Apple’s FCC Response Infuriates Google Voice App Developer

11

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

kemplang

Ruby on Rails program languange in Government 2.0 and Oracle Consultant
http://Kiranatama.com

avatar

jibran_pcc

Duerr says that the emails that developers currently receive “shed little to no light on the real issue. They almost always require a hefty amount of interpretation, followed by a leap of faith that the developer knows what Apple actually meant.” He adds that emails to the app review team result in canned responses 99.99%

Your Net Bizof the time.

avatar

Cathy Preston

Let them answer and vent their frustration. Then, challenge them to own the "issue" at hand: "How would you handle the situation?" Encourage them to give you feedback on how to make it easier.

Dating Advice

avatar

dezinewiz@mac.com

I can totally see both points of view.The developer - "I developed the app. It was IN the store. Why was it pulled?!"Apple - "Ha ha ha ha ha!! YOU ARE ALL MINE! :-D It's OUR store. OUR iPhone. We can do WHAT WE WANT!!"Folks, I fully believe the bottom line is this - Apple + AT&T, no doubt, have firm, binding agreements about how the device works with the service. Remember, technologies such as visual voicemail (if memory serves me correctly) were created with Apple and AT&T together. Both companies have tremendous investments, and money makers to protect.If such is the case, why on earth would Apple, working in it's best interests, approve an application that allows, in it's own defense, many technologies that the iPhone either a) already has, or b) will no doubt be getting in the future + more, and better?All of that being said, why on earth Apple would approve something, and then pull it from the store without explanation, I don't understand.Either that is totally true, or someone isn't fessing up to something.At the end of the day - MMS is still coming before September?

avatar

texasbrian

... is jguzicki's logic.

Because using his logic, since it's Apple's toy and Apple's world, Apple can do what it wants. Therefore, using that logic, Apple could choose not to sell iPhones to black people, or not sell apps to women, etc.

No, my friend, once Apple enters the marketplace, the entity known as the Federal Trade Commission comes into play. You may know them as the guys who regulate monopolies, who watch Microsoft with an eagle eye, approve mergers and regulate certain commerce.

But enough about logic; let's talk about focus for a second. This isn't about "forcing" Apple to "sell what they don't want to." It's about an even playing field. It's about banning an app in favor of your business partner. That's cronyism as its best, collusion at its worst. And THAT is why the government asked what involvement AT&T had in the decision-making. You see, AT&T benefits here the most.

Finally, if you're so pro-Apple, why are you jailbreaking phones?

avatar

jguzicki

no. it doesn't have the right to discriminate to who gets the end product; thats why people that have already downloaded the app can still use it and that it still functions. I never said that they had the right to discriminate, nor did i mention that it was "apple's world," "apple's toy," or any of the other nonsense you declared.lets put it into perspective: I work for at&t. our competitors are verizon, t-mobile, and sprint, among other private entities serving as a front for one of the bigger companies. Now, at&t sells phones - obviously. but so do verizon, t-mobile, and sprint. do I have to offer them as alternatives to my service, in my stores? well, no. so why, on a platform built and focused on one carrier- at&t, would I want to advertise a rival (which google is quickly becoming) and make it readily available to the cliental that are now locked in a two year contract.since when has it become the governments job to make the business world a level playing field? so when companies go under, we can make everyone feel good about themselves and bring them out of oblivion (i.e. Chrysler and GM).Capitalism is not a "level playing field" for business. That, my friend, is where the government owns and regulates all commerce. what a novel idea, a true level playing field! Oh, wait, i do believe someone has already tried that. and failed. Its called communism, and is the polar opposite to capitalism. If you think that trade should be regulated, no one is keeping you here. ship off to cuba, or china. Thats why i offered jailbreaking as a solution to someone that is hellbent on getting their cake and eating it too. you can unlock t-mobile phones to use on at&t, and at&t to t-mobile. but you don't see them readily advertising unlock codes, do they?In the end, the user decides what he or she, black, white, or any colours you throw in between, want to do with their phone. Apple doesn't offer google voice, sorry. go somewhere else, or get your iphone and do with it what you want. be on your way and no one really cares but you. want to talk logic? i'll be here all week. :] have a good one, texasbrian. hah.

avatar

genovelle

You comment makes not sense.  When did Apple say they wouldn't sell apps to different groups. No one else made this suggestion either.  They CAN and will chose what is sold in their stores as it their right.  I don't see dell promoting Apple Products on their site.  Walmart carries what ever they feel is right for their clientele.  You can't expect to go to A Ford dealership and get an Accord or even a Ford that has been built by Honda.  You could at one point get a Saturn with a Honda V6 engine, but that was because the companies agreed to make that happen.  The app was not approved because it did just like the Google version and made certain features of The APPLE Iphone not function like it should. ie Visual Voicemail. I wonder if after closer inspections of the help line if they noticed the number of confused consumers that they were having to help because the apps unwittingly broke one of rules of the SDK but was initially over looked because it was unforeseen it would do such. The playing field is even, notice they removed all of the apps in question. And its their store.  You could buy apps for other phones before Apple created the App store concept.  Why do you think they have so many apps after a year, when the others have been around for years.  They did something right and it can not be a free for all.  That model doesn't work!Its always been clear that apps could not modify the core features of the Iphone.   

avatar

jguzicki

is that its apple's own system and it can approve any app it wants to be (or disapprove any app it doesn't want to be) used on its platform. if you've got problems with apple's stance, jailbreak it and get on with your life. Apple made the appstore to work on its own platform so that developers could make apps for it. If they could have forseen the shit that they'd get for it, they might as well make apps impossible to get into the app store.

If you really are that upset about it, make it publically available for jailbroken phones. i don't see whatthe big deal is; its their store, and shouldn't be forced by ANY organization to sell what they don't want to.

avatar

fredcraig

I think it some form of cosmic payback that GoogleVoice should fall into Apple's black hole considering that Google kept GrandCentral (which eventually resurfaced as GoogleVoice) in its own "we may eventually release it" hole for a couple of years. Both companies could learn a lot about transparency.

avatar

pbernicchi

I agree with the need for transparency, as a general rule.  I don't agree with the rest of your comment.  The developer of VoiceCentral should not be held hostage because of a cosmic pissing contest or payback between Google and Apple, if that is even a valid point.  Google purchased GrandCentral in 2007.  The technology then became theirs to migrate to GV and release when they saw fit, if at all.  They are under no obligation to divulge details or timetables, other than to satisfy users' curiosities.  It's like a developer buying two adjacent houses, bulldozing them, and putting up a mansion.As for as transparency, a Twitter search for #googlevoice would yield at least three Google/GV feeds, with one being the team lead.  I was fuming for months after requesting an invite and finally got one... but I'll never know what work had to be done before it was ready to release beyond existing GC users.

Log in to Mac|Life directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.