http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:03PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
AT&T cant have everyone mooching free from Google...

Apple would make an app that uses 10GB a day if they wanted... AT&T network is SHITE!!!!

Hey that SAF that you pay is not to upgrade the networks, but to fill up the gas tank in those Ferraris and Bentlys of Rogers and AT&T...]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
Apple had nothing to lose/gain with Google Voice's rejection, but GV was a significant threat to AT&Ts cash cow of those insanely overpriced SMS plans and also all the minutes consumed during the use of Visual Voicemail.]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
No, they may have a contract with AT&T that says what sorts of app AT&T would not like to have in the store, but obviously the decision comes down to Apple.]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/I hate AT&T. Can't wait for the iPhone become non-exclusive and watch ATT sink. Why does Apple even support this exclusivity? They'd sell more phones if just any operator could buy them.]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
Apple "Says it has not rejected the Google Voice application and "continues to study it."

So they've had it and it was their decision to use it, except...

"Apple's concerned Google Voice alters "the iPhone's distinctive user experience" and "disables Apple's Visual Voicemail.""

It has a competing feature so we can't allow it just like some of the other competing apps.

"# Says its "covering new ground and doing things that had never been done before," and that "many of the issues we face are difficult and new.""

Bullshit. Mobile apps have been available on other platforms for years. What new ground is Apple covering here?

Front up, soldiers: It was Apple and Apple alone.]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
That's it: they rejected it because it has a better solution than visual voicemail. The iPhone's visual voicemail can't do voice transcription, which is actually a much better feature that the weaksauce solution that Apple offers. I bet Steve Jobs personally screwed this up; it totally reeks of a spoiled brat CEO throwing a tantrum.

So the moral of the story is Apple will reject your app if you do something better than they do. ]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Claiming that running Google Voice would "disable" the visual voicemail based on the fact that if you're running the google voice app you woud be using google voice's voicemail system is pretty ridiculous.]]>Aug 21st 2009 6:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
Google obviously isn't lying.

AT&T isn't lying.

Apple just flat out admitted it.

Everything else is just Apple fanboys running around screaming with their hands over their ears.

Fuck Apple.

The flood of amazing Android phones coming out over the next year is looking better and better every day.

]]>Aug 21st 2009 6:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
Stop victimizing Apple, you think they give a shit about their customers any more than AT&T?

Even if you want to point the finger and some how blame AT&T, at the end of the day Apple is the one allowing all this to happen, because after all the App Store is owned by Apple and not AT&T. They are just as guilty (if not even more so) of being greedy, money hungry whores for inking a deal that gives AT&T any power at the app approval process at all.
]]>Aug 21st 2009 6:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
AT&T sure skirted the issue on Page 15 of their response as to apps being rejected from the app store but available on other handsets. It seems fairly evident that this question was intended to ask why AT&T why they allow Sling on WinMo, Blackberry, and Symbian handsets, but AT&T really really took all efforts never to mention Sling in their entire response. In my mind, this was a bad move on the FCC's point not to ask the question more directly as it might have forced the issue of explaining why Apple is responsible for enforcing the ToS.

Apple does not do a good job of explaining why they choose to play policeman for AT&T's ToS, particularly given that the iPhone is available worldwide.

But I do believe this spat is mostly between Google and Apple and Apple is being very unreasonable. If they truly believed that an app presenting its own dialer and sms interface was grounds for rejection, there would be quite a few apps rejected for these same reasons. So Google may be eager to ride the media train out here to see if they can get away with something they aren't supposed to -- if so, then Google isn't exactly being honest either.]]>Aug 21st 2009 7:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
I don't know if any one of you noticed, but maybe the first 1 or 2 pages of Apple's response was simply an Advertisement for the iPhone. As I kept reading, I asked myself "Is this actually the response? Or simply the planning script for their new commercial?"


]]>Aug 21st 2009 8:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 22nd 2009 1:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
AT&T and Apple's responses sure seem to have been coordinated.

On the flip side, I think they're being pretty honest in that GV is almost like a whole new front end for voice & sms on the iphone (and the web version is not), and that's truthfully what they don't like about it.]]>Aug 22nd 2009 9:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
Screw you Apple. Get your crappy products out of my life. I'm sick of being restricted on my iphone and can't wait until my contract is up.

Get your lies out of here.]]>Aug 22nd 2009 1:32PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 24th 2009 7:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
Oh how I long for the days of the Internet Bubble when the ideas were fresh and the big corporations were scrambling to figure out how they could be an Internet company. The little guys were shaking things up and providing Internet Service when the cable cos and telcos wouldn't touch it. In those days the big boys couldn't say to their managements that the reason they hadn't made their products more consumer friendly yet is that they wanted "to get it right". Nice stall. Gas up the Range Rover and head out on Thurs for a long weekend.

Thanks FCC.]]>Aug 26th 2009 5:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 10:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
It will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out..... ]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
sniff, this is a special moment...

I'd like to thank the academy, Engadget, My Voice coach! that guy who gave me the +1...

]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
see what happens when you make a sensible comment and not troll around for once?]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/ ,--/___ `.
| `--`.___
| o `I-.__
| o |---]]>Aug 21st 2009 6:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
Apple just ADMITTED to be one responsible. They even outlined in detail the bullshit justification for doing so.

And yet the fanboys are still trying to pretend their beloved Apple had nothing to so with it.

Sucks to be you iPhone fanboys. Google Voice is incredible and life changing.

Enjoy your farts apps.

]]>Aug 21st 2009 6:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 22nd 2009 12:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 6:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 7:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 25th 2009 11:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:08PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
either that or you're just jealous you didn't get an invite. go ahead... take your time on this one]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
I wish Google had bought up all of the old analog towers. I'd rather use a full-fledged Google phone service than have to deal with all this crap going on.]]>Aug 21st 2009 5:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 6:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/
FREE UNLIMITED OUTGOING CALLS? (if you use it with Sprints Pick 3/5, or TMo's Fave 5's)?

Or is it the voicemail transcriptions you object to?

Perhaps free SMS doesnt sit well with you?

Could it be the one phone number you can always have for the rest of your life that doesn't sit well with you?

How about Free calls to Canada, and cheap international calling that puts your local service providers, and even land lines to shame?

There are lots of other features Im not even mentioning, but seriously, either you're a jealous iPhone using iDiots, or your just another troll.
]]>Aug 21st 2009 8:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/21/atandt-tells-the-fcc-it-had-no-role-in-removing-google-voice-fro/Aug 21st 2009 5:10PM