Apple Responds to Full Disclosure of Google FCC Response
Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris has sent TiPb a response to the now fully public Google FCC disclosure, which Dieter posted earlier today.
“We do not agree with all of the statements made by Google in their FCC letter. Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application and we continue to discuss it with Google.”
So it’s either Apple-said/Google-said, some broken-telephone (the irony!) between the two companies, or a mix of both?
Regardless of the “was it rejected or is it still being studied” tempest, Google Voice and Google Latitude remain absent from Apple’s App Store, and all companies seem to agree on the reason: they duplicate what Apple considers to be core functionality of the iPhone, and that’s something Apple currently doesn’t want to see duplicated.
Since it’s Apple’s product, that’s their prerogative (especially if they consider Google competitive in this space), though if Google Voice and Google Latitude are features a user needs, they’re not going to consider an iPhone. When/if that becomes a huge portion of the user base, Apple may have to reconsider. Either way, Google is still going ahead with WebApp versions for now and everyone else is just going to have to wait and see..
| Tweet |
|
|
← Previously
Google Says Apple Did Fully Reject Google VoiceLeave a Reply
Note: Comments must be civil, respectful, and on-topic. If a comment does not add to the conversation, if it contains spam advertising, or inappropriate language or content, it will be removed. Comments containing links may be held for moderation. Relax, enjoy, and share in the discussion.
“Since it’s Apple’s product, that’s there prerogative…”
You mean, their prerogative?
tempest in a teapot.
both companies are probably right in one way or another, if it comes down to either of the companies having a different idea of what constitutes “rejection”.
i think “rejection” is a broad enough concept that two companies can have differing ideas of what it means.
this is all really just a semantic misunderstanding, although i think google is closer to what the “common sense” definition of “rejection” is, and that apple has indeed rejected the app and is merely continually reconsidering that rejection.
in the meantime, customers are caught in the middle of a petty silicon valley turf war. it just so happens that google’s interests more closely align with those of most customers, and apple’s interests do not.
Apple has allowed others to circumvent “their prerogative” and add dialers for other phone services, such as Voip and SIP. They seem to exercise “their prerogative” rather unevenly.
“Continuing to study”. Do they mean pouring over Google’s Source code trying to figure out how Google did so much better at providing a dialer than Apple? Some folks are openly raising this possibility: http://gigaom.com/2009/09/18/apple-rejected-google-apps-because-they-were-better/
This whole thing stinks like yesterday’s fish.
But what is interesting is that Apple contacts TiPb directly. Even if it is a bulk email campaign, it signals that TiPb has worked its way up the pecking order of influential blogs. Kudos for that!!
@icebike
yeah apples definitely jealous of googles dialer. That must be the problem. Does anyone even use a dialer anymore? Don’t you just tap on a persons name for the most part?
That’s right don’t let Google bully you around Apple.
From itunes connect it is pretty straight forward: Either you have a yellow light next to you app saying it is in review, or a red light next to your app saying it is rejected. What color is the light?
We asked Apple for comment, it was initiated on TiPb’s end. This was what they sent in response.
What about the dozen or so other “dialers” in the app store?
@Therealtruth:
Not for international calls I don’t. GV or Voip is way cheaper.
This whole issue is a big distraction leading to no immediate solution.
However, this issue and 6 or 8 other NOTHING stories have managed to push the really important story off TiPb’s front page:
http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/09/16/iphone-31-bugs-random-freeze-shut/
The Coma Mode issue is WAY more important to WAY more people, and one of the most Active posts on the whole blog, in addition to 53 thousand hits on discussions.apple.com.
@icebike
if google voice uses your cell minutes then how is it cheaper? yeah voip is cheaper and also available in the app store.
Because I have a ton of minutes, but not for international calling, and most of my customers are international.
But don’t assume CHEAPER is the only reason to have GV, because if you do, you totally miss the point of GV.
Google Voice is US only, which also means Google has thus far rejected international users from the service…
But Calling internationally via GV is quite cheap:
http://www.google.com/support/voice/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=141925
You can’t sign up for an account yet, oh disadvantaged Canadian, but I suspect this will be changed soon.
We can already call you for free on GV. http://googlevoiceblog.blogspot.com/2009/08/calls-to-canada-are-free-again.html
Rene, clever. Though it is also true that Google Voice users can call internationally, so you aren’t totally rejected…
@Therealtruth:
Funny you should ask that. I used my dialer for the very first time today to order chinese food from a take-out menu I had laying around.
The funny thing here is that Apple should be out in front of this issue developing VOIP for the iphone and integrating it into the existing phone in such a way that “It Just Works”, choosing free voip where ever possible, and resorting to the cheapest paid service when its not possible.
If they did this, they would be well ahead of the game and steal yet another march on the competition. Because the FCC has decided to make a formal push for net neutrality in a big way. That bandwidth you pay for will be your so use any way you want.
So if Apple was waiting in the wings with a completely integrated seamless blend of Voip/Sip/Cellular available across Wifi/3G/LTE they would have the stage to themselves when Wireless Net Neutrality hits.
Some combination of what Google Voice and Skype and Fring provide would be nice.
LTE is all about the NET anyway. Apple needs to get out in front of it and stop rejecting things just because Google does it better. If they don’t, Android will. In this case, Google has the Vision Thing working overtime, and Apple is just trying to rest on their laurels.
I’m sure i’m not the only one who thinks this. http://tinyurl.com/l27gbm
And No, Rene, you are not REJECTED, you are being studied.
@fastlane yeah i just ask the google mobile app for the number to my favorite chinese place and then just tap the number. or i use voice control for my contact list. its cool that you can actually talk to your dialer though. wow!!!
@icebike
people always think apple is resting on their laurels. the fact is you dont really hear anything from them until its ready. who knows what theyve got planned.
Where’s Truth at? I don’t find The Real Truth quite as “real truth” as he says. Not to mention as entertaining.
@tweger01
oh come on im much more entertaining than that guy. check out some of my psts on the zune. classics if i do say so myself. plus i do feel that im a bit more level headed than the other guy…..
This is why webos is looking more attractive everyday.
Apple wants to do what Google does and Google wants the same. They are in direct competition with each other it’s evident. Once Google got into the phone game seriously it changed everything.
Yea apple, just because google is a bigger company, doesn’t mean you have to listen to them and do what ever they say. Go apple
@ joszoo
You must have a sad pathetic life if you spend your time looking for spelling/grammar mistakes!
I think apple is probably trying to find a way of integrating GV into the OS .. piping it in the background. This way it is seamless and doesn’t hijack most of apples phone features like the GV app does. Apple is all about user experience and device simplicity. Having 2 separate apps for sms , voicemail and calling is not going to happen.
It’s perogative… Not prerogative. Mistakes can be distracting and will lessen the impact of your post. Just sayin.
As far as gvoice, it is Apple’s perogative. I, personally, have no use for it. squirrel!….
@hand me:
What have you seen anywhere on the web that leads you to the conclusion that Apple is trying to integrate Google Voice?
You are the first to suggest this. How could apple do this without Google’s knowledge and permission? GV belongs to Google!
And just so you know there are ALREADY other apps in the app store that allow VOIP/SIP dialing.
This Rene bloke seems to be a bit fan-ish at times. Needs to proof read more too.
Google is refusing to offer push Gmail for iPhone (and other competitors) users, but allow it on Android.
You should try using iSIP. You can then use almost any VoIP provider like Callcentric, which is even cheaper then GV.
Nice thing about capitalism is if you don’t like something you can go buy another product. If you don’t like Apple because they rejected GV and Latitude but a Android phone. Personally I have no use for either app. But there are plenty of apps I do have a use for and enjoy using, if they were not available I would consider using a differnt phone. I would not however make bogus claims that Apple is a monopoly, just because they rejected apps I wanted. I know full well no matter which phone I purchased there would be limiting factors.
@ Chobbs1
Main Entry: pre·rog·a·tive
Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French & Latin; Anglo-French, from Latin praerogativa, Roman century voting first in the comitia, privilege, from feminine of praerogativus voting first, from praerogatus, past participle of praerogare to ask for an opinion before another, from prae- + rogare to ask — more at right Date: 15th century 1 a: an exclusive or special right, power, or privilege: as (1): one belonging to an office or an official body (2): one belonging to a person, group, or class of individuals (3): one possessed by a nation as an attribute of sovereignty b: the discretionary power inhering in the British Crown 2: a distinctive excellence
Just sayin.
Striatic has so far summed up pretty well my opinion on all of this. I hope they get it sorted and come end of contract I will do the usual and check the current and coming phones. For me my iPhone software is good. It’s functional but has weaknesses. It’s the hardware that really puts it ahead of the competition. The handset itself is still way ahead of the competition. Should that change you never know.
If Apple didn’t reject Voice and Latitude then Apple should immediately put both in the App Store. Otherwise Apple is lying.
Apple should just stop rejecting things gawd.
In 2011 GV will be done with review.
Its quite simple. If Apple are stopping legitimate applications from being installed on their phone because it might compete with their core offering, then the EU will eventually step in and treat them in the same way they do Microsoft. Apple will eventually lose out do to their inconsistent application of the rules they place, and stop acting like the monopoly in Seattle that they love to moan about.
Apple, stop being anti-competitive. Allow other browsers, allow voice dialing and stop trying to cheat customers out of better deals.
Oh and stop overpricing your mobile devices to subsidise cuts in your computer market. iPhone is a high profit, high yield device.