Google Voice Daily

There was a huge flow of news today on the FCC’s look into the Google Voice apps rejection. I’ve rounded up the most important takes from scores of articles and postings to give you a feel for the big picture within which Google Voice is progressing.

My overall view is that the US is headed toward broader wired and wireless broadband access and a “net neutrality” approach for cell phones too. Google Voice is perfectly suited to this new approach. The first-ever review of cell phones for their Google Voice capabilities, linked below, is a sign of this.  

Washington Post (TechCrunch article): Why the FCC Wants to Smash Open the iPhone

Erick Schonfeld sums up the Google Voice brouhaha well. and quickly ties the Google Voice rejection to the broader issue of wireless broadband Internet access. He sums up the questions asked by the FCC. But the headline really says it all.  

Washington Post: Google CEO Schmidt Quits Apple Board Amid Scrutiny

Franklin Paul and Gariel Madway sum up the news and issues well and point out that Apple COO Tim Cook can take up the empty seat on the board.  They point out that investors could see it as a positive – and both companies’ stock rose 2% just after.

PC Magazine: The Best Phones for Google Voice

Sascha Segan rates the best phones for Google Voice, giving high marks to three BlackBerrys and the myTouch 3G.

My take: A short article and not very incisive, but interesting as a very different way to rate cell phones.

Information Week: FCC Probes Google Voice Blockage

Marin Perez quotes Forrester analyst Charles Golvin as minimizing the likely impact of the FCC move and cites several recent instances of the FCC moving to open up access to mobile networks.

GigaOm: Interview with FCC Chairman Genachowski

Om Malik interviewed Genachowski last Thursday, which unfortunately was the day before the letters to Apple, AT&T and Gooogle over Google Voice. In the interview Genachowski points to other countries as having moved ahead of the US in telecomms regulation, and Om points out that they’re also ahead in competition. Genachowski points out that he’s hiring engineers, economists and entrepreneurs as well as lawyers to the 2500-person FCC, and hints that new laws will be needed to update the regulatory framework for the Internet age. He also mentions upcoming 4G as key.

San Jose Mercury News: FCC Chair Touts Broadband as Top Priority

The editors of the Mercury News met with Genachowski on Monday. He emphasized wider broadband access as perhaps an even greater concern than mobile telephony.

My take: This may be a false distinction; broadband access through mobile telephones brings the issues together, and tends to push cell phone service providers toward the “dumb pipes” role.

Public Knowledge: FCC and Congress Start Campaign For Open Internet

Public Knowledge Communications Director Art Brodsky describes his group’s advocacy for open Internet access through both cell phones and traditional broadband.

My take: This is the big battle into which many other stories will fit.

Forbes.com: Apple isn’t Evil for Rejecting Google Voice

In what’s almost a contrarian view, the writer points out that it’s sensible for Apple and AT&T to reject Google Voice. The idea is that, by taking money from AT&T for SMS and international calls, Google Voice undercuts the ability of the pair to offer iPhones for $99 – instead of the $500-$600 common in countries that don’t allow tight tying together of devices and service plans. (Another Forbes article makes the same point more pithily: “you get what you pay for”.) For an alternative approach, with distinctive phones for half the iPhone’s price, see here.

My take: The FCC seems to disagree. (The article was written before the FCC letters were announced.) And just because consumers benefit in one (important) way doesn’t mean that the deal that allows them to do so is legal. The article does inadvertently point out how hard it will be for the iPhone to gain traction in countries where it’s priced fairly.

Dashes.com: Apple: Secrecy Does Not Scale

Anil Dash writes a useful opinion piece on how Apple should be more open. He cites the expense of secrecy and the increasing difficulty of maintaining it.

San Francisco Chronicle: Google CEO Schmidt leaves Apple Board

Staff writer James Temple describes the departure of Google CEO Eric Schmidt from Apple’s board and how Apple attributes it to intensifying competition between the two. He reports analysts’ belief that government scrutiny of the relationship played a roughly equal role.Temple points out that the FTC has spent months investigating whether Schmidt’s and Genentech Chairman Arthur Levinson’s membership of both companies’ boards violates antitrust law. He then describes the Google Voice decision and other sources of tension. He leaves open whether Schmidt’s leaving is a focused effort to sidestep the antitrust issue or the beginning of a bigger rivalry.

My take: Very good roundup article. I’d additionally observe that “those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it”. “Interlocking directorates” have been a “trustbuster” target for a century, and for Apple and Google to dangle such a tempting target in front of the Feds has always been arrogant and stupid of both companies. Look for Levinson to resign from one of the boards soon to finish off the issue. (Genentech shareholders: he’s stupid, unethical and a tool, a dual-use one at that. Why is he your chairman?)

Business Week: Apple vs. Google: Tech’s Newest Rivalry?

Peter Burrows speculates that the Microsoft/Apple, Microsoft/IBM and Microsoft/Google rivalries will be followed by Apple/Google as the “new defining rivalry in tech”. He describes the very open vs. tightly controlled approaches of the two companies.

PC Magazine: The Google vs. Apple War Begins

Sascha Segan describes the US Government as basically in Google’s pocket, with CEO Schmidt as a technology advisor to Obama and Obama’s deputy CTO Andrew McLaughlin a recent former Google employee. He makes the case that the FCC investigation of the App Store is irrational as there is, in the big picture, plenty of competition. Blackberry is #1 in the US and Nokia globally, so Apple isn’t even #1, let alone a monopolist.

My take: A well-made case, though I disagree that no the Feds are in Google’s pocket and that no investigation into whether laws are being broken by Apple is needed.

MediaPost Blogs: FCC Questions Apple Ban of Google App

Writer Wendy Davis points out that advocacy group Free Press asked the FCC to investigate whether limitations on Skype’s usefulness on the iPhone (it’s WiFi-only) violated net neutrality principles. An AT&T senior executive was quoted at the time as saying AT&T had “every right” to decline to promote rivals, and also admitted to blocking 3G support the SlingPlayer television app, an interesting contrast to their current “it’s up to Apple” statements. Advocacy group Public Knowledge has cheered the move. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is asking the US Copyright Office to bless “jailbreaking” of iPhones.

My take: Apple’s response to the EFF has prompted it to make ridiculous claims that jailbroken iPhones could be used for terrorist cyberattacks on cell phone towers. (If the iPhone is a potential weapon of mass destruction, it shouldn’t be sold, and neither should any Android phone, etc.) Separately, Apple is accused of covering up problems with iPhones overheating and even exploding. The dustup over Google Voice is part of a host of problems for Apple.

eWeek: Apple’s Rejection of Google Voice Points to Just One Thing

Andrew Garcia speculates that Apple is working on a Google Voice-like service for MobileMe, occasioning the rejection of all Google Voice apps last week. He describes how podcast downloading and tethering were both blocked from the App Store before then being offered by Apple.

My take: Interesting speculation, only time will tell if it’s right. I would guess not. A Google Voice-like service would lose a good chunk of its appeal if it was tied to one vendor, even if that’s a giant in the market like Apple.

Switched: Is Apple More Evil than Microsoft?

Terrence O’Brien asserts that Apple is less open than Microsoft, on both the Mac and the iPhone; that Apple copies other companies too; that Apple are “jerks” for going after jailbreakers and shutting down a successful Mac rumor site; that Apple doesn’t “do” charity like Microsoft (let alone Bill Gates).

My take: Interesting complement to Chris Dannen’s Seven Reasons to Ditch the iPhone, published yesterday. (An article that made Digg’s Top 10 for the week, after only one day in circulation.)
 
StorefrontBacktalk: The New Mobile Landscape: Google Quits Apple Board

Evan Schuman mentions Schmidt’s departure, then anticipates mobile commerce (M-Commerce) as the “next big thing” in retail. This is actually buying from your cell phone.

Barriers are said to be lack of standardization – of URLs, of how the GUI works, of where on an e-commerce site a customer would find the link. The iPhone is described as the most m-commerce-ready phone, and Apple, being the leader, as the most resistant to “lowest common denominator” standardization. Google is described as the open standards advocate.

My take: I don’t know if m-commerce is on the principals’ minds here, but interesting as to what the future will bring.

The Ski Channel: Google vs. Apple – Let the Games Begin

An unsigned article relates the Apple/Google tensions to skiing at Mammoth Mountain and proposes a Winter Games between the companies to settle things.

Also of interest

• A Forbes writer calls Apple the world’s most discreetly feminine brand. I wonder how much Google Voice will appeal to men vs. women as its uptake grows. Of course, with iPhone adoption hindered by Apple’s move, growth will be stronger on the more likely male-heavy BlackBerry and Android platforms.
• Another Forbes writer sees Apple as having the advantage over Google in their newly competitive relationship, with Apple ahead on operating systems and mobile phones, while Google leads in Web browsers.