PDA

View Full Version : Apple/AT&T/Google response to FCC



Mateo
August 22nd, 2009, 04:29 PM
I'm surprised that there hasn't been a topic about this already, I know that it has little to do with ubuntu or linux but come on, this is a major technology issue.

Basically AT&T has all but wiped their hands of having involvement in the Google Voice rejection. Apple does its best double-speak and tries to confuse the FCC (making dishonest claims like that GV routes voicemails to their app.. which is only true of calls made to the GV number). Google has little to say, except to say that they don't review Android Market apps, which is disappointing because they could have really made their case here.

Any thoughts?

pwnst*r
August 22nd, 2009, 07:58 PM
it'd help if you posted some links for background.

BuffaloX
August 22nd, 2009, 08:05 PM
Don't buy Apple products, problem solved. :P

MikeTheC
August 22nd, 2009, 10:06 PM
Sad to say, I know it to be foolish to expect sanity or a rational outlook from a Linux message board on this kind of topic. Actually, it's altogether fairly predictable, in my view, given the general lack of social graces and areas of interest of stereotypical geeks and nerds, far too many of whom are a part of the tech scene. This is part and parcel of the complaint I've made before about how the Linux community are like cats, and efforts at any form of solidarity for any reason is like trying to herd them, with much the same (lack of) result. Many of you don't give a toss about even your fellow Linux users so long as your own personal needs are met, much less take account of the "big picture" of the tech industry and its politics in your so-called "world" view.

I'm not sitting here as a long-time Mac user hoping blindly Apple comes out unscathed regardless of what actions they engage in like some kind of blind fanboi who's drunk far too much of the company kool-aid.

I am a long-time Mac user who hopes the truth of all of this -- whatever it may be -- comes out, and that Apple, AT&T or both of them as the case may be can be judged according to their acts by the courts and the general public, in full view of all of the facts, and not just out of some equally blind, biased fanboi agenda or worse yet, a Nero-istic "let Rome burn for all I care" attitude as decried about above.

While I believe some of you may "get it", I know many don't, so let me spell it out for you. Microsoft is the enemy. They are not the enemy because they're a competitor to Linux or to Apple. They are the enemy because they are a company which has done many evil acts and has a very long history of behaving badly. Not only should they not be encouraged to continue, they should not be emboldened to continue or empowered to succeed. What we're all suspecting or dreading Apple may have done -- and I'm in that list too -- can only hurt Apple, and in so doing it will indirectly hurt us along with them. The reason I believe this is that I recognize something which evidently a great number of Linux users don't, and that is Apple represents a sort of "partner" in F/OSS' efforts of honest competition in the OS and general software space against Microsoft for the hearts and minds of the general public. We "need" Apple, in an indirect sense, because we don't have -- for several reasons -- any kind of advertising campaign targeted at the general public. Apple's advertising efforts are the "foot-in-the-door" which all of us -- Apple included, obviously -- need to compete for those hearts and minds. With a weakened -- or worse yet, destroyed -- Apple, it will be that much harder for the Linux community to get the general public to understand the Two Critical Things: 1. There is such a thing as an alternative to Microsoft-produced OS and software products; and 2. It's more than just wishful thinking that such a competitor could ever possibly be viable.

The hell of it, as I see it, is that for all the incredible inventiveness and innovation of the F/OSS community, we seem to lack people who understand what I call "battlefield strategy marketing" and combat tactics. In fact, we also seem to lack much in the way of any kind of savvy high-visibility marketing, and that's truly a hindrance to mass desktop adoption and market penetration. Of course, going back to my earlier complaint about the myopic "I don't care about anyone else or what they use" world view of many in the Linux community, I know these words and my general argument will fall on many deaf ears.

I'm simply tired of the attitude that technical superiority and market penetration/adoption rates are somehow antithetical or diametrically opposed goals for the F/OSS community to achieve. Perhaps that comes from some people's in-built preconceptions that Linux somehow only enjoys "security through obscurity" because it doesn't have the same size user share which Microsoft's Windows products have. Regardless of the reason, that part of the attitude is one specific ingredient or "flavoring", if you will, of the Linux soup we don't need.

Anyhow, all of this is to say, I guess, that I am going to wait to see what comes of all of this, but clearly Apple's potential actions are troubling to me.

geekygirl
August 22nd, 2009, 11:00 PM
@ MikeTheC:

You sir should take a bow for what is truly an intelligent and well thought out post on a topic that I too agree has the potential to cause more harm than good, yet I also know in my heart that there will be users in this forum that will rub their hands together with glee at the thought of what might happen to Apple. How does that make someone any better than the so called 'corporate enemy' they think Apple is I do not know. Seems that should someone even dare to suggest that supporting Apple is a good thing, whilst looking at the larger picture just makes one a 'fanboi', yet their own musings would make them appear rather one eyed and incapable of seeing the larger picture, but given the average user on the forum is a teenager with many miles to go yet I do not find that the least bit unusual.

I also agree that Microsoft is indeed the enemy, and their only real threat in the market place us Apple, NOT Ubuntu - and before people start retorting that statement, think about it seriously for one minute before you do post. Rather than with the rose coloured glasses that tend to prevail in this forum about the 'market penetration' of Ubuntu and indeed the entire FOSS movement, which compared to Microsofts closest competitor, Apple, is very negligible. Whilst I would like to see that market share grow to a point beyond that of the usual Linux user, that is to say those of us found in here who are generally tech savvy and capable of making that decision to move away from dependance on Microsoft products, fact is that reality is a long way off and like MikeTheC has stated, the best product currently in any position to do this, regardless of personal beliefs, is Apple.

I hope that there is a good outcome to this issue, and I would hate to think there are FOSS users out there currently on the same side as Microsoft all waiting around to see the demise of Apple based more on blind faith rather than rational thought, and in my opinion those users are no better than Microsoft at the end of day wishing ill upon others rather than being the so-called family that is supposed to be Ubuntu and the FOSS movement.

hanzomon4
August 22nd, 2009, 11:05 PM
OMG people are making generalizations on the internet

BuffaloX
August 22nd, 2009, 11:17 PM
Apple represents a sort of "partner" in F/OSS' efforts of honest competition.


No sorry to disagree with you on this, but actually Apple is much worse than Microsoft. The only reason this goes unnoticed, is because Apple is not dominant like Microsoft.

What other company sues their own customers for putting solutions to technical problems on the net?
Threaten to sue and void warranty to silence customers.
Break the functionality of their own products to maintain absolute control over them.



Anyhow, all of this is to say, I guess, that I am going to wait to see what comes of all of this, but clearly Apple's potential actions are troubling to me.


As they very well should be, Apple wants to make jailbreaking illegal.
If you think DMCA put an end to "Fair use", you just wait till Apple have their way...

t0p
August 22nd, 2009, 11:25 PM
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Therefore Apple is my friend"? Nah, you can shove that.

This case is illustrative of why the App Store is A Bad Thing.

MikeTheC
August 22nd, 2009, 11:31 PM
Hey BuffaloX!

Can you please site specific instances of what you're saying? I'm not trying to right off the bat yell and scream at you, but I'd like to see some substantiation so we all can see whether we need to drive the wooden stake through Apple's heart, or through someone elses' (copyright holders, for instance?)


If you think DMCA put an end to "Fair use", you just wait till Apple have their way...
I have no love for DMCA and I think it's having the same effect as software patents, and for fundamentally the same reasons.

BuffaloX
August 23rd, 2009, 12:32 AM
Hey BuffaloX!

Can you please site specific instances of what you're saying? I'm not trying to right off the bat yell and scream at you, but I'd like to see some substantiation so we all can see whether we need to drive the wooden stake through Apple's heart, or through someone elses' (copyright holders, for instance?)


I have no love for DMCA and I think it's having the same effect as software patents, and for fundamentally the same reasons.

Fair enough, sorry for the wait, but here goes:

What other company sues their own customers for putting solutions to technical problems on the net?:
http://www.tuaw.com/2006/05/04/macbook-pro-heat-problem-heats-up/

Threaten to sue and void warranty to silence customers:
Threaten to sue and void warranty to silence customers.

Break the functionality of their own products to maintain absolute control over them:
http://www.businessgreen.com/vnunet/news/2227848/judge-green-lights-iphone-brick

With friends like that, who need enemies?

BuffaloX
August 23rd, 2009, 12:33 AM
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Therefore Apple is my friend"? Nah, you can shove that.

This case is illustrative of why the App Store is A Bad Thing.

Sorry what case?

hanzomon4
August 23rd, 2009, 12:59 AM
Sorry what case?

Google Voice App

BuffaloX
August 23rd, 2009, 01:15 AM
Google Voice App

Sorry silly me. :oops:

And yes it is an example, but it's far from the worst example.
App store is so overflowing with unfair practices it's unbelievable.

Mateo
August 23rd, 2009, 01:20 AM
Google's response to the FCC is one of most misleading pieces of FUD I have seen in a while. They repeated use the word "replace" to describe the Google Voice app in respect to the iPhone core apps. They specifically talk about the Phone app and use the word "replace", as though installing the GV app replaces the native Phone app. It does not. GV provides an alternative phone interface (which only works with your google voice number), an alternative SMS interface, an alternative voicemail. It doesn't replace the core iPhone apps, nor does it route these services to the GV app (like they claim).

Apple could have used the word "reinvent" or "reproduce" or "imitate". It chose to use the word "replace" in order to mislead the FCC, knowing that they're likely ignorant about technology and won't question it.

How anyone could call Apple a partner is beyond me. The Orwellian control that they wield over their user base is unequaled in the technology industry.

Mateo
August 23rd, 2009, 01:21 AM
Sorry silly me. :oops:

And yes it is an example, but it's far from the worst example.
App store is so overflowing with unfair practices it's unbelievable.

The Google Latitude rejection is more interesting to me than the GV rejection. While GV does improve on many phone functionalities, it's still a little bit different. But Latitude is more or less just a straight up better version of Maps. Which demonstrates what Apple is really about... eliminating competition.

Chronon
August 23rd, 2009, 01:37 AM
Google's response to the FCC is one of most misleading pieces of FUD I have seen in a while. They repeated use the word "replace" to describe the Google Voice app in respect to the iPhone core apps. They specifically talk about the Phone app and use the word "replace", as though installing the GV app replaces the native Phone app. It does not. GV provides an alternative phone interface (which only works with your google voice number), an alternative SMS interface, an alternative voicemail. It doesn't replace the core iPhone apps, nor does it route these services to the GV app (like they claim).

Apple could have used the word "reinvent" or "reproduce" or "imitate". It chose to use the word "replace" in order to mislead the FCC, knowing that they're likely ignorant about technology and won't question it.

How anyone could call Apple a partner is beyond me. The Orwellian control that they wield over their user base is unequaled in the technology industry.

Did you mean Apple in the first paragraph?

Chronon
August 23rd, 2009, 01:39 AM
But Latitude is more or less just a straight up better version of Maps. Which demonstrates what Apple is really about... eliminating competition.

Maps is also by Google, isn't it? Strange.

Mateo
August 23rd, 2009, 02:11 AM
Did you mean Apple in the first paragraph?

yep :) I would say Freudian slip but it really doesn't fit!

Mateo
August 23rd, 2009, 02:11 AM
Maps is also by Google, isn't it? Strange.

Actually, no. Maps uses Google Maps as a data source, but Apple wrote the actual app.

MikeTheC
August 23rd, 2009, 03:28 AM
BuffaloX:

Ok, I see what you're getting at. I didn't realize the details on the 1st Gen MBPs was like that. Now, technically, I can understand Apple not wanting an internal document published externally without their approval. However, what they obviously should have done is to request it be removed and then provide a "for the public" version of the document, and in parallel with that also make sure they notify all relevant parties (that is, owners) of the issue and offer to do a warranty service on their unit.

Come to think of it, I would expect Apple to have done the latter first. Based on my own experiences over the years, while they may not be perfect, generally Apple has been on top of the problem before most of their user base was aware of the issue.

As for the others, what happens is you have this gray area where basically "intellectual property" meets physical hardware. Sadly, the industry as a whole (and other industries which have the same kind of circumstances) have traditionally (that is, as this kind of situation has come into existence in very recent times) tried to game the system and keep it gray.

And absolutely I'm glad to hear the judge was willing to take a serious look at the situation and not just dismiss it out of hand. In truth I don't think he should have limited the scope of it, but that's his decision and not mine.

Now, all of this notwithstanding, I still don't view Apple as being "worse than" Microsoft, and I don't for three specific reasons.

Excepting the Zune, Microsoft hasn't really gotten into the kind of peripheral hardware market that Apple has, and to the extent that there are product category overlaps, they've been on such trivial devices as keyboards, mice and webcams.

Apple has not hijacked (or attempted to hijack) whole entire industries (music distribution is but one part of the music industry and Apple still doesn't sell physical CD products).

Microsoft's history of corrupting or hijacking standards, of poisoning certain categories of software (web browsers, for instance), and holding licensees hostage to selling Microsoft's operating system and only Microsoft's operating system on their own hardware in addition to deliberately excluding anyone elses' OS product, are specific instances I can think of who's effect to date has been more egregious than Apple's actions of recent times.

None of this is to suggest that I hold -- or feel that everyone else should hold -- Apple harmless from any and all actions they feel like doing. On the contrary, it really upsets and disappoints me with Apple. I have always felt and indeed still feel that Apple needs to take the high road and both set and be held to a higher standard than Microsoft. However, if Apple's going to be such a bad actor (to use a legal concept) then this really isn't such a great situation, is it?

So, I guess we'll just have to see what the future holds.

BuffaloX
August 23rd, 2009, 11:52 AM
BuffaloX:
Microsoft's history of corrupting or hijacking standards, of poisoning certain categories of software (web browsers, for instance), and holding licensees hostage to selling Microsoft's operating system and only Microsoft's operating system on their own hardware in addition to deliberately excluding anyone elses' OS product, are specific instances I can think of who's effect to date has been more egregious than Apple's actions of recent times.[/list]


I don't know how long you have been in this "game", but sadly what I mentioned earlier is only scratching the surface.

Remember the MAC II SCSI interface?, an industry standard interface, except Apple changed the pin layout, so if you tried to use a standard disk, which was less than half the price of an apple disk, you would burn the motherboard!
The MAC II LS I think it was called, used standard IDE, but only two disks were available that worked with it, because they underpowered the interface.
Just two examples of corrupting standards. Apple is not big enough to use MS tactics to "Embrace expand extinguish".

Their App store philosophy speaks for itself, every app sold for an iPhone comes with an Apple tax, if you try to sell apps through other channels than App store, Apple will shut you down, if you return an app, the developer has to pay the full refund, Apple never return a dime.
Apple gives no arguments why programs are excluded from App Store.
iPhone functions may not be duplicated.
If you want to develop for iPhone, you have to sign an SDK agreement which includes a non disclosure agreement, Apple use this very actively to silence developers.

Apple doesn't want to just control a standard, they want to control EVERYTHING.
This is not just a fluke, I've observed Apple since the late 80's, and their behavior hasn't changed one bit, they are just more successful now.

Competition is better than a monopoly, and usually I root for the underdog, to keep competition alive, but in the case of Apple I can't.

mrgnash
August 23rd, 2009, 12:34 PM
Sad to say, I know it to be foolish to expect sanity or a rational outlook from a Linux message board on this kind of topic. Actually, it's altogether fairly predictable, in my view, given the general lack of social graces and areas of interest of stereotypical geeks and nerds, far too many of whom are a part of the tech scene. This is part and parcel of the complaint I've made before about how the Linux community are like cats, and efforts at any form of solidarity for any reason is like trying to herd them, with much the same (lack of) result. Many of you don't give a toss about even your fellow Linux users so long as your own personal needs are met, much less take account of the "big picture" of the tech industry and its politics in your so-called "world" view.

I'm not sitting here as a long-time Mac user hoping blindly Apple comes out unscathed regardless of what actions they engage in like some kind of blind fanboi who's drunk far too much of the company kool-aid.

I am a long-time Mac user who hopes the truth of all of this -- whatever it may be -- comes out, and that Apple, AT&T or both of them as the case may be can be judged according to their acts by the courts and the general public, in full view of all of the facts, and not just out of some equally blind, biased fanboi agenda or worse yet, a Nero-istic "let Rome burn for all I care" attitude as decried about above.

While I believe some of you may "get it", I know many don't, so let me spell it out for you. Microsoft is the enemy. They are not the enemy because they're a competitor to Linux or to Apple. They are the enemy because they are a company which has done many evil acts and has a very long history of behaving badly. Not only should they not be encouraged to continue, they should not be emboldened to continue or empowered to succeed. What we're all suspecting or dreading Apple may have done -- and I'm in that list too -- can only hurt Apple, and in so doing it will indirectly hurt us along with them. The reason I believe this is that I recognize something which evidently a great number of Linux users don't, and that is Apple represents a sort of "partner" in F/OSS' efforts of honest competition in the OS and general software space against Microsoft for the hearts and minds of the general public. We "need" Apple, in an indirect sense, because we don't have -- for several reasons -- any kind of advertising campaign targeted at the general public. Apple's advertising efforts are the "foot-in-the-door" which all of us -- Apple included, obviously -- need to compete for those hearts and minds. With a weakened -- or worse yet, destroyed -- Apple, it will be that much harder for the Linux community to get the general public to understand the Two Critical Things: 1. There is such a thing as an alternative to Microsoft-produced OS and software products; and 2. It's more than just wishful thinking that such a competitor could ever possibly be viable.

The hell of it, as I see it, is that for all the incredible inventiveness and innovation of the F/OSS community, we seem to lack people who understand what I call "battlefield strategy marketing" and combat tactics. In fact, we also seem to lack much in the way of any kind of savvy high-visibility marketing, and that's truly a hindrance to mass desktop adoption and market penetration. Of course, going back to my earlier complaint about the myopic "I don't care about anyone else or what they use" world view of many in the Linux community, I know these words and my general argument will fall on many deaf ears.

I'm simply tired of the attitude that technical superiority and market penetration/adoption rates are somehow antithetical or diametrically opposed goals for the F/OSS community to achieve. Perhaps that comes from some people's in-built preconceptions that Linux somehow only enjoys "security through obscurity" because it doesn't have the same size user share which Microsoft's Windows products have. Regardless of the reason, that part of the attitude is one specific ingredient or "flavoring", if you will, of the Linux soup we don't need.

Anyhow, all of this is to say, I guess, that I am going to wait to see what comes of all of this, but clearly Apple's potential actions are troubling to me.

I don't consider either Apple or Microsoft to be "the enemy" (this is a very childish viewpoint, in my opinion). But I do dislike Apple far more than MS. Deal with it.

bryonak
August 23rd, 2009, 02:17 PM
@MikeTheC:
I also have to disagree with you here...
I don't consider Apple significantly "nicer" than Microsoft. PsyStar and <video> are two recent examples that I think haven't been mentioned before (although they also aren't by far as "bad" as many other things Apple has done).
I also don't believe that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", which might provide a temporarily useful associate, but it's no reason for trust by it's own accord.

They are neither our "ally" nor would their demise be a big loss for FOSS IMO.
Popular project like CUPS, WebKit, etc would immediately find new maintainers, and apart from that code, Apple contributes nothing to FOSS (very much IMO ;)).
Mind you, code is important, but I don't see it as a problem if it were backed by someone else.
That said, I wouldn't like to see them go away... they provide work places, increase competition, generate economic value and produce nicely looking hardware :)

Ubuntu is doing fairly well on it's own. In my region, it's popularity is quickly rising, lot's of people are taking an interest.
Almost every month I hear that someone I know has installed Ubuntu to give it a try.
You surely know the rumour that Microsoft sees FOSS as a far bigger threat than Apple.

I'm writing this from my MacBook Pro: we don't need Apple at all ;)

markbuntu
August 24th, 2009, 12:54 AM
I think we should just quietly go about our own business and leave those monsters alone.

Regenweald
August 24th, 2009, 02:45 AM
I guess all i can say is if you decide to use an apple product you should not feel compelled to defend the corporate entity. You use osx because it serves your uses, and ipod because you think it is a great device. Don't mix up the engineering department( i like engineers) with marketing and legal.

Apple policies are aggressively anti-consumer and anti choice. Again, don't get your departments mixed up.

cprofitt
August 24th, 2009, 03:18 AM
I will put my .02 in the ring.

Apple makes some good products. Their OS is good.

Apple as a company is arrogant and does things to squash the competition that I consider unfair. They do things that 'hurt' the consumer as well. Microsoft, to my knowledge, has killed competition but usually doesn't attack customers in the same manner as Apple.

The more I find out about both companies the more I dislike both... but Apple is still leading in the 'evil' category for me.

Regenweald
August 24th, 2009, 07:32 PM
Case in point:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=592665

Who can defend this ? I'd love to hear about how we're all too hard on poor lil apple.

HappinessNow
August 24th, 2009, 07:47 PM
edit.

joshua.rh
September 16th, 2010, 05:56 AM
As far as apple goes, I think they put out FUD and generally try to lock you in to their platform, like some other OSs do (take iTuned for example). However, they do NOT try to (I think the quote was) "poison standards", and this is the biggest thing that annoys me about MS. This is something people put off and say "oh they're a business, so bad web browers, jvms, chat clients, etc are OK with us and should be with you too.

The comment about linux users being about cats: I'd agree, but I'd also add that most if not all computer users are like that, we just do (maybe because we're allowed to?) change our OS more, you can't always do that with MacOS/Windows.

I think the important thing to do is take a look at things like this and let everyone (cats they may be) post their opinions, FUD, and otherwise trolling comments (if that's what they want to do) then require them to back up what they say, so they can either do that or consider the other side (or, hopefully, both). That's what the community has always done for me and I thank them for it.