And they are opening an investigation into it.
According to a Dow Jones Newswire report, on Friday afternoon the FCC sent letters to Apple, AT&T, and Google. The federal inquiry asks Apple why the Google Voice application was rejected from its App Store for the iPhone and iPod Touch, and why it removed third-party applications built on the Google app that had been previously approved. The federal commission also asks whether AT&T was allowed to weigh in on the application before it was rejected, and seeks a description of the application from its creator, Google, according to the report.
For background, see my piece chastising Apple here.
If Microsoft decided to block Windows users from installing Firefox alleging that IE already offered the same features, how different would that be?
Alberto – you hit the nail on the head. Apple seems to think they have this walled garden that is all theirs, but the problem is they’re too successful with the iPhone. Once it amasses a huge amount of users, it’s no longer a walled garden — its a ubiquitous device, it’s public. They must relinquish their stranglehold on the device or be perceived suddenly as a monopoly, which is what happened to Microsoft and PC’s.
This is getting good. It’s about time Apple’s app store processes get checked.
Apple will be the owner of an infrastructure developed much more time. Mac computers can not achieve success in the sector and the micro computer to look like. Because a good job first and was able to get into the hands. Microsoft on this issue certainly will be back. He directed me to her. Where Düşünsenize Playstation, XBox Where? 🙂
I’m really glad to see this. It makes no sense to me at all that you buy a device, but can’t actually control it.
Something I’ve been curious about (this is genuine curiousity, not trying to stir up trouble, I promise!)
Why isn’t phone service nationalized? In most cases, I’m against “more government” but… as large as the infrastructure is, and given that we all benefit from it, it seems very similar to “roads” to me. We wouldn’t want one (or even 4-5) companies controlling our highways, limiting what vehicles can and can’t use them, and charging crazy fees (“U-turns cost $4.95 extra! Or buy an unlimited package, only $19.95 a month!”)
The only real reason I can come up with against this is that it removes a barrier to government “spying” on users, but… my understanding is that the barrier is pretty much gone already (ATT hands over whatever the government asks for, no questions wrong.) What am I missing? Thanks.