Google Voice iPhone app rejected | Hacker News Reader

Google Voice iPhone app rejected

engadget.com

63 pointsnreece28 comments

Apple is making a huge mistake here. I love my iPhone, but in the wake of this GV business, I find myself seriously considering a switch to an Android phone. I can't speak for everyone, but I'm sure I'm not the only iPhone fan out there who feels this way.

How many people out there know someone with an Android phone? I personally don't know anyone but I run in a decidedly non-techie social circle.

I think we sometimes think our outrage over "huge mistakes" have something in common with the general population's attitude when that is most definitely not the case.

Issues like removing Google Voice apps to protect their core business won't cause enough of a mass exodus to competing phones to make Apple flinch because the majority of people interested in an iPhone don't give a damn or know what Google Voice is.

Full disclosure: I'm an extremely satisfied iPhone owner.

I agree. I think all theses articles are nonsense because I have yet to get a GV invite, and I have been waiting for one since it was GrandCentral. It's one thing for Apple to block a popular, well-known service (and I mean Facebook popular, not "I read TechCrunch daily popular"). It's another to block an admittedly beta service that isn't even public.

As sad as it may be, the general consuming public doesn't care, or maybe doesn't even know about the "plight of the developer" on the iPhone. The fact of the matter is that as long as people get their Facebook and fart apps, the general public is happy with their iPhone.

I too have been wondering about the slowness of GV invites, but I finally got mine. And it is everything they said it would be. Of course, it's not perfect; text transcription of voicemail is pretty weak...but nevertheless, the tools for managing it (playback through your browser, with word highlighting as it plays back) are good enough for it to be useful.

Don't want to sound like I'm shilling for GV here, but it does feel like gmail for your phone. Although this might not switch many or any away from the iPhone, it's going to highlight the weakness of the walled garden approach, and put off potential new buyers (like me).

I actually just got my GV invite and set it up today. True story. Now I'm looking for a way to initiate calls from my GV number from the iPhone.

I'm sure Google will produce a slick iPhone webclip version of their GV site. Until then, even m.google.com/voice is incompatible with my phone.

Agreed. I can't wait for the service to come to Canada actually, it should work great on my Storm!

Oh yeah, I can also multitask, and download applications from non-Apple stores, websites and vendors. The list goes on and on! :)

Apple and AT&T are allowed to do this in the US because of ludicrous FCC overwatch that allows operators to do almost whatever they want after they have paid the obligated billions in spectrum licenses. Such practice along with things like locking hardware devices to one operator, thus effectively limiting consumer choice would not only be considered anti-competitive in other parts of the world, but also grounds for a major investigation.

Unfortunately, the 'lobbying' mobile communications industry in the US has an absurdly rigid establishment that has limited competition from the beginning and people gladly pay for things like receiving phone calls/sms .

The main problem with android (for me) is the lack of CDMA phones. I am on the SERO plan with sprint - $30 a month for voice, data, and text - and I am not switching for any phone. If there were android phone in Sprint's line up, I'd be game.

I do not have an iphone, and I don't want one at this point. Jailbroken they look intriguing, but not stock. I need PDANet.

Rumor has it that Sprint will be carrying the HTC Hero later this year. It is definitely the best Android phone to date; I will be switching to Sprint if they are the first to get it. So you may be in luck.

But no hardware keyboard...

"GV Mobile developer Sean Kovacs relays a phone call he had with Apple where he was notified of his app being removed from the iTunes store for duplicating built-in iPhone features."

It's worth noting that instead of actually addressing the AppStore approval process, apple is trying to get around the controversy by sending rejections by phone. The idea being that it's more difficult to show an official record of Apple saying what they said. Ironically, Google voice can help there with call recording :)

I wonder if Apple's worried about an upcoming lawsuit?

Maybe. I wonder what happens if there's a ruling forcing them to stop stuff like this? Will it let them get out of whatever contractual agreements they've made with AT&T which are affecting their behavior in regards to the App Store?

A part of me likes the idea that Apple will continue to make increasingly bad PR moves while discreetly pointing a finger at AT&T.

I know Apple has been arguably hostile towards developers with the app store approval process but it's got to be really demoralizing to have your app verbally approved by someone so high up and then taken out of the app store entirely after it's been available for a while. I wonder if any of these devs will release the apps for jailbroken phones?

Lesson learned: If you pick up the phone and it's Apple, request an email or letter, and hang up. Or maybe, ask to start recording?

It would be easier to record if the call came in via Google Voice...

Vote with your feet, don't buy the iPhone. There are a lot of arguably better smartphones out there that are not handicapped in the way that the iPhone is.

They're all handicapped in other ways, though. And sadly, the handicap that seems to matter most to most people is "no apps."

Vote with your feet; write something cool for Android.

The Apple apologists say it cuts into Apple's recurring revenue stream. This is based on speculation that Apple is receiving a fixed amount per iPhone subscriber every month. Though even this speculation says it is a fixed amount for each subscriber and is not based on how much the monthly phone bill is.

I like my iPhone, I like developing for the iPhone, but moves like this are making me reconsider.

I'm still waiting to read something about an Android fon written by someone who can tell me about its pitfalls. There's very little press about them, other than reactions to PR.

And once again, Apple is shooting itself in the foot. Do they really think that Google will just lie back and take this? I mean, is it really a good idea to piss off a company that has: way more money, a massive talent pool, a customer base which contains of a very large number of iPhone users, and an OS platform that directly completes with Apple's flagship product?

Does it mean Apple should just take any bulls* from Google? All these guys protect their share of the pie; Google do the same crap.

Yeah, but they shouldn't do things like this at the expense of their users. This definitely makes for a poorer user experience.

I dunno, I think Google knows the DOJ is waiting for an excuse to come after them, and it's hardly worth the risk over something that has no impact on their bottom line.

If anything, the iPhone rejection weakens any case against Google. Google creates a way to make free phone calls. Google wants to let its competitors use that, but the competitors won't allow it. Google is trying to play nice, but Apple won't let them. They could restrict GV to Android, but they chose not to.

The potential DOJ interest in Google isn't about android, it's about advertising. Playing nice in a non-core area won't win you any points from the DOJ in another.

Hmmm ... when you've got Google's kind of money, the Feds will raid small nations for you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com