Let the hive mind of Engadget get that for you.
"As someone who doesn't reside in the USA, I was wondering what would be the best way to get internet for my computer in the US for a couple of weeks? If it were Europe I know I'd look for some prepaid data. Is there anything similar offered by American carriers? A MiFi or a data SIM that I can tether from would work, but I'm trying to maintain a tight budget. Help!"
How is this AT&T's fault?
Blackberry has a Google Voice app and the last time I checked there are Blackberry phones on AT&T.
lots more people who have AT&T are buying iPhone than Blackberry, champ.
More people have iPhones that Blackberries??
Do you know how many Curves and Pearls are in the wild??
A Blackberry app doesn't need to be approved by ATT ( correct me if im wrong ha i might be..)
(correct me if im wrong again...) Theres 10 million + iPhones on ATT with the number of people buying them increasing, more than blackberries.
I don't own either phone. ( iPhone or Blackberry) so to me it doesn't matter...I am making a point as far as blaming AT&T...
now your point of approval is a good one... Do you think if they had to approve the app for Blackberry that they would have blocked it?
don't be dense.
You must know that on average, an iPhone user uses SEVERAL times more data than the average bb user. Shit, my gf has a bb, and all she ever does that uses bandwidth is load those shitty, pictureless web sites in bb's shitty browser.
What % of bb users have theirs through work? Sure, they do email, but they aren't streaming video or uploading to facebook or using other network-intensive apps to the same extent that the average iPhone user does.
AT&T knows this, and so they tax iPhone users more. The rejection of the Slingbox application is completely demonstrative of this. You disagree?
AT&T is scared shitless that they're going to lose control in this battle. Jesus, Verizon cripples wi-fi on their handsets for the same reason.
It's all lame, but I do think that iPhone users get the worst of it, and it's more AT&T's fault than Apple's
It's speculated (and likely IMO) that there are restrictions like this in te AT&T / Apple contract. Same reason that there will be no VOIP apps that use 3G.
I suspect that once the iPhone exclusivity with AT&T ends we'll see a lot more cool apps. Personally I use GC numbers as my primary business numbers and I was really looking forward to this. Hopefully they will get it worked out. I'm holding off on a 3Gs until some of this shit gets settled.
All that sounds wonderful but like I said...You are not using data to make phone calls with Google Voice. That seems to be the premise of your argument.
Have you used it before? The only time you will be using data for is SMS or Voicemail. The bulk of the time you will be making/receiving calls. What data are you using??
It's not about bandwidth, really:
FTA:
The systematic disappearances don't have a larger official explanation but, given the common thread of their using the same service, is now thought less to a matter of Apple guarding its built-in features and more cellular carriers pushing it to keep the service out. Google Voice not only lets users provide one virtual phone number to call multiple real phones but greatly reduces the cost of outbound long-distance and messaging, all of which potentially deprive AT&T and eventually other carriers of possible extra revenue.
@CraigJ
You make an excellent point and I agree so if AT&T had the ability to not allow Blackberry users to use the app..Do u think they would reject it? There are more iPhones out in the market place but it isn't like there are that many less Blackberries. They will benefit in the same way iPhone users will by the explanation you provided.
This is 100% Apple's fault, because either they rejected it themselves for anti-competitive purposes, or because they gave AT&T the ability to ultimately veto apps which Apple would otherwise accept (SlingPlayer being the obvious example).
Whichever is the cause of the rejection in this instance, blame Apple. Apple could have sold the iPhone unlocked and free of any carrier subsidy. They decided that it was better to receive a higher subsidy from AT&T and give up some control than to try to sell an unsubsidized phone directly to customers. From a user-experience perspective, it was a really disappointing decision. However, it was a smart business move for Apple, because the subsidy mean they sell a lot more phones and make much more profit than if they were to sell unlocked iPhones for $400.
That was very sexual.
@Mike. It's not that simple. Apple HAD to sign an exclusive agreement with AT&T to get the iPhone to market. Verizon turned them down (and frankly if you think there are issues with the phone apps on AT&T Verizon would likely have been worse given their track record of screwing up phone OS features)
So, Apple had to make a deal with the devil. Personally I am looking forward to the day the exclusivity contract expires, but even then it is likely that the carriers will try to restrict features like this to boost their revenue.
crawdad, you must be the biggest moron on this article, and the way you describe other phones vs. the iPhone in your posts shows your stuborn undying love of all that is iPhone, its a great phone, but your so short sighted its not even funny. It has NOTHING to do with user base!!! You think if more people buy a BB or similiar phoen they will reject GV or Slingboxx App? Get your freaking head out of your Apple poisoned ass. I don disagree with it being a good phone, iPhone, but your obvious blind faith in the Apple App Store is beyond a doubt a ridiculous absurdity. Apple has FIRST say on what app is addded or not, and if it was AT&T deciding this, they would NOT give it just to BB owners and not Apple, as AT&T customers across the board would flip out. IT IS APPLE YOU DOLT. holy jeez you make my head hurt. GTFO man