1. cgull's Avatar
    Many of my friends with iPhones are very disappointed with Apple about Google voice being blocked from App Store. Allot of once hard core iPhone fans have already moved to Android. Eric Schmidt stepped down from Apple's board. Looks like game on.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by cgull; 08-10-09 at 06:39 AM.
    08-10-09 06:35 AM
  2. Tre Lawrence's Avatar
    They moved to Android because Google froze out GV?
    08-10-09 07:34 AM
  3. DravenX's Avatar
    You should of told them to get a BB.

    Here is an arcticle about the iphone and AT&T's limitations.
    Apple, You're Screwing Up The Iphone
    Last edited by DravenX; 08-10-09 at 08:06 AM.
    08-10-09 07:57 AM
  4. cgull's Avatar
    They moved to Android because Google froze out GV?
    The ones I spoke with moved because Apples rejection of GV from the app store shows they will attempt to block anything they deem to threaten their revenue stream, even if it is something their customers want. I think Apples cult, I mean customers expect them to take the high road on such matters and this conflicts with their core philosophy.

    I am sure there is more to it but perception is reality and the damage is done. I am going to grab some popcorn and watch as Android phones launch with every major carrier while the iPhone is locked in the AT&T DeathStar in a multi year agreement.
    08-10-09 08:15 AM
  5. mdude85's Avatar
    Apple has always been in the business of restricting consumer access to third party software and hardware in favor of proprietary/approved choices. They practically invented the model of creating computers that only worked with proprietary peripherals. It's nothing new.

    Even though Apple's deal with ATT is restrictive, it is still selling millions of iPhones, so Apple is just pushing the boundaries to see what the consumer is willing to tolerate before pushing back. There is a lot of vocal opposition, but Apple's market share is still rising, which indicates that users are not upset enough to switch platforms/phones. Perhaps your friends are switching over to Android to prove a point that consumers are free to choose. But a couple of stray users switching to a platform that has yet to be a proven competititor to Apple will not really prove anything. Personally uprooting my phone and its plan just because one app got rejected from a Store that never fooled users into thinking every app would be accepted, seems a little un-necessary.

    Apple's arbitrary rejection of apps in the App Store is not going to lead to the death of the App Store itself, although it may lead to some developer disillusionment. Fortunately, the ball is in Apple's court here, and I think after some time (and increased competition), they will see the error of their ways.
    Last edited by mdude85; 08-10-09 at 10:16 AM.
    08-10-09 10:12 AM
  6. cgull's Avatar
    dude85 11:12 AM Yesterday -- [Reply] [!!]

    Apple has always been in the business of restricting consumer access to third party software and hardware in favor of proprietary/approved choices. They practically invented the model of creating computers that only worked with proprietary peripherals. It's nothing new.

    Even though Apple's deal with ATT is restrictive, it is still selling millions of iPhones, so Apple is just pushing the boundaries to see what the consumer is willing to tolerate before pushing back. There is a lot of vocal opposition, but Apple's market share is still rising, which indicates that users are not upset enough to switch platforms/phones. Perhaps your friends are switching over to Android to prove a point that consumers are free to choose. But a couple of stray users switching to a platform that has yet to be a proven competititor to Apple will not really prove anything. Personally uprooting my phone and its plan just because one app got rejected from a Store that never fooled users into thinking every app would be accepted, seems a little un-necessary.

    Apple's arbitrary rejection of apps in the App Store is not going to lead to the death of the App Store itself, although it may lead to some developer disillusionment. Fortunately, the ball is in Apple's court here, and I think after some time (and increased competition), they will see the error of their ways.

    But Apples proprietary approach has been directed at providing performance and stability more than locking out competition. I agree that the bulk of iFans will continue to happily sip the kool aid and not notice Android. However, while Apple has a good short term tactic with ATT, Google has a sound strategy by opening up the space and packaging cloud services. And you can save a chunk of cash each month by going to T-Mo or Sprint. Time will tell what happens.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by cgull; 08-11-09 at 05:22 AM.
    08-11-09 05:18 AM
  7. sniffs's Avatar
    All I have to say is I'm soo waiting on AT&T's Android phone. I am dying to play with it, and I can get one for free.
    08-11-09 12:57 PM
  8. avt123's Avatar
    If the Hero ever comes to AT&T I will get it. The one that is currently coming to AT&T doesn't really interest me. I don't want a slider.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    08-11-09 02:06 PM
  9. sniffs's Avatar
    +1 to HTC Hero.
    08-11-09 02:16 PM
  10. snookiesnoo's Avatar
    99.9% of iPhone users don't know or care.
    The rest are smart enough to know this will be available as a web app complete with icon in the near future.
    Android is slow, is a mess, and on lousy hardware. We will see if it gets better.
    Apple = Microsoft is too silly to comment on any further.

    Many of my friends with iPhones are very disappointed with Apple about Google voice being blocked from App Store. Allot of once hard core iPhone fans have already moved to Android. Eric Schmidt stepped down from Apple's board. Looks like game on.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    08-12-09 11:27 AM
  11. snookiesnoo's Avatar
    I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984 and am a Senior Enterprise Architect with 20 years in IT. I've used and implemented pretty much everything at one time or another. What you say is not true at all. Even when they had, many years ago, non-standard peripheral connects such as ADB or NuBus they did nothing to prevent other companies from making peripherals.

    The difference now is they make and sell a phone hardware/software package that runs on a third parties network. They restrict software to avoid legal issues and stability issues. Every now and then they do something that a tiny percentage of people reading tech blogs get all lathered up about because they want to be the anti-apple to show how cool and with it they are.

    It's not as if the other cell phone companies are any better. Verizon not allowing wi-fi on the Tour is a much bigger deal. They are only now forced to say there will be wi-fi on all future hardware and unlocked GPS because of the pressure the iPhone is putting on them. I can tell you for a fact that except for Apple the other cell phone companies tell the cell phone manufacturer features they will and will not allow. Verizon has crippled hardware for years in this manner.

    Apple has always been in the business of restricting consumer access to third party software and hardware in favor of proprietary/approved choices. They practically invented the model of creating computers that only worked with proprietary peripherals. It's nothing new..
    08-12-09 11:40 AM
  12. Shao128's Avatar
    I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984 and am a Senior Enterprise Architect with 20 years in IT. I've used and implemented pretty much everything at one time or another. What you say is not true at all. Even when they had, many years ago, non-standard peripheral connects such as ADB or NuBus they did nothing to prevent other companies from making peripherals.
    Since you are speaking generally about Apple as company here I would like to hear your opinion on this question. Why does Apple restrict people from running OSX on standard PC hardware? With simple small hacks this can be accomplished and runs fine. So why does Apple not let this happen?
    Last edited by Shao128; 08-12-09 at 12:10 PM.
    08-12-09 11:54 AM
  13. mdude85's Avatar
    I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984 and am a Senior Enterprise Architect with 20 years in IT. I've used and implemented pretty much everything at one time or another. What you say is not true at all. Even when they had, many years ago, non-standard peripheral connects such as ADB or NuBus they did nothing to prevent other companies from making peripherals.
    Of course it's true! Hello! Haven't you ever heard of MiniDisplayPort? It came out in 2008 as a replacement for another proprietary connector, Mini DVI. The only way other manufacturers can create peripherals using MiniDisplayPort is by licensing that technology from Apple, or by creating adapters, but sometimes the adapters do not carry certain signal variants to the output peripheral (as was the case with Mini DVI). So you'd then have to purchase a proprietary adapter from Apple itself. Before that Apple was prone to using ADC (another proprietary connector) but then migrated to DVI (thankfully). There was a stretch of time where you literally could not use an Apple Cinema display without a Mac and vice versa. And Apple Cinema displays are extremely popular in the creative arts fields.

    Also as you will recall, AAC was for a long time proprietary, meaning you could not load songs downloaded on iTunes onto a non-iPod player. Now that format is open.

    You don't have to be a senior enterprise architect to be aware that Apple is notorious for weird proprietary hardware and even software connects. They got in a lot of hot water a number of years ago for creating a bunch of proprietary connects for their printers. I can recall their proprietary bus connectors going all the way back to the mid 1980s with the ADB. I'm surprised you haven't heard of any of this ...
    08-12-09 01:07 PM
  14. mdude85's Avatar
    Since you are speaking generally about Apple as company here I would like to hear your opinion on this question. Why does Apple restrict people from running OSX on standard PC hardware? With simple small hacks this can be accomplished and runs fine. So why does Apple not let this happen?

    I know this was not addressed to me but I know the answer. First, because most people recognize that there isn't much that sets a Mac apart from a PC other than Mac OS and a thoughtfully designed shell to put the hardware in. If you remove Mac OS from the equation, all you have is a shell that is basically no different from a PC half its price.

    Also, on a less cynical note, by pairing Mac OS with Macs, Apple can ensure that the software works smoothly with the hardware as opposed to Windows hardware and software which is prone to hang-ups with a lot of poorly designed hardware and software from 3rd party manufacturers that Microsoft has no control over.

    And lastly, pairing Mac OS with Macs ensures some level of 'brand exclusivity' for which Apple can charge a premium.
    Last edited by mdude85; 08-12-09 at 01:16 PM.
    08-12-09 01:13 PM
  15. avt123's Avatar
    I know this was not addressed to me but I know the answer. First, because most people recognize that there isn't much that sets a Mac apart from a PC other than Mac OS and a thoughtfully designed shell to put the hardware in. If you remove Mac OS from the equation, all you have is a shell that is basically no different from a PC half its price.

    Also, on a less cynical note, by pairing Mac OS with Macs, Apple can ensure that the software works smoothly with the hardware as opposed to Windows hardware and software which is prone to hang-ups with a lot of poorly designed hardware and software from 3rd party manufacturers that Microsoft has no control over.

    And lastly, pairing Mac OS with Macs ensures some level of 'brand exclusivity' for which Apple can charge a premium.
    I completly agree. It is a smart move by Apple too. They ensure their software will work with THEIR hardware, because they made both.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    08-12-09 01:34 PM
  16. equinoxable's Avatar
    genius!!!!!
    08-23-09 04:12 AM
  17. Radius's Avatar
    I think overall disallowing Google Voice is a bad move for them though. I believe this thing will really catch on, it is one of the most important things to happen to the phone since it was made mobile.

    I know a few people that were really looking forward to it and then started to question their purchase of iPhones after it was canned. This really could be a deal breaker for a lot of people in the future.

    I can see where Apple is coming from though, they would have been in serious danger of losing most of their apps to Google had they let this go through. The only stock apps left to Apple on the iPhone would be config packages, a few games and maybe a camera app.
    08-31-09 04:45 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD