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