Although the Yahoo-Microsoft deal is sure to steal most tech
headlines of the day, there's also a little news involving the other
two tech giants: Apple and Google. Apple has decided not to allow any
applications for its iPhone involving Google Voice, software which
provides the ability to receive and place cheap, even international,
phone calls. This thickens the plot further given the competition
Google will have on its hands going forward.
Apple's rationale for banning the Google Voice application is
obvious: its iPhone already has a service for phone calls,
exclusively provided by AT&T. Still, many users are angered by Apple
treating its iPhone applications store like a dictatorship. Just
because iPhone users can already use AT&T, they'd prefer not to be
forced to do so.
NEWS: FCC launches investigation into Apple’s banishment of Google Voice iPhone app
Apple’s move to strip third-party Google Voice iPhone apps from the
AppStore drew the ire of iPhone users everywhere. To make matters
worse, Apple’s secretive ways have shrouded mystery over why Google
Voice apps like GV Mobile were recently pulled from the AppStore. Did
AT&T ask Apple to ban Google Voice apps in order to prevent iPhone
customers from making cheap phone calls and sending discount text
messages? Did Google request the iPhone apps’ removal in an attempt
to push their own Google Voice iPhone app? Fortunately, the federal
government is just as curious as we are. The Federal Communications
Commission has launched an official inquiry into why Apple gave
Google Voice the boot.
The FCC has sent out letters to Apple, AT&T and Google, asking each
company to explain their involvement in the decision to remove the
Google Voice apps. The FCC’s mission to "to foster a competitive
wireless marketplace, protect and empower consumers, and promote
innovation and investment" puts it in a unique position of power to
find out whether or not Apple, AT&T or Google colluded to squash
competition in the wireless market.
In their letter to Apple, the FCC asks why the company did what it
did. The FCC also wants to know if AT&T had anything to do with their
decision. And, if so, to what extent did AT&T influence Apple’s
decision. The feds are also asking what kind of obligations Apple has
to AT&T when it comes to approving apps for the iPhone AppStore.
The letter to AT&T likewise asks whether or not the wireless carrier
is involved in AppStore approvals. More specifically, the FCC would
like to know if Apple is contractually obligated to bow to AT&T’s
will when it comes to the iPhone. The FCC is also requesting copies
of all communications between Apple, AT&T and Google.
Google got off the easiest. The FCC wants to know if Apple gave
Google a reason as to why the Google Voice app was rejected, and if
there are any other iPhone apps coming from Google.
The important thing to note here is that the FCC is launching an
official inquiry into why Apple suddenly took a disliking to Google
Voice apps. The matter will open to the public, so official company
comments on the matter will be made available for everyone to see.
We’ll keep a close eye on this one.
Links to letters at:
<http://www.intomobile.com/2009/07/31/fcc-launches-investigation-into-apples-banishment-of-google-voice-iphone-app.html>
Re: NEWS: FCC launches investigation into Apple’s banishment of Google Voice iPhone app
John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:ol9975tsesrq3ba5av532hs5vt4oa91f1o@4ax.com:
>
> Apple’s move to strip third-party Google Voice iPhone apps from the
> AppStore drew the ire of iPhone users everywhere. To make matters
> worse, Apple’s secretive ways have shrouded mystery over why Google
> Voice apps like GV Mobile were recently pulled from the AppStore.
> Did AT&T ask Apple to ban Google Voice apps in order to prevent
> iPhone customers from making cheap phone calls and sending discount
> text messages? Did Google request the iPhone apps’ removal in an
> attempt to push their own Google Voice iPhone app? Fortunately, the
> federal government is just as curious as we are. The Federal
> Communications Commission has launched an official inquiry into why
> Apple gave Google Voice the boot.
>
> The FCC has sent out letters to Apple, AT&T and Google, asking each
> company to explain their involvement in the decision to remove the
> Google Voice apps. The FCC’s mission to "to foster a competitive
> wireless marketplace, protect and empower consumers, and promote
> innovation and investment" puts it in a unique position of power to
> find out whether or not Apple, AT&T or Google colluded to squash
> competition in the wireless market.
>
> In their letter to Apple, the FCC asks why the company did what it
> did. The FCC also wants to know if AT&T had anything to do with
> their decision. And, if so, to what extent did AT&T influence
> Apple’s decision. The feds are also asking what kind of obligations
> Apple has to AT&T when it comes to approving apps for the iPhone
> AppStore.
>
> The letter to AT&T likewise asks whether or not the wireless
> carrier is involved in AppStore approvals. More specifically, the
> FCC would like to know if Apple is contractually obligated to bow
> to AT&T’s will when it comes to the iPhone. The FCC is also
> requesting copies of all communications between Apple, AT&T and
> Google.
>
> Google got off the easiest. The FCC wants to know if Apple gave
> Google a reason as to why the Google Voice app was rejected, and if
> there are any other iPhone apps coming from Google.
>
> The important thing to note here is that the FCC is launching an
> official inquiry into why Apple suddenly took a disliking to Google
> Voice apps. The matter will open to the public, so official company
> comments on the matter will be made available for everyone to see.
> We’ll keep a close eye on this one.
>
> Links to letters at:
> <http://www.intomobile.com/2009/07/31...igation-into-a
> pples-banishment-of-google-voice-iphone-app.html>
>
Well, let's see how they end having to redefine their use of the words,
"open platform."
"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:uni375hrlfaftb8p9442dtfjfgahlqp6ch@4ax.com...
:
: Although the Yahoo-Microsoft deal is sure to steal most tech
: headlines of the day, there's also a little news involving the other
: two tech giants: Apple and Google. Apple has decided not to allow any
: applications for its iPhone involving Google Voice, software which
: provides the ability to receive and place cheap, even international,
: phone calls. This thickens the plot further given the competition
: Google will have on its hands going forward.
:
: Apple's rationale for banning the Google Voice application is
: obvious: its iPhone already has a service for phone calls,
: exclusively provided by AT&T. Still, many users are angered by Apple
: treating its iPhone applications store like a dictatorship. Just
: because iPhone users can already use AT&T, they'd prefer not to be
: forced to do so.
:
: MORE:
:
<http://business.theatlantic.com/2009/07/apple_says_no_to_google_voice.php>
Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC has made
inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others regarding that vary
issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest as well.
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 17:43:55 -0500, "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
<h52gf7$e4q$1@news.eternal-september.org>:
>>[SNIP]
>Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC has made
>inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others regarding that vary
>issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest as well.
See my thread
"NEWS: FCC launches investigation into Apple’s banishment of Google
Voice iPhone app" <news:ol9975tsesrq3ba5av532hs5vt4oa91f1o@4ax.com >
--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>
If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?
"NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
news:h52gf7$e4q$1@news.eternal-september.org:
> Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC
> has made inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others
> regarding that vary issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest as
> well.
>
>
Just making a noise. The FCC works for the sellphone companies, which is
why you have such stellar sellular service across America, today!
--
Larry
http://flightaware.com/analysis/allflights_movie.rvt
Each tiny red dot is an airliner in this Quicktime movie, ONE recent day of
air travel in the USA. What would happen if "they" found out this was the
real source of air pollution or cancer or why all the bugs around my
streetlight have disappeared? Would "they" tell us? Would "they" STOP
IT?!
Larry <noone@home.com> wrote in
news:Xns9C5B67EB76FAnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13:
> "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
> news:h52gf7$e4q$1@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC
>> has made inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others
>> regarding that vary issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest
>> as well.
>>
>>
>
> Just making a noise.
Yes you are.
The FCC works for the sellphone companies, which
> is why you have such stellar sellular service across America, today!
>
>
>
I do have stellar service. With the exception of two instances in the last
ten years (both of which involved locations with practically no population
base), I have enjoyed the ability to place and receive calls and use other
contracted services at will from coast to coast. My landline has given me
more problems than my cell phone.
John Blutarsky <bluto@faber.com> wrote in
news:Xns9C5AE977FA0F4blutofabercom@188.40.43.213:
> I do have stellar service. With the exception of two instances in the
> last ten years (both of which involved locations with practically no
> population base), I have enjoyed the ability to place and receive
> calls and use other contracted services at will from coast to coast.
> My landline has given me more problems than my cell phone.
>
Wow! I guess all the rest have bad iphones.....
--
Larry
http://flightaware.com/analysis/allflights_movie.rvt
Each tiny red dot is an airliner in this Quicktime movie, ONE recent day of
air travel in the USA. What would happen if "they" found out this was the
real source of air pollution or cancer or why all the bugs around my
streetlight have disappeared? Would "they" tell us? Would "they" STOP
IT?!
Larry <noone@home.com> wrote in news:Xns9C5B68144843Fnoonehomecom@
74.209.131.13:
> John Blutarsky <bluto@faber.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9C5AE977FA0F4blutofabercom@188.40.43.213:
>
>> I do have stellar service. With the exception of two instances in the
>> last ten years (both of which involved locations with practically no
>> population base), I have enjoyed the ability to place and receive
>> calls and use other contracted services at will from coast to coast.
>> My landline has given me more problems than my cell phone.
>>
>
> Wow! I guess all the rest have bad iphones.....
>
I don't have an iPhone- never said I did. I was responding to your stupid
ranting that service is less than stellar in the US. Nothing could be
further from the truth.
On 8/1/09 11:38 PM, in article Xns9C5B67EB76FAnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13,
"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote:
> "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
> news:h52gf7$e4q$1@news.eternal-september.org:
>
>> Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC
>> has made inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others
>> regarding that vary issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest as
>> well.
>>
>>
>
> Just making a noise. The FCC works for the sellphone companies, which is
> why you have such stellar sellular service across America, today!
>
>
Lar, do I hear the ladies of the Waffle House calling you? Sure the FCC is
private. Been that way since you started modifying those SSB CBs back in the
70's, right? Shooting skip was never so much fun until they broke up your
party? Those Bastards!
> I don't have an iPhone- never said I did. I was responding to your stupid
> ranting that service is less than stellar in the US. Nothing could be
> further from the truth.
"Father Guido Sarducci" <don@novello.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9C5CC94FB72D8FatherGuido@202.177.16.121...
: In message news:1or9755k7n3i7qffn5lo1t3hnh5im0fq9g@4ax.com, John Navas
: <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> said:
:
: > On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 17:43:55 -0500, "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
: ><h52gf7$e4q$1@news.eternal-september.org>:
: >
: >>>[SNIP]
: >
: >>Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC has
: >>made inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others regarding
: >>that vary issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest as well.
: >
: > See my thread
: > "NEWS: FCC launches investigation into Apple’s banishment of Google
: > Voice iPhone app" <news:ol9975tsesrq3ba5av532hs5vt4oa91f1o@4ax.com >
:
: For those keeping score at home:
:
: 1. Apple invented the iPhone and the iStore.
:
: 2. Google invented Google Voice.
:
: 3. AT&T built the infrastructure.
:
: 4. The FCC did none of these things, yet they think they have
: the power to control the other three.
:
: Fuck the government.
The United States Federal Communications Commission, created by an act of
Congress on 19 June 1934, merged the administrative responsibilities for
regulating broadcasting and wired communications under the rubric of one
agency.
If you think screwing with Mother Nature can be a problem ... you're in for
a rude awakening.
On Jul 30, 9:33*am, John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> * *Although the Yahoo-Microsoft deal is sure to steal most tech
> * *headlines of the day, there's also a little news involving the other
> * *two tech giants: Apple and Google. Apple has decided not to allow any
> * *applications for its iPhone involving Google Voice, software which
> * *provides the ability to receive and place cheap, even international,
> * *phone calls. This thickens the plot further given the competition
> * *Google will have on its hands going forward.
>
> * *Apple's rationale for banning the Google Voice application is
> * *obvious: its iPhone already has a service for phone calls,
> * *exclusively provided by AT&T. Still, many users are angered by Apple
> * *treating its iPhone applications store like a dictatorship. Just
> * *because iPhone users can already use AT&T, they'd prefer not to be
> * *forced to do so.
>
> MORE:
> <http://business.theatlantic.com/2009/07/apple_says_no_to_google_voice...>
If the iPhone is the answer, it must be a very funny question.
Serious, why would anyone expect Apple to act differently? Remember,
Steve knows best. Now just drink your Kool Aid and shut up!
> If the iPhone is the answer, it must be a very funny question.
>
> Serious, why would anyone expect Apple to act differently? Remember,
> Steve knows best. Now just drink your Kool Aid and shut up!
What's odd is that the lack of a dedicated Google Voice app doesn't stop
anyone from using Google Voice on the iPhone to make less expensive
international calls. You can still initiate calls via the Google Voice
web application, or by calling your Google Voice number from your
iPhone. It does make it a little more of a pain because presumably the
iPhone Google Voice app was able to use the phone book data on the
iPhone, and since the iPhone can't multi-task now there'll be more
cutting and pasting of phone numbers. But you can have a contact list in
Google Voice when you access it via the web, so this isn't a terrible
big deal anyway.
A Google Voice app would cause the usage of more peak minutes on the
AT&T network, leading some subscribers to purchase more expensive
monthly plans. Do any iPhone users (or any cell phone users on any
network) actually place international calls over their carrier's
network? This is a very foolish thing to do.
miso@sushi.com wrote:
> On Jul 30, 9:33 am, John Navas <spamfilt...@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> Although the Yahoo-Microsoft deal is sure to steal most tech
>> headlines of the day, there's also a little news involving the other
>> two tech giants: Apple and Google. Apple has decided not to allow any
>> applications for its iPhone involving Google Voice, software which
>> provides the ability to receive and place cheap, even international,
>> phone calls. This thickens the plot further given the competition
>> Google will have on its hands going forward.
>>
>> Apple's rationale for banning the Google Voice application is
>> obvious: its iPhone already has a service for phone calls,
>> exclusively provided by AT&T. Still, many users are angered by Apple
>> treating its iPhone applications store like a dictatorship. Just
>> because iPhone users can already use AT&T, they'd prefer not to be
>> forced to do so.
>>
>> MORE:
>> <http://business.theatlantic.com/2009/07/apple_says_no_to_google_voice...>
>
> If the iPhone is the answer, it must be a very funny question.
>
> Serious, why would anyone expect Apple to act differently? Remember,
> Steve knows best. Now just drink your Kool Aid and shut up!
Actually, as it turns out, it wasn't Apple's idea to ban the program, it
was AT&T's idea.
Father Guido Sarducci <don@novello.com> wrote in
news:Xns9C5CC94FB72D8FatherGuido@202.177.16.121:
> 4. The FCC did none of these things, yet they think they have
> the power to control the other three.
>
The FCC has controlled the AIRWAVES as a PUBLIC entity since 1934.
I'd like to think we can keep it that way so the PUBLIC, not the
corporations, have CONTROL over our property....licensing it out to
controlled users....like me! I'm a licensee, too!
It has served us very well in the past. Notice how your RCA TV could
pickup all the NBC COMPETITORS' stations as well as RCA's own NBC network.
Without the FCC DICTATING which TV system the country was going to use,
NONE of the networks would have had the SAME analog TV system....or the
ATSC digital TV system FCC also DICTATED all licensees will use.
You know not what you speak....
--
Larry
http://flightaware.com/analysis/allflights_movie.rvt
Each tiny red dot is an airliner in this Quicktime movie, ONE recent day of
air travel in the USA. What would happen if "they" found out this was the
real source of air pollution or cancer or why all the bugs around my
streetlight have disappeared? Would "they" tell us? Would "they" STOP
IT?!
On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 20:23:44 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
>What's odd is that the lack of a dedicated Google Voice app doesn't stop
>anyone from using Google Voice on the iPhone to make less expensive
>international calls.
So, Google Voice is out, but Skype for the iPhone is still ok:
<http://www.skype.com/download/skype/iphone/>
That makes no sense. It's possible that something else is going on
behind the scenes.
On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 20:29:32 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
>Actually, as it turns out, it wasn't Apple's idea to ban the program, it
>was AT&T's idea.
>"http://gizmodo.com/5329063/google-voice-app-pulled-following-att-request-apple-support-person-claims"
I'm not so sure. Raymond C. is probably in India and is certainly
guessing. See the reader comments at the bottom of the above URL.
<http://www.informationweek.com/news/government/mobile/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=218900501>
"AT&T said it does not manage or approve apps for the virtual
store..."
My guess(tm) is that AT&T is trying to stall the introduction of
Google Voice, which combines a mess of phone numbers to ring on one
number. This is something that AT&T does not offer. If Google were
to grab all the early adopters, AT&T would have a tough time
convincing them to switch to the inevitable AT&T clone of Google
Voice. Stifling innovation comes to mind here.
At 03 Aug 2009 23:20:31 -0700 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 20:23:44 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >What's odd is that the lack of a dedicated Google Voice app doesn't
stop
> >anyone from using Google Voice on the iPhone to make less expensive
> >international calls.
>
> So, Google Voice is out, but Skype for the iPhone is still ok:
> <http://www.skype.com/download/skype/iphone/>
> That makes no sense. It's possible that something else is going on
> behind the scenes.
Skype is ok because it's been neutered to only operate over WiFi, not
AT&T's (or any MO's) data network.
I presume GV was rejected because it provides an alternate dialer over
cellular, and can bypass AT&T's international LD service automatically.
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 20:23:44 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> What's odd is that the lack of a dedicated Google Voice app doesn't stop
>> anyone from using Google Voice on the iPhone to make less expensive
>> international calls.
>
> So, Google Voice is out, but Skype for the iPhone is still ok:
> <http://www.skype.com/download/skype/iphone/>
> That makes no sense. It's possible that something else is going on
> behind the scenes.
On the AT&T side, Google Voice could cut into AT&T's revenue from other
products. On the Apple side, there's the idea that one of their major
competitors is trying to distribute a product that Apple can't offer, on
an Apple platform.
It's not a terrible big deal for Google Voice users. The web interface
is still available, and it actually gives the user more of an
opportunity to not use up AT&T peak minutes than the iPhone GV app. One
of the nice things about GV is the ability to connect two phone numbers
together for free (one of them has to be one registered to you, i.e.
home or work) so you don't use up your mobile minutes on long calls
during peak times. The iPhone GV app apparently didn't have this
capability, you'd have had to go to the web app anyway.
[alt.cellular.cingular removed. Cingular no longer exists]
> 1. Apple invented the iPhone and the iStore.
> 2. Google invented Google Voice.
> 3. AT&T built the infrastructure.
> 4. The FCC did none of these things, yet they think they have
> the power to control the other three.
>
> Fuck the government.
The government regulates use of the public's air waves. It also regulates
interstate trade. That and monopolistic behaviors.
All three apply in regard to Apple's abusive behavior.
In article <R_ednT9mH64jwOXXnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
"Bill Kearney" <wkearney99@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 1. Apple invented the iPhone and the iStore.
> > 2. Google invented Google Voice.
> > 3. AT&T built the infrastructure.
> > 4. The FCC did none of these things, yet they think they have
> > the power to control the other three.
> >
> > Fuck the government.
>
> The government regulates use of the public's air waves. It also regulates
> interstate trade. That and monopolistic behaviors.
>
> All three apply in regard to Apple's abusive behavior.
Actually none do. They regulate airwaves, but aside from some
technical issues that iPhone adheres to, they usually haven't (for
instance) mandated what TV show is shown on which network or generally
interfered with the business relationships of airwave users.
You aren't really going to suggest that this is a monopoly? Unless
you are going to define the market as a single entity, yeah they got the
iPhone monopoly. However, the market would most likely be smartphones
and it is hard to suggest a monopoly exists with Palm, RIM, etc.
involved.
--
Searching is half the fun: life is much more manageable when thought
of as a scavenger hunt as opposed to a surprise party.
Jimmy Buffett
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:25:38 -0600, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:
>Skype is ok because it's been neutered to only operate over WiFi, not
>AT&T's (or any MO's) data network.
Sorta. Skype works over 3G using a jailbroken iPhone and the
VoIPOver3G app. This has been around since Oct 2008:
<http://www.iphonehacks.com/2009/01/voipover3g-hack-allows-iphone-users-to-make-voip-calls-over-3gedgegprs.html>
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:25:38 -0600, Todd Allcock
> <elecconnec@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:
>
>> Skype is ok because it's been neutered to only operate over WiFi, not
>> AT&T's (or any MO's) data network.
>
> Sorta. Skype works over 3G using a jailbroken iPhone and the
> VoIPOver3G app. This has been around since Oct 2008:
> <http://www.iphonehacks.com/2009/01/voipover3g-hack-allows-iphone-users-to-make-voip-calls-over-3gedgegprs.html>
I get the feeling of being back in the 1980's when Apple decided to
implode by angering users, developers, and add-on board manufacturers
with their attitude. Back then, the open, though inferior, platform won.
It seems like it's about to be deja vu all over again. All of those
iPhone apps could easily be ported to Anroid, the Blackberry, or the
Pre. Maybe Verizon made the right decision by passing on the iPhone.
John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:1or9755k7n3i7qffn5lo1t3hnh5im0fq9g@4ax.com:
> On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 17:43:55 -0500, "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
> <h52gf7$e4q$1@news.eternal-september.org>:
>
>>>[SNIP]
>
>>Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC
>>has made inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others
>>regarding that vary issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest as
>>well.
>
> See my thread
> "NEWS: FCC launches investigation into Apple’s banishment of Google
> Voice iPhone app" <news:ol9975tsesrq3ba5av532hs5vt4oa91f1o@4ax.com >
Who give a sh*t if the GoogleVoice apps were removed ?!
What ever happened to the free market where ultimately the consumer
choices determine what product/services live where, and for how long.
The FCC has no friggin' business dealing with this *business issue*. It
does not affect 'the airwaves'. It's not unlicensed use of
bandwidth.........there's nothing technical for the FCC to investigate.
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 08:52:32 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:25:38 -0600, Todd Allcock
>> <elecconnec@aNOoSPAMl.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Skype is ok because it's been neutered to only operate over WiFi, not
>>> AT&T's (or any MO's) data network.
>>
>> Sorta. Skype works over 3G using a jailbroken iPhone and the
>> VoIPOver3G app. This has been around since Oct 2008:
>> <http://www.iphonehacks.com/2009/01/voipover3g-hack-allows-iphone-users-to-make-voip-calls-over-3gedgegprs.html>
>
>I get the feeling of being back in the 1980's when Apple decided to
>implode by angering users, developers, and add-on board manufacturers
>with their attitude. Back then, the open, though inferior, platform won.
Some interesting reading on that era:
<http://www.amazon.com/Apple-Intrigue-Egomania-Business-Blunders/dp/0887309658>
>It seems like it's about to be deja vu all over again. All of those
>iPhone apps could easily be ported to Anroid, the Blackberry, or the
>Pre. Maybe Verizon made the right decision by passing on the iPhone.
Nope. The ban will probably just produce a small increase in
jailbroken iPhones among those that just can't live without Google
Voice. Any market pressure will probably depend on the popularity of
Google Voice and the availability of alternative devices. I also
don't think users will abandon their iPhone simply because of the
non-availability of Google Voice. From the financial and convenience
standpoint, it's cheaper and easier to continue using the iPhone and
just pay AT&T their long distance charges.
However, if history really does repeat itself, AT&T can predictabily
be expected to do something stupid during the congressional
investigation, and Apple can be counted on acting with characteristic
defensive arrogance. Such things also depend on what's going on
behind the scenes. For example, the congressional investigation of
Microsoft's monopoly status was only to remind MS to contribute to
political campaigns. My guess(tm) is that this investigation is
similarly motivated. Just follow the money.
On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 11:33:07 -0500, DanS
<t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> wrote:
>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
>news:1or9755k7n3i7qffn5lo1t3hnh5im0fq9g@4ax.com :
>
>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 17:43:55 -0500, "NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in
>> <h52gf7$e4q$1@news.eternal-september.org>:
>>
>>>>[SNIP]
>>
>>>Can't find the cite but there was a post to the effect that the FCC
>>>has made inquires of both Apple and ATT with notice to others
>>>regarding that vary issue. Seems there is some anti-trust interest as
>>>well.
>>
>> See my thread
>> "NEWS: FCC launches investigation into Apple’s banishment of Google
>> Voice iPhone app" <news:ol9975tsesrq3ba5av532hs5vt4oa91f1o@4ax.com >
>
>Who give a sh*t if the GoogleVoice apps were removed ?!
>
>What ever happened to the free market where ultimately the consumer
>choices determine what product/services live where, and for how long.
>
>The FCC has no friggin' business dealing with this *business issue*. It
>does not affect 'the airwaves'. It's not unlicensed use of
>bandwidth.........there's nothing technical for the FCC to investigate.
That would be oh-so-nice. However, the prime directive of any
bureaucracy is to first expand its area of control. I call to your
attention the cable TV business, which is micromanaged by the FCC,
including a "reasonable" rate, franchise fees, "proper" content
control, etc. They're now working on "ala carte" packaging.
<http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cablerates.html>
That's what happens when an industry doesn't buy enough politicians to
keep them off its back. My guess(tm) is that they're expecting some
concessions or contributions from AT&T in trade for going away. From
Apple, just the contributions will suffice.
NEWS: Apple Says No To Google Voice 
Linear Mode
