You have all probably been waiting on the very edge of your seats to see what Apple, AT&T, and Google have to say about the highly-publicised Google Voice rejection, but don’t fret, the wait is over and the results are finally in. The gist of it is, no one is guilty of anything. Who would have figured?
There is a ton of reading to be had, but here is essentially how it breaks down. Apple claims that they haven’t even officially rejected Google Voice at this point, they are simply continuing to “study” it. The reason it hasn’t been approved yet is that Apple is concerned that the app alters the iPhone’s user experience and disables Visual Voicemail. Also, a user’s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers and Apple can’t be sure enough that it will be used in appropriate ways. All of these concerns are also applied to other apps like GV Mobile.
According to both Apple and AT&T, AT&T has no role in rejecting or approving apps, Apple makes the final decision. Although, it is within Apple and AT&T’s exclusive contract that VoIP apps that run on AT&T’s cellular network (3G) can not be approved. They do plan on taking a “fresh look” at the issue. AT&T has gone to Apple on three separate occasions regarding apps that they were worried about, but Apple made AT&T take care of the situation on two of those occasions and the other Apple took care of. According to Engadget, “All three cases seem pretty benign.”
Other interesting points of interest include: More than 40 full-time trained iPhone app reviewers are working on approving apps, and at least two different reviewers take a look at each app. If there is app that raises a new issue, they are escalated to the App Store Executive Review Board, which meets weekly to determine procedure and set new policies. Apple receives about 8,500 new apps and app updates per week, and only about 20 percent of them are not approved as originally submitted.
As for Google, they really didn’t have much to say except that they would rather have Google Voice be a native app and not a web app.
Apple’s entire response can be found on their website. If you are looking to do a bit more reading, Engadget has all three FCC responses in-hand.
Apple explains it in much more thorough detail but the Google Voice rejection was what I thought all along. Which is, it duplicates a lot of the built-in features. I didn’t realize, however, that it did so in such a ‘deep’ way. I would have similar concerns if I were in Apple shoes.
To quote another comment I made to an earlier FCC article on AppAdvice, “While I hope it continues to push the cellular carriers to upgrade their networks as quickly as possible, I do see certain restrictions a good thing at this point. For example… A few large events, that obviously attracted a plenty number of iPhone users, crippled AT&T’s network since the iPhone’s initial launch. This was voice and data interruptions. If you were to allow free reign of app usage like SlingPlayer Mobile, VoIP, and other ‘heavy’ network data titles than we’d really have something to complain about.”
Other rejections… Well… Some make sense but the explicit content I still find “wishy-washy”. What’s the point of the parental controls and rating system if everything is censored any? No nudity, no cursing, … Seems silly to me. Of course, this has bothered and confused me in other mediums.
please explain to me how duplicating features negatively affects apple and their users in any way. I just don’t see it. Especially when there are probably a thousand other apps that duplicate native features
It could compromise the basic / built-in functions in terms of reliability and overall quality. In which case, customers would likely point the finger at Apple / AT&T while it would be Google’s fault. No point of dealing with other companies problems, especially if it is costing them. It is Apple’s and AT&T’s responsibility to ensure the highest level of reliability and quality for features they include and you’re paying for. If Google Voice was approved, Apple / AT&T would need to make it absolutely clear that they are not responsible for the level of service experienced if a customer chooses to use Google Voice. On top of that, they would need to make it clear that the customer is still obligated to pay service fees to AT&T and Apple. It’s a very ‘rocky’ situation that requires very careful execution. Not impossible but extremely risky.
You’re taking of much of Apple’s response to literally, without considering the reality of the way the service works.
Google doesn’t actually replace ANY iPhone functionality. Your Messaging (SMS, MMS if AT&T ever gets it working) app still works. iPhone visual voicemail still works for calls that come directly to your iPhone. Your iPhone dialer still works, and the iPhone still makes receives calls natively.
Google Voice adds it’s own functionality in these ares, but it doesn’t replace anything.
Apple has already approved apps that replace Messaging (Beejive/IM+ for instant messaging, TextPlus for true SMS), various VoIP clients replace the dialer more completely then Google Voice did. The iPhone itself can be configured to upload your contacts to Google without any additional software, so the whole “sharing your data” thing is both moot and stupid.
Does Google Voice add substantial functionality? Sure. Are users likely to use it rather then Apple’s own apps? Absolutely.
Apple is just mad that Google did a better job then Apple themselves, and instead of competing, Apple is taking their ball and going home.
This is rather similar to their little “don’t poach our employees” offer to Palm, Apple spent the last few years poaching Palm employees, it was only once Palm got better at it then Apple that Apple took offense.
I’m very open to physical proof ( directly from Google would be best ) but as far as I’m aware, you’re making educated guesses as much as I. That is, how do you know Google Voice wouldn’t replace the Apple shortcuts ( on the home screen ) for SMS, phone, and address book?
I never said anything about being against Google Voice. That’s fine… Approve it. I couldn’t care less either way. Sounds like a very useful group of services for a plenty number of people. i don’t have any interest in it but that doesn’t mean I don’t want it approved.
Beejive, IM+, … don’t replace any built-in functionality. Apple doesn’t include any IM app on the iPhone. I don’t know about textPlus but I’ve looked into TextFree, … but those don’t replace the built in SMS / MMS app as they ( the ones I looked into ) were SMS to email solutions to bypass true “texting” service fees. By the way, sounds like a big pain and not really a solution. Once again, if others want to use them that’s fine by me.
Apple is a joke. They basically said they haven’t approved the app because if they did people wouldn’t use THEIR pretty little dialing app and that would make them sad. All a bunch of horseshit. As much as I love apple I hope the FCC sees right through this and is able to charge them and AT&T with perjury of some sort and make them think twice about treating their customers like they’re stupid little infants in the future.
God I wish there were a decent alternative to the iPhone cause I’d love to shoot up my iPhone like that guy did a few weeks back
Rough week?
Maybe I misunderstood it but Google Voice sounded to me like more than just a regular app and more of modifying core OS objects. On top of that, you’re paying for Visual Voicemail from AT&T, so why cut that feature off for Google’s version? Lastly, Apple made a good point about not knowing Google’s intent on data sharing. How do you know Google won’t sell or otherwise distribute in a not so friendly way all of the information in your Address Book ( contacts )? This really does seem like a unique situation from any other app so far submitted.
You failed to show a single example of how it negatively affects anyone. Their argument that google might distribute our contacts in a harmful manner is quite ridiculous. Why would they? they ever done anything like that before. Doing so would essentially be the end of Google.
More importantly, Apple has approved many apps that synchronize your data with external third parties. The iPhone itself can already sync your contacts with Google without ANY third party software, there are several contact synchronization tools available that synchronize with Google and with others too.
If this was a concern, Apple wouldn’t allow any sort of contact synchronization, or even store contacts on the phone, after all I might let someone see my phone and they might copy my contacts manually.
“The iPhone itself can already sync your contacts with Google without ANY third party software” I am curious on this. Any screenshots or steps? Quick glances at Mail, Address Book, and other preferences didn’t seem to have any kind of option to synchronize with a third party like Google.
I never said this was a big reason. I just said that it is a realistic concern, however small it may be. Especially in the legal department.
@crsrc stop being such a baby. You buy an iPHONE with AT&T CELL SERVICE, yet you (and others) wish to make CELL PHONE calls using another SERVICE? Why don’t you go be a pioneer and create your own device to accomplish this. Maybe you should quit the Google Koolaid and realize that they provided the weakest response to the probe.
Maybe Apple should write an iPhone app for Android. I just blew your mind, didn’t I?
You obviously have no idea what google voice is so you shouldn’t be commenting on this. Google voice is NOT A VOIP. Maybe you should read on the subject before you come in here acting like high and mighty. You obviously a lame fanboy that as happy to let apple dictate what is good for you.
Also, Google in all likelihood provided the best and most telling response, they just redacted most of it because it entailed private conversations between them and Apple. Again educate yourself before making idiotic comments.
The best part about this whole thing? Google Voice *does* use AT&T mobile phone minutes!
I’ve built something very similar for my own consulting company, my PBX knows where I am, if I’m “in the office” then calls ring for 10 seconds at my desktop, my iPhone and VoIP phone start ringing too (desk phone still rings) and I can snag the call anywhere.
When I leave the office, calls goes immediately to my iPhone AND VoIP client so that I can grab my calls anywhere. I use my iPhone a ton more now since I can still get calls when I’m not near my desk phone.
(VoIP phone, in this context, is a softphone on my laptop for when I’m traveling internationally and don’t feel like paying over $1/minute roaming)
This type of system causes me to spend *more* time on the phone, not less, which should be a win-win for Apple and AT&T.
@crsrc Actually I didn’t read any of it. I just wrote that comment to see how fired up you would get. Thanks for coming through for me.
Well, congratulations on succeeding at your goal of douchebaggery. I’m proud of you.
@Odie, you’re such a Fanboy you can’t see past your own reflection. I hope you are getting paid by Apple and AT&T.
Not at all. I enjoy a lot of things about Apple products and services but there are certainly products and services I would never purchase or use. I also feel there are a number of changes I would like to see from current products. That doesn’t mean those changes are good or bad but are of my preference. Possibly a similar opinion of others and possibly a dislike of others.
However… I am willing to look at all perspectives. In this situation: Apple, AT&T, Google, and even the FCC and other federal agencies. They all have their reasonable points, faults, mistakes, … I ( and everyone else ) have the ability to possibly misjudge, misinterpret, or make some other mistake. I’m just not about to be, “All of those evil corporations are just greedy” and “Why can’t we have everything. Competition is a good thing.” It doesn’t work that way and it most certainly isn’t that ‘black and white’. Traditionally, it is called being “open minded.”
Just because you want something and some aspects are positive doesn’t mean that allowing it is the best course of action.
I think it’s funny how Apple says that the majority of rejected applications are due to software bugs that it gets the developer to fix. The latest update for Prowl was so buggy that if you changed one setting it crashed. They immediately released a fixed update a week later, but how did Apple miss these bugs and allow it to be released? Better yet, how did the developer miss them?
I do agree ( unfortunately ) that this doesn’t seem to answer or even fix the App Store approval process and is more of a delay tactic. I’m hoping that it is a step in the right direction and that Apple is giving full attempts to continue improving. Let’s not forget that the iTunes Store ( formerly the iTunes Music Store ) had many bumps along the way. Heck… There are still complaints here and there but there is no way to satisfy all.
WTF?!?!?!?! I am so f********* tired of this bullshit. AT&T is crap. They are greedy bastards. Where’s MMS? Where’s tethering? In order to get rid of the crap apple gets for the app submitting process they need to forget about their little apps. If they want to keep their apps “on top” then why not make them better. And why can’t 3g users have voice commands. Which I heard kinda sucked.
I won’t copy and paste this comment from iKeepass developer’s blog, as it’s quite long and should be read in context:
http://ikeepass.de/bl0g/?p=101&cpage=3#comment-1905
This application (iKeepass) is another “victim” of Apple’s review process, it was submitted eight months ago(!!) and they’re still rejecting it again and again.