or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple pulling Google Voice-enabled iPhone apps
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple pulling Google Voice-enabled iPhone apps - Page 4

post #121 of 143
You cannot be charged for receiving SMS on an iPod Touch. You CAN be charged for SMS messages you send from an iPhone or receive on an iPhone, which I gather, is what this person was doing.

They cannot bill an owner of an iPod Touch. It has no cell service and relies on WiFi for it's connection. When AOL says their service is free, they mean they themselves won't charge you to use their service. If you have their AIM messages being forwarded to your cell phone however, they arrive as an SMS message, not as an instant message unless you happen to be logged into the AIM software and actively running it at the time you receive the instant message. The AIM app cannot run in the background. When you are logged into the AIM app, you receive an Instant Message (not billable). When AIM is not actively running, you receive an SMS instead (assuming you have forwarded your AIM messages to your cell). It even warns you when you enable the AIM forwarding service that service charges may apply from your cell provider for SMS messages.

As to what Apple is doing, they seem to be crossing a line at times with their policy regarding allowed apps. All I can say here is that they need to watch themselves. This is a new day and a new administration and Apple is already in their sights as well as AT&T when it comes to anti-trust.

I love Apple products, but they seem to be going too far in censoring applications and data on the iPhone. I am fully capable of deciding what is appropriate and what is not appropriate on my phone. If they have a legal commitment to AT&T that forced this then I would say they are making bad decisions that reflect poorly on Apple and hopefully they will do better in the future.

For those stating that 3g lag doesn't affect VOIP (yes I know this Google Voice is not a VOIP app but I couldn't resist), average 3g lag runs in the 1000 to 2000 millisecond range. That's 1-2 seconds to the laymen. It is undeniably noticeable. You get what you pay for. I don't see why cell providers are so afraid of VOIP apps, especially over 3G. The typical person would still use a cell service instead of VOIP due to lack of technical expertise or even knowledge that VOIP exists, lag, and bad connection quality. If you doubt it, you can download a free app called "Speed Test" from the app store which will report average ping times to a local server. You may be surprised at how poorly 3g performs in this respect.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #122 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I'm puzzled why you say that, it doesn't make sense. I think you left out a couple steps showing how it hurts Apple.



If not, why is an app necessary for this?

Sorry for the ignorance, but I'm not finding much info about it in action.

You log in to google voice via app, click the contact you want to dial (or dial the number), wait for your phone to ring. Answer your phone. Then it works like normal.

Without the app you must use the browser and that sucks compared to the app.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #123 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmythe00 View Post

This is yet another reason that if Verizon ever gets the iphone I will be one of those goofballs on tv waiting in 5 hours lines to sign up. I give ATT too much money to be shortchanged. If ATT reads this....Ich verlasse dich!!!

You do realize that Verizon is even more controlling than AT&T, right?

The iPhone is only on AT&T because Verizon would not allow Apple to make a phone Verizon did not control. It had to have Verizon's logo on the phone, it had to have Verizon's God awful menu system, etc. They also would not add Visual Voice mail.

I want something other than AT&T too, but Verizon is even worse.
post #124 of 143
Hm. I think this will result in everyone jailbreaking their phone. What good does this do Apple?

Until today I was thinking I would get a 3GS in a few weeks and just play it straight. One thing I needed was something like Google Voice to make cheaper calls. If they eliminate this type of functionality, I'm jailbreaking it. That wast the tipping point. From what I've read, there is absolutely nothing to lose. It's easy to do and undo. If you need to bring it in for service or whatever, just reset the iPhone. It's just software, they'll never know. I wonder if in the next rev or two they add some more tamper-proof way of telling whether you have jailbroken the phone?

Well this is just a bonus actually. I'm sure I'll like my iPhone more when it is jailbroken. Maybe I'll even run it on a different network. Wonder if AT&T bigwigs that probably have never even used "that facebook thing" GET THAT. They are screwing themselves by getting greedy in the short term. Competing networks will (I hope) drive data plan costs down. Unless they illegally cooperate like they did on the outrageous SMS fees.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #125 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post

Hm. I think this will result in everyone jailbreaking their phone. What good does this do Apple?

Until today I was thinking I would get a 3GS in a few weeks and just play it straight. One thing I needed was something like Google Voice to make cheaper calls. If they eliminate this type of functionality, I'm jailbreaking it. That wast the tipping point. From what I've read, there is absolutely nothing to lose. It's easy to do and undo. If you need to bring it in for service or whatever, just reset the iPhone. It's just software, they'll never know. I wonder if in the next rev or two they add some more tamper-proof way of telling whether you have jailbroken the phone?

Well this is just a bonus actually. I'm sure I'll like my iPhone more when it is jailbroken. Maybe I'll even run it on a different network. Wonder if AT&T bigwigs that probably have never even used "that facebook thing" GET THAT. They are screwing themselves by getting greedy in the short term. Competing networks will (I hope) drive data plan costs down. Unless they illegally cooperate like they did on the outrageous SMS fees.

Isn't their a problem with certificates for Push Notifications on jb iPhones? If so, I would hesitate to jb right now, s I don't want my IM's going to random people.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #126 of 143
This was posted over at MacRumors on this subject. It is supposed to be a transcript of the actual call from Apple when they removed the app.

Quote:
Richard: Im calling to let you know that VoiceCentral has been removed from the App Store because it duplicates features of the iPhone.

Me: I dont understand that reasoning. By that logic wouldnt apps like Textfree, Skype, fring, or iCall be considered duplicates?

Richard: I cant discuss other apps with you.

Me: Its not the apps themselves I want to discuss just the lack of consistency in rule enforcement.

Richard: I can only say that yours duplicates features of the iPhone and was causing confusion in the user community. Its against our policy.

Me: So what has changed that it is now against policy? It has been in the store for the last 4 months with no problem. There wasnt a problem for the 1.5 months prior to that when you were reviewing it. And this didnt come up with any of the updates we submitted after it was already in the store.

Richard: I cant say - only that yours is not complying with our policy.

Me: Can you tell me what portions of the app were duplicate features?

Richard: I cant go into granular detail.

Me: Is there something we can change or alter in order to regain compliance and get back in the Store?

Richard: I cant say.

Me: Well if we cant figure out the issue then how will we know whether to resubmit the app. And how will we know whether to invest in any other development efforts? Future apps could be impacted.

Richard: I cant help you with that

Me: So how do we know whether it is still viable for us to consider Apple a partner if this is how the scenario plays out. If you were in my shoes would you continue to invest blood, sweat, tears and money in something that can be killed off at any moment without your say so?

Richard: I understand your point but I cant help you with that.

Me: Surely someone there at Apple asked you to make this phone call. Can I speak with that person about this?

Richard: I am the only one you can speak with on this subject.

Me: There has to be someone there I can actually have a back and forth with so that we can make some strategic decisions on whether this partnership makes any sense.

Richard: You can only talk to me

Me: Nothing personal since I know you have just been tasked to make this call but we arent really talking here. Theres no back and forth and you arent allowed to answer any questions. Can I implore you to ask your managers if there is anyone who would be willing to speak with me and have a real conversation? I dont care if it needs to be off the record or we need to sign another top-secret NDA but we really have nothing to go on at this point. We will need to make business decisions on whether it makes any sense to continue developing.

Richard: I will relay that to my managers.

funny. but not funny.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #127 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Isn't their a problem with certificates for Push Notifications on jb iPhones? If so, I would hesitate to jb right now, s I don't want my IM's going to random people.

I think you should not Jailbreak, even though the proposal of Backgrounder is quite interesting to me. But I don't think it is worth it as it will blow your warrenty immediately.
post #128 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

You log in to google voice via app, click the contact you want to dial (or dial the number), wait for your phone to ring. Answer your phone. Then it works like normal.

Without the app you must use the browser and that sucks compared to the app.

So to be absolutely clear here, neither AT&T nor Apple is rendering it impossible to use the iPhone to connect to the Google Voice service.

You can still use any web browser (such as Safari on the iPhone) to log in to the Google Voice website and set up your next desired outgoing call. And then you can use any telephone connected to the public telephone network (such as the "Phone" part of the iPhone itself) to call in to the Google Voice service and make the connection you set up via the web app.

In order for them to do totally prevent the iPhone from using Google Voice, they'd have to either modify Safari to blacklist certain website URLs to prevent you from visiting unsatisfactory websites, or else start preventing you from being able to use your anytime minutes to dial out to certain unsatisfactory local telephone numbers.

What they have done here is prevent you from having automatic access to your iPhone's contact list for use with the Google Voice service, and prevent you from having one-click access to set up the call and dial in to the service itself.

Also to be absolutely clear here, this is not discriminating against iPod touch users, because in order to use Google Voice, you still have to have the ability to place a regular voice call to a local telephone number. The iPod touch doesn't have access to the cellular network, so it wouldn't be able to call that local telephone number in the first place.
post #129 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGSStateStudent View Post

I think you should not Jailbreak, even though the proposal of Backgrounder is quite interesting to me. But I don't think it is worth it as it will blow your warrenty immediately.

I have a 3G from last year, so my 1 year warranty is done or just about. I was basically planning to jb once it was done to really get the full functionality of the iPhone exposed. Crap like banning these apps is just one more reason for me. But, I really like Push and if it doesn't work reliably on jb iPhones, then that will be enough for me not to do it.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #130 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfmorrison View Post

So to be absolutely clear here, neither AT&T nor Apple is rendering it impossible to use the iPhone to connect to the Google Voice service.

You can still use any web browser (such as Safari on the iPhone) to log in to the Google Voice website and set up your next desired outgoing call. And then you can use any telephone connected to the public telephone network (such as the "Phone" part of the iPhone itself) to call in to the Google Voice service and make the connection you set up via the web app.

In order for them to do totally prevent the iPhone from using Google Voice, they'd have to either modify Safari to blacklist certain website URLs to prevent you from visiting unsatisfactory websites, or else start preventing you from being able to use your anytime minutes to dial out to certain unsatisfactory local telephone numbers.

What they have done here is prevent you from having automatic access to your iPhone's contact list for use with the Google Voice service, and prevent you from having one-click access to set up the call and dial in to the service itself.

Also to be absolutely clear here, this is not discriminating against iPod touch users, because in order to use Google Voice, you still have to have the ability to place a regular voice call to a local telephone number. The iPod touch doesn't have access to the cellular network, so it wouldn't be able to call that local telephone number in the first place.

It links down to the true hard truth that Apple is very restrictive in its App Store offerings. This is not going to do them good overtime.
post #131 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by lfmorrison View Post

So to be absolutely clear here, neither AT&T nor Apple is rendering it impossible to use the iPhone to connect to the Google Voice service.

You can still use any web browser (such as Safari on the iPhone) to log in to the Google Voice website and set up your next desired outgoing call. And then you can use any telephone connected to the public telephone network (such as the "Phone" part of the iPhone itself) to call in to the Google Voice service and make the connection you set up via the web app.

In order for them to do totally prevent the iPhone from using Google Voice, they'd have to either modify Safari to blacklist certain website URLs to prevent you from visiting unsatisfactory websites, or else start preventing you from being able to use your anytime minutes to dial out to certain unsatisfactory local telephone numbers.

What they have done here is prevent you from having automatic access to your iPhone's contact list for use with the Google Voice service, and prevent you from having one-click access to set up the call and dial in to the service itself.

Also to be absolutely clear here, this is not discriminating against iPod touch users, because in order to use Google Voice, you still have to have the ability to place a regular voice call to a local telephone number. The iPod touch doesn't have access to the cellular network, so it wouldn't be able to call that local telephone number in the first place.

That is what makes this decision so puzzling. Why bar these apps? The ban doesn't prevent users from using the service, just makes it must less convenient. The apps allowed a centralized way to get at most of the functionality. I assume the official GV app would have had even more features integrated. This is why I think it was something that the official app was going to bring to the table that the third party apps do not that caused Apple to deny their app. Once their app was denied Apple had to bar the other to appear consistent.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #132 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by w00master View Post

Wow. Here's a gold star for you Extreme Apple Fanboy. Enjoy.

This is simply terrible news for consumers and iPhone fans and iPhone developers. Simply god awful terrible news.

w00master

Yeah I was just thinking that. Only the one insane hardcore Apple fanboy could possibly defend them for this incredibly anti-consumer move.

This is why we need Android to succeed.
post #133 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post

Yeah I was just thinking that. Only the one insane hardcore Apple fanboy could possibly defend them for this incredibly anti-consumer move.

This is why we need Android to succeed.

Why should Android succeed? Sure, it has a vast possibility of expansion and integration but OS X is far more advanced and while it has its own shortcomings, is the best OS out there IMO. Of course, competition is always good for us, consumers.
post #134 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGSStateStudent View Post

Why should Android succeed? Sure, it has a vast possibility of expansion and integration but OS X is far more advanced and while it has its own shortcomings, is the best OS out there IMO. Of course, competition is always good for us, consumers.

You answered your own question. For Android to succeed doesn't mean it kills the iPhone. It means it becomes a viable and real competitor to the iPhone. if this happens, then it will force Apple to react. Apple could further improve the OS or the feature set or the price to compete with a successful Android. They could also be forced to be less heavy-handed with the app approval process if a successful Android market ends up being noticeably more relaxed. s you say, competition is always good for us...and it is good for the platform too.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #135 of 143
Folks may not like it, but Android is a good thing. It will force Apple to adapt and to be more flexible (possibly in stupid policy decisions like this). This whole App Store policy thing just seems totally out of hand and very 'wild west' in implementation in regards to enforcing policy. I don't use this particular app, but if I did, I would be very peeved since it accomplishes nothing but to inconvenience the app users.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #136 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

You answered your own question. For Android to succeed doesn't mean it kills the iPhone. It means it becomes a viable and real competitor to the iPhone. if this happens, then it will force Apple to react. Apple could further improve the OS or the feature set or the price to compete with a successful Android. They could also be forced to be less heavy-handed with the app approval process if a successful Android market ends up being noticeably more relaxed. s you say, competition is always good for us...and it is good for the platform too.

True. Android and WebOS is what I feel are the closest competitors to iPhone OS. Is multitasking for 3rd party applications here yet?
post #137 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

I have a 3G from last year, so my 1 year warranty is done or just about. I was basically planning to jb once it was done to really get the full functionality of the iPhone exposed. Crap like banning these apps is just one more reason for me. But, I really like Push and if it doesn't work reliably on jb iPhones, then that will be enough for me not to do it.

From what I have read, the problems with push are with 3GS phones that are not just jailbroken but also unlocked (which in the US allows you to use the phone on TMoblie.) So if you just plan to jailbreak the phone this will be a non-issue for you.
post #138 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGSStateStudent View Post

Why should Android succeed? Sure, it has a vast possibility of expansion and integration but OS X is far more advanced and while it has its own shortcomings, is the best OS out there IMO. Of course, competition is always good for us, consumers.

That should be obvious. Android is an open platform, and do you seriously think google would so something as retarded as block Google Voice?

Bottom line- when AT&T say jump, Apple say how high, no matter how anti-consumer the demand. Worse still, AT&T through being so mind blowingly bad hanve crippled the iPhone not just for the US, but THE ENTIRE WORLD! It's beyond ridiculous.

I have an iPhone and mostly love it, but this makes Apple look like fools and they should be using their market position to be calling every last single shot with AT&T. In face AT&T, and ALL phone carriers should be bending over backwards to do absolutely anything Apple demands. The situation we have now, is a farce.
post #139 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

I have a 3G from last year, so my 1 year warranty is done or just about. I was basically planning to jb once it was done to really get the full functionality of the iPhone exposed. Crap like banning these apps is just one more reason for me. But, I really like Push and if it doesn't work reliably on jb iPhones, then that will be enough for me not to do it.

I actually have a problem with AppleInsider confusing people on this issue... a huge red mark on an otherwise great Apple news and analysis site.

Push works PERFECTLY on my jailbroken iPhone 3G and 3GS. The only time push becomes an issue is if you try to "hacktivate" the phone, activating it outside of iTunes because you do not have a legitimate iPhone contract. This is because in order for push to work, you need to generate your unique certificate and register it with Apple's servers. This process is done when you plug in your phone after a fresh restore, when it says "connect to iTunes."

If you have a legitimate iPhone plan that's currently active, and you can activate the phone without using 3rd party tools, then Push Notification will work just fine. You can jailbreak, and even UNLOCK after its been activated and push will work.
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
post #140 of 143
Thanks yuusharo and bulk001. That is indeed much more clear. Even re-reading the AI article it never clearly says hackivated or unlocked (unofficial). It only, and repeatedly says jailbroken. Reading more closely, it does say only jailbroken phones that use "unofficial activation". That they put this part in quotes and brackets makes it appear unimportant and for skim readers like me, it gets passed by on first read.

So, I guess jb is back on the table as an option. Can't use GV up here in Canada yet anyway, so that being one of my main reasons, I am not yet in a rush.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #141 of 143
As a long time Google Voice/Grand Central user, I've been waiting years for good handset integration. The carriers are blowing it in my opinion... they should be embracing this tech, not trying to squash it. If I had an iphone, I'd jailbreak it without thinking twice just for this app. But I don't have one since AT&T's coverage sucks so hard where I live, so I guess it's just academic for me.
post #142 of 143
[QUOTE=DJRumpy;1455825]I love Apple products, but they seem to be going too far in censoring applications and data on the iPhone. I am fully capable of deciding what is appropriate and what is not appropriate on my phone. If they have a legal commitment to AT&T that forced this then I would say they are making bad decisions that reflect poorly on Apple and hopefully they will do better in the future.
[QUOTE]

+1! I completely can't disagree with this statement! Rock on!
post #143 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by eepmatt View Post

As a long time Google Voice/Grand Central user, I've been waiting years for good handset integration. The carriers are blowing it in my opinion... they should be embracing this tech, not trying to squash it. If I had an iphone, I'd jailbreak it without thinking twice just for this app. But I don't have one since AT&T's coverage sucks so hard where I live, so I guess it's just academic for me.

Same here. It's not that we're being bitches, but this is something really basic. App approval by Apple is dumb.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple pulling Google Voice-enabled iPhone apps