Forums | MacLife

Bat · 2009-08-08 5:21 am

Specifically, Apple's authoritah. First fallout from the Schmidt resignation? War coming?

Getting rejected from the app store is no biggie for Google, apparently

Apple rejected Google Voice almost two weeks ago, removing it from the app store. Now under investigation by the feds, AT&T has pointed the finger at Apple for the rejection. Now in an exciting move Google is moving its rejected application online in an effort to essentially negate any attempts by Apple to police the application.

The new app can be installed as an icon on your homescreen. The specially crafted iPhone-shaped webpage will offer all the features of the original app. In other words, in a move akin to flipping the bird to Steve Jobs, Google has essentially highlighted a way for app developers everywhere to easily publish their rejected content.

There are some important caveats. First, Google's app was intended to be free in the first place. Apps like "MeSoHoly", which Apple rejected as offensive were intended to come at a minimal charge. Donations could work, but Apple's simple revenue sharing would be missed by developers forsaking the app store. Second, its not as trivial to build the app online, and there's still things that can't be done within the iPhone's version of Safari.

On the other hand the move could usher in a new era of freedom for iPhone users. [..]

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=15919

Bat · 2009-08-08 5:34 am

(As an aside, Jasoco, IIRC you wondered why Google was Safari's search engine. It's because Google pays them for that; something back from the ad revenues generated).

Bat · 2009-08-24 5:31 pm

App clashed with the iPhone's existing functionality and had to be banned, Apple insists

When Google Voice was banished from the iPhone, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission launched an investigation of Google, Apple, and AT&T, seeking more details to determine if something improper was taking place. AT&T quickly pointed the finger at Apple, saying it played no part in the rejection.

Now Apple has issued its own response and it appears it is indeed claiming responsibility for the rejection. Apple in the statement says that it does not think of the app as rejected, but rather considers it under "study". Apple states that the application alters "the iPhone's distinctive user experience" and that it "disables Apple's Visual Voicemail". Apple is also unhappy that the app syncs the iPhone's contacts with Google contacts, despite the fact that Apple's Mac computers already can do this.

In its statement Apple expresses fears that its users wouldn't be able to understand Google Voice or use it properly, as it replaces frequently used elements of the iPhone interface. It indicates that concerns over confusing users or depriving them of functionality were driving reasons for not approving the application.

One significant comment which Apple makes is that it would welcome a Google Voice web application. Google is reportedly tailoring just such a web application at this time, which would provide identical functionality to the rejected app.

Interestingly, while it backed up AT&T's story on the GV rejection, Apple contradicted AT&T's claim that AT&T never played a part in rejecting apps. It says that it rejected the SlingPlayer app initially, "because redirecting a TV signal to an iPhone using AT&T's cellular network is prohibited by AT&T's customer Terms of Service."

Can't both be true. Apple Says Google Voice Too Confusing for Its Customers