Some of us just don't care. And really, we don't need the geek contingent on MR telling us what we should or should not care about or consider important issues.

Rather arrogantly I'd like to say that I think the average consumer is an idiot, they're just buying things like the iphone because they've seen it on TV.
Absolutely noone that I know who owns an iphone has any idea what they're missing out by having a locked down ecosystem and app store compared to what potential the device has.

 

[Voidness]

I have a question. How many of those complaining about Google Voice's rejection actually have access to the service? Isn't it US-only and invite-only at the moment?

Anyway, something's not right here. Apple wouldn't reject Google Voice without AT&T's influence, as Apple have nothing to gain from the rejection. On the other hand, they allowed Rhapsody and Spotify to the App Store, direct competitors to iTunes.

 

[madmaxmedia]

One has nothing to do with the other.

You're right, I was being facetious.

I do agree that this is not a government issue, not something that Apple can be forced to do one way or the other.

I still think Apple is going about this wrong, but hey in the end we will all vote with our pocketbooks.

 

[djdole]

Apple's rejection = BS

Rejecting ANY app because it duplicates Apple functionality is a conflict of interest. I REALLY hope Apple get the smack-down for this, because if allowed to continue this will not only hamper app innovation and competition, but also hurt Apple by putting them in a position where they may believe similar actions (but with other products) in the future will be acceptable (which may lead to worse legal litigation).
If Apple is forced to learn their lesson now with this arguably trivial instance, they'll be more than likely ready to fairly conduct themselves in the larger market in the future (such as if they actually open their OS up for install on PCs).

Till then, Apple's fear of competing software doesn't surprise me one bit.
It seems that, more and more, with every act Apple displays less and less confidence in the quality of their own software in comparison to possible competitors. They seem to prefer to artificially create monopolistic scenarios and muscle-out competition rather than have the possibility that someone elsewhere may in fact be able to create a better piece of software than what they make.

"Oh noes! People may not want to use Shitfari if given an alternative! So we CAN'T allow Firefox or Opera on the iPhone!"

 

[mds]

I have to agree with some of the anti-Apple sentiment here. I'm a long time supporter (owned an Apple IIc when I was a kid) and use Macs in my work and at home every day. I'm not a fanboy (I use PCs as well, own a Pre (and like it), etc), but I think Apple makes great products.

It is troublesome to see how Apple has gone from underdog to behemoth. I guess its just the nature of business...when you're the underdog you extol it as a virtue, when you're on top you through your wait around to stay on top...sad to see Apple spending so much time trying to squeeze competition out in the courtroom rather than just continue innovating...

 

[*LTD*]

Isn't that what you are trying to do? You are trying to tell those who care to not care because it's not important to you.

You make a good point. Except that you don't see me whining ad infinitum about something that is part-and-parcel of the Apple way of doing things to begin with, and which has been this way for years now.

There's a price to pay for the "Apple experience." Always has been. Total openness and transparency is not one of the ideals (and never was) that are high on Apple's list or priorities. It's a closed system. But one that manages to be far, far more attractive and usable than all the others out there.

Apple is no more closed/restricitve today than it was five years ago. In fact, it has opened up in some ways. There are just more products in the Apple lineup and more fingers in the Apple pie that need to be regulated, placated, controlled, catered to, reigned in, etc.

 

[Poll Smoker]

I do, but I then think about how much more app developers could do if THEY HAD MORE CONFIDENCE in the APPROVAL PROCESS.

Explain to me why it's ok to have a VOIP app but not the GV app?

In what way is the VOIP app not Duplicating features?

What about all of those weather apps?

What about all of those calc apps?

Quit apologizing for Apple.

w00master

Why do you even waste your time arguing with him?

He's a joke of a fan boy, and spouts the same sh*t ad naseaum over at AI as well.

 

[w00master]

I have to agree with some of the anti-Apple sentiment here. I'm a long time supporter (owned an Apple IIc when I was a kid) and use Macs in my work and at home every day. I'm not a fanboy (I use PCs as well, own a Pre (and like it), etc), but I think Apple makes great products.

It is troublesome to see how Apple has gone from underdog to behemoth. I guess its just the nature of business...when you're the underdog you extol it as a virtue, when you're on top you through your wait around to stay on top...sad to see Apple spending so much time trying to squeeze competition out in the courtroom rather than just continue innovating...

Well said... I'd like to remind the Apologists on this Apple Ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oAB83Z1ydE

I love how Apple is "Thinking Different." More like thinking like Microsoft.


w00master