What is Digg?70 Comments
- pingpants, on 08/24/2009, -2/+43(Love the Mordor graphic with Apple in the middle.)
- inactive, on 08/24/2009, -5/+24The more they compete the better the public ends up in the end. I love the tech wars raging around us. This promises to be a very interesting case.
- DaviDTC, on 08/24/2009, -0/+18Gmail isn't in beta anymore.
- dig1x, on 08/24/2009, -7/+25Apple is blocking google voice.
And Google is blocking Skype.
http://digg.com/apple/FCC_to_take_bite_out_of_Appl ...
After all these years, MS has *never* blocked a developer. That is because MS is the most Open platform of the bunch. - nexmachina, on 08/24/2009, -1/+15The moral of the story here Apple is: No matter how hardcore your fanboys are, Google will always have more of them! Because their motto is "Don't Be Evil". You put ATT and Apple together and it's like Stalin ass raping Hitler...
- AmyVernon, on 08/24/2009, -2/+12Totally. Things suck when there are monopolies and no competition. Let the punches roll.
- ohreilly, on 08/24/2009, -1/+10Nokia doesn't block them either, unless you need your application to be signed and it fails the test criteria (which cover technical aspects, like warning the user if going online and uninstalling cleanly) in which case you get told why you failed and can resubmit when you've fixed it. If you want to install an unsigned app on your own phone you can do it quite freely without any testing or cost.
- skipvt, on 08/24/2009, -0/+8Dear Apple,
It's the public's airwaves, and your anti-consumerist policies are counter to the public good. Therefore, try selling your device without access to a US cellular network.
***** you,
FCC - wilhoitm, on 08/24/2009, -1/+8It's all Googles fault!
/s - curiousgrge, on 08/24/2009, -3/+10Ok, I'll bite? Where is your proof that Google is blocking Skype? From what I've read the application for VOIP haven't been built yet on Android. What does Google have to gain from blocking as they're not a cell service provider? Early builds of Android supposedly didn't have the right hooks for VOIP but that's supposedly fixed now.
Regarding Microsoft, it certainly wasn't from the lack of trying.
"A pre-release version of Windows 3.1 was designed to return a non-fatal error message if it detected a non-Microsoft DOS. This check came to be known as the AARD code[2]. With the detection code disabled, Windows ran perfectly under DR-DOS and its successor Novell DOS. The code was present but disabled in the released version of Windows 3.1"
"It was a simple matter for Digital Research to patch DR-DOS to circumvent the 'authenticity check' in Windows 3.1 beta, and the patched version was on the streets within six weeks of the release of Windows 3.1. With improved marketing and packaging, very advanced memory management, disk compression and the Super PC-Kwik caching software, DR-DOS 6.0 was an outstanding value and easily the most successful version."
Then there is the rumored version of MS-DOS that breaks Lotus 1-2-3. - richiewrt, on 08/24/2009, -0/+7The point of the app is so you can make outgoing calls from your GV number without having to dial in and hit a button and then dial what ever number you call. It also allows you to get your voicemail transcribed and sent to the phone. Oh, and it works great on my blackberry :)
- acknotSW, on 08/24/2009, -0/+6Ahhh, if only corporate and legal communication was this clear.
- DerekV, on 08/24/2009, -0/+6The cell providers in the US are trying to delay their inevitable future of becoming wireless dumb pipes.
- diggdong, on 08/24/2009, -3/+8*****. AT&T right in the kisser
- peestandingup, on 08/24/2009, -5/+10"Apple just doesn't seem to really have that much of a reason to reject the Google voice app unless AT&T pressured them."
Jesus ***** Christ, what will it take for Apple fanboys to see this is ALL APPLE'S DOING? Is both Apple & AT&T admitting in writing to the FCC it was 100% all Apple's decision not good enough??
Seriously, give it up. Apple are ***** ups nowadays & have only their best interests in mind. They could give a rat's ass about you or doing what's right. They used to, but not anymore. - michaelpinto, on 08/24/2009, -3/+8Apple very much had reason to reject the Google app: They're in competition with Google!
- yaosio, on 08/24/2009, -1/+6What's that, a closed hardware and software platform having problems? Why I never! Apple lost the first time by closing off hardware despite having a better interface and a lead against it's competitor, why do they think they'll win this time?
- Nerden, on 08/24/2009, -0/+4I've seen vans with @aol.com on the back.
- yaosio, on 08/24/2009, -0/+4You can pay for online google applications, which offer 99% uptime.
- Swift2, on 08/24/2009, -2/+6It is true that there's a lot of confusion about what Google Voice even is, and what we need it for. By "we" I mean the average Joe. I can already make Skype calls with my iPhone when I'm near wifi. I can call anywhere in the country with my regular plan. I signed up for Google Voice, but frankly, I've trimmed back to only the iPhone for all my telephonic needs, so what is it I need GV for? Instead of my cell ringing, my cell rings? Oh, it's another source of cheap international calls? People who call my GV number will get my iPhone to ring? Why don't I just give them my iPhone number?
I think this is for busy entrepreneur types with, you know, a lot of phones.
I'll get it eventually. I'm sure it's going to be useful to me. - inactive, on 08/24/2009, -0/+3Dear Skip,
You rock.
Thank you,
Everyone with a brain on Digg - mattsull, on 08/24/2009, -1/+4But apple doesnt make money from people making calls
- doctordbx, on 08/24/2009, -1/+4I seriously hope you don't have a gmail address on your business card and you're just using gmail as a webmail client for your domain's email.
Seriously. - spyderfreek2k, on 08/24/2009, -0/+2You dont even have to pay to use gmail for your domain! Sure for more features and for enterprise solutions you may, but I have 3 personal domains running gmail inbox right now (ever use godaddy email? Terrible.)
- ultrafez, on 08/24/2009, -0/+2Free Google services have 99% uptime too. The problem is when the 1% happens: all hell breaks loose.
- Mateo2, on 08/24/2009, -0/+2I only have a cell phone but i still use it. These are the advantages for me:
1) Cheap international. Costs about 1/3rd of TMobile's rates (which are normal for mobile carriers).
2) Free text messaging (in U.S.)
3) Can block anyone i don't want to talk to.
4) Local number, my cell phone is from another area code.
5) Voicemail transcripts. - Myztry, on 08/24/2009, -0/+2Google can't be too unfriendly with Skype. It's been an option with the Google pack for a long time.
http://pack.google.com/intl/en/pack_installer.html - curiousgrge, on 08/24/2009, -0/+2My understanding is that Verizon turned down the iPhone because Apple wanted a percentage of the monthly cell phone usage which is unheard of at that time.
- SPECOPS, on 08/24/2009, -0/+2I think the anti-trust victories show just how "open" Microsoft is (or was) - maybe now a days they are more open though.
- ultrafez, on 08/24/2009, -1/+3I buy a piece of equipment and expect to be able to use it however the hell I want. Which is why, if I get an iPhone, I will jailbreak it immediately. I won't have someone else decide what I can and can't see. It basically comes down to censorship.
- AaronTheYoung, on 08/24/2009, -0/+2I guess for one cell phone, it's not such a draw.
Even so, free SMS is a bonus if you are paying for that separately, you no longer have to pay for it. Money back in your pocket.
I personally like a single place on the web to go for voice mails in addition, plus I can actually KEEP my voice mails and send them along to someone else.
I personally like the fact that every call is kept track of. Not the 100 call limit my iphone currently has. Apple can you PLEASE make my call log longer?!
If I don't like a person calling my number, I can just turn it off with Google Voice, how cool is that? Ex-girlfriend, GONE, Sales calls, GONE, etc.
I like the fact that this phone number is yours to connect to what ever phone number you want in the future. You never have to get a new phone number. No more porting your phone number from service to service if you move or change providers.
I always say, to each, his own, but I'm definitely enjoying having Google Voice. - milflyboy, on 08/25/2009, -0/+1Generally speaking, I'm not an Apple fan (and don't own anything Apple), and I am a Google fan. But I can also read between the lines. :-p
You don't redact something that would make the public MORE sympathetic to you. You redact things you DON'T want people to know. (Duh) Google isn't publicly commenting because they'd rather not end the speculation. When don't you end speculation? When it's more favorable to you than the truth. There's not nearly enough at stake here to flat-out lie to a regulator or the public, however, so they answer the FCC honestly but confidentially, while giving "no comment" to the public. (By the way, the reason the FCC honors confidentiality requests is because in situations like this, they'd rather they got the truth than no one got it.)
Think about it. When else would company A not want to say what company B told them?? When it contained discussion of some trade secret of company A. You think Google is going to be discussing any trade secrets with Apple (even to get one app accepted)? Please.... - w00tpoe, on 08/25/2009, -0/+1if toshiba said you couldnt watch certain channels on your tv, then you would have already known that before buying the tv. if you dislike the iphone, why are you buying it and supporting apple and then bitching on the internet about it? they dont care, they're making money in a recession.
- inactive, on 08/26/2009, -0/+1I do use gmail. Just because I tend to switch companies a lot.
I get one for work, then when I leave it gets deleted.
When I do consulting, and pick up overflow work, I don't want a competing company name after the @.
Why not? The service is great, and it plays nicely with mail, calendar and contacts on my MacBook and iPhone.
(nuevasync helps wit iPhone.) - SPECOPS, on 08/24/2009, -1/+2Okay then why is the "ATT receptionist" and the Ring Central app allowed? (both have ATT connections) but the GV app is not? They pretty much do exactly the same thing (confusing ignorant users as Apple would say) - the only difference is, the GV service has an added feature, SMS relaying, and is not ATT sponsored.
- Chrysalii, on 08/24/2009, -1/+2Don't use rumors to prove something, and besides
is an MS operating system, something has to break. (that could be said of anything) - inactive, on 08/25/2009, -0/+1I can not believe how many morons keep posting "its apples product if you don't like it don't buy it". The point is a business is restricting what you can do with your own item. For all you fools opposing china's internet regulations why don't you stop defending Apple as well. Imagine if Toshiba didn't let you watch even channels on your TV or your computer won't let you run certain games AFTER you buy it.
- jtf042, on 08/26/2009, -0/+1I never said anything about it being a money issue for Apple. But, I dunno, just a shot in the dark here, I'm sure Apple has some kind of vested interest in AT&T getting their money's worth.
So you're right, Apple may not make any money from calling, but how appealing do you think the iPhone is gonna be for AT&T to carry exclusively once people start using it for VoIP? It probably wouldn't make a huge difference, but it would be dumb for Apple to risk it to find out.
Maybe you should read my comment again. - rda1441, on 08/25/2009, -0/+1They can go at any time. You have to ppay the fee, but you can do that at any time.
- BobAlmightyX, on 08/24/2009, -0/+1We've really got two problems here. One is basically a network neutrality issue, and the other is Apple's closed platform issue. With AT&T, and frankly every single "telephone" company in the US, there is the problem network neutrality. There really aren't telephone companies anymore. Atleast not like their used to be. Virtually everything is data service. Do you still use an analog cellphone? Didn't think so. AT&T is really data service provider.
A bit is a bit. Text, voice, video are all the same, just varying amounts of bits. We're getting ***** by these companies when they charge us for a text mail. It costs them the same for every bit, but they're charging us a 1000 times more for one bit of text versus a bit of voice or video. Further more, if AT&T was your internet provider could they tell you that you couldn't use Google Voice on their network since they offer a competing voice product? Hence the network neutrality issue. Unfortunately, the law doesn't back us up on reality here, but it should. These companies should all be considered data carriers and service providers and be neutral to the traffic they carry.
As for the iPhone, it is a closed platform. I don't think this is the best path for Apple, and I don't like it, but they are free to do what they want. If they want to prevent certain apps from being used on the iPhone, that's their business, even if it's dumb. It isn't "EVIL" it's Apple's M.O. and it's not any different than it was 5 years ago. Get over it. If you don't like it, don't buy an iPhone and come up with some better criticism. - zaffir, on 08/24/2009, -6/+7You've managed to post 3 sentences, without really saying anything at all.
- CressCrowbits, on 08/24/2009, -4/+5You managed to post 12 words, when all you really needed to say were three - "I'm a douche".
- antdude, on 08/25/2009, -0/+1Is there a bigger image of that showing more? Like Steve Jobs as Sauron? [grin]
- jtf042, on 08/24/2009, -0/+1and?
- Mateo2, on 08/24/2009, -0/+1Students: the above is a prime example of several variants of the "ad hominem" logical fallacy, specifically "poisoning the well" and "red herring".
- texsando, on 08/24/2009, -0/+1anyone remember the good ol days before the mega corps began their takeover of the net for business purposes?
- Mateo2, on 08/24/2009, -0/+1No, they can't. They are locked into a 2 year contract.
- jtf042, on 08/24/2009, -1/+1And that's fine, and that's your decision, but in the real world, a company should be expected to protect its assets. This really isn't a ridiculous proposition by any means.
It's not a matter of censorship because it's Apple's product, which they made specifically to only allow applications that they want on it.
Don't like it? Buy an Android phone. Jesus. - anillop, on 08/24/2009, -1/+1Wow you had to go back to the days of MSDOS to find a case study. I think you just proved his point.
-
Show 51 - 71 of 71 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is