

How I Got the Google Voice/App Store Story Wrong - barredo
http://daringfireball.net/2009/08/google_voice_story_wrong

======
mcav
That's the _right_ way to address mistakes. Gruber could have said nothing of
the error, or he could have turned on his source. Instead, he took the time to
investigate the error. That's class. Journalists take note.

~~~
mwcremer
+1 for admitting screwed up, -10 for laying it off on his _single_ source. Why
didn't he second-source it, like real journalists do?

~~~
novum
I can't imagine _well-sourced_ rumors are all that commonplace about a company
as secretive as Apple. Probably you have to go with what you're given on the
rare occasions you get precious little anything at all.

~~~
mwcremer
I could live with that, if Gruber didn't make a point of serving up "claim
chowder" every time someone else rushed to print a juicy tidbit without
checking the facts. If you are going to throw stones...

I agree that in general Gruber has well-researched and thoughtful pieces. I
would have more respect for his retraction if he didn't spend most of it
telling me why it wasn't his fault.

"But, trust me, it was AT&T’s decision."

and then

"My source [...] was wrong."

~~~
calambrac
You're implicitly giving a lot of credit to the stories he calls out as 'claim
chowder'. They're pretty much always unsourced bs speculation from hacks and
trolls who would never call attention to their own mistakes.

------
stijnm
Am I the only one thinking this is all rather convenient?

As any good PR team should do (and I know Apple's are excellent), after the
big backlash they experienced over the GoogleVoice debacle, they are now
slowly but surely turning it around.

OK, I am cynical, but using the old _"you didn't understand my inflection"_ to
win an argument is something I used against my sister - when I was 10.

~~~
youngian
Also, "according to both Apple’s and AT&T’s responses to the FCC inquiry, AT&T
in fact played no role..."

So we're just taking their word for it? Did they provide any evidence that
this was the case?

~~~
alain94040
Companies don't lie to the FCC. They will carefully phrase their answers, but
they can't be caught telling an actual lie.

So yes, we can take their word for it.

Just keep in mind that their statements will be crafted to maximize what you
think they mean and minize what they really mean.

An example I digged up recently about a privacy policy: "Examples of how we
use your data: [very reasonable usage]". Doesn't say that that they don't use
your data for _other_ purposes. You just got tricked by a lawyer.

In the Apple AT&T case, they clearly say that they didn't chat about the
Google Voice app directly. But they also admit that AT&T is telling Apple that
in general, apps that consume bandwidth are not to be approved, and any app
that does phone while using AT&T's network is no-no. So technically, they may
not have discussed the particulars of Google Voice, but Apple may feel like
they are doing AT&T's bidding without having to actually talk...

~~~
youngian
Yeah, that sounds reasonable. Sure, they may not have had a conference call
where AT&T said "Jobs! Kill the Google Voice app!", but it's not like there
aren't other ways for the message to get across. Competition with AT&T is the
simplest and best explanation for why it was canned, and I would be very
surprised if it was shown to be anything else.

------
sil3ntmac
Props to tptacek for his comment a few weeks ago, when discussing this exact
issue: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=779099>

He nailed it.

------
gehant
A great example (seemingly effortless on Gruber's part) of integrity &
accountability in journalism. Thank you.

------
pistoriusp
I don't see why so many people congratulate him on admitting that he made a
mistake.

He got it wrong. He admitted it. Congratulations in order? No. It seems to me
that it's a fairly natural way to do things that doesn't require a back pat,
or are we really so arrogant?

~~~
gjm11
Empirically, it seems that pundits who make mistakes rarely admit it.
Therefore, admitting it is evidence that he's got more integrity than most.
(Or, of course, different readers, or a different mental model of what his
readers care about, or something, but whatever it is it seems to produce
similar results to integrity.)

~~~
jcl
Corollary: To increase the integrity of your site, all you have to do is make
some mistakes, then retract them a few days later. :)

------
paul9290
Overall the letters sent to the FCC doesn't not explain why Apple removed
other Google Voice 3rd party apps from the app store around this same time.
They were approved and in the store to use in the Spring, but once all this
Google Voice hoopla occurred they were removed?

Still fishy to me!

------
mistermann
Oh....so, the app isn't rejected...it just.....hasn't been approved. Ok,
you've won back my trust apple!

------
BRadmin
Any chance this was Apple's way of disseminating misinformation to track down
a leaker?

------
st3fan
Sounds like he got a call from a lawyer.

------
yhuiuyggb
So ATT don't say which apps Apple approve. It's simply that app store managers
have to guess which apps would annoy their only phone connection supplier

