Skip to Content

Is AT&T behind the rejection and removal of Google Voice apps?

by Chris Rawson Jul 28th 2009 at 12:45AM

In the wake of TJ Luoma's report earlier tonight that the two independent Google Voice applications have been removed from the App Store, Jason Kincaid at TechCrunch says that the official Google Voice app has also been given the shaft. He theorizes that, despite the official Apple line that the apps "duplicate features that come with the iPhone," the real reason the apps were removed was because of squawking from AT&T.

While TechCrunch doesn't offer any definitive proof that AT&T is behind the Google Voice blockage, they do cite GV Mobile developer Sean Kovacs' point that Phil Schiller himself, who you may remember from Apple events like Macworld '09 and WWDC, personally approved the GV Mobile app last April. In fact, Kovacs says that Schiller called him to apologize for the delays in getting the app approved.

Given that high-level support for the app, it's not hard to follow TechCrunch's logic and set sights on AT&T when looking for reasons for its removal. While few people would argue that Apple's app approval process is pretty broken right now, it's hard to believe that an application that was approved by Apple's VP of marketing was somehow magically unapproved because it "duplicates functionality."

As TJ said in his post, it's difficult to believe that Apple truly thinks users will be confused by an application that does the same thing as the built-in Phone app when they went out of their way to purchase and download it. Even setting that aside, it's not at all clear exactly what functionality is supposedly being duplicated. If it's the dialer, then that's a poor excuse; lots of other approved apps include dialers, including Skype. If it's the SMS functionality, again, poor excuse, as other apps provide SMS functionality as well.

It's true that Google Voice isn't necessarily as "scary" to AT&T as a true VoIP app like Skype, but some of the Google Voice functions that TechCrunch describes, like free SMS messages and cheaper long distance, certainly do sound like something that would rattle AT&T's cage.

Take into consideration that Skype was approved because it will only work over Wi-Fi, even though there's no technical reason it shouldn't run over 3G. Look at how crippled SlingPlayer is compared to the same app on other phones. Now, Google Voice is dead in the water on the iPhone. What we have is a very clear and disturbing pattern. Applications that provide innovative solutions to users, but which fall outside the bounds of what a traditionally-minded telecommunications company like AT&T considers acceptable, are being either hobbled by arbitrary restrictions like Skype and Sling or blasted out of existence like Google Voice.

Whether it's Apple's fault or AT&T's, it's getting tiresome to see innovative applications like Skype or Google Voice constantly kicked to the curb or kneecapped. Are we headed for an App Store with nothing in it except fart apps? Those, at the very least, don't duplicate any built-in iPhone functionality that I've heard of.

One more thing: who else thinks it's ironic that a company started by a couple of guys who spent lots of time phone phreaking in a garage in the 1970s now kowtows to AT&T and kills apps that help people make cheaper calls?

View Tags

Related Stories

Categories

Analysis / Opinion Wireless Bad Apple iPhone App Store

In the wake of TJ Luoma's report earlier tonight that the two independent Google Voice applications have been removed from the App Store,...
 

Add a Comment

Sign in »
*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

90 Comments

Filter by:
The Sonic God

AT&T influences Apple's decisions left and right... because any step closer to having free mobile phone service will cripple them.

Want some cheese with that whine, AT&T?

July 30 2009 at 3:21 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
James

I love how people are immediately ready to blame AT&T, basically Apple is at a point where they can pretty much do anything to screw the customers over for their own gain and maybe make a bit of a fake fuss at AT&T and they still look like the good guys.

Apple signed this partnership knowing how behind Cingular was to the others and they signed with them anyway for the sweetheart deal.

Apple can put their money where their mouth is and when the deal is up offer it to other carriers, if not spare me the toothless gestures and anger.

July 29 2009 at 2:06 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Rick

I don't understand the issue here, it's really a no brainer. Apple and/or AT&T is preventing an app to be used on it's phone that circumvents the carrier from making money while using it's network and subsidized phone. Duh. Would your cable comapny support a settop box that unscrambles premium channels for free? No? Those bastards!

What a dumb debate. Mad that the phone company won't allow you to cheat them, haha

July 29 2009 at 9:29 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
DWesnor

Does the pope $#!+ in the woods?

July 28 2009 at 10:37 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
airmanchairman

I've just finished watching a particularly grisly "psycho-killer" episode of CSI, so forgive me for sounding a little paranoid here:

Has anyone considered the abuses and misuses of this GV functionality, and could that factor have finally weighed against it in the approvals process in both Apple and AT&T camps?

The word "liability" cropped up in quite a few posts here - quite possibility the decision was to put approval on hold until a few checks and balances are in place to ensure both public safety and (of course, first of all) the safety of their corporate *sses.

Just a thought, if a tad macabre...

July 28 2009 at 8:03 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
lanejasper69

Apple and ATT are both to blame. If Apple wants to keep this shit up (knocking useful apps that people WANT), they will just keep losing loyal customers of their store and people will just jailbreak to get the apps they REALLY want instead of a bunch of 4th grade fart shit!

If ATT wants to keep their high prices and shitty or non-existent MMS and other crappy bullshit service at high prices, people will just jailbreak and keep their current provider (with exception of non -GSM networks of course)

Wake Up Apple and ATT!! There are ways to get around all your BS!

July 28 2009 at 5:45 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
KaneBaker

I just hope the rumored apple tablet is a computer and doesn't follow the appstore structure. I won't buy it if it only works with the app store.

July 28 2009 at 4:38 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
CDUB

Why wouldn't Apple allow a product to release that violates the terms of service not only for AT&T, but every major U.S. carrier? Oh that's right...LIABILITY. Carriers don't police what you remotely install on your phone (thank God). They are however completely within their rights to expect their partners to release content that adheres to the legal terms of service. Say it did become a huge problem and carriers decided to start policing it. Apple has a great legal team...but even they could not bend reality far enough to shield Apple from the legal onslaught of angry customers who just had their service cut off. Not to mention this would render both the application and the device useless.

The real solution here, is for Apple to just step up and admit they are working with 'the man'. I don't think anyone would blame them if they were up front about it. These are terms that were in place long before they partnered with AT&T, and terms that are the same no matter which company they partner with. But will start communicating things differently to their developers, of course not. Why would they when it is so easy to simply claim ignorance and throw AT&T in front of the bus. Be mad at AT&T all you want, but who here really expects them to stand by and do nothing when they have a relationship with the distributor. Unfortunately, that distributor is the only distributor for iPhone applications (legally anyways), so people will just have to live with it. When other app stores gain the sway that Apple's has (if they do), don't expect it to be any different.

Both companies are to blame, but at least the argument can be made that AT&T is the consistent one here. Maybe if people read the contract before they signed it, they would not be so shocked when Apple did not make it easy for them to cheat the system.

July 28 2009 at 4:35 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Tired_

This clinches it. I won't be buying a 3GS this cycle, and I won't buy Apple next year till they fix the app situation. If it isn't fixed by Xmas, I'll go to Dell for my new laptop. I didn't buy an iPhone so some arrogant company could tell me what not to do with it.

July 28 2009 at 3:31 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
2 replies to Tired_'s comment
Janne

What does the brand of laptop have to do with the phone? If you don't like the iPhone and the policies around it, then don't buy it. How is the laptop relevant at all? Do you have a problem with Apple-laptops? If not, then I fail to see why you should opt for a crappy alternative, like Dell. Should I not buy an Xbox, because Vista is crap?

And by and large, there is no "app situation" to fix. Far and away the App Store is a success, the problem-cases are few and far between. Should we boycott Apple because there are few problem-cases among thousands of apps?

Just in case: good luck with your future Dell-laptop. You are going to need it ;).

July 28 2009 at 4:15 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Tired_

The brand has everything to do with it. Apple has chosen to limit how I can use my iPhone, so I choose to limit how Apple can use my money. It's called voting with your wallet.

I also disagree with your assertion that there is no app problem. There is functionality I want on my iPhone, functionality that is technologically possible but disallowed by policy. Functionality that is available to some but not to others (those who got the GV apps before they were pulled, or who install them now via Cydia). This isn't the only example...the IM apps available are terribly primitive, because the developers have to spend so much time coding around Apple's bizarre and often-changing rules. If I had known it would be like this at the beginning, I never would have gotten an iPhone in the first place, and I won't reward Apple for the choices they have made by purchasing their other products.

July 28 2009 at 4:32 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Hot Apps on TUAW

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.