Posted on 08/01/2009 8:53:21 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi
Right about now, Apple probably wishes it had never rejected Google Voice and related apps from the iPhone. Or maybe it was AT&T who rejected the apps. Nobody really knows. But the FCC launched an investigation last night to find out, sending letters to all three companies (Apple, AT&T, and Google) asking them to explain exactly what happened.
On its face, it might seem odd to some people that the FCC is investigating the rejection of a single iPhone app. After all, iPhone apps are rejected every day. But the Google Voice rejection caused an unusual amount of uproar, and there is nothing like a high-profile case to make an example out of in pursuit of pushing a bigger policy agenda. The FCC investigation is not just about the arbitrary rejection of a single app. It is the FCC's way of putting a stake in the ground for making the wireless networks controlled by cell phone carriers as open as the Internet.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The FCC is too technology-illiterate to deal with the wireless industry. They can’t find their arse with both hands when it comes to broadband use, access, and underserved areas, too.
In the past few years I’ve watched as my telephone options went from landline only to Nextel, added Alltel and then Verizon. There are reporting problems when it comes to who operates where and which networks work but the last people I’d trust to fix it are the FCC.
Google has the Dems in their back pocket. This is all about paying them back for their past and future support. Global warming and Al Gore have deep, deep ties to Google.
Not as simple as that. Google Voice was rejected after it was approved on the grounds that it "duplicates functionality" when Apple doesnt provide what functionality. Or why they approved it in the first place only to reject it later on.
Also, AT&T allows all sorts of other apps on other types of phones like Blackberry and Microsoft phones. Namely, Sling Mobile which AT&T required it be wifi only for the iPhone but didnt require that for other phone models.
There could be a case be made that Apple is working with AT&T to stifle competition.
Google and its ilk represent the liberal dream of free access and open source for everyone while they are the sole purveyors and can control content without users knowing or having any say....additionally, they want you to store everything on their systems so they can scan it and use whatever ideas you might have as a boost to liberal companies and liberal supporters.
Wireless is keeping AT&T afloat. Screw with that and AT&T goes down for the count. Their land lines are dying, their Yellow Pages are dying.
It doesn’t matter.Lots of people are starting their own codes for net conversation.Try figuring out 1 million different code languages when there is no code book.Good luck!
It is what Apple does best....stifle competition even though most Applefiles will accuse Microsoft of doing worse.
This is a case of Apple using its power, derived from hardware, to control the network.
It tells you a great deal about Apple's management philosophy and what would happen if they had more control of the PC market.
Ping.
Stupid Steve Jobs, thinking he gets to decide what is good for business and the economy. Who does he think he is, Obama?
Your phone should be just another internet-connected computing platform that you can use as you see fit. That's in conflict with the carriers' view of things. They want it to be a walled garden where they can nickel-dime you every time you turn around.
Hardware and software companies should compete to provide the best possible mobile computing platforms. Carriers should compete to provide the best coverage at the lowest costs. Carriers should have no control over what apps are running on the mobile computing platforms.
Apple’s Board of Directors;
Bill Campbell
Chairman and former CEO
Intuit Corp.
Millard Drexler
Chairman and CEO
J. Crew
Albert Gore Jr.
Former Vice President of the United States
Steve Jobs
CEO, Apple
Andrea Jung
Chairman and CEO, Avon Products
Arthur D. Levinson, Ph. D.
Chairman
Genentech
Dr. Eric Schmidt
CEO
Google
Jerry York
Chairman, President and CEO
Harwinton Capital
Google has the Dems in their back pocket. This is all about paying them back for their past and future support. Global warming and Al Gore have deep, deep ties to Google.Exactly, and why some of you continue to support/use Google is beyond me.
No one "Googles" on my computer.
They want it to be a walled garden where they can nickel-dime you every time you turn around.This is what happens when the only thing a country produces is cell phone minutes and carbon credits.
Google isn't competing with Apple, nor ATT in this case. They are trying to take a revenue source which is contractural in nature and sticking their name in to create revenues for themselves. Google can market it's own phone and carrier.
It is like saying that a Ford dealer must install a Chevy engine to drive on their highway! Google is a primary box on my iPhone for searching the web. Safari is not a primary revenue producer, unlike Google's engine...
It tells more about you a great deal about and your anti- Apple's management philosophy anything and what would happen if they had more control of the PC market that you demonstrate no clue about how business works.
There, that more accurately describes the content of your usual Anti-Apple screedssss!
“Apple probably wishes it had never rejected Google Voice and related apps from the iPhone”
From post #3;
“Global warming and Al Gore have deep, deep ties to Google.”
Google is trying to Obama them. Google is the thug, here! They want to ride on the success of others. I can't understand why you would agree with their premise? That is another reason our country is falling apart...
The poster in #3 was saying that Al oGre has “deep ties” to Google. I was merely pointing out that Al oGre is on the board of directors at Apple.
BTW, I’m on an old G4, and I use Dogpile for searches.
I've used Macs since 1984!
I agree. AT&T Yellow Pages rates are also high for the advertising value. AT&T considers themselves a growth company so they charge more and more and more and more and more and more . . . year after year . . . trying to force growth in declining markets.
Of course Dogpile searches Google and others. I like it, and don’t trust Google.
Comments?
I'm now at the point of "Why ask why?".
Amazing << Hear this. Feel this, and tell me that this isn't music.
Oh, dear...
It is like saying that a Ford dealer must install a Chevy engine to drive on their highway! Google is a primary box on my iPhone for searching the web. Safari is not a primary revenue producer, unlike Google's engine...Not even close to what I said.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
Yeah, and 0bama's too stupid to deal with the auto industry, but it doesn't stop him.
AT&T isn’t really AT&T. When they broke AT&T into baby bells, Southwestern Bell did very well. They converted their name to SBCGlobal, then acquired AT&T, and changed their name to AT&T.
Global warming and Al Gore have deep, deep ties to Apple.
Their internet service is pretty abysmal too. They’re still using copper lines for DSL, so their DSL speeds top out at around 6-8Mbps, while low-tier cable can hit double that for half the price.
And then there’s the blinding speed of Verizon FIOS...
Funny thing is that I’ve heard grumblings that the DOJ or SEC was thinking about looking into the cozy relationship between Apple and Google as a possible anti-Trust violation. There’s already a Google Maps app on the iPhone and a Google search app on iPhone. Google is the default search engine on Safari and selecting another one is a massive PITA. So, Apple is breaking the law if they get too cozy with Google, and they’re breaking the law if they don’t get too cozy with Google. See my tagline.
In a more sane world, Flash would be considered malware.
Gee, that's quite an accusation. Can you give any examples?
That's not music... it's WONDERFUL music!
I'm on AT&T U-Verse... glass cable.
In a more sane world, Obama and the Flash development team would be in the same prison.
Now, why in the world would the FCC want to put a good steak in the ground?
Just wondering here.
Google has Android, their own OS for mobile phones. They have an SDK for developing applications for those phones. Their app is available on Android phones. So why would Google want to move onto the iPhone?
Less Blue Screens?
Cell phones have been around for ~ 20 years. The iPhone is less than 3 years old.
Are you seriously suggesting that Apple & ATT have developed a monopoly position in less than 3 years?
And your snarkey posts illustrate your pro-Apple blindness.
So if Apple starts telling you what internet sites you are allowed to visit on your Mac, that would be OK with you?
They are getting awfully close to doing that here with the iPhone.
No, but Apple is trying to tell ATT what is allowed on their network.
Would you think it is OK for Cisco to determine what internet sites could run on their routers?
If anyone is doing the telling it is ATT, and the real reason is that their network can easily get overwhelmed.
Apple only has control over what goes on iPhones. ATT carries voice and date from many phones other than iPhones. Are you claiming Apple can tell them what to carry on these other phones?
I think the real issue is that data usage on the iPhone is much, much higher than anyone ever believed it would be. Both from more iPhones than planned, and from more data per iPhone due to ease of use. The ATT network is failing under the strain.
Sure I would like fewer restrictions on my iPhone. But when I bought it, I knew what the restrictions were. You don't like that deal, don't take it. Get a different phone.
Why the FCC has any jurisdiction over this is a mystery to me.
Google has Android, their own OS for mobile phones. They have an SDK for developing applications for those phones. Their app is available on Android phones. So why would Google want to move onto the iPhone?
Because they are allowed to according to the Apple agreement (that seems to have a very flexible definition according to apple).
I write iPhone apps and I follow the scene pretty closely and i think it's a very ugly system Apple put into place. There is no communication between dev and their review teams and the timelines are BS in terms of upload to reviewed steps.
I was rejected today for having an app that imports a feed from a soccer site so it needs to be rated "Mature Content". WTH?
And your experience on an iPhone prohibiting you from going to any website is how deep? Just exactly WHAT webites have you, on your iPhone, been told you cannot go to?
I asked you for your evidence to back up your accusation. You can't. That makes your accusation FUD.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.