Rotten Apple? Google Voice App Blocked from App Store

Earlier Tuesday we learned that Apple (AAPL) 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 (GOOG) 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. If there’s ever been a time to be furious with Apple, now is it.

A Google Spokesperson has told us the following:

We work hard to bring Google applications to a number of mobile platforms, including the iPhone. Apple did not approve the Google Voice application we submitted six weeks ago to the Apple App Store. We will continue to work to bring our services to iPhone users — for example, by taking advantage of advances in mobile browsers.

Of course, it’s not hard to guess who’s behind the restriction: our old friend AT&T (T). 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. Carriers have known about Google Voice for a long time, but it wasn’t until recently that it began accepting new users, and there has still been some hassle associated with actually using the service. Smartphone apps like GV Mobile remove many of those hassles, which is why AT&T is keen to keep them off the iPhone (Google already has official apps available for BlackBerry and Android).

Here’s another testament to just how ridiculous this move is: GV Mobile’s developer Sean Kovacs says that the app was personally approved last April by Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior Vice President of Worldwide Product Marketing — the man who often takes the stage during Apple keynotes when Steve Jobs isn’t around. Kovacs says that Schiller called him to personally apologize for the delay in initially getting the application approved. Now, I’m sure Apple has laid out in its terms of service somewhere that you’re not allowed to mimic the iPhone’s functionality. But when you’ve got a blessing from that high up, that would seem like a pretty good indication that the application belongs in the App Store.

The thing that really bothers me about the move is that Apple is now actively stifling innovation. Google Voice is the kind of service that can actually have a positive impact on your life, and not in a frivolous, entertainment-related sense. It makes it easier to connect with people, and to manage those connections. Apple can point to the App Store’s 50,000 applications all it wants, but how many of them could truly be called groundbreaking? Are they really putting a dent in the universe?

All the more upsetting is that this comes from the company that Steve Jobs built. The company that once made record labels bow to a flat 0.99 pricing structure for years longer than they would have liked is now screwing customers because AT&T asked them to. They’re trying to limit what I can and can’t run on my mobile phone — a phone whose marketing is largely based on its extensibility.

Back when the App Store first launched there were some warnings about its walled garden approach — could developers trust Apple to maintain a fair marketplace? Until recently, Apple has managed the store in a generally benevolent, if not somewhat incompetent manner. But now things are taking a turn for the worse. From a handicapped Sling app to blocked apps from Qik and Google Voice, it’s becoming clear that Apple is doing its best to keep many of the iPhone’s most game-changing apps away from users. Palm, if you’re looking for marketing material — take note.

Image by brankomaster.

Original post

Comments

[FreeRange:]

This "article" is absurd. Why would Apple screw their telecom partners! The tone of this "article" is offensive. Get over it. All carriers restrict what happens with the phones they subsidize and Apple isn't about to bite that hand. If you don't like it, go buy another phone, and give up a brilliant multi-function hand held computer. Apple has created a whole new competitive environment.

Jul 28 11:44 AM

[isellapple:]

This is a terrible article written by someone that does not examine all the view points of AT&T. the iPhone is the only phone that does not sell apps and music through its carrier, but that doesn't mean that AT&T cant have some say in what Apps are approved. you can still use Google Voice over the internet - no one can stop you there.

if you need to buy or sell a computer email me! [e-mail]

Jul 28 12:05 PM

[User 389100:]

A tsunami-of a rant if there ever was one. The writer of this piece obviously got caught up with jargon twang. I can hear the keys thumping! And what nonsense! Check with any carrier and find out the scores of reasons you cannot do this or you cannot do that with ANY phone.
And he likes the "if not" paraphrase, viz:
"Apple has managed the store in a generally benevolent, if not somewhat incompetent manner." What arrogance!

Jul 28 12:26 PM

[Timeline St...:]

This is typical whining about anything that digital devices have the potential to make free.

'I want it free! I want it now!'

What happens when you are not on WiFi? Does Google have an answer for that? I don't see the Google truck out putting up wireless towers, which is what it would take for them to replace the carrier. What they are offering is a sliver of service.

Apple is correct to protect the carriers and their contractual rights, just as they did with the music labels. No one loves the carriers, but if there were such a great alternative to them, it would be profitable and someone would be making money from it. That business model does not exist.

And why would Palm risk this with Sprint? Are you kidding me? Sprint has an ocean of red ink all the way back to 2007, why would Palm risk making their partner even less profitable because some geeks with grudges ask for handouts?

This relentless drive to zero is not where we want to go.

Jul 28 12:39 PM

[iJah420:]

AGREED FreeRange...

If you don't like it..... Buy a Dingle Berry...

Jul 28 01:03 PM

[Eokram:]

It doesn't really seem like a competition issue to me. How much money is really lost by AT&T? If people don't bog down their network infrastructure and they get monthly payments for their phones anyway, seems like they are getting money for nothing when people use the google or skype app on a wireless network.

Is AT&T going to stop people from using an analog phone modem on their lines because it competes with their digital services? Hello, AT&T? - you make money either way.

Am I missing something? Seems like AT&T is making a bad business decision.

Jul 28 03:38 PM

[iNeal:]

When you pay full price for a phone, it's yours. When the carrier pays 60% of it for you, they deserve some input on the functionality. The communist mentality that all things digital belong to the people nearly killed the music industry, which Apple then saved.

Jul 28 04:11 PM

[SiliconVall...:]

First, the article's author is guessing, he has no proof one way or another, so do not jump on ATT so fast.

Second, Apple signed a contract with ATT, and both parties must now live up to that contract, whatever it may say. Do you know the details of the legal language? I do not.

From an outsider's point of view, it seems reasonable that Apple cannot allow another "phone service" to piggy-back on ATT's cell service. This is just like DishTV rides its signal for FREE on DirecTV satellites. Do you think that reasonable?

We need carriers to maintain the infrastructure of this country. They need to make some money so they can pay your neighbors who may be the very linemen who maintains the towers, the dishes and the fiber optic lines in the middle of a giant ice storm when you are cuddled up in a warm house waiting for power and phone service to come back on.

Let us think a bit beyond just our own selfish views?


On Jul 28 03:38 PM Eokram wrote:

> It doesn't really seem like a competition issue to me. How much
> money is really lost by AT&T? If people don't bog down their
> network infrastructure and they get monthly payments for their phones
> anyway, seems like they are getting money for nothing when people
> use the google or skype app on a wireless network.
>
> Is AT&T going to stop people from using an analog phone modem
> on their lines because it competes with their digital services?
> Hello, AT&T? - you make money either way.
>
> Am I missing something? Seems like AT&T is making a bad business
> decision.

Jul 28 07:20 PM

[BertNo!:]

I love how Apple fans always cry foul whenever a negative article about Apple is written.

Jul 29 01:36 AM

[Paul H. M.:]

This is an example of how Windows became big in the first place: it has always been much less restrictive than the Mac OS.

Apple makes you do everything their way, while Windows makes it easy to choose from so many hardware and software companies that develop for Windows.

Many Mac users are forced to install Windows, just to be compatible with the world!

Jul 29 01:50 AM

[Bastion:]

Paul, this "choice" is also why there is so much incompatibility on PCs.

But I was most annoyed by your proposal that "many" Mac users install Windows to be "compatible with the world". With that word choice, "world", you are exaggerating the scope and need for Mac users to run Windows.

There isn't a whole "world" out there that we're missing. Macs natively do email, HTML, Word/Excel/PowerPoint, Photoshop, Flash, PDF, etc. etc. etc. just as well, if not better, than PCs.

So what "world" are you referring to? Gaming?

Oh well, for some, that will be worth infecting a Mac with Windows. For most, however, it does not...


On Jul 29 01:50 AM Paul H. M. wrote:

> This is an example of how Windows became big in the first place:
> it has always been much less restrictive than the Mac OS.
>
> Apple makes you do everything their way, while Windows makes it easy
> to choose from so many hardware and software companies that develop for Windows.
>
> Many Mac users are forced to install Windows, just to be compatible with the world!

Jul 29 03:30 AM

[marnold2000:]

Im scratching my head over this one, "Microsoft less restrictive than MacOS?" You mean the company that has forced people to use it's antiquated internet browsers in order to update it's software? You can't even delete IE, they force you to use it because if they didn't, no one would use it. They have been restricting people to use everything Microsft since their inception, only anti-trust suits have forced them to loosen them a bit.

Also, "Microsoft makes it easy to choose from many hardware companies"? Um, that's because Microsoft doesn't build PC's so they kind of depend on other people building them, geez...


On Jul 29 01:50 AM Paul H. M. wrote:

> This is an example of how Windows became big in the first place:
> it has always been much less restrictive than the Mac OS.
>
> Apple makes you do everything their way, while Windows makes it easy
> to choose from so many hardware and software companies that develop
> for Windows.
>
> Many Mac users are forced to install Windows, just to be compatible
> with the world!

Jul 29 02:46 PM

[Cellhub:]

I think you should try Messmo at once. From few days I have been using this software and it really worked great for sending free sms from mobile.I know there are lots of sites on internet through which you can send free sms but instead of taking a pain of logging to your machine each time you wish send free sms, why not to MESSMO onto your mobile and start sending free from anywhere at anytime

Oct 23 12:36 AM

[Davidcell:]

With messmo send fast SMS for free of cost and save money. Now you can send free sms from your mobile phone and enjoy…

Oct 27 12:17 AM