If the app was rejected by Apple then Google could simply produce the rejection notice to prove it.
Why don't they?
Or is the rejection notice next to the birth certificate?
Yep. They put some pictures up of cute bunnies at Easter next to their search field, and people give away all their rights to these turkeys. No company has set individual and consumer rights back further on the internet than Google. Not even evil Microsoft has pulled the kind of crap that these scumbags have gotten away with.
They are a telemarking company, that's how they make all of their revenue. They are in bed with domestic and international junk mail companies, but they put up cute bunny pics on their search and these dummies help them fight their battles. What the hell has Google ever done for you?
Apple makes this really cool, shiny iPhone that does all this wonderful stuff on its own, tens of thousands of developers (new, small, medium, big) are making a living selling their apps on the App Store. They have fanboys for a reason, they have a very long, unbroken history of deserving it. You can't even use any of Google's services on their own, you need product(s) made by others to even access them. If their feelings are hurt because they can't parasite of Apple and the iPhone in all the ways they want, they can suck it. I'd rather type random characters into my browser's address bar than help that creepy, beady-eyed, little dweeb Eric Schmidt.
A lot of whiners and brats on here, need to do a lot more reading (books not just memoirs and pamphlets). I see a lot of specific corporate talking points being expounded upon by dimwitted surrogates and whiny brats. Stop falling for the same, stupid ploys. If you're having trouble dating and meeting people, don't pretend that getting raped by Google is the same thing.
Google Voice may have been rejected OMG! Or it may not have been approved yet OMG!!
But in light of a new perspective - ie. what you should actually be doing right now (work/exercise/enjoying your life) instead of posting petty shit on AI, who actually gives one whether this app is in the app store or not?
Apple, I love you...but you are worse than Microsoft when it comes to playing fair. I feel like an abused spouse....you bring me flowers (new shiny tech toys) and I forgive you....then you just turn right around and punch me in the gut by not allowing other great technology to work with you.
You don't know much about logic or argument do you?
It's patently obvious that there can be many things in-between "were 100% okay with this" and "no we won't host this app in the store." The very fact that all the rejections we know about so far point to specific features or reasons app were considered unacceptable indicates that Apple is usually open to negotiation.
In this particular case, they've even already indicated that they would probably accept a web-based version of the same thing, and that the issue is not VoIP per se.
You don't know enough about me to make any sort of presumption about what I know or don't know.
Negotiations or not, the fact is they haven't accepted the Google app as is, so they have therefor rejected it. Dancing around semantics won't change anything. It won't be accepted by Apple until changes are made. There is no gray area there.
The last time I applied for a job at Google, they didn't respond. Ultimately, it was a rejection. I do not believe they wanted to talk further about it.
Oh but according to some in this thread that's flawed logic. There is plenty of gray area for interpretation in their inaction. They probably weren't really rejecting you, but merely sending a message that they like you, but you need to change, so therefor they didn't really mean go away, and you're actually hired. Maybe. But they didn't reject you. See the difference?
It's not a VOIP app, it uses the voice channel just like making a call today on your iphone.
I am amazed at the number of people that STILL think GV is a VoIP application. It comes up in every forum that mentions the GV/iPhone debate and it's getting old.
I am amazed at the number of people that STILL think GV is a VoIP application. It comes up in every forum that mentions the GV/iPhone debate and it's getting old.
Yes, there are still many people (like me) who don't care much about the iPhone and the 60k apps, because it is on AT&T only (in this country). I am happy that the iPhone has spread geekiness amongst many of my non-tech friends, and made "smartphones" de rigeur, but that's about it.
What is the big deal of even having GV on the iPhone? Maybe get an Android Phone, if it's so important?
Yes, there are still many people (like me) who don't care much about the iPhone and the 60k apps, because it is on AT&T only (in this country). I am happy that the iPhone has spread geekiness amongst many of my non-tech friends, and made "smartphones" de rigeur, but that's about it.
What is the big deal of even having GV on the iPhone? Maybe get an Android Phone, if it's so important?
You can care nothing for the iPhone and still find GV very useful. Especially if you have more than one phone number. It's features are listed here:
I've got a sneaking suspicion that there is a great deal of overlap between the "GV on iPhone" evangelists and the "Tunes should be open to all players" crowd. Both groups seem to believe that Apple has created platforms that should be socialized and made freely available to the masses rather than capitalized and made available at Apple's discretion for what the market will bear.
Google CAN put GV on the iPhone as a Web App so it has not been rejected, if Google decides it doesn't want to do that it's Google that's at fault.
GV is still in Beta isn't it?
What gives anyone the right to demand Beta software, it's not like you can walk into Best Buy and demand a Laptop with Windows 7 installed on it.
What?
Google could put GV on my Tivo, that doesn't bare any relevance to it's status in the AppStore. Google could do a webapp, but that also has no baring on it's status in the AppStore.
What gives you the right to demand any software, beta or otherwise? The service is beta, not the app.
I stand corrected. So, what exactly does this magical app do? If it just allows one to make phone calls, why would we need it? Just sayin'
phone number consolidation. Free long distance. free voice mail. Voice mail transcription.
All features available to users of the iPhone, with or without the native App. Apple banning it in no way prevents iPhone users from using the service. The app would have simply made it more convenient to use the service.
This whole, Apple lied, it was rejected, blah blah blah argument is ridiculous. I typically am not fond of the, "if you don't like it here go somewhere else," argument but if you really can't live without GV, if you're that passionate about everything Google, maybe you really should get an Android phone. I hear it's an excellent gateway drug for entering Google Paradise. You can get a Google tattoo, too, while you're at it, maybe one of those cute little things they do with their logo around your favorite holiday. Maybe you can just get the Google brain implant while you're at it: it transmits all your thoughts to Google and they tell you what you think.
First of all, here's the question the FCC posed to Google:
Quote:
What explanation was given (if any) for Apple's rejection [emphasis mine] of the Google Voice application [...]?
To which Google, of course, responded "... the Google Voice application was rejected because..."
Doesn't it seem obvious to anyone that Google decided to answer the question in the same form as it was asked because it was to their benefit to do so. Apple chose to reject the FCC's characterization of their refusal to sell the GV app as is as a "rejection" because the connotations of "rejection" imply that the app would never be approved under any circumstances. Clearly Apple and Google are still discussing the matter, which indicates that Apple hasn't definitively ruled out allowing it into the App Store under any and all circumstances or any and all forms.
It's also interesting to note that Google neglected to mention any of the specifics of why Apple hasn't allowed the app into the App store. Are we really to believe that in the phone conversations between Apple and Google executives regarding GV that Apple only gave them a one sentence response with no details. So is Google lying? I'll leave that for you to decide. But, anyone accusing Apple of lying in their response to the FCC cannot avoid the same charge against Google in theirs without engaging in a high degree of intellectual dishonesty, or not really being rational in their reaction in the first place.
Apple has declined to offer quite a few apps in the App Store in the form they were submitted. Some of them seem to have been declined for rather whimsical reasons, and for some of those Apple has reversed itself, but no small number have run up against exactly the same issues that GV does: duplication of core iPhone features. So, it's not really a surprise that Apple would decline to offer GV in the form it was submitted, nor should it have been a surprise to anyone at Google that this would happen. Did they just expect that because they are Google they can just do whatever they want. Frankly, I suspect they did.
It's kind of like listening to Eric Schmidt talk about the proposed book settlement. To paraphrase: "Well, we put a lot of time into this, we scanned these books, we got some people to agree to what we want to do, so you have to let us. No one is offering any other suggestions about how we should be allowed to do this." Well, except perhaps the suggestion that you, Google, violated copyright law and that the whole proposed settlement is illegal and that you should just start obeying copyright law and consider yourselves lucky not to go to jail or have to pay the damages that could be levied against you by applying the law.
And, of the two companies, people are comparing Apple to Microsoft? Apparently all rationality and common sense have been tossed out the window. If you can't have Google this and Google that you'll go into withdrawal. Google is electronic heroin and just as dangerous as the poppy itself.
This is not a company with your best interests at heart. This is a company that wants to own you and everything about you, and to undermine every technology company that stands in their way of doing that, in any way they can, in whatever way they have to. Are you really so naive that you believe them when they say they will, "Do no evil?" This is a company drunk on ambition and power and greed, and not a company to be trusted.
So, stand your ground Apple. Don't let them walk all over you, and don't let them turn the iPhone into an Android-clone, Google service.
No. You're reading this ruling wrong and you didn't read (or maybe just don't agree with?), Apple's stated opinion on Google voice.
According to their statement, Apple is actually okay with Google Voice but not the current implementation. This ruling wouldn't apply, because Apple isn't blocking Google from the network, only blocking them from doing that in a particular way. That's a big difference.
They are presumably okay with them doing it as a web app, or even as a native one if it doesn't violate the user guidelines. They also allow other VoIP apps so it's hard to argue that Apple is blocking these kinds of services as a matter of policy hidden or otherwise.
I'm not saying I believe them or that they are saints or anything, but legally and logically, they would not be affected by this ruling at all AFAICS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore
Is that all you have to contribute? Explain why you disagree moron!
Essentially, the guidelines will "prevent wireless companies from blocking internet applications and prevent them from discriminating (or acting as gatekeepers) [against] web content and services."
Anyone that thinks Apple would not just give a bald faced lie about their motives is living in lala land. There are plenty of Apps that currently change the "user experience" and replace the native dialer, etc. Then they give this school boy answer like, "We didn't reject it" - then they go on to explain why they rejected it. Based on their answer, GV violates every stipulation, so why would they still be "studying it"? That just BS.
I agree telling someone their are wrong and not explaining is kindergarden behaviour, let's stop doing this on forum. Also the name calling is just as worse.
Gazoobee explain it very well, why you have misread the statement.
First I'd like to say I think it's obvious that Apple is playing games here. This is pretty clear. Even though we may not know all the reasons, clearly Apple is toying with the FCC.
Second - the reason Apple is toying with the FCC is because it's not politically correct for Apple to respond to the FCC by saying what really needs to be said, and that is this:
Dear FCC,
in regards to your enquiry about the rejection of the Google voice app. Damn right we rejected it. And to be perfectly honest, we don't need to give you or anyone else any reason for rejecting it. It's our product, and we have 100% authority of what is allowed on the phone and nobody else. This includes Google, and least of all the U.S. Government. It's called a "free market" and this is widely practiced in th U.S.A. to be perfectly honest, as long as we do not have a monopoly position (and last I checked 1% errors on the side of no monopoly) there is not a hell of a lot you can do about it.
You may recall, we are the ones who brought the Music labels to their knees and introduced .99 cent songs and no DRM (with no help from you I might add) so do not even think about lecturing us on consumer rights. We are just sick and tired of companies trying to coast off our success, and everyone wants a piece of the app store because it is the hottest development platform in the world. Period. If we let every Tom dick andharry into the store - we would end up with the same mess Windows is in.
Not to brag - but we are the ones who have made the smart phone market what it is today. And that is because we know what is right. If Google wants to make all their crappy apps available tooeople, they can submit it to a vendor who has lower standards then we do -there are plenty to choose from - Palm, Windows, and even Android to name just a few.
Again, we would like to emphasize that you - the FCC, has **** all to say about what we allow on our product, we abide by all laws we are required to follow, and FYI - allowing every ***** app that is submitted to the app store is not one of them. You would have better luck getting us to allow sync support for the Pre in iTunes (which is not going to happen in a million years either btw)
mind you, we have no hard feelings - we realize that we are the hottest company in the history of technology and we are probably the coolest brand in the history of the world, and companies like you and Greenpeace like to latch onto that because it gets you a lot of press. Google also has friends in the Obama administration and probably called in a favour and is probably the only reason you are looking into this. Let's face facts - we both know this issue is none of your ******* business and anything short of an entire overhaul of the communications history and the free market - your hands are tied and this letter is where it's going to end. You have to admit it - the REAL reason this industry is a mess is because you have been asleep at the wheel for the past 2 years - so I'm a little curious why all of a sudden you give a ****. So kindly - please **** off.
Comments
If the app was rejected by Apple then Google could simply produce the rejection notice to prove it.
Why don't they?
Or is the rejection notice next to the birth certificate?
Yep. They put some pictures up of cute bunnies at Easter next to their search field, and people give away all their rights to these turkeys. No company has set individual and consumer rights back further on the internet than Google. Not even evil Microsoft has pulled the kind of crap that these scumbags have gotten away with.
They are a telemarking company, that's how they make all of their revenue. They are in bed with domestic and international junk mail companies, but they put up cute bunny pics on their search and these dummies help them fight their battles. What the hell has Google ever done for you?
Apple makes this really cool, shiny iPhone that does all this wonderful stuff on its own, tens of thousands of developers (new, small, medium, big) are making a living selling their apps on the App Store. They have fanboys for a reason, they have a very long, unbroken history of deserving it. You can't even use any of Google's services on their own, you need product(s) made by others to even access them. If their feelings are hurt because they can't parasite of Apple and the iPhone in all the ways they want, they can suck it. I'd rather type random characters into my browser's address bar than help that creepy, beady-eyed, little dweeb Eric Schmidt.
A lot of whiners and brats on here, need to do a lot more reading (books not just memoirs and pamphlets). I see a lot of specific corporate talking points being expounded upon by dimwitted surrogates and whiny brats. Stop falling for the same, stupid ploys. If you're having trouble dating and meeting people, don't pretend that getting raped by Google is the same thing.
...
... If you're having trouble dating and meeting people, don't pretend that getting raped by Google is the same thing.
Now, that is rich!
Google Voice may have been rejected OMG! Or it may not have been approved yet OMG!!
But in light of a new perspective - ie. what you should actually be doing right now (work/exercise/enjoying your life) instead of posting petty shit on AI, who actually gives one whether this app is in the app store or not?
You don't know much about logic or argument do you?
It's patently obvious that there can be many things in-between "were 100% okay with this" and "no we won't host this app in the store." The very fact that all the rejections we know about so far point to specific features or reasons app were considered unacceptable indicates that Apple is usually open to negotiation.
In this particular case, they've even already indicated that they would probably accept a web-based version of the same thing, and that the issue is not VoIP per se.
You don't know enough about me to make any sort of presumption about what I know or don't know.
Negotiations or not, the fact is they haven't accepted the Google app as is, so they have therefor rejected it. Dancing around semantics won't change anything. It won't be accepted by Apple until changes are made. There is no gray area there.
The last time I applied for a job at Google, they didn't respond. Ultimately, it was a rejection. I do not believe they wanted to talk further about it.
Oh but according to some in this thread that's flawed logic. There is plenty of gray area for interpretation in their inaction. They probably weren't really rejecting you, but merely sending a message that they like you, but you need to change, so therefor they didn't really mean go away, and you're actually hired. Maybe. But they didn't reject you. See the difference?
It's not a VOIP app, it uses the voice channel just like making a call today on your iphone.
I am amazed at the number of people that STILL think GV is a VoIP application. It comes up in every forum that mentions the GV/iPhone debate and it's getting old.
Man, that is quite inflammatory. IMO.
But, I guess that is your right to say so.
I wonder how many here condone your position. I don't.
Anybody?
I have not rejected sapporobabyrtrns's position and I continue to discuss it.
It's not a VOIP app, it uses the voice channel just like making a call today on your iphone.
I stand corrected. So, what exactly does this magical app do? If it just allows one to make phone calls, why would we need it? Just sayin'
I am amazed at the number of people that STILL think GV is a VoIP application. It comes up in every forum that mentions the GV/iPhone debate and it's getting old.
Yes, there are still many people (like me) who don't care much about the iPhone and the 60k apps, because it is on AT&T only (in this country). I am happy that the iPhone has spread geekiness amongst many of my non-tech friends, and made "smartphones" de rigeur, but that's about it.
What is the big deal of even having GV on the iPhone? Maybe get an Android Phone, if it's so important?
I stand corrected. So, what exactly does this magical app do? If it just allows one to make phone calls, why would we need it? Just sayin'
this should help you get up to speed:
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=google+voice
You go to the airport and you see that your flight has not arrived as scheduled. So I gather you would say it 'crashed'.
No, but after waiting at the airport for a couple months, one might assume it was cancelled.
Yes, there are still many people (like me) who don't care much about the iPhone and the 60k apps, because it is on AT&T only (in this country). I am happy that the iPhone has spread geekiness amongst many of my non-tech friends, and made "smartphones" de rigeur, but that's about it.
What is the big deal of even having GV on the iPhone? Maybe get an Android Phone, if it's so important?
You can care nothing for the iPhone and still find GV very useful. Especially if you have more than one phone number. It's features are listed here:
http://www.google.com/googlevoice/about.html
Honestly, GV on the iPhone is just bonus for me, Fortunately, I bought GV Mobile from the iTunes app store before it was removed.
Google CAN put GV on the iPhone as a Web App so it has not been rejected, if Google decides it doesn't want to do that it's Google that's at fault.
GV is still in Beta isn't it?
What gives anyone the right to demand Beta software, it's not like you can walk into Best Buy and demand a Laptop with Windows 7 installed on it.
What?
Google could put GV on my Tivo, that doesn't bare any relevance to it's status in the AppStore. Google could do a webapp, but that also has no baring on it's status in the AppStore.
What gives you the right to demand any software, beta or otherwise? The service is beta, not the app.
I stand corrected. So, what exactly does this magical app do? If it just allows one to make phone calls, why would we need it? Just sayin'
phone number consolidation. Free long distance. free voice mail. Voice mail transcription.
All features available to users of the iPhone, with or without the native App. Apple banning it in no way prevents iPhone users from using the service. The app would have simply made it more convenient to use the service.
Instead of asking why the app was rejected, ask why it hasn't been accepted yet.
When Apple claims the app submission is still being discussed, ask about the content of said discussions and when they took place.
They need to get details from the two companies. That way it is much harder to duck and weave.
First of all, here's the question the FCC posed to Google:
What explanation was given (if any) for Apple's rejection [emphasis mine] of the Google Voice application [...]?
To which Google, of course, responded "... the Google Voice application was rejected because..."
Doesn't it seem obvious to anyone that Google decided to answer the question in the same form as it was asked because it was to their benefit to do so. Apple chose to reject the FCC's characterization of their refusal to sell the GV app as is as a "rejection" because the connotations of "rejection" imply that the app would never be approved under any circumstances. Clearly Apple and Google are still discussing the matter, which indicates that Apple hasn't definitively ruled out allowing it into the App Store under any and all circumstances or any and all forms.
It's also interesting to note that Google neglected to mention any of the specifics of why Apple hasn't allowed the app into the App store. Are we really to believe that in the phone conversations between Apple and Google executives regarding GV that Apple only gave them a one sentence response with no details. So is Google lying? I'll leave that for you to decide. But, anyone accusing Apple of lying in their response to the FCC cannot avoid the same charge against Google in theirs without engaging in a high degree of intellectual dishonesty, or not really being rational in their reaction in the first place.
Apple has declined to offer quite a few apps in the App Store in the form they were submitted. Some of them seem to have been declined for rather whimsical reasons, and for some of those Apple has reversed itself, but no small number have run up against exactly the same issues that GV does: duplication of core iPhone features. So, it's not really a surprise that Apple would decline to offer GV in the form it was submitted, nor should it have been a surprise to anyone at Google that this would happen. Did they just expect that because they are Google they can just do whatever they want. Frankly, I suspect they did.
It's kind of like listening to Eric Schmidt talk about the proposed book settlement. To paraphrase: "Well, we put a lot of time into this, we scanned these books, we got some people to agree to what we want to do, so you have to let us. No one is offering any other suggestions about how we should be allowed to do this." Well, except perhaps the suggestion that you, Google, violated copyright law and that the whole proposed settlement is illegal and that you should just start obeying copyright law and consider yourselves lucky not to go to jail or have to pay the damages that could be levied against you by applying the law.
And, of the two companies, people are comparing Apple to Microsoft? Apparently all rationality and common sense have been tossed out the window. If you can't have Google this and Google that you'll go into withdrawal. Google is electronic heroin and just as dangerous as the poppy itself.
This is not a company with your best interests at heart. This is a company that wants to own you and everything about you, and to undermine every technology company that stands in their way of doing that, in any way they can, in whatever way they have to. Are you really so naive that you believe them when they say they will, "Do no evil?" This is a company drunk on ambition and power and greed, and not a company to be trusted.
So, stand your ground Apple. Don't let them walk all over you, and don't let them turn the iPhone into an Android-clone, Google service.
No. You're reading this ruling wrong and you didn't read (or maybe just don't agree with?), Apple's stated opinion on Google voice.
According to their statement, Apple is actually okay with Google Voice but not the current implementation. This ruling wouldn't apply, because Apple isn't blocking Google from the network, only blocking them from doing that in a particular way. That's a big difference.
They are presumably okay with them doing it as a web app, or even as a native one if it doesn't violate the user guidelines. They also allow other VoIP apps so it's hard to argue that Apple is blocking these kinds of services as a matter of policy hidden or otherwise.
I'm not saying I believe them or that they are saints or anything, but legally and logically, they would not be affected by this ruling at all AFAICS.
Is that all you have to contribute? Explain why you disagree moron!
Essentially, the guidelines will "prevent wireless companies from blocking internet applications and prevent them from discriminating (or acting as gatekeepers) [against] web content and services."
Anyone that thinks Apple would not just give a bald faced lie about their motives is living in lala land. There are plenty of Apps that currently change the "user experience" and replace the native dialer, etc. Then they give this school boy answer like, "We didn't reject it" - then they go on to explain why they rejected it. Based on their answer, GV violates every stipulation, so why would they still be "studying it"? That just BS.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/17226...n_the_end.html
I agree telling someone their are wrong and not explaining is kindergarden behaviour, let's stop doing this on forum. Also the name calling is just as worse.
Gazoobee explain it very well, why you have misread the statement.
Second - the reason Apple is toying with the FCC is because it's not politically correct for Apple to respond to the FCC by saying what really needs to be said, and that is this:
Dear FCC,
in regards to your enquiry about the rejection of the Google voice app. Damn right we rejected it. And to be perfectly honest, we don't need to give you or anyone else any reason for rejecting it. It's our product, and we have 100% authority of what is allowed on the phone and nobody else. This includes Google, and least of all the U.S. Government. It's called a "free market" and this is widely practiced in th U.S.A. to be perfectly honest, as long as we do not have a monopoly position (and last I checked 1% errors on the side of no monopoly) there is not a hell of a lot you can do about it.
You may recall, we are the ones who brought the Music labels to their knees and introduced .99 cent songs and no DRM (with no help from you I might add) so do not even think about lecturing us on consumer rights. We are just sick and tired of companies trying to coast off our success, and everyone wants a piece of the app store because it is the hottest development platform in the world. Period. If we let every Tom dick andharry into the store - we would end up with the same mess Windows is in.
Not to brag - but we are the ones who have made the smart phone market what it is today. And that is because we know what is right. If Google wants to make all their crappy apps available tooeople, they can submit it to a vendor who has lower standards then we do -there are plenty to choose from - Palm, Windows, and even Android
Again, we would like to emphasize that you - the FCC, has **** all to say about what we allow on our product, we abide by all laws we are required to follow, and FYI - allowing every ***** app that is submitted to the app store is not one of them. You would have better luck getting us to allow sync support for the Pre in iTunes (which is not going to happen in a million years either btw)
mind you, we have no hard feelings - we realize that we are the hottest company in the history of technology and we are probably the coolest brand in the history of the world, and companies like you and Greenpeace like to latch onto that because it gets you a lot of press. Google also has friends in the Obama administration and probably called in a favour and is probably the only reason you are looking into this. Let's face facts - we both know this issue is none of your ******* business and anything short of an entire overhaul of the communications history and the free market - your hands are tied and this letter is where it's going to end. You have to admit it - the REAL reason this industry is a mess is because you have been asleep at the wheel for the past 2 years - so I'm a little curious why all of a sudden you give a ****. So kindly - please **** off.
Kind Regards,
Steve.