Apple: 'Continues to study' Google Voice apps; AT&T: We played no part
Summary: Apple, AT&T and Google have responded to an Federal Communications Commission inquiry into the Google Voice app flap. Apple says Google Voice apps interfere with iPhone functionality.
Apple, AT&T and Google have responded to an Federal Communications Commission inquiry into the Google Voice app flap. Apple says Google Voice apps interfere with iPhone functionality. AT&T says it had no role in the App Store approval process. If you recall, Google Voice related applications were booted from Apple's App Store in a move that raised a few regulatory eyebrows.
On Friday, all the parties chimed in. Here's the short version (Apple and AT&T statements) of the response to the FCC's inquiry last month:
AT&T's Jim Cicconi, AT&T senior executive vice president, external and legislative affairs, says:
Let me state unequivocally, AT&T had no role in any decision by Apple to not accept the Google Voice application for inclusion in the Apple App Store. AT&T was not asked about the matter by Apple at any time, nor did we offer any view one way or the other.
Apple says:
Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it. The application has not been approved because, as submitted for review, it appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voicemail. Apple spent a lot of time and effort developing this distinct and innovative way to seamlessly deliver core functionality of the iPhone.
So now what?
Apple spent a lot of time outlining its App Store approval process. First and foremost, Apple said its responsibility is to its users and core iPhone functionality. The company said:
Most rejections are based on bugs found in the applications. When there is an issue, we try to provide the developer with helpful feedback so they can modify the application in order for us to approve it. 95% of applications are approved within 14 days of their submission.
In a nutshell, Apple is arguing that the Google Voice application replaces iPhone functionality like Visual Voicemail. Simply put, Apple considers that takeover one helluva bug.
Meanwhile, it's unclear what will resolve the stand-off. Apple added:
The Google Voice application replaces Apple’s Visual Voicemail by routing calls through a separate Google Voice telephone number that stores any voicemail, preventing voicemail from being stored on the iPhone, i.e., disabling Apple’s Visual Voicemail. Similarly, SMS text messages are managed through the Google hub—replacing the iPhone’s text messaging feature. In addition, the iPhone user’s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways. These factors present several new issues and questions to us that we are still pondering at this time.
Apple maintains that it acted alone in its decision about Google Voice. It's unclear how the FCC will react. Can the FCC really dictate how Apple approves apps?
One wrinkle that may garner FCC attention is this one from Apple's statement:
There is a provision in Apple’s agreement with AT&T that obligates Apple not to include functionality in any Apple phone that enables a customer to use AT&T’s cellular network service to originate or terminate a VoIP session without obtaining AT&T’s permission.
However, the way Apple positions that agreement it's portrayed as standard operating procedure.
Update: Here's a PDF of Google's response to the FCC. Most---if not all---of the good stuff is redacted.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Uh, no.
Did you read the same letter I did? Because the words [i]I[/i] saw said
that Apple hadn't approved GV because it duplicated iPhone functions
and did some iffy stuff with Contacts. Apple doesn't consider that a bug,
they consider it a violation of the developer agreement, a BIG
DIFFERENCE, and if you don't realize that you might want to reconsider a
career in IT industry commentary.
iPhone users are stupid
Users are too stupid to understand when they are using an application and what that application does.
Apple said in a letter to the F.C.C. that Google Voice duplicated the functions of the iPhone, which uses the AT&T network in the United States, and may confuse users.
Ha! Take that iPhone users. Apple says you are stupid!
Crack me up. I'm writing this on a MacBook by the way so no Apple troll accusations against me.
Pot calling the kettle black.
Apple's letter. While you may infer that, it doesn't make it true. The fact is
simple, Apple says GV duplicates functionality it reserves for itself. That
Google is turning GV a web app pretty much indicates that they accept
that decision.
RE: Apple: 'Continues to study' Google Voice apps; AT&T: We played no part
This application replaces their user interface and Apple doesn't like that, so they didn't approve it.
Apple needs to officially allow the iPhone to get its applications from other sources. Apple has no business telling me what applications I can or can't run on my phone.
Jail Break it and move on.
like a stone on water. Just do not expect these actions to warrant
support. It is not against the law to modify it. Apple makes it clear
however, that once you do these things you are on your own. If you
choose to Jail Break it then do not expect to update the device with
official updates from Apple. It is no longer supported.
Didn't you hear?
And?
are no longer looking for support from Apple. Big deal.
Well..
Being able to detect jail breaks, they could disable the phone or use the data in more evil ways.
Slipper slope
Umm...
If you have a jail broken and unlocked phone, I don't see how Apple/ATT is going to disable your phone, unless you run a firmware update. Usually, people who jail break their phones don't use the official update by Apple because most likely it'll nullify their jailbreak.
I guess what they can do is do a forced update on your phone if they detect it's a jail broken phone? But would they go through that kind of trouble? I mean, if they implement something like this, I'm pretty sure someone will find a hack to disable that feature too...seems like a moot point.
On jailbreaking
wallet"?
Buying a locked down phone with the intention
of hacking it (and thus opening it up) is kind
of like being a devoted republican voting for a
democrat ironically. The vote still counts.
If you buy a locked down phone you are sending
a signal to the manufacturer and the market at
large that you want your phones to be locked
down.
Buy with intent?
another non-subsidized.
That one I do what I want with.
RE: AT&T: We played no part
Apple's been pretty clear all along
that changes their phone part of an iPhone? Odd duh-
factor there.
Personally I can't see why anyone would but an iPhone to jail
break it, but some mothers do have them. If you prefer
than to buying a phone that meets your needs, have at it.
Otherwise buy something designed to work with Google in
the tasks you want to use.
Some of the Apple fans here...
The rest of us will laugh at your apologetics.
RE: Apple: 'Continues to study' Google Voice apps; AT&T: We played no part
"the iPhone user?s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google?s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways."
So, Apple is saying don't trust Google to keep your data safe, but do trust Apple. Why couldn't Google just report back and say "We have concerns about the security of the iPhone and for those that want it, we offer basically a back-up for that data."
You seem to be misunderstanding Apple's position.
Apple controls its own privacy policy, but has no control over Google's
privacy policy. Apple doesn't want the data you enter on your iPhone or
Mac to be taken and used by a third party over whom they have no
control.
RE: Apple: 'Continues to study' Google Voice apps; AT&T: We played no part
Contact information is store on the Iphone. If a persons email address, phone number and other details are stored either on someone personal phone or on personal computer that then they have physical access and can place safe guards on. If an app will take information and move it to a server run by another company then a person would want to know that the information is protected,secure and will not be shared.
Apple took the closed model because they want customers to have a high degree of user satisfaction and then means that to them means ensuring a consistent user interface, and seamless app integration,
Some people like that model other do not those that do not can buy another phone.
Consumers have vote and that called purchase power.
What role is the FCC playing here? Are they now going to monitor company approval process and dictate what is acceptable?
The missing piece...
While Apple may have denied Google Voice, they, without
any note as to why, pulled other apps that had been in
place and some had even been through updates. Yes some
of these tapped into Google Voice functionality. but
these were pulled with no warning, and no hope of
"fixing" for resubmitting - and they stuck the developer
with all costs.
For me it is not so much whether or not Apple
approves/denies the Google Voice app, it is the way they
treat the life blood of the App Store, the developers....
Google just needs to get off their butts
One thing nobody will be able to duplicate is a media content library the size of iTunes. There are some non-public agreements with the record labels and the media cartel that would make it difficult for anybody to compete with iTunes at this stage. It will take legal action or a law for mandatory licensing to break Apple's grip on the digital content industry.
It's probably in the long-term interests and safety of the content providers to look beyond Apple. Last's weeks NPD Group survey said iTunes is responsible for 25% of music sales in the US, which puts them well ahead of Walmart and with Best Buy as a distant third. That much power in the hands of one retailer with a worldwide reach is like a knife at the throat of the music cartel, but I guess they see it as a necessary evil compared to the alternatives of unpaid file sharing.
RE: Apple: 'Continues to study' Google Voice apps; AT&T: We played no part