

Apple blocking Google Voice blocking webOS App - davidcuddeback
http://flpalmdev.blogspot.com/2010/02/apple-blocking-google-voice-blocking.html

======
boundlessdreamz
He is comparing Google not providing an API to AT&T redirecting google.com to
bing.com or apple blocking the voice app? Lost his argument, right there.

Wish he provided more technical details instead of just just ranting. What is
the "uper easy access number" and whats with the headline ?

I understand he is frustrated but he is trying to reverse engineer a product.
It is rarely easy. And since google voice has a mobile version, it is not even
that webOS users are locked out.

------
ajross
I'm not sure I get the complaint. It's Google's service, it's never been free
software, and clearly they're going to exert some control over what clients
get to connect. That's clearly within Google's power and rights to do, and it
doesn't hurt anyone but competing voice app vendors who want to use Google's
(!) service.

How does that compare to banning a Google Voice app from the iPhone store,
which while also within Apple's power and rights, is clearly harming
_consumers_ who don't get to use the service?

~~~
briansmith
I'm not sure I get the complaint. It's Apple's operating system, it's never
been free software, and clearly they're going to exert some control over what
apps get installed. That's clearly within Apple's power and rights to do, and
it doesn't hurt anyone but competing app vendors who want to use Apple's (!)
operating system.

How does that compare to banning a WebOS app from the accessing the Google
Voice service, which while also within Google's power and rights, is clearly
harming consumers who don't get to use the service?

~~~
ajross
You're being amusingly snide, but just plain wrong, sorry. Blocking Google
Voice at the app store quite clearly prevents iPhone users from using Google
Voice, a service Google wants to provide to them. But for a third party
(Apple) those users would be able to use it, so without it they are harmed.

Google doesn't want to provide/support service to WebOS, or other third party
clients. These users wouldn't be served anyway, they aren't "harmed" except by
reference to a utopian world where we all run free software all the time. It's
like demanding that Apple support iTunes on the Linux or Palm Pre; it's a
ridiculous argument.

~~~
jsdalton
If all they were doing was not supporting third party clients or failing to
provide an API, I would agree with you. However, from the article:

> ...they are implementing byzantine security to actually prevent 3rd party
> apps from accessing the same functionality that their Android native app is
> capable of or their new mobile site is able to access.

There's a big difference between failing to support and actively creating
obstacles to use. Seems like Apple and Google are both equally guilty of this,
to the detriment of end users.

------
mattmaroon
This is the problem with "don't be evil". Evil all depends on your point of
view.

Google probably views the iPhone as evil given its closed nature, and thus
Android is their attempt to save humanity from Steve's evil clutches. Thus
anything they do to facilitate that, including closing off their own products,
is morally justified.

------
caryme
This seems to contradict Sean Kovacs' (the developer of GV Mobile) post at the
release of the Google Voice mobile web app:

<http://www.seankovacs.com/index.php/2010/01/im-in-love/>

I don't know from personal experience, as I haven't tried to do any of this
myself. Also, Kovacs' post was from a month ago, so something may have
changed.

~~~
megaman821
That is why developer is complaining. Using that used to work but does not
anymore, possibly because of security protocols.

Also it seems like Google is using a secret api in the Android app. Why not
just slap the tag 'Beta' on the api and publish it? It may suck when an api
changes but at least it is in the developer's control to get his app working
again.

~~~
caryme
Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

I totally agree with the beta api idea.

------
jsz0
Google probably wants to ensure that Android phones have the best GV
integration. At some point, as we saw with Buzz, Google will start leveraging
other popular services to compete. It's inevitable. Google Voice can be a
killer app and could sell a ton of first party Google phones.

------
davidcuddeback
I agree with the sentiment in this blog post, but I can't help but wonder if
regulations on telecommunications services require Google to implement the
extra security.

------
fnid2
If you are involved in advertising, marketing, and branding at all, you begin
to realize that advertising is really taking all the weaknesses of a product
and making them strength of the product.

So, with Google, the engineers realize that it is impossible for a company
with that much power and investment capital involved to avoid evilness, thus,
they take the opposite of the company and make it the slogan, thus an evil
company becomes a company with slogan of "do no evil."

~~~
stanleydrew
This is kind of ridiculous. The "don't be evil" slogan originated in 2001
supposedly, when Google had $7 million in profit and very few employees. They
were hardly a powerhouse, although things looked very promising at that point.

~~~
fnid2
The founders of Google were visionaries who understood the humanity involved
in any large organization. The very slogan was introduced to help them
remember not to do bad things when they get big. Unfortunately, it hasn't
worked out that well.

