7 ms·

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 experie

by stijnm 17y ago

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 17y ago
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 17y ago
  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 17y ago
    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.

by stijnm 17y ago

youngian 17y ago

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 17y ago
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 17y ago
  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.