http://www.apple.com/hotnews/apple-answers-fcc-questions/

Some points regarding the general discussion:

1) I echo comments by BlueHeronTrail (and others). I won’t be going with an iPhone — no matter how much I lust for it — until AT&T is no longer a requirement. In my neck of the woods (S. New Hampshire), Verizon simply has very little competition in terms of coverage (and believe me, I’m not such a Verizon fanboy either). Sprint is a distant second in my coverage area, and AT&T is simply not in the running.

2) I’m also disappointed by some of Apple’s decisions regarding apps, features, and other points; however, I think it’s important to take a deep breath before every criticism of the App Store, and repeat the mantra, “No one has ever done this before. There Will Be Mistakes.” Yeah, they will mess up. And yes, they may __richly__ deserve scathing criticism. But they are also pretty much in uncharted territory in terms of this kind of product development. Sort of like Amazon with the Kindle. Companies SCREW UP, largely because they are composed of people who make mistakes on Mondays, Fridays, and most other days that end in “y” — fact of life. Should we forgive them every time? No, not at all. But should we recognize that this is Really Hard? Absolutely.

3) I guess that not many of us know what the legal issues are with putting a VOIP app onto a phone on a cell provider’s network (I sure don’t). I suspect that Apple and AT&T are somewhat aware of these things. Maybe Apple decided that it just didn’t want the liability headache from some arcane contractual language, and pulled the plug to shortcut the whole legal thing. Yes, it pisses us off, but if some-phone-company sues for millions of dollars down the line, then that will effect us, too. Right?

4) If you are really pissed off, then jailbreak it. My iPod touch has all kinds of wonderful “unauthorized” stuff on it; it’s a low-end Unix workstation in my hand, and I have a number of apps that have been removed from the App Store. Yes, you do have to redo it after each Apple update, and yes, there are risks, and no, I don’t update my iPod at the first opportunity (I’m on 2.2.1, waiting for 3.1 to hopefully fix all the performance bugs reported in 3.0…). But it really is not rocket science at this point, and if you do it correctly, you can indeed “virginize” the device to restore it to factory-fresh condition (should you need service, etc). So I would urge everyone to please stop complaining as if there are no options; you do have an option in this case. If you choose not to use it __after__ recognizing that fact, then that is also a valid choice.

5) I’m really hoping the next-gen iPod touch will mirror some of the hardware in the iPhone (namely the combo mic/earphone jack). In that case, VOIP on an iPod is entirely feasible on WiFi. And then I will jailbreak that one if needed, and happily run Skype…

6) @Joseph Lewis: “Apple has never flew (sic) a pirate’s flag. If you believe they have in the past then you’re gravely mistaken.”

Sorry, Joseph. Maybe you were just speaking metaphorically (in which case, please ignore this nit – you are entitled to your viewpoint); however, in terms of factual history, you’re simply wrong. Cali was speaking literally as well as dramatically; back in the ’80s, Apple did fly a real pirate flag on the roof of their “Bandley 3″ development building. You could have discovered that by Googling “apple pirate flag”, and selecting the first result (or any thereafter):

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Pirate_Flag.txt

The article, authored by Andy Hertzfeld — if you don’t know who he is, please look him up… fascinating guy — shows the flag (with Jobs in front), and tells the story. I remember seeing a photo of the flag hanging off the front of the building some time after it first happened.

That said, if they’re beginning to think more like a Microsoft or IBM, it’s only a matter of time before they’ll be turning out swill and expecting us to go for it just because it’s there. I haven’t been a fan of AT&T in years. (I always had crappy service with them and only stayed with them as long as I did because I was employed there and got it for free.) However, as long as Apple is in bed with them, they’re every bit as culpable in this as AT&T is.

For my part, I won’t be purchasing an iPhone until they open it to other providers, and that may be years away. I can wait.

perhaps a ‘don’t buy from the app store’ 1 day protest every month till the app is allowed?

–Pete

I will be the first among the first in line at the Verizon store when that happens.

I’m with you, except for streaming audio apps. I wish Apple would let devs flag an app as streaming audio and let it get some extra scrutiny so it can run in the background. Or somehow sandbox streaming apps into the iPod app, something. I love using MLB AtBat but when I’m streaming a game, I can’t do anything else, which is annoying to no end.

I didn’t think this either, but it does say you can PLACE (not take) calls on the Google Voice website:

http://www.google.com/googlevoice/about.html#

If anyone would like to clarify, please do.

The only service that Google Voice provides that would harm AT&T is SMS. (and there’s Voicemail but I don’t think that’s an issue.)

Even with it most likely being AT&T’s fault that certain apps get removed (or the developers fault because they go and do something stupid in some cases.) With Apple maintaining control of the device unlike any other subsidized phone I’ve ever seen, any contract Apple entered into with any carrier would most likely result in clauses that say you can’t have software we don’t approve of and you can’t have software that can duplicate functionality of a service we provide. Granted there are exceptions in every contract and exceptions that can be added in.

I decided a long time ago that I didn’t like Apple’s policies on Applications, back when they didn’t have an App Store. I’ve had a jailbroken iPhone since the beginning and I’m glad I do because I’ve gotten some of the best apps on my phone that would never be approved for the App Store or that were pulled off.

Google Voice is a great service, I’m sure, but there are features which hurt AT&T as a carrier. We’d all love a free lunch, but when you can place calls for free on a cell phone using internet only, it’s not hard to see why AT&T wouldn’t want it. I know Skype exists, but way more people use Google apps and this is a bigger competitor.

(Sorry for the double comment)

The best point you made was about the fact that Apple is the new IBM. They are into profits now more than anything else. They have billions of dollars in cash, yet they charge $30 for a stupid little iPhone stand that should be included anyway? Come on! These probably cost less than $5.00 a piece to make. I don’t have a problem with them making a profit, but let’s not rape the consumer.

So you’d give up the iPhone over ONE SINGLE app that wasn’t available BEFORE, merely because it isn’t available STILL? Not only is that totally absurd, it’s insane. Did you buy your first 2 iPhones because you wanted Google Voice on it and that was the only reason you bought it? How does not having Google Voice cripple your iPhone? And would switching to a different phone then GIVE you the Google Voice app on that phone?

Don’t forget, Apple has a partner in this iPhone endeavor. If you aren’t familiar with AT&T’s control freakishness, then I suggest you study up before blasting Apple.

From day one Apple has marched to a beat of a different drummer. On some days that beat seems slightly off and other days everyone is running to catch up.

Many have knocked Apple’s exclusive carrier deals, but at the end of the day it really was a game changer. And the complaints about selecting AT&T as their US carrier, what was Apple’s other choices? T-Mobile, Sprint, Verizon?

As far as Google Voice goes, I personally see several problems with the technology, which explains why Apple is reevaluating the application.

My personal concern if Google, giving them further access to my personal data and information worries me. Remember Google makes all of their money from advertising and …..

What about a Pre?

Keep in mind Apple never wanted the iPhone to native Apps. We have native apps because we made a big deal about it and we started hacking our phones to use them. The only way Apple could control the hacking and using of native apps what to allow them in.

So now, instead of hacking our iPhones to use native apps we hack them to use rejected native apps.

Apple is dropping the ball on the App Store and someone is going to sue them.

“Thinking Different” is determined by who? The consumer or the marketing department? I ask that from the point of view of the mainstream as for when Apple was in its hayday back when they were the mainstream. So what has changed? They’re no “different” now then they were then, except for this time they’re the underdog. And who doesn’t like to root the underdog that’s different because they have to be to separate themselves from the crowd. Is it that Apple’s user experience is all that different? That’s up to the customer to decide.

Would it be a stretch to compare Apple to a band you love that plays in a hole in a wall venue that jump’s slowly to making it big? If you’ve watched the career of the Black Eye’d Peas you’ve seen this first hand as just one example. The onset of Fergie to the group propelled them to stardom outside of the underground and now that they’ve it mainstream acceptance those same underground fan’s have started to turn on them not because their any less what they were, but because they have evolved. We all want everyone to see things our way, but what do we do when that actually happens?

I can’t imagine a huge amount of U.S. iPhone users making international calls with Google Voice. IMO, most are using Google Voice to aggregate several phone numbers into 1, and to mask their mobile number.

If the majority of AT&T wireless subscribers are staying within their calling plans then where is the loss of revenue?

If the $$ loss isn’t there, why does AT&T want to cast itself in a negative light? Its PR and marketing groups should quit over AT&T continually shooting itself in the foot.

But, just maybe Gruber had it right – “Google Voice is a mobile phone service provided by the maker of one of the biggest competitors to the iPhone OS. What if Google Voice were instead Microsoft Voice? And what if Windows Mobile were as modern and competitive as Android? Would you be as surprised then that Apple is discouraging iPhone owners from using the service? “

Although I think Apple should not have done this, and I don’t like their app store policies, what bothers me more is their filing linking jailbreaking to terrorism. That’s like the fact that any conversation hits the lowest of lows of absurdity anytime someone losing an argument brings out the hitler comparison. Well, Apple did that with their argument on jailbreaking.

AT&T has no say in what apps Apple will allow on the phone and in the app store.

In all seriousness, I have also noticed that Apple’s app store policies are a bit over the top. On one hand, when the app store launched, there was little control over what was being placed out there (200 flashlight apps, anyone?) Apple has also declined to sell the Commodore 64 emulator app (pretty sweet for those old enough to remember the C64 first hand – http://toucharcade.com/2009/06/20/full-commodore-64-emulator-rejected-from-app-store/). Though not as useful as Google Voice, it’s just as frustrating when you know something is good and available but just not for you.

I’m sure Apple will come around. “I Quit The iPhone” has been a trending topic on Twitter today as well. I’d be surprised that come this time next week, we aren’t able to use GV.