Apple's response to the DOJ inquiry looks a lot more plausible than
the explanations proffered by the conspiracy theorists. In a
nutshell, adding Google Voice to an iPhone significantly changes the
operation of the iPhone. It replaces so many of the iPhone's
functions that it left Apple wondering if the result was still an
iPhone.
Apple claims that it did not reject Google Voice, but that it merely
delayed its approval and kicked the decision upstairs to a senior
management committee. They need some time to sort it out.
Sorry about the double post. Listserve sent a rejection notice for WSJ
story that's posted, and rejected the PC Mag story instead, but didn't
mention it [--sending now].
I posted two different articles about the same issue. I give very little
credence to anything on the editorial page of the WSJ, but it's
certainly provocative--and narrow-minded. Consider the header, using
"Kill" instead of a more accurate description. AT&T isn't dying, it's
SBC, an incestuous relationship that is doing just fine. None of this
would be an issue if the telcos would embrace new technology, and price
it fairly. No, they prefer to continue to double-charge for cellular
calls and cry foul when they get slapped by Google and Skype--and FCC.
It makes sense for Apple to reject the GV technology that could possibly
cause major changes in the iPhone's functionality, however, Google Voice
is the perfect kind of app for the iPod Touch. When a technology affects
an Apple product so significantly, it's good business to wait, do
serious R&D to determine as many effects as possible before making GV
available.
*************************************************************************
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*************************************************************************
