Posted byHarry McCracken on July 30, 2009 at 12:17 pm
My friend David Pogue of the New York Times is a man on a mission. He’s become irate over the time that cell phone company voicemail systems spend playing a recorded message telling you to leave a message, explaining how to send a page, and suggesting that you hang up when you’re done leaving the message. The messages are pointless little annoyances every time you hear them–and since they take fifteen seconds or so to play, they eat up the monthly minutes of the person who called.
David is trying to rally phone users to bury carriers in such a surging sea of complaints that they enter the 21st century by ditching these obsolete recorded messages. It’s a great idea. His post about all this includes instructions on how to tell your carrier you’re part of the crusade.
Of course, it’s not just that 15-second message that’s irritating–voicemail systems in general tend to sport the most aggravating user interfaces this side of automated supermarket checkouts. One of the nice things about using an iPhone and/or Google Voice is getting to avoid those convoluted menus…and David says that Apple insisted that AT&T eliminate the 15-second message for iPhone voicemail. Which proves it can be done–you know of anyone who’s called an iPhone owner, been bounced into voicemail, and gotten confused by the lack of instructions?
In either case, one thing’s clear: These apps aren’t being kept out of the App Store in the interest of iPhone owners. Apple’s monopoly on app distribution means that iPhone owners who haven’t unlocked their phones simply don’t have control over their devices.
In most respects that matter, the iPhone is by far the best mobile platform that has ever existed. I keep telling people that it proves that it’s not going to be very long until we think of a Personal Computer as something we carry in our pockets, and even laptops begin to look like antiques. But an iPhone that’s deprived of apps that Apple and/or carriers dislike for competitive reasons isn’t really a PC. It’s just a phone that offers a heck of a lot of applications. And the App Store, like the crummy, self-serving download stores that carriers have put on phones, is a walled garden–just a really big walled garden.
For thirty years, PC owners have had the final call on what software they used. That’s why many people run Apple software on Microsoft operating systems and Microsoft software on Apple operating systems. It’s why people get to run Firefox and Chrome on Windows, even though they duplicate features in Internet Explorer. If it hadn’t been this way for decades, the growth of the Windows and Mac platforms would have been horribly stunted, and the computers we use today would be a lot less useful and interesting. And if Apple maintains these policies moving forward, the iPhone platform will be horribly stunted, and iPhones will be a lot less useful and interesting than they might have been.
I keep coming back to what Steve Jobs told us at the Apple event that introduced the App Store last year:
Jobs said that Apple wouldn’t distribute porn or malicious apps or privacy-invading apps, and said that Apple’s interests and those of third-party developers were the same. The slide also mentioned “Bandwidth hogs,” which apparently meant stuff like SlingPlayer, and “Unforeseen,” which I assumed at the time referred to other applications that put iPhone owners at risk in one way or another. What he didn’t do is say that Apple would reject software that competed with Apple or AT&T offerings.
I’m looking on the bright side: Apple’s approval process is capricious enough that it’s entirely possible it’ll change its mind and permit Google Voice apps on the App Store at some point. A couple of months ago, the company approved the excellent e-reader Eucalyptus shortly after rejecting it. Doesn’t that establish a precedent for quiet undoing of bad decisions?
Posted byJason Meserve on July 28, 2009 at 9:23 am
Google Voice aficionados–of which there are more by the day–were excited to see mobile apps for the service launch for Android and BlackBerry devices. The general consensus: A similar iPhone app must be right around the corner. Not so fast.
The unofficial GV Mobile app written by Sean Kovac has been rejected by Apple or, more likely, AT&T, according to Mashable and Kovac. GV Mobile lets Google Voice account holders dial numbers through the address book or keypad, send SMS messages, retrieve call history data and take calls on a different phone–all functions the Google Voice web site offers. Google too had its official Voice application rejected by Apple, according to TechCrunch.
The problem with Kovac’s app, Apple says, is that this duplicates functionality of the iPhone and therefore is not needed. “Richard Chipman from Apple just called–he told me they’re removing GV Mobile from the App Store due to it duplicating features that the iPhone comes with (Dialer, SMS, etc). He didn’t actually specify which features, although I assume the whole app in general,” Kovac wrote on his blog.
Apple’s beta of the iPhone OS 3.1 update has begun to circle the web, indicating the company is close to offering the first major update to the new OS. While none of the tweaks are overly groundbreaking, impatient iPhone users will likely be happy about one thing.
The beta appears to turn back on the MMS functionality for all iPhone users, including those on AT&T, as well as updating the “profile” for the carrier. These appear to be the first steps towards bringing the functionality to the consumer, at least on the device side.
It should be noted that installing 3.1 beta will not give you MMS. As AT&T has said, the carrier must enable it from it’s side before you will be able to picture (and video, if you have a 3GS) message to your hearts content.
Rumors had circulated on the Internets that AT&T was targeting a July timeframe for the debut of MMS. Seeing that 3.1 is already enabling the functionality, that’s surely a promising sign.
Besides MMS, most of the other tweaks are fairly minor, and seem to generally be 3GS centric. Non-destructive video editing seems to be the biggest addition (where editing will not destroy the original video), as well as bluetooth-enabled voice control.
Developer enhancements include improvements to OpenGL and Quartz, as well as an API to allow third-party apps to call up the video editor. A video picker API has also been added, according to reports.
Which is why I admire what Mark Sullivan and my other PC World pals did: compare the three carries for upload speed, download speed, and reliability in thirteen cities. PCW conducted this ambitious real-world experiment in partnership with Novarum, using Ixia’s IxChariot tool. As Mark says in his story, the results are only a snapshot of how the networks did on a given day, in the particular locations in the specific cities that PCW and Novarum visited. But they’re interesting nonetheless. And they tend to jibe with some of the anecdotal impressions that folks have about the three carriers:
–The performance varied a lot from city to city.
–Out of the 13 cities, Verizon got the highest reliability rating in seven and Sprint got the highest one in six. AT&T didn’t score highest in reliability in any cities, and was often far behind its two competitors.
–Verizon got the highest download score in seven cities; Sprint scored highest in four; AT&T in two.
–AT&T had the highest upload score in ten cities; Sprint was highest in two; Verizon in only one.
The most notable result is AT&T’s lackluster download score. AT&T told PCW that it stands by its claim of being the nation’s fastest 3G provider, based on results from two independent firms and tests involving a million road miles and a million data sessions. I don’t dispute its stance. But PCW’s experiment is a useful reminder that claims about “America” or “the nation” may or may not reflect what you get in your own hometown. And it might help to explain why AT&T is the only one of the big three carriers who never talks about dependability or reliability in its ads.
Posted byHarry McCracken on June 26, 2009 at 12:09 pm
PreThinking has noticed that Sprint is running ads for the Palm Pre directed at the earliest of iPhone adopters–the folks who bought first-generation iPhones two years ago, and whose contracts are therefore starting to end. (Or will be in a few days–next Monday is the second anniversary of the iPhone’s introduction.) The ads correctly point out the Pre’s multitasking and Sprint’s all-inclusive $99 service plan as reasons to consider a Pre. They also mention Sprint’s 4G network, which is a tad odd given that the Pre doesn’t support it.
Posted byHarry McCracken on June 24, 2009 at 4:29 pm
The iPhone 3.0 app goodness continues roll in. An iPhone version of AT&T’s Navigator turn-by-turn GPS driving directions app is live in Apple’s App Store. It’s one of several navigation apps that have already appeared in the week since iPhone OS 3.0’s arrival. (The most eagerly-awaited one, though, is probably from TomTom–and it’s not due until later this summer.)
Navigator is powered by GPS stalwart TeleNav, and worked reasonably well as I used it on my iPhone 3GS while tooling around the Bay Area today. I was worried that it might not work as well as a dedicated GPS handheld, since early scuttlebutt had it that the iPhone 3G had a wimpy antenna. (I spent $150 on TomTom’s Windows Mobile version for my AT&T Tilt phone, and while the software was great the Tilt wasn’t much better at figuring out where it was than I am. And I have a cruddy sense of direction.)
Navigator had no problem keeping up with me even at 60mph. It has decent search for addresses and businesses, live traffic updates, and a bunch of other features that my current GPS system (a five-year-old one built into my Mazda3) lacks. However, it works only in portrait mode as far as I can tell–I wish it also offered a more windshield-mimicking landscape view. And the quality of its spoken directions was surprisingly muffled, which occasionally left me straining to understand them.
If you’re serious about using Navigator or any other GPS application for the iPhone, there’s no doubt that you’re going to want some sort of mounting system that pumps its audio through your car’s stereo and provides power–otherwise, the phone will be too hard to see and too hard to hear, and its battery will be drained in a jffy. Devices of that sort already exist, and TomTom plans to sell one as an option for its software.
AT&T being AT&T, it’s selling Navigator as a service, not a program–typical for phone GPS (although one of the benefits of getting the Palm Pre and paying for Sprint’s $99 voice and data plan is that it comes with driving directions). Navigator is $9.99 a month. I’d really like the option of paying a one-time fee. (Especially since I’m most likely to need this software when I’m on the road for business or pleasure in a rent-a-car.)
Bottom line: Navigator’s not bad, but I’ll wait until TomTom’s out before I decide which GPS application will live on my iPhone. After the jump, a few screens of the AT&T product in action.
The latest rumor du jour regarding AT&T’s tethering support says that it could cost as much as $55 per month on top of an unlimited data plan for the functionality. This has sparked even more criticism against the already battered carrier, something it is not going to allow to happen.
From the company’s official Facebook page: “There are a lot of reports out there, but wanted you guys to know that rumors of $55 tethering plan on top of an unlimited data plan are false. We’ll have more news to share when the iPhone tethering option is closer to launch.”
It is not exactly clear what AT&T will charge, but apparently it’s not going to be $55. Probably far less (let’s hope free, like some other carriers).
Posted byHarry McCracken on June 19, 2009 at 1:30 pm
On a scale of 1 to 10, my experience buying a new iPhone 3G S this morning was a 9.5 (well, except for the part about showing up at 3:15am). I was in and out of the Apple Store in less than ten minutes with a working phone. It was a vast improvement on my buying encounter last year, when the store’s Windows CE-powered wireless terminals kept crashing and I spent close to an hour in the store–and left with an iPhone 3G that still didn’t work until I activated it at home.
But AppleInsider is reporting that some people are discovering that their phones aren’t activating, and that iTunes is telling them that it could take 48 hours before they’re all set. (I don’t think the “Waiting for Activation: This May Take Some Time” message mentioned by AI is a sign of trouble–I got that message too, and in my case, the “some time” was around twenty seconds.) Let’s hope that the 48-hour figure is an absurd worst-case scenario, not a likely experience.
I don’t know how widespread the issues reported by AppleInsider are, but a Twitter search for “iPhone activation” returns more tweets by people worrying about activation glitches than by those actually experiencing them. I choose to take that as a sign that things are going smoothly for most folks.
What a revoltin’ development this is. As my colleague Jason Meserve 
Google Voice
Special “let’s ask questions” edition!
Sprint claims to have “
PreThinking has noticed that Sprint is