Apple to iPhone users: You can't have Google Voice

[kathrynhr]

Apple Is Growing Rotten To The Core: Official Google Voice App Blocked From App Store

From the article:

Earlier today we learned that Apple had begun to pull all Google Voice-enabled applications from the App Store, citing the fact that they “duplicate features that come with the iPhone”. Now comes even worse news: we’ve learned that Apple has blocked Google’s official Google Voice application itself from the App Store. In other words, Google Voice — one of the best things to happen to telephony services in a very long time — will have no presence at all on the App Store.

<snip>

Google Voice scares the carriers. It allows users to send free SMS messages and get cheap long-distance over Google Voice’s lines. It also makes it trivial to switch to a new phone service, because everyone calls the Google Voice number anyway.

So, to get any GV functionality on an iPhone, you must jailbreak the phone.

Lucky for the iPhone community, one of the GV apps' developers has planned to put his version of the GV app up online for free:

Sean Kovacs » Wow

[kathrynhr]

So here's my question: if this is an AT&T thing, i.e. AT&T doesn't want people sending free text messages or making cheap/free long distance calls through GV, bypassing AT&T's detection and billing... then why are AT&T Blackberry users able to use the app? Is it just a case of them not being able to adequately police the installation and use of BB apps?

I'm ignorant about what the carriers can/can't see us do.

[akosnitzky]

Wirelessly posted (Its All About the U!)

I guess I am happy NOT to be with AT&T

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by kathrynhr

So here's my question: if this is an AT&T thing, i.e. AT&T doesn't want people sending free text messages or making cheap/free long distance calls through GV, bypassing AT&T's detection and billing... then why are AT&T Blackberry users able to use the app? Is it just a case of them not being able to adequately police the installation and use of BB apps?

I'm ignorant about what the carriers can/can't see us do.

Yup.

[ArgonNJ]

Apple and ATT are so worried about people jail breaking their phones. Well crap like this is the reason people are doing it.

[Johnny909]

I have to agree with this whole bad apple thread.

[VIOLATOR]

Maybe I am just extremely cynical towards apple products - but would this not be more of an apple issue?

Apple has always been extremely (pronounced zealously) proprietary and is notorious for blocking access to products, services and/or applications that it does not have total control over.


David

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by VIOLATOR

Maybe I am just extremely cynical towards apple products - but would this not be more of an apple issue?

Apple has always been extremely (pronounced zealously) proprietary and is notorious for blocking access to products, services and/or applications that it does not have total control over.


David

No, this is all ATT. Apple had nothing to lose with the Google app, ATT did.

[daphne]

Originally Posted by ArgonNJ

No, this is all ATT. Apple had nothing to lose with the Google app, ATT did.

Not according to this article.

iPhone Jailbreaking Could Crash Cellphone Towers, Apple Claims | Threat Level | Wired.com

[VIOLATOR]

Originally Posted by daphne

Not according to this article.

iPhone Jailbreaking Could Crash Cellphone Towers, Apple Claims | Threat Level | Wired.com

That is exactly what I am saying. This has always been apple's MO. Any thing that that is not absolutely proprietary to their product and their product alone - they attack with a legal slash and burn mentality.


Interesting how their argument went from the catastrophic crashing of cell towers to - "well drug dealers would like it"



David

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by daphne

Not according to this article.

iPhone Jailbreaking Could Crash Cellphone Towers, Apple Claims | Threat Level | Wired.com

I was talking about the Google app here, not jail breaking. Having the Google voice app sold through the Apple store running would not have affected Apple. It was ATT revenue stream that was at stake here. By removing the app, they are forcing some to do the very thing, jail breaking, that Apple and ATT fear.

[redwing019]

Wirelessly posted

I read the article in the NY Times this morning, and found it hilarious how there blackberry users can get it but the iphone can't. I am a verizon user and I have the storm which, I love for Business use,the iphone my friends have just can't compare in business usage, or the service. AT&T service cuts out everywhere. My friend had 3G but no bars when we were in the mountains. So he could look at his Facebook, but not make a call.

Way to go AT&T!

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by ArgonNJ

I was talking about the Google app here, not jail breaking. Having the Google voice app sold through the Apple store running would not have affected Apple. It was ATT revenue stream that was at stake here. By removing the app, they are forcing some to do the very thing, jail breaking, that Apple and ATT fear.

the att claim is by a blog with no proof. the apple hold solid proof that its apple that denied it not att. fanbois will claim its att. in reality its apple.

it fits apple motto.

bottom line it don't really matter it just shows that past a 99c or free app its not worth even developing for the platform, since time/money investment means nothing when they say no.

hopefully the up and coming android zii, will have a way better approval, oh wait its open you can get apps from anywhere, then apples nazi approval methods.

[kathrynhr]

After reading several articles and blogs, I agree with those who blame Apple. Their decision to lock their platform and delivery system down so tightly is now backfiring on them. They've provided a way for themselves to act like Big Brother, and now their carrier is demanding access to those abilities. Apple now looks very bad - and deservedly so - for not telling AT&T no.

As far as the carrier goes, in this case it's AT&T, but would it be any different if any other carrier were at the helm and saw a product coming along that

(a) threatened their existing business model, and
(b) would be implemented over their own infrastructure, and over their objections,

if they had a method to prevent all that sitting right in front of them? I really can't imagine Sprint, Verizon or T-Mobile would behave differently. From locking down ringtones to forcing people to buy themes and wallpapers (!) through an inefficient and painful proprietary catalog, I think all 4 carriers have consistently tried to control as much as they were able to on all of our phones.

And here's Apple, providing AT&T with an easy way to protect the status quo by refusing to say no to their anticompetitive demands.

[wabbit]

the only problem is, att needs apple not the other way around.

i would agree with that att, blocked if it blocked the blackberry version also, they didn't

out of there subscriber base, maybe what? 5% is iphones?

its an apple call not an att call. only thing att would lose is at most text msg. voice is still over a call fwd.

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by wabbit

the only problem is, att needs apple not the other way around.

i would agree with that att, blocked if it blocked the blackberry version also, they didn't

out of there subscriber base, maybe what? 5% is iphones?

its an apple call not an att call. only thing att would lose is at most text msg. voice is still over a call fwd.

Could ATT block it on the Blackberry?

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by ArgonNJ

Could ATT block it on the Blackberry?

there network, there data stream, yes. they could block the streams, maybe not prevent people from installing it onto a blackberry, but functionality they can most def block.

[JRUNCK]

They block everything. We all knew they would block it so that's why you jailbreak your phone. Takes care of everything & it's easy. The end.

PS. The Storm Is STUPID

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by JRUNCK

They block everything. We all knew they would block it so that's why you jailbreak your phone. Takes care of everything & it's easy. The end.

PS. The Storm Is STUPID

so, trusting a hacker to do justice is the answer for functionality. or fairness? interesting.

the whole apple crowd puzzles me with this.

they put up with apple's crap due to a hacker, which by definition is not a helpful person but, cyber criminals.
very interesting perspective.

i would only imagine if microsoft did this to windows people would cry bloody murder, but for apple, its ok we got hackers that do good!

anyway. too funny. i like that comment, go just install this app which nobody has a clue what it does. yeh this is really an answer. and people are puzzled why identity theft, and other crimes are so high.

too funny.

[jacobsaa]

Originally Posted by ArgonNJ

Apple and ATT are so worried about people jail breaking their phones. Well crap like this is the reason people are doing it.

+1. Although I do like AT&T, this has been a practice of the Apple Brand for their entire existence. I am not all that broken up about it though. Although I wrote in another thread that Google Voice isn't for me, I'll side with Google over Apple any day of the week, and twice on Sunday.

[JRUNCK]

Originally Posted by wabbit

go just install this app which nobody has a clue what it does. yeh this is really an answer. and people are puzzled why identity theft, and other crimes are so high.

too funny.

The "too funny" thing is people like you insisting that "nobody has a clue what it does" because you in fact have no clue what you're talking about. The other funny thing is people like you insisting that we have to be criminals for wanting full functionality of a phone we choose to pay 100's of dollars for. I didn't trust a hacker to do anything I choose to hack my phone and have full functionality of it & do research on the programs I install before I install them. The program "GV Mobile" for iPhone works fine as a substitute for the Google approved program we can't have just because Apple & most of all AT&T won't let us have due to being pigs for more & more money. I feel my monthly bill and price of the device gives me the choice to do whatever I feel like with my phone. So keep speaking out of ignorance and without doing any research and maybe someone will believe you. Keep hating on a device that can do just about anything you say it can't. To iPhone users: You can't have Google Voice . . . um think again haters! Yes we can and do and it works fine.

[kathrynhr]

Wirelessly posted

Looks like the FCC has now entered the fray:

http://mobile2.wsj.com/device/article.php?CALL_URL=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124908121794098073.html

"Curiouser and curiouser!"

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by JRUNCK

The "too funny" thing is people like you insisting that "nobody has a clue what it does" because you in fact have no clue what you're talking about. The other funny thing is people like you insisting that we have to be criminals for wanting full functionality of a phone we choose to pay 100's of dollars for. I didn't trust a hacker to do anything I choose to hack my phone and have full functionality of it & do research on the programs I install before I install them. The program "GV Mobile" for iPhone works fine as a substitute for the Google approved program we can't have just because Apple & most of all AT&T won't let us have due to being pigs for more & more money. I feel my monthly bill and price of the device gives me the choice to do whatever I feel like with my phone. So keep speaking out of ignorance and without doing any research and maybe someone will believe you. Keep hating on a device that can do just about anything you say it can't. To iPhone users: You can't have Google Voice . . . um think again haters! Yes we can and do and it works fine.

ever read the tos?

you own the hardware, the os, etc is owned by apple (leased to you by apple)

the fact that it has to be hacked to allow 3rd party installation of apps, means a few things.

a the device is not secure
b people are putting trust into god know what else that if the jailbreakers want can install and you got no clue.
c compromising a weak device into an ever weaker device is lol. you cant check for virues, maleware etc yet its a smart phone with plenty of leeway to do finical / personal transactions.

do you really want to compromise all this?

but then again like i said, 95% of apple fans, cant understand a pc, or dont want to. they prefer here do this, that, and this, and thats how its done.
this has been a mac thing since mac's been out with full control to apple not the end user.

the biggest difference between apple to microsoft.

but k, enjoy your security compromised device, just dont cry when cyber criminals hack your personal data.

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by wabbit

but then again like i said, 95% of apple fans, cant understand a pc, or dont want to. they prefer here do this, that, and this, and thats how its done.
this has been a mac thing since mac's been out with full control to apple not the end user.

the biggest difference between apple to microsoft.

but k, enjoy your security compromised device, just dont cry when cyber criminals hack your personal data.

I can't believe you are calling PCs secure. Windows is the most hacked OS on the planet. Right now millions of infected PCs are SPAM zombies sending out millions of pieces of SPAM, spyware and god knows what else. Your typical PC user is the most clueless on the planet. How many times have I heard that the big blue "e" is the internet. Most PC users couldn't tell you the difference between Windows, OSX or Linux. They just know they bought a Dell, HP or whatever, plugged it in and it works. How many clueless PC users run without any virus protection at all, or let their trialware version laps when many ISP offer free versions. People buy Mac because they know better and don't want all the garbage that comes with owning a PC. That's why they are willing to spend the extra coin to do so.

And you mentioned something about leasing the OS from Apple. Well your boys at Redmond don't sell you the OS either. And their EULA is far more restrictive then Apple's.

[Flight714]

okay, tre cosi

1. Wabbit isn't calling PCs secure, nor is he calling MacBooks (or etc) insecure, he's saying that the iPhone is a "security compromised device".

2. Most viruses are written for PCs because they have been dominating the personal and business market for years up until recently.

3. Using the same logic from point #2, wouldn't it make sense from a hacker's point of view to write a virus for an incredibly popular smartphone with giant flaws in its security software?

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by Flight714

okay, tre cosi

1. Wabbit isn't calling PCs secure, nor is he calling MacBooks (or etc) insecure, he's saying that the iPhone is a "security compromised device".

2. Most viruses are written for PCs because they have been dominating the personal and business market for years up until recently.

3. Using the same logic from point #2, wouldn't it make sense from a hacker's point of view to write a virus for an incredibly popular smartphone with giant flaws in its security software?

I only addressed the point he made in the portion quoted. And as to your second point. While, yes this is true, but the Windows OS is inherently less secure. This is due to adding upon millions of lines of code over the years that even MS programs don't have a grasp of. There is also IE and Active X. Countless computers have been compromised through these two vectors, yet MS continues to push them. OSX is built upon Unix and unlike Windows, doesn't give you automatic access to the root level. And yes you don't have to run Windows as an admin, but there are still far to many Windows applications that won't run right unless you do. So I stand by my post.

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by ArgonNJ

I only addressed the point he made in the portion quoted. And as to your second point. While, yes this is true, but the Windows OS is inherently less secure. This is due to adding upon millions of lines of code over the years that even MS programs don't have a grasp of. There is also IE and Active X. Countless computers have been compromised through these two vectors, yet MS continues to push them. OSX is built upon Unix and unlike Windows, doesn't give you automatic access to the root level. And yes you don't have to run Windows as an admin, but there are still far to many Windows applications that won't run right unless you do. So I stand by my post.

only dist i know and thats is linux that does not have root is ubuntu, slackware, gentoo, and debian after install you only have a root acct, you have to make an acct like in windows not to be root.

while windows has bugs, active x, and flash does too, so does the linux kernel, and so does bsd, they are all filled with holes, heck i remember exploiting sendmail to get root on unix. each has its own, but i dont see how it dont give auto root access, maybe osx which is more like a ubuntu of bsd, but a unix/bsd clean install is root then creating of accts.

that does not mean you cant exploit unix code for root access. i mean its been proven time and time again how easy, osx which is based on bsd, which runs on the iphone, how easy it is to hack it. new phone a new jailbreak is out.

i never said a pc is secure. what i am saying is the blindless fools have a fail sense of security due to a fact that "apple" said so.

now

a pc is more secure then a mac.

patches to flaws dont take months but zero day is patched zero day. unlike a mac. while no os is fool proof, atleast ms is more on the ball of fixing there os then mac.

do you think the sms patch would of been out today if it was not for the media? lol

[ArgonNJ]

Originally Posted by wabbit

patches to flaws dont take months but zero day is patched zero day. unlike a mac. while no os is fool proof, atleast ms is more on the ball of fixing there os then mac.

MS releases patches as soon as a flaw is discovered? There are plenty of flaws that go weeks and months without a fix. Don't kid yourself here. They're good, but they're not that good.

[wabbit]

Originally Posted by ArgonNJ

MS releases patches as soon as a flaw is discovered? There are plenty of flaws that go weeks and months without a fix. Don't kid yourself here. They're good, but they're not that good.

and they are still faster then apple at fixing flaws.

[wabbit]

so guess the truth came out! it was apple not att.

[kathrynhr]

Originally Posted by wabbit

so guess the truth came out! it was apple not att.

You appear to be right. Statements from all 3 parties to the FCC:

Google, Apple, and AT&T All Make Their Statements to the FCC over Google Voice - bad apple - Lifehacker