What is Digg?Sponsored by FUNimation Enertainment
Bow before the frog. Sgt. Frog conquers the Earth? view!
funimation.com - Alien frogs are living among us! Vacuuming our rugs? Sgt. Frog - Season 1, Part 2 available 11/24
367 Comments
- dreamtiger, on 08/01/2009, -14/+700I am an Apple user and I approve this message. Support Net Neutrality!
- filldeviant, on 08/02/2009, -8/+638Wait, is a government organization actually protecting the consumer's rights?
This is rare. - nanowerx, on 08/02/2009, -5/+311"The FCC investigation is not just about the arbitrary rejection of a single app. It is the FCC's way of putting a stake in the ground for making the wireless networks controlled by cell phone carriers as open as the Internet. "
Holy hell, since when did the FCC start petitioning freedom of anything? Something smells funny about this. - RBarStar, on 08/02/2009, -2/+232On this rare occasion, I would like to express a little bit of respect for the FCC.
- music2play1, on 08/02/2009, -2/+121net neutrality means that any computer should be able to connect to the same internet as any other computer, with phones becoming more like handheld computers, they are connecting to the internet more, and by apple/att deciding they cannot connect to the same network they are denying net neutrality..
- jaydedrag0n, on 08/02/2009, -0/+114response from at&t : we have nothing to do with the process please talk to apple
response from apple: we have nothing to do with the process please talk to at&t - bjornski, on 08/02/2009, -4/+117I'm a PC, and I support network neutrality too!
- CUBSWILLWIN, on 08/02/2009, -16/+94But I think the FCC are a bit retarded too. They first said ATT couldn't be a big company and split it into things like SBC and such. Then, the FCC let's them be one and ATT is a bug company no one can screw around with. That's probably why ATT thinks they can mess with the app store...
- fireashes, on 08/02/2009, -3/+72If i buy a book (copyrighted material), I dont expect the copyright holder to sue me for writing on my book. But same is not true for the hardware i buy. Who owns the iphone (or any phone) when someone buys it.
- DorXtar, on 08/02/2009, -4/+72Don't mess with google. BEEYOTCH.
- smacksaw, on 08/02/2009, -0/+66I think Apple should answer all of the FCC questions the same way the answer developer questions. That would be lulz.
"I'm Robert from Apple. I'm sorry, we can't answer your questions. I am the only one you can speak to. I cannot tell you that information." - bjornski, on 08/02/2009, -11/+68Much less rare than you pretend it to be.
You won't see a corporation fighting for consumer rights. - Spire3660, on 08/02/2009, -1/+58LOL, the AT&T of today is NOTHING like the AT&T of yesteryear. AT&T was a FAR worse monopoly then MS in its heyday. Kids these days......
- PhillyMJS, on 08/02/2009, -7/+62AT&T is full of ***** with their denials. Of COURSE they are behind it! They're the ones who will lose money when people take advantage of Google Voice features!
By pulling/rejecting those apps, Apple could lose money. Example: someone who really wants to use the GV features and is on the fence between an iPhone and a Blackberry will now be more likely choose the Blackberry, since there's a GV app available for it (since AT&T has no way to stop the distribution of that). That's why the third-party GV apps were approved, because Apple knows cool features like that will move iPhones. It wasn't until GV started doling out the invites and getting popular that AT&T must have realized what it could do to their revenues and put the kibosh on those apps. - nickbarreto, on 08/02/2009, -2/+57That's like saying why shouldn't Microsoft have a say on what is available on windows. If they decide that you shouldn't be allowed to use iTunes or VLC because you should be using Windows Media Player, and prohibit you from doing that, you wouldn't be happy. And Microsoft would also be breaking anti-competitive laws.
The amount of control Apple has over the app store is too much. - Sil369, on 08/02/2009, -0/+53im an atari. byte me.
- mapnet, on 08/02/2009, -3/+47It's about time! It only took the US government... 20 YEARS to notice that the forced bundling of mobile devices with mobile services was unfair for consumers and entrepreneurs! I guess it takes a product like the iPhone for the US to see the light. Here in the EU it's been largely illegal to forcefully bundle devices and services since the telecom act of 1987, which also forced all of our mobile operators to rebuild their networks and switch to GSM, so we don't have any of that proprietary CDMA2000 crap you have to put up with in the US.
- MWeather, on 08/02/2009, -1/+44Yeah, as big as it's gotten, I still don't have to lease my phone from them like you used to have to. Wait a minute....
- RBarStar, on 08/02/2009, -4/+47I'm a Linux, but I'm reluctant. Pass me the some dank first.
- awm80, on 08/02/2009, -3/+43-===--=-=-SLING......BOX..........APP===-=-=-=-
Nice try AT&T - jsp123, on 08/02/2009, -1/+39Infinite loop... RUN!!!
- varchar255, on 08/02/2009, -3/+41I beg to differ: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
- inactive, on 08/02/2009, -5/+40I would rather have the FCC breaking up cable monopolies so we aren't forced to deal with companies like comcast.
Google will kill apple soon enough. - hotsoda, on 08/02/2009, -0/+33"Do carriers have an obligation to run programs that will put them out of business?"
What's stopping the carriers from merely providing a better product? - Brak710101, on 08/02/2009, -7/+36Only thing I see wrong here is probably that Apple has it written somewhere that "we reserve to reject any application without explanation."
Maybe the FCC will question why Apple rejected the Google Voice app, but I don't think it will help getting it on the App Store.
The whole iPhone lockdown needs to be taken on, not just the app acceptance process. - digiguy, on 08/02/2009, -2/+31Still no flash?
- inactive, on 08/02/2009, -1/+30Yes. That is how software companies see it, but the legality of that position is a matter of contention.
- ECas123, on 08/03/2009, -0/+28What's next, women voting?
- harlowsmonkeys, on 08/02/2009, -1/+28It was the Justice Department, not the FCC, that split up AT&T.
- smacksaw, on 08/02/2009, -4/+31Obviously you don't, since reading the article would have given you the tone and topics of what we're discussing.
Amazingly, on Digg we actually read the articles and then discuss them in the forums. Try it sometime. It's much more interesting than tooling around and not knowing what in the hell is going on and being outside of the conversation. - them3nace, on 08/02/2009, -0/+27The google voice app is far from putting carriers out of business. These VOIP apps are simply filling a demand that helps prevent carriers from raping customers with overuse fees for SMS and airtime.
This is simply an adaptation that sprung from consumer demand. And if apple/AT&T continue to fight it, i can only hope that they lose in support of the free market. - inactive, on 08/02/2009, -15/+41Maybe since the administration changed and troll bush lackey isn't in charge?
- Hota, on 08/02/2009, -1/+26It wasn't the FCC that split up AT&T, it was the DOJ as they're responsible for anti-trust issues.
- ericdano, on 08/02/2009, -7/+32One reason I DID NOT get the new iPhone 3GS is because I'm hoping that Apple ditches AT&T for a better carrier. I think AT&T has really blotched any good will it had left. There still is NO MMS on the iPhone. We have dropped calls. Text messages sometimes take a long time to reach people (I've had one take 2 hours before it arrived on someones phone. And they are on AT&T as well, and their phone was on).
AT&T needs to step up its game or Apple will leave them. Verizon will should, if it was smart, be willing to match or beat anything AT&T is offering when Apple's deal with AT&T comes to an end. - mdelling, on 08/02/2009, -1/+25Agreed. It seems like they're inconsistent with how they view/treat AT&T.
I'm still in favor of finding out why the app was rejected and by who. - nickbarreto, on 08/02/2009, -0/+23Calls are restricted to wifi only, which pretty much means when you are at home or a place where you could otherwise use a landline to make your calls anyways. So AT&T (or whatever carrier you've got; O2 in my case) doesn't lose out in that case, because you wouldn't be using your minutes anyways.
- Mujokan, on 08/02/2009, -0/+23Irrelevant trolling FTW.
Obama kept way cooler than most over AIG. The level of ignorance in the hearings Congress held on that issue was astounding on both sides. - opiapr, on 08/02/2009, -15/+37It was about time something was at least investigated.
- stuffradio, on 08/02/2009, -1/+22They're not even good at that. They complain to Microsoft when Microsoft fights back.
- robertbaker13, on 08/02/2009, -2/+22... because they're iPhone users and they're so fed up with AT&T dropping their calls they just want to smash something, anything.
- smacksaw, on 08/02/2009, -1/+20That's like saying "why have shares of ExxonMobil if you don't like them" or "why work for Wal-Mart if you think they are bad" kind of things.
If you own part of a company or work at a company, you have some say about it. You may be the future leader of that company.
Well, you buy something, you build up business and expectations. As well, it means that you're a paying customer who must be heard. If you want a voice with Apple, you have a hell of a lot more of one if you are at least a customer. - Shaggy3, on 08/02/2009, -38/+57I'm going to get dugg down for even hinting at defending Apple, but.. Apple pretty much said long ago that according to the deal with ATT they had to do everything in their power to keep things like the voice app off of the iPhone.
- Mujokan, on 08/02/2009, -2/+21In this case they are trying to stop monopolistic practices and increase competition. A stateless market would be full of monopolies. Back to the days of robber barons.
- badgrammar, on 08/02/2009, -6/+25Apple should stick to trashing Microsoft and leave Google alone. They've bit off more than they can chew with this one.
- rusty0101, on 08/02/2009, -1/+19It was not the FCC that broke up AT&T, it was a court judge. (different branch of the government.
The FCC's area of responsibility in this case is in regulating wireless spectrum and telecommunications both wireless and wired. In this case since there is a contract between AT&T and Apple, they are interested in whether AT&T 's contract had a bearing on the situation.
Since AT&T's service in this case is both as a phone provider and as a data service provider, they could be in the clear as they earn money on the contract whether a user uses their voice service, or the data service.
Apple on the other hand may be getting a percentage of the charges for SMS messages, Phone Calls and other related transactions that an app such as Google Voice may be affecting theri revenue stream. If this is the case, AT&T may very well be happier to have data traffic for two reasons. The first is that if you exceed their data cap, they can get a user to pay even more than otherwise. The second reason is that if they are paying per call/message transaction fees to Apple, having you bypass those methods means that they don't end up shelling out as much to Apple each month.
All that said, I don't know what's in the contract, and have no idea how important any of that speculation may be.
One area that I think people are pretty much dropping the ball on though is that the iPod Touch devices could be being used as wifi phones under Google Voice and it is possible that this has more to do with Apple's decision than anything specific to the iPhone. Since there is no kick-back from AT&T for iPod Touch network traffic, Apple would very much like to have users restrict phone type applications and features to the iPhone. (Again, speculation on my part.) - KoldKalamity, on 08/02/2009, -2/+20They want their fill on iPhone discounts.
- thesportoflife, on 08/02/2009, -1/+18I'm more pissed that they rejected google latitude than google voice. ***** web apps.
- senae, on 08/02/2009, -1/+18It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that google, as a company, has had more to do with expanding and freeing the internet, and other forms of media(such as google voice) then any other company, could it?
I like google because I firmly beleive that they are a constructive force in the world.
As opposed to apple, who seems to be obsessed with firmly controlling their vision of the future. - schnikies79, on 08/03/2009, -0/+17I digg starts using flash, I quit digg.
- eldridgea, on 08/02/2009, -0/+17I hope they don't confuse Google Voice Apps as true Voice Apps.
FTA: "Please explain any differences between the Google Voice iPhone application and any Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications that Apple has approved for the iPhone."
The Google Voice App simply places a call from your phone to the destination with the Google Voice number as your caller ID, and then uses your phones *existing* cell phone connection. Thus utilizing the minutes for which you are paying AT&T. It does not actually send any large amount of data.
If it is presented as a VoIP app, AT&T could claim that VoIP apps are to much for their network too handle (which, sadly, is probably true).
The main thing AT&T is worried about (I think) is the free texting. However, they're are already free texting apps in the App Store. -
Show 51 - 100 of 374 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is