Apple pulling Google Voice-enabled iPhone apps

123578

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 141
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Dumb question. What does GV do and how does it work?



    I've heard a lot of buzz about it but I honestly don't know how it works and what it does.
  • Reply 82 of 141
    chronsterchronster Posts: 1,894member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    I expect that from one who wants everything for nothing. As you said before, I gather a lot of things are out of your price range.



    Who doesn't want everything for nothing? You'd have to be a complete fool to not think this way. I mean, stealing aside, wanting everything for as close to nothing as possible is the most logical way to think.



    btw i wont get into my "price range" but rest assured, if I wanted the most expensive thing apple offered, I could pay for it in cold hard cash.
  • Reply 83 of 141
    gwydiongwydion Posts: 1,083member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    He works(/ed) in the industry and has helped develop marketing for the very practices he is defending. Perceptions may be thusly skewed. Take with a gigantic grain of salt.



    Well, the iPhone's exclusive carrier in Spain (Telefonica) had $10.8 billion NET profit last year and $2.4 billion in Q1 2009, so when I read this defense of carrier I laugh
  • Reply 84 of 141
    If this is AT&T mandated, it sets a dangerous precedent I think. It's one thing to outlaw content like Sling on AT&T's 3G, it's another to not even allow apps to exist and work over wifi.
  • Reply 85 of 141
    wprowewprowe Posts: 33member
    This may be an obligation between Apple and AT&T pursuant to their exclusivity contract. Permitting a phone call that circumvents AT&T's cellular service may be a contract violation. Assuming the contract terms between Apple and AT&T are likely confidential, neither side would be permitted to acknowledge the true reason for pulling these applications. It is common practice to lock phones to specific carriers under exclusivity deals between phone makers and cellular providers. This would easily fall under that kind of clause between Apple and AT&T, especially since AT&T is subsidizing the phones. This should not be a surprise to anyone, just like tethering.
  • Reply 86 of 141
    hezekiahbhezekiahb Posts: 448member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    What Apple is doing here is troubling. Looks like they are making an inadvisable trade-off for the short run. Hopefully, competition will handle it in the long-run: if GV does what it says it does effectively, and does take off on other mobile operating systems, handsets, and carriers, Apple will be forced to eat crow.



    Driving revenue (and profit) down is what competition is all about, nothing unusual there. One can only stop that for so long.



    As to "call quality," people can decide for themselves and make appropriate trade-offs between quality and cost. They're not collectively stupid.



    Duplication of services should be thrown out as justifiable deniability. Many apps offer the same service from different companies, is Apple going to pick one they like best & throw out all the rest?



    I think Apps like that shouldn't be banned, but if AT&T wants to restrict them let it come with some sort of monthly charge from AT&T, sort of a "you can use this technology but what costs us costs you."



    I don't have any problem with any company trying to make a profit, if they didn't then they'd go out of business. Companies don't make cool technology or provide cool services for free & people who think they should being unrealistic or just plain stupid.
  • Reply 87 of 141
    hezekiahbhezekiahb Posts: 448member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wprowe View Post


    This may be an obligation between Apple and AT&T pursuant to their exclusivity contract. Permitting a phone call that circumvents AT&T's cellular service may be a contract violation. Assuming the contract terms between Apple and AT&T are likely confidential, neither side would be permitted to acknowledge the true reason for pulling these applications. It is common practice to lock phones to specific carriers under exclusivity deals between phone makers and cellular providers. This would easily fall under that kind of clause between Apple and AT&T, especially since AT&T is subsidizing the phones. This should not be a surprise to anyone, just like tethering.



    Could even be a contract violation for the end user, remember that you do sign a cell agreement, which outlines terms of service & legal rights regarding your service. People just get mad when no one is willing to own up to the truth about why those apps are banned. Least they can do is be upfront about it.



    Developers making the apps ought to know where they could potentially get blocked as well. Apple should have a pre-submission for developers where they can get their application design plans approved before they even begin a project & waste all those hours of time.
  • Reply 88 of 141
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    Dumb question. What does GV do and how does it work?



    I've heard a lot of buzz about it but I honestly don't know how it works and what it does.



    It is a lot of things. if you go to voice.google.com you can watch videos and read descriptions of all of the features. In short, it is a calling service.



    Through their website, you can place calls, listen to your voice mail, read your voice mail transcribed. Their primary claim to fame, was that they allowed you to group all of your phone numbers into one phone number which they provide (you choose it). You then provide your GV phone number as your only number to people. When they call that number, it will ring any or all of the phone numbers that you have added to your profile. You can select what phones ring, depending on who is calling, when they call comes in, etc. From your own phone, landline or mobile, you can call a local GV phone number, select the option to place a call, enter a phone number and GV will connect to that number and connect you into the call. They currently offer free long distance to any number from and to the continental US.



    The GV apps for the iPhone streamlined the outbound calling process. Other than trying to kill competition for AT&T's LD service by making it more difficult for customers to use, there is no really compelling reason for banning these apps.
  • Reply 89 of 141
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wprowe View Post


    This may be an obligation between Apple and AT&T pursuant to their exclusivity contract. Permitting a phone call that circumvents AT&T's cellular service may be a contract violation. Assuming the contract terms between Apple and AT&T are likely confidential, neither side would be permitted to acknowledge the true reason for pulling these applications. It is common practice to lock phones to specific carriers under exclusivity deals between phone makers and cellular providers. This would easily fall under that kind of clause between Apple and AT&T, especially since AT&T is subsidizing the phones. This should not be a surprise to anyone, just like tethering.



    Certainly, it would seem to be Apple acting on AT&T's directives. Whether because of contractual obligations or just pacifying their partner by screwing their customers is not clear.



    GV doesn't really circumvent their cellular service. You still call out on their voice network. But, you call a local number and then have access to cheap/free long distance on google's dime. Maybe their app would have allowed true VoIP calling, but that could easily be limited to Wifi only, exactly as other VoIP apps are. Right now, there is nothing keeping you from using GV service from your iPhone. Call GV, place the call and go. You can also use the web site to access other features. The apps made all of this easier and gave you central access to some of the other features. The official GV app would have probably made it even easier and exposed even more features.



    This was just a dumb decision that negatively impacts their end users. No really debate about that. Those making excuses for the behavior haven't really put forward any cohesive argument, just nuthugger "AT&T and Apple made the decision so it must be right" type of drivel.
  • Reply 90 of 141
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 686member
    How can ATT be charging someone on an iPod Touch 0.20 per text via AIM? There is no sim card so how do they know who you are or where to send the bill or what credit card to charge? The AIM app itself has nothing to do with ATT so other than the cost of buying the app (or using the free version) I don't understand how you could be bill for it. Now if you received a message from someone via AIM on your iPhone and it notified you via SMS then that would make sense as it is just like getting any other message.
  • Reply 91 of 141
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post


    It must be nice to be born in an era when somebody else has paid the Piper to do and benefit from most of the things we do today.



    And then to demand that everything connected to it be free or let somebody develop a vehicle so that freeloaders can sponge on the creativity and work of others.



    As for, "?SMS messages which cost almost nothing?," perhaps you, as a IT genius, could illustrate how you could build the infrastructure to your for-free-designed system.



    http://communication.howstuffworks.c...s_tutorial.htm



    And just to make it quite clear, I would like to pay less for a lot of things. However, there are countries that thrive on copying the works of others. I would rather live here and realize that there is a cost for such freedom.



    The idea that everybody is ripping everybody off and all the time, including Apple, suggests that perhaps relocation is better choice for a lot of the futures here.



    As for GOOGLE, it must be nice to make money basically off the backs of others, and in particular, Apple.



    As others have said, do I even need to go into how iPods take money right from the music industry? How many people are buying those 80GB and 120GB iPods who paid for all of that music? Should we lock down iPods to only playing music downloaded from the iTunes store? Apple sure doesn't seem to mind.



    One of the selling points the iPhone and iPod Touch has is the app store. Developers are doing Apple a favor by creating good applications that entice people to buy the hardware to use the application on (the iPhone in this case). Apple gives them a cut of the money they make by selling it, or in Google's case, people are using Google's services. Nobody's suddenly stealing ATT's service by NOT using their text messaging service. If you aren't using the service, then why would you pay for it? ATT/Apple are forcing people into using their service. If you use the 3G network, you pay for it! If you use ATT minutes, you pay for it! If you use SMS messaging, pay for it! But if you aren't using those things, or using someone else's services, then why would you pay for it? If ATT doesn't want people to use other services, then they need to compete in terms of service and pricing.



    Obviously building an infrastructure isn't free, so that means price hikes and rip-offs are a-okay?



    http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings...ng.cfm?id=3917



    http://mynewsjunkie.com/2009/06/15/c...g-price-hikes/



    Whether you agree with this or not, it is widely accepted/believe that companies make a (possibly unfair) killing off of SMS messages.



    If you want to pay whatever prices anyone charges you, you're more than free to do it! For those who feel we're potentially getting ripped off, we don't have to pay for that service, and use another service that allows us to do what we want which may cost less or nothing at all. It's called competition, it's a wonderful thing. That's why Apple has an App STORE. You can pick and choose what you want to buy.



    You seem to be taking all of this awfully personally. o_O. "You damn kids grew up in so and so age, taking things for advantage!". "If you don't like it, don't bother trying to change it! Just go to another country!".
  • Reply 92 of 141
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    It is a lot of things. if you go to voice.google.com you can watch videos and read descriptions of all of the features. In short, it is a calling service.



    Through their website, you can place calls, listen to your voice mail, read your voice mail transcribed. Their primary claim to fame, was that they allowed you to group all of your phone numbers into one phone number which they provide (you choose it). You then provide your GV phone number as your only number to people. When they call that number, it will ring any or all of the phone numbers that you have added to your profile. You can select what phones ring, depending on who is calling, when they call comes in, etc. From your own phone, landline or mobile, you can call a local GV phone number, select the option to place a call, enter a phone number and GV will connect to that number and connect you into the call. They currently offer free long distance to any number from and to the continental US.



    The GV apps for the iPhone streamlined the outbound calling process. Other than trying to kill competition for AT&T's LD service by making it more difficult for customers to use, there is no really compelling reason for banning these apps.



    Watched the video. Pretty cool stuff.
  • Reply 93 of 141
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    The more I think about it, while it very well could have been at AT&S behest that Apple banned these apps, maybe it really was simply Apple doing it for their own interests.



    If it was because of AT&T, it is pretty clear they did it because GV would compete against them for long distance calling. But, since with or without the apps you can still use the GV outbound call forwarding service, this doesn't seem like a rational decision. It may have been, but it doesn't make sense, since it doesn't in anyway accomplish what they seek to prevent. It just blocks apps that make it easier.



    But, GV offers more than outbound call forwarding. They offer a very advanced voice mail system. You can browse, listen, read your voice mails. You can get email notifications of pending emails and I assume the official GV app would have push notifications of voice mail. This is basically Visual VoiceMail on steroids. Who loses out if iPhone users drop VVM and start using GV voice mail? Certainly the carrier (AT&T) would lose the very high margins they currently maintain on VVM. But, Apple would also lose out. VVM required every carrier to purchase and deploy very expensive VVM servers and whatever other infrastructure is required. They purchase this from Apple and probably pay Apple based on number of subscribed users. If users start using GV voice mail, then the carriers will not be paying Apple as much. So, the decision to ban these apps might have come from Apple entirely with no input from AT&T. Apple's statement of duplication of features of the built in phone app make more sense in this context.



    Still a dick move.
  • Reply 94 of 141
    robrerobre Posts: 56member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by yuusharo View Post




    ..............Is Google Voice the end-all be-all service everyone should have? Probably not. Is it even the future? Who knows. But the fact that innovations like these are being completely stifled and snuffed out before they even have a chance is senseless. ....



    The services that Google Voice is providing are not new. They have been innovations a decade ago. These services have been introduced by small carriers in 2000 here in the US . The big carriers never really picked up on them - no vision. Google Voice is nice and handy for people but it really flies when it is used by a carrier or if it is fully integrated into the Android OS, however. When Google bought Grandcentral it made sense because it looked like that they were planning to become a carrier... What will the future be?
  • Reply 95 of 141
    As a lifetime Apple customer, I am shocked and deeply disappointed by this decision. Since the iPhone came out, I have been an evangelist for phone and most of my friends have it now. Now, I regret being so excited about the iPhone. The truth is that Apple is willing to sacrifice loyal customers by banning GREAT applications because...... Oh wait, we have no clue why because THEY WONT SAY.



    Apple has great products. But if there is one thing that can bring them down it is by turning their loyal base off by cutting off basic functionality.



    Sign this petition with your Twitter Account to let Apple know how much they screwed up: http://twitition.com/xh8jk



    Hey Apple: TTYN!
  • Reply 96 of 141
    walshbjwalshbj Posts: 864member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BlackSummerNight View Post


    You still charged for inbound SMS. This is no different from AOL IM. This is Apple at work and not ATT&T. Google voice is already out for Blackberry, which ATT has many models, and is coming for WM, with ATT has dozens of models.



    No, you're charged for inbound SMS if you choose to be. Google Voice has an option that doesn't forward inbound SMS to your true mobile number. Clear the box for free SMS.
  • Reply 97 of 141
    sensisensi Posts: 346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eksodos View Post


    This is a great decision by Apple.



    When fanboism/brand boot-licking reach that state of self-harm mindset, it is scary...
  • Reply 98 of 141
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JakiChan View Post


    Just out of curiosity, how do I dial my contacts from Safari? Not all of us keep all our contacts on Google.



    I like the GV Mobile app. I am very mad at Apple for killing it. This action worries me and makes me think perhaps I shouldn't have bought a 3GS.



    If you have a Google Voice account already, you'd know that you load up your contacts into GV, then it can connect the both of you with the click of a button.



    Also, so you bought an iPhone 3GS only because you MIGHT be able to use the GV Mobile app? I don't think so.
  • Reply 99 of 141
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eksodos View Post


    People are stupid



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    That's a pretty arrogant statement



    Arrogant perhaps.. but more often than not quite accurate!
  • Reply 100 of 141
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    If you have a Google Voice account already, you'd know that you load up your contacts into GV, then it can connect the both of you with the click of a button.



    ..and hence the comment "Not all of us keep all our contacts on Google". GV Mobile allowed you to select you contacts from your phone. Now, he will have to. Not a biggie, but answering his valid question with sarcasm is just petty.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    Also, so you bought an iPhone 3GS only because you MIGHT be able to use the GV Mobile app? I don't think so.



    No, but maybe being crippled in this way is enough to not want it. There are lots of individual ways Apple could further cripple the iPhone/Apps that would be deal killers for people, without being their sole criteria for having purchased the iPhone initially. Especially functionality that was there/allowed when he bought it.
Sign In or Register to comment.