or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google plans to bypass Apple's App Store on the Web
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google plans to bypass Apple's App Store on the Web

post #1 of 72
Thread Starter 
With its native Google Voice application rejected from the iPhone App Store, the software maker is planning a full-featured Web application in its place.

Revealed by David Pogue in The New York Times, Google's alleged Voice Web application is said to be the "next chapter" in the ongoing dispute between it and Apple.

"Already, Google says it is readying a replacement for the Google Voice app that will offer exactly the same features as the rejected app -- except that it will take the form of a specialized, iPhone-shaped Web page," Pogue writes. "For all intents and purposes, it will behave exactly the same as the app would have; you can even install it as an icon on your Home screen."

He goes on to question: "What is Apple going to do now? Start blocking access to individual Web sites?"

On Friday, Google declined to comment on Pogue's column. However, the news reaffirms the browser abilities alluded to in comments from a Google spokesperson last week.

"We work hard to bring Google applications to a number of mobile platforms, including the iPhone," the spokesperson told AppleInsider. "Apple did not approve the Google Voice application we submitted six weeks ago to the Apple App Store. We will continue to work to bring our services to iPhone users, for example by taking advantage of advances in mobile browsers."

Weeks ago, Apple rejected the Google Voice application, and pulled two programs that used the Voice service from the App Store. AT&T has denied responsibility in the incident, but it, Google and Apple are under investigation from the Federal Communications Commission over the matter.
post #2 of 72
fantastic, I love Google Voice and it'll be great to get it on my iPhone. I can only hope Apple's recent reign of evil doesn't carry over to blocking the site.
post #3 of 72
Why is Google under investigation for their app being blocked?
post #4 of 72
Exactly why it made no sense at all to ban these apps.

The unfortunate part of it being a web app is 2 key features will be somewhat hobbled. VVM and SSM will both work but will be far less convenient by being a web app. Notifications will have come by email and so not be instantaneous.

"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 #5 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt Zeppelin View Post

Why is Google under investigation for their app being blocked?

Poor wording, I think. The are included in the parties that have been asked by the FCC for info regarding their investigation into Apple's decision and what influence AT&T had.

"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 #6 of 72
I think this is a good choice by Google. At least it looks like they aren't going to be vindictive by refusing to support the iPhone. And Google's ability to turn Google Voice into a Web App shows that Apple may not have been wrong by pushing Web Apps instead of a SDK in the beginning, since Web Apps are just as capable in many cases.

It's doubtful that Apple will block a Web App since even hardcore Apple supporters would probably be adverse to Apple actively censoring the internet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

The unfortunate part of it being a web app is 2 key features will be somewhat hobbled. VVM and SSM will both work but will be far less convenient by being a web app. Notifications will have come by email and so not be instantaneous.

I wonder if Apple would approve a dedicated notification program for Google Voice into the App Store that just directs the user to the Web App when a push notification comes in.
post #7 of 72
Thank god, the current web interface sucks butt...
post #8 of 72
No Apple is not going to block the site. Apple provides all the tools needed for any app to by pass the app store and create a web app. You are free to make any web app that contains any content or functionality you choose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mavfan1 View Post

fantastic, I love Google Voice and it'll be great to get it on my iPhone. I can only hope Apple's recent reign of evil doesn't carry over to blocking the site.
post #9 of 72
I hope Apple blocks access to the application via a software update. If people want to use this junk, they can go buy another phone. Apple made it very clear their garbage is not welcome on the iPhone platform by rejecting their application outright.
post #10 of 72
Apple could compromise by working with Google to ensure the web app of GV can do the exact same functions as the native app.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Exactly why it made no sense at all to ban these apps.

The unfortunate part of it being a web app is 2 key features will be somewhat hobbled. VVM and SSM will both work but will be far less convenient by being a web app. Notifications will have come by email and so not be instantaneous.
post #11 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by mavfan1 View Post

fantastic, I love Google Voice and it'll be great to get it on my iPhone. I can only hope Apple's recent reign of evil doesn't carry over to blocking the site.

Yeah, because they've gone after all the porn web apps after rejecting porn on the App Store, right?

And it makes perfect sense to blame Apple for pulling Google Voice considering they provide their own cellular service (oh wait, AT&T provides the cellular service and they've openly admitted to blocking apps like SlingPlayer from using their network).
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #12 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos View Post

I hope Apple blocks access to the application via a software update. If people want to use this junk, they can go buy another phone. Apple made it very clear their garbage is not welcome on the iPhone platform by rejecting their application outright.

So, you believe Apple should decide what websites you can visit? I am a bigger fanboie than most (and for longer) but damn if I am a big enough nuthugger to ask Jobs for permission. That would be pathetic.

So, let's delve into your thought process? Why is it junk or garbage? Because Apple says so? Ironically, they didn't , so any belief that they did is simply delusional.

If Apple approved it, would it then be acceptable to you? If Apple promoted it and said it was great, would that make you think it was great?

I have been accused of being too biased when promoting Apple stuff to my friends. Macaddict is a fair description. But some people take it to truly scary, really cult-like devotion. When your feelings about a subject are based entirely on what you perceive to be their feelings, it is probably well into unhealthy territory.

"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 #13 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos View Post

I hope Apple blocks access to the application via a software update. If people want to use this junk, they can go buy another phone. Apple made it very clear their garbage is not welcome on the iPhone platform by rejecting their application outright.

You're not trying very hard. If you really want to win 'Troll Of The Week' you'll have to match wits with iPhone1982.
post #14 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Yeah, because they've gone after all the porn web apps after rejecting porn on the App Store, right?

And it makes perfect sense to blame Apple for pulling Google Voice considering they provide their own cellular service (oh wait, AT&T provides the cellular service and they've openly admitted to blocking apps like SlingPlayer from using their network).

Yes. I think it is incorrect to characterize this as a dispute between Apple and
Google. It seems likely that Apple rejected the Google Voice apps due to their
obligation to AT&T (and possibly other carriers worldwide). Apple is probably
pleased that Google is developing this web app. Wasn't Jobs once quoted that
he thought the phone carriers should just be "dumb pipes"? I am sure that
Apple does not want this app to be available on other phones, but not theirs.
post #15 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Apple could compromise by working with Google to ensure the web app of GV can do the exact same functions as the native app.

The wouldn't need Apple's help. They can build everything into it themselves. But notifications are os based. A web app would not be a native app, by definition. It would run in Safari. It can't receive push updates. All apple could do would be to allow the app that would then use the APN API to receive notifications.

Unfortunately, the nature of web apps and of notifications precludes any way for the web app to receive notifications. Unless there is a native app component to 'receive' the notification. And in that case, they have just approved the app they denied.

"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 #16 of 72
AT&T's vague denials don't convince me. Who cares if the iPhone has Google voice? Apple would love to have another major app on the iPhone, and they partner with Google on several things already (Maps, Safari search, GMail integration, etc.).

It's AT&T who cares about Google voice. If they REALLY don't object, then I hope to see the app back soon

It would be great if the investigation burns both Apple and AT&T, and makes it a harder for future partners to make this kind of demand on Apple.
post #17 of 72
What many of you don't see is that Apple pushing major apps to be web apps in the long run is a good thing for the mobile industry. Apple could be pushing to lock all of the best apps to the iPhone or providing developers little incentive to port their apps to other mobile platforms. That would be evil.

Web apps can be run on any browser that supports HTML5/CSS/JavaScript. Even if the developer has to adjust the UI for each type of phone. That's still a lot easier than writting entirely different apps for each mobile platform.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mavfan1 View Post

fantastic, I love Google Voice and it'll be great to get it on my iPhone. I can only hope Apple's recent reign of evil doesn't carry over to blocking the site.
post #18 of 72
Mmm... Google want our personal information bad.
post #19 of 72
Not saying they will, but Apple set up the notification process they can change the way it works if they wanted to.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

The wouldn't need Apple's help. They can build everything into it themselves. But notifications are os based. A web app would not be a native app, by definition. It would run in Safari. It can't receive push updates. All apple could do would be to allow the app that would then use the APN API to receive notifications.

Unfortunately, the nature of web apps and of notifications precludes any way for the web app to receive notifications. Unless there is a native app component to 'receive' the notification. And in that case, they have just approved the app they denied.
post #20 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Not saying they will, but Apple set up the notification process they can change the way it works if they wanted to.

Yes, but what would it update with the notification? The OS gets the message and...

I am not saying couldn't do something, but what? Easier to just allow a native app than to rewrite the APN API to somehow allow webapps to be updated. Webapps that are not running don't have any presense on the os. It the app has a badge that can be updated and settings to configure push is not a webapp, it is a native app.

"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 #21 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Yes, but what would it update with the notification? The OS gets the message and...

I am not saying couldn't do something, but what? Easier to just allow a native app than to rewrite the APN API to somehow allow webapps to be updated. Webapps that are not running don't have any presense on the os. It the app has a badge that can be updated and settings to configure push is not a webapp, it is a native app.

It would be a bit of a compromise but Google might get an app approved that had the sole functionality of receiving push notifications from the OS with a button that opened up Safari and logged you into the web page app. That could take care of the IM part and skirt around the 17+ rating since the browser would not be embedded. Although they would still need to overcome the voice part since the microphone on the iPhone is not accessible from Safari as far as I know.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #22 of 72
There needs to be a greater push on web apps when services are provided that require network/internet access. While I agree that this move ruffles the feathers of developers of native apps, it can help push toward the holy grail of cloud computing that we've heard for years is coming any day now.

I can't help but think that once there is a good web interface for google voice that many are going to look back at this event for a couple seconds to reflect and then move on knowing that it's not as big of a deal to customers as it's being made out to be.
post #23 of 72
I think any perceived friction between Apple and Google is just something they want to promote. Jobs originally wanted all iPhone apps to be web-based. This seems like an effective way to put pressure on AT&T, while allowing Google to continue along the same path, but via web-apps, until the Apple Apps Store is less restricted due to Apple's contractual obligations.
post #24 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

It would be a bit of a compromise but Google might get an app approved that had the sole functionality of receiving push notifications from the OS with a button that opened up Safari and logged you into the web page app. That could take care of the IM part and skirt around the 17+ rating since the browser would not be embedded. Although they would still need to overcome the voice part since the microphone on the iPhone is not accessible from Safari as far as I know.

They already have a Google app that automatically launches you to the particular web app of your choice. Currently Google Voice is not part of that app. Theoretically they could build the push notification into that app, and give you the option for notifications for other Google Web apps as well, such as GMail.
post #25 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

It would be a bit of a compromise but Google might get an app approved that had the sole functionality of receiving push notifications from the OS with a button that opened up Safari and logged you into the web page app. That could take care of the IM part and skirt around the 17+ rating since the browser would not be embedded. Although they would still need to overcome the voice part since the microphone on the iPhone is not accessible from Safari as far as I know.

Regardless of how it works out, there no need to access the mic. All calls come and go through the iPhone phone app.

"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 #26 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Regardless of how it works out, there no need to access the mic. All calls come and go through the iPhone phone app.

Beat me to it, thanks. Quite a few people still seem to think Google Voice is an end-user VOIP tool. So much misinformation, so little time.

A safari app would hold me over until Google/Apple/AT&T work this out. Pretty disappointing if they don't.

All I need in the GV web app is a bookmarkable page with my Favorites I want to call. Maybe a keypad. Clearly, the texting will be very important to many people, I'm not one of them. Anything they can come up with is welcome. The current page works but features plenty of shortcomings.
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
post #27 of 72
Stupid question, I am not in the US, is Google voice fundamentally different from Skype, iChat, IM? Or is this just Google trying to outdo Skype with more focus on web-only applications (and tying it together with all their other free services)?
post #28 of 72
Apple's iphone is a GREAT product but, like all Apple products, it is a closed system. It took all but 5 days for the brain-trust at Google to stick their collective middle fingers up at Apple and asked them to sit and twirl on a web app that has all the functionality of the Google Voice iphone app but will run on ALL platforms.

Now if only Google could provide better cell coverage than att, I'd be set.

Bravo, Google! Bravo!
post #29 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

Stupid question, I am not in the US, is Google voice fundamentally different from Skype, iChat, IM? Or is this just Google trying to outdo Skype with more focus on web-only applications (and tying it together with all their other free services)?

In the USA, you can only use Skype if connected to a WiFi hot-spot. Google Voice promises IP phone capabilities on a browser via 3G or Edge connections. Big trouble for ATT here.....
post #30 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

Stupid question, I am not in the US, is Google voice fundamentally different from Skype, iChat, IM? Or is this just Google trying to outdo Skype with more focus on web-only applications (and tying it together with all their other free services)?

The calls don't go over the end user's internet connection. They can be initiated on the web or through an app, but the actual call uses landlines and cell phones on the ends. Unless you call a voip user.

The texting is free. You can choose to have the text messages forwarded to a mobile phone, for which you may be billed by your carrier. Texting is not free on Skype.

There are all kinds of rules and filters you can place on incoming calls. Voice mails can be transcribed and delivered as email. All free.

When someone calls your GV number you can have it ring multiple phones or go straight to voice mail. You can set schedules of what phones should ring. You can have custom greetings for different contacts.

USA calls are free. International are 2 cents a minute for calling landlines in many countries.

It's a completely different beast than Skype. And it highlights that the major US carriers have been sitting on their hands while voip providers, Skype, and now Google provide far more compelling features than they have.
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
Emailing video from iPhone to Apple TV , sort of..
Reply
post #31 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Oh wait, AT&T provides the cellular service and they've openly admitted to blocking apps like SlingPlayer from using their network.

Not so.. AT&T told the nice man from FCC that they don't have any say over the day to day App Store policies, procedures, rejections, etc....

AT&T wouldn't LIE to the FCC now would they?!?!

Fact is if AT&T gets away with the crap they've been pulling then the FCC is the biggest joke of a government agency in the history of the US! Given the rest of the government, it takes a lot to earn that unique distinction.
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
Apple Fanboy: Anyone who started liking Apple before I did!
Reply
post #32 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by elgreco View Post

In the USA, you can only use Skype if connected to a WiFi hot-spot. Google Voice promises IP phone capabilities on a browser via 3G or Edge connections. Big trouble for ATT here.....

Not even close. You are talking about VOIP. GV is not VOIP.

"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 #33 of 72
Do you think Apple and Google have done enough yet, to show the FCC that they have no interest in monopolistic practices?

They should also force Google to release this beta software to everyone on earth.

Even places where there are no phone carriers, after all they only need "dumb" pipes.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #34 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post

It's doubtful that Apple will block a Web App since even hardcore Apple supporters would probably be adverse to Apple actively censoring the internet.

Do not underestimate the lengths Apple apologist will go to in order to defend everything that Apple does.

Apple will not make a video iPod. Nobody wants to watch video on an iPod. Anybody who wants a video iPod is a whiner.

Apple should not allow third party developers to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native iPhone applications. Web apps are really SWEET. Anybody who wants native iPhone applications is a whiner.

Apple will not make a 3G iPhone. Nobody cares about 3G. Anybody who wants 3G is a whiner.

Apple will not add GPS to the iPhone. Nobody cares about GPS. Anybody who wants GPS is a whiner.

Apple will not add copy and paste to the iPhone. Nobody cares about copy and paste. Anybody who wants copy and paste is a whiner.

Apple will not make a multi button mouse. Nobody cares about a multi button mouse. Anybody who wants a multi button mouse is a whiner.

Apple will never switch to Intel processors. Intel is evil. Nobody cares about Intel processors. Anybody who wants Intel processors is a whiner.
post #35 of 72
If this will be a web-based app, won't it get an "Adult" rating and require you to be 18 or older to get it?
post #36 of 72
Wow, haven't seen that old chestnut for ages, did it take long to copy and paste it?

You must be pretty obsessed if you saved it somewhere even more so if you memorized it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Do not underestimate the lengths Apple apologist will go to in order to defend everything that Apple does.

Apple will not make a video iPod. Nobody wants to watch video on an iPod. Anybody who wants a video iPod is a whiner.

Apple should not allow third party developers to create native iPhone applications. Nobody cares about native iPhone applications. Web apps are really SWEET. Anybody who wants native iPhone applications is a whiner.

Apple will not make a 3G iPhone. Nobody cares about 3G. Anybody who wants 3G is a whiner.

Apple will not add GPS to the iPhone. Nobody cares about GPS. Anybody who wants GPS is a whiner.

Apple will not add copy and paste to the iPhone. Nobody cares about copy and paste. Anybody who wants copy and paste is a whiner.

Apple will not make a multi button mouse. Nobody cares about a multi button mouse. Anybody who wants a multi button mouse is a whiner.

Apple will never switch to Intel processors. Intel is evil. Nobody cares about Intel processors. Anybody who wants Intel processors is a whiner.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #37 of 72
What, to save a bookmark in Safari?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajectory View Post

If this will be a web-based app, won't it get an "Adult" rating and require you to be 18 or older to get it?
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #38 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

What, to save a bookmark in Safari?

No, if the app accesses web-based content, Apple now automatically classifies them as for adults only.
post #39 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt Zeppelin View Post

Why is Google under investigation for their app being blocked?

Because Google also has its own cell phone platform, its own cell phone app store and it can reject apps.
post #40 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post

AT&T's vague denials don't convince me. Who cares if the iPhone has Google voice? Apple would love to have another major app on the iPhone, and they partner with Google on several things already (Maps, Safari search, GMail integration, etc.).

It's AT&T who cares about Google voice. If they REALLY don't object, then I hope to see the app back soon

It would be great if the investigation burns both Apple and AT&T, and makes it a harder for future partners to make this kind of demand on Apple.

It would be great if you guys really understand the size of Apple and Google --- when compare to carriers, hollywood studios and major music labels.

Yes, AT&T is about the same size as Apple and Google. But that's about it. The rest of the carriers worldwide are much smaller than Apple and Google. In terms of market capitalization, Apple and Google are individually twice as big as the "big bad evil red" Verizon. It's Apple and Google that are bossing the carriers around.

When Steve Jobs talks about Apple's "fight" against the major music labels in the itunes stores --- you have to realize that you can buy one of the 4 major music labels, Warrner Music Group, for under $800 million US. That's compared to some of these silicon valley billionaires who spent $400 milllion US to build their supersized yachts. Throw in a few of their personal gulfstream jets --- their "toy" collection is enough to buy a major music labels.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google plans to bypass Apple's App Store on the Web