4 ms·

Does this mean Google Voice will be supported as a native iPhone app?

borism 17y ago
if/when Apple pulls its' head out of its' a*, maybe. or maybe Google will punish Apple and not release native app again.
- SamAtt 17y ago
  I wasn't sure at first (thought Apple might be taking the heat) but this seems to confirm AT&T's claim that it's Apple that has the problem with Google Voice and not AT&T.
jkincaid 17y ago
It isn't clear yet. Google Voice isn't VoIP (at least, not in the same way that Skype is) because you use your carrier's minutes whenever you place a call. That said, AT&T may choose to bundle the two announcements together because they're both examples of them being "open". Of course, Apple is the one supposedly behind the Google Voice ban, so don't be surprised if Google Voice isn't mentioned at all during tomorrow's event.
Timothee 17y ago
I figured that the Google Voice issue would be brought to light with this announcement. But, the Google Voice app should have technically been accepted before 3G Skype calls: it doesn't really use data like Skype does. It seems (I don't have it) to be more of a convenience for the user so that he doesn't have to call his GV number and then dial the number he wants to reach, and instead accesses your address book and dials everything for you. If this shows anything, it's that Apple is really behind the refusal (so far) of the GV app.
dschobel 17y ago
In light of the Vonage app which was approved the other day, I don't see what possible objection ATT/Apple could have against the Google Voice application.
- steveklabnik 17y ago
  If the Vonage app doesn't replace the native dialer, then it's certainly possible that it could have been approved while GV hasn't been. Remember: it's not an objection to VOIP in general. It's an objection to the replacement of core iPhone functionality. EDIT: Hey everybody. I'm just repeating what Apple said. The GV announcement said nothing about VOIP, it just said "replacement of core functionality." Thanks.
  - gloob 17y ago
    Remember: it's not an objection to VOIP in general. It's an objection to the replacement of core iPhone functionality. Perhaps I'm just old-fashioned, but I would have thought that the piece of software in the iPhone that makes it usable as a phone would be closer to "core functionality" than the dialer. VOIP is definitely treading on the former, though how it deals with the latter is obviously a question of interface rather than of protocol.
    - alnayyir 17y ago
      Conceptualizations of what constitutes core functionality in products and software have become increasingly shallow and less feature focused. I don't know if this is because of a somewhat less "business" driven mindset, or because Apple is absolutely brimming with UI freaks, but the mentality seems to at present be that the imitation of a dialer in software rather than the actual ability to make calls is what is most important to "protect". I appreciate Apple's attempts maintain integrity in the UI interface but their hysterics over something like this make me wary.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
  - eb 17y ago
    That's not true. AT&T has always limited iPhone VoIP applications to WiFi to cripple their usefulness. They just announced today that they were extending VoIP apps to 3G, most likely due to pressure from the FCC. Also, you can't replace the native dialer or any core functions on the iPhone. Google Voice implemented its own dialing interface and was rejected for duplicating the built-in dialing and voicemail functions. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ATT-Extends-VoIP-to-3G-bw-767580967.html?x=0 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ATT-Extends-VoIP-to-3G-bw-7675... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_voice#Rejection_from_iPhone_App_Store http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_voice#Rejection_from_iPh...
cmgarcia 17y ago
I thought the only reason given for rejecting Google Voice was that it would cause confusion with Apple's dialer? If they did announce Google Voice along with VoIP, there would be some backtracking, I'd imagine.
- dschobel 17y ago
  Did Apple ever explain how the GV dialer was more prone to confusion with Apple's offering than the Skype/everyother voip app one?
  - steveklabnik 17y ago
    I don't think we've actually seen any screenshots of how the GV app was supposed to work.
    - dschobel 17y ago
      Well a dialer is just a number pad from where you dial numbers, no? Maybe I misunderstand the objection then.
      - steveklabnik 17y ago
        I assumed that due to Google's special access to the iPhone, the app was a little more far-reaching than the screnshots that are a sibling to you seem to show. That's also what Apple's announcement implied to me.
        eb 17y ago
        Google doesn't have special access to the iPhone, they use the same SDK as everyone else with the exception of a couple of private APIs though that's fairly common. http://daringfireball.net/2008/12/private http://daringfireball.net/2008/12/private
        steveklabnik 17y ago

if/when Apple pulls its' head out of its' a*, maybe. or maybe Google will punish Apple and not release native app again.

SamAtt 17y ago
I wasn't sure at first (thought Apple might be taking the heat) but this seems to confirm AT&T's claim that it's Apple that has the problem with Google Voice and not AT&T.

jkincaid 17y ago

It isn't clear yet. Google Voice isn't VoIP (at least, not in the same way that Skype is) because you use your carrier's minutes whenever you place a call. That said, AT&T may choose to bundle the two announcements together because they're both examples of them being "open". Of course, Apple is the one supposedly behind the Google Voice ban, so don't be surprised if Google Voice isn't mentioned at all during tomorrow's event.

Timothee 17y ago

I figured that the Google Voice issue would be brought to light with this announcement. But, the Google Voice app should have technically been accepted before 3G Skype calls: it doesn't really use data like Skype does. It seems (I don't have it) to be more of a convenience for the user so that he doesn't have to call his GV number and then dial the number he wants to reach, and instead accesses your address book and dials everything for you. If this shows anything, it's that Apple is really behind the refusal (so far) of the GV app.

dschobel 17y ago

In light of the Vonage app which was approved the other day, I don't see what possible objection ATT/Apple could have against the Google Voice application.

steveklabnik 17y ago
If the Vonage app doesn't replace the native dialer, then it's certainly possible that it could have been approved while GV hasn't been. Remember: it's not an objection to VOIP in general. It's an objection to the replacement of core iPhone functionality. EDIT: Hey everybody. I'm just repeating what Apple said. The GV announcement said nothing about VOIP, it just said "replacement of core functionality." Thanks.
- gloob 17y ago
  Remember: it's not an objection to VOIP in general. It's an objection to the replacement of core iPhone functionality. Perhaps I'm just old-fashioned, but I would have thought that the piece of software in the iPhone that makes it usable as a phone would be closer to "core functionality" than the dialer. VOIP is definitely treading on the former, though how it deals with the latter is obviously a question of interface rather than of protocol.
  - alnayyir 17y ago
    Conceptualizations of what constitutes core functionality in products and software have become increasingly shallow and less feature focused. I don't know if this is because of a somewhat less "business" driven mindset, or because Apple is absolutely brimming with UI freaks, but the mentality seems to at present be that the imitation of a dialer in software rather than the actual ability to make calls is what is most important to "protect". I appreciate Apple's attempts maintain integrity in the UI interface but their hysterics over something like this make me wary.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
- eb 17y ago
  That's not true. AT&T has always limited iPhone VoIP applications to WiFi to cripple their usefulness. They just announced today that they were extending VoIP apps to 3G, most likely due to pressure from the FCC. Also, you can't replace the native dialer or any core functions on the iPhone. Google Voice implemented its own dialing interface and was rejected for duplicating the built-in dialing and voicemail functions. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ATT-Extends-VoIP-to-3G-bw-767580967.html?x=0 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ATT-Extends-VoIP-to-3G-bw-7675... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_voice#Rejection_from_iPhone_App_Store http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_voice#Rejection_from_iPh...

cmgarcia 17y ago

I thought the only reason given for rejecting Google Voice was that it would cause confusion with Apple's dialer? If they did announce Google Voice along with VoIP, there would be some backtracking, I'd imagine.

dschobel 17y ago
Did Apple ever explain how the GV dialer was more prone to confusion with Apple's offering than the Skype/everyother voip app one?
- steveklabnik 17y ago
  I don't think we've actually seen any screenshots of how the GV app was supposed to work.
  - dschobel 17y ago
    Well a dialer is just a number pad from where you dial numbers, no? Maybe I misunderstand the objection then.
    - steveklabnik 17y ago
      I assumed that due to Google's special access to the iPhone, the app was a little more far-reaching than the screnshots that are a sibling to you seem to show. That's also what Apple's announcement implied to me.
      - eb 17y ago
        Google doesn't have special access to the iPhone, they use the same SDK as everyone else with the exception of a couple of private APIs though that's fairly common. http://daringfireball.net/2008/12/private http://daringfireball.net/2008/12/private
        steveklabnik 17y ago