Google says Phil Schiller himself rejected Google Voice from the App Store
By Nilay Patel 
posted September 18th 2009 11:54AM
posted September 18th 2009 11:54AM
Update: And here we go -- Apple just pinged us to say the following: "We do not agree with all of the statements made by Google in their FCC letter. Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application and we continue to discuss it with Google."
Update 2: So we've been thinking about it, and here's our question -- if Apple didn't reject GV, and is still studying it, what exactly did Phil Schiller say to Google to make them think it had been rejected? The difference between "rejected" and "on hold pending further discussion" isn't a subtle one, and Google clearly thought GV had been explicitly rejected. For whatever it's worth, reports of GV's "rejection" are how this whole mess got started, so either this is all one huge misunderstanding, or someone here isn't telling the entire truth.
Read - Google unredacted FCC filing [Warning: PDF]
Read - Google Public Policy Blog explaining decision to release letter
This should be easy Apple, simlply respond with evidence of your continuing discussions.
I got the app while it was still in the app store. Who cares, you can still use it via the safari browser on your iphone.
Posted by dennis headley:[On the one hand the computer group was expandable, customizable and was limited only by the imagination of the people using it. On the other hand the consumer electronics group was closed, controlled, like game consoles and PMP devices that were an echo system totally controlled by the manufacturers. 99% of the people respected the division of the two groups and the public rarely did anything to try to get around those boundaries. }
Are you serious? People have been modding electronic devices for years. If you had the technical knowledge and something dissatisfied you about your power amp or receiver or turntable or clock radio, you busted out your soldering iron. It's only recently that the companies have been able to stop it.
I bought it, it's mine, and I can do what I want as long as I don't hurt anyone else. Period. Why did we ever give up personal sovereignty?
As I said, 99% of the people (crude estimate on my part) respect the devices as purchased and I would say that as time goes by and electronics have advanced, that less and less people have the ability to do modifications. We are getting to be a throw away society in that regard. When I went to high school we had a great electronics class right next to the metal shop and the wood shop. Today, not one school system of the six in my county even offers an electronics class or drafting class. Its all about national and state testing these days. If you want more than academic classes you have to go to the county vocation school.
I work for a company that does industrial automation for large scale manufacturing, tying in different control systems, integrating dissimilar data types and making it it all work together through a common human interface, in this case Wonderware. In the production building I'm in right now there are over a thousand people working at the moment including roughly thirty of the in-house maintenance crew (programmers/electrical/mechanical). If I walked out right now and asked what the color codes on a resister meant, I'd be willing to bet at least 80% of them would ask me what a resister was, the rest would have a general idea what it was but I'd be lucky to get one person that could actually tell me what the codes meant on that resister. Sadly it wouldn't be one of the maintenance crew either, it would be some teenager that just graduated high school in June and remembered it from some Vocational Education class he took in high school.
I read these threads all the time and people talk about how this or that computer is overpriced and you could go to newegg and build a better system for half the price. I laugh when I read those posts. Thats another area where you would say "are you serious? people have been building their own systems for decades" and i would say "are YOU serious? the number of computer owners that have ever opened the case on their computers, let alone installed a new motherboard+cpu is again probably in the single digit percentile"
We as people that work with technology want to think that we are the normal, that everyone else is like us and is capable of the same things. In reality, if you look around your home right now and consider the people around you you'll find that in fact no, you aren't the norm. Your wife is busy working on her moms lasagna recipe that you wish her mom would make. Your daughter texting her friends about some boy named Sean? she has a crush on. Your eighteen year old, graduated from high school and apparently taking online courses through Xbox Live, son.
Over the phone?? Is there any formal process to accept reject apps? or for Google there is a shortcut a.k.a phone call. There is no proof. There is no case against Apple. God Damn Google should have asked for an E-mail for Phil.
As a self proclaimed Apple fan boy on most occasions... I have to stop and say that Apple is a lying sack of **** I believe The Goog over Apple any day... I hope this release of information makes Apple **** their pants!
Apple= The Mob
Steve Jobs= The Don(Mafioso)
Feds need to R.IC.O. their ass
By "not approving, and not rejecting" in fact means that Apple contacted Google and said:
Apple: "cool thing this GV thing, but instead of releasing you app, we will add it as our own in a future OS update, ok?",
Google: "keep dreaming, we are partners, but we aren't married. GV is a Google thing."
Apple: "so it's a no? So no app approval for you"
Then Google left Apple's director's board and threw all the shit and the fan. Good choice.
More like Apple is nice to Google, integrates it in their products. Google in Safari, iPhone, all over the place (search, maps, email). Apple invites gCEO to join it's board. He is briefed on everything Apple does. Meanwhile he is developing Android, Chrome, Chrome OS. Do you think he gave Apple warning about all of that? You think Apple would have wanted him around if the intent was to compete with Apple on every front. Schmidt was supposed to be representing Apple shareholders in good faith. Do you think he did that?
Are you sure you know who the asshole is here?
So Apple is dragging it's feet on this stupid app. Google is doing the same thing to Skype on Android. No one cares about that apparently. Google probably deserves much worse if you ask me. And Eric Schmidt should be the subject of an Apple shareholder lawsuit for breach of fiduciary responsibility.
Apple is on a fast-track to an Antitrust hearing. They may be large, but Google is not a company you want to piss off.
I remember when it was reported that Apple threatened a family in the UK with a gagging order and that turned out to be a big lie. (And yet, all of you were in that thread using the same language you are using in this one).
Perhaps some of you should give this topic time to stew.
Google is no great big angel in this world either, compelled to tell nothing but the truth.
How many months does it take to study an application? Even students in college take only 4 months to study one semester of class.
"if Apple didn't reject GV, and is still studying it, what exactly did Phil Schiller say to Google to make them think it had been rejected? "
More importantly, if Apple DID reject GV, then Google should have no problem showing a rejection letter. I don't see any reference to rejection letters in Google's unredacted letter - which makes Google's statement somewhat suspect.
I've got the solution, google should just remove google maps from all iphones, and prevent them from using google services. That would help
but then they wouldn't make any money
@ahaveng
Like apple is their only source of revenue.
Not a chance.
Google is very close to control of the search engine market and the online video market. Simply banning a company from accessing tehir products out of spite would be pretty strong evidence of abuse of monopoly power.
Apple has only a tiny piece of the smartphone market and would not be subject to such constraints.
Google should use their own hardware to put their crummy software on.
Stop riding of the coat tails of others.
Remember youtube is owned by Google. Apple uses google maps and search. If Google were to cut ties with Apple then a lot of iLemmings would cry a hissy fit to daddy Jobs.
yea and apple should have made their own version of exchange server and supported that instead of MS exchange server. right?
Well, in that case, did Apple remove all the other Google Voice apps live GV Mobile, or did they just "Move it to an unaccessible section of the App Store", and have not actually rejected them either?
Google should tell Apple to fuck off and block their ability to use Google Maps. MS should do the same. Block them. That would leave what? A few shitty open source maps? Ditto with AIM, Yahoo, and MSN.
Apple is nothing but a damn parasite. They feed off open source and companies that open their wares up to the world and only give back when it benefits them. Apple couldn't give less of a shit about OSS. How much has OSS saved their asses in OS development costs over the years? But when someone wants to do something on their platform with their software to cut corners. Be it Palm and the Pre on iTunes or Google and GV....nope. Access denied.
The tech industry should collectively shut these assholes out, block them from using their wares until Apple stops being the multiverse's largest douche.
its not easy to block an already existing app like google maps or youtube app because guidelines were wrote long before writing these apps like the protocols. they only way to block will be changing the protocols which will bite googles own ass
It would actually be trivially easy to block out just the Iphones from accessing Google Maps data. They could have it written and tested by Monday and not have to pay much overtime either.
Blocking only the default Maps app might be a bit trickier, but I am sure it can be done should Google want to.
a totally irrevelant question:
will it be possible to sue apple on the grounds of not fully supporting exchange on iphone 3g after initially supporting it? they claimed that iphone 3g has "full" exchange support and O2 sells iphones for business users. if we were using iphone 3g then apples false advertising costs us either security degradation on servers or hefty upgrade costs?
I don't own an iPhone don't plan to simply because Apple is not open. It prevents Pre from acessing iTunes store. Prevents developers from adding/replacing functionalities and has no standards for app approval process. I don't plan to support a company any time soon
If I was told that my app hadn't been rejected, but was "pending further review" or somesuch, I'd consign myself to reality, something Apple itself doesn't seem capable of, and consider my app rejected.
things just keep getting more and more absurd!
Dear Apple, as much as I love your phone, well especially since I jailbroke it. You are not gaining fans, when a new and better phone hits the market, and give it time, it will, all of us will remember you very well, and go with a company with a better product, better response to develepers, better response to it's users... It is just a matter of time.
Schiller rejected Google Latitude in part because it might "offer new features not present on the preloaded maps application."
Isn't that what apps in the app store are supposed to do? Go beyond the preloaded apps?
Oh, this is such a delicious comment thread!
Re: Update 2 -- it's easy to imagine Schiller saying something like "we'll never approve it" and then claiming it doesn't mean the same thing as "we rejected it."
Google is just out playing Apple. Sitting in on board meetings, they know what Apple has in store. They now have Apple in potential trouble with the FCC. We are seeing new hardware for Android on a regular basis that from Hero to Cliq keep looking better and better.
Google is taking over
It doesn't matter. The sheep will keep buying their iPhonies....
I'm sure that Apple's position is going to be cleared up as follows:
Apple will say that the current version that was reviewed has not been approved for XXX reason. They'll state that this isn't a rejection as Google will be able to make changes and submit again.
So really, Apple never rejects an application... they just don't approve all applications. Any applications that aren't approved are also not rejected... they're... uh... pending acceptance.
Is no one else offended by Apple's continuing desire "not to confuse" users. Do they think we're *that* stupid that multiple apps that offer similar functionality might trouble our tiny little minds? Boooogus!
Wow, so many absolute morons commenting on this article. And even more morons rating the comments, so that anything anti-Apple gets high ranked (regardless of the stupidity of the actual comment) and everything that is not anti-Apple (regardless of whether it is pro-Apple) getting faded into oblivion.
To the dozens of people who said "so Apple lied" - we have two different versions of the story and ZERO evidence to suggest which version (if either) is correct. Only absolute idiots would say at this point that either side "lied". You just don't know, and you look so stupid when you claim to know.
You look even more stupid for not realising the existence of the third option - that no one lied!
To the author, whose prejudice is very clear in the article, I think you need to step back and re-examine exactly what evidence and information you currently possess.
You said, "and it makes Apple's version seem even more divorced from reality that it already is" but I could just as easily retort that Apple's version makes Google's story seem even more divorced from reality that it already is.
There is no evidence or information that yet suggests whose story is "divorced from reality", so why exactly have you decided that Apple is the one who is lying? Answer: prejudice.
Here's a really funny idea - perhaps (just perhaps) Phil said something that he could reasonably defend as being "not a rejection" that Google could also reasonably defend as being "sounded like a rejection to us".
Yeah, how about that? No lies, no evil companies, no conspiracy, merely a turn of phrase that could possibly mean both things. It isn't hard to come up with phrases that would fit that bill, in fact it is easy.
This whole thing will end up being the proverbial molehill that the FCC and blogs like Engadget have turned into a mountain. You watch and see.
In the meantime, making concrete statements about conversations that you haven't heard makes you look incredibly stupid. Just letting you all know that. (While I can, before the comment rankers realise that I haven't been anti-Apple in this comment and will therefore keep ranking me down with their shadow accounts until this comment too is faded.)
Wow, Apple is being a bitch! Slap 'em Google, slap 'em real hard and hell ya, release it to Cydia! Whenever I read about Google Voice for iPhone, I just can't stop hating Apple and yes, I love Apple products (most of them and I spend a lot every year on Apple)...