Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Businesses Google The Internet Apple

Apple Kills Google Voice Apps On the iPhone 541

Posted by kdawson
from the hey-wait-isn't-he-on-our-board dept.
molnarcs writes "Apple pulls Google Voice-enabled applications from its App Store, citing duplication of functionality. The move affects both Google's official Google Voice and third party apps like Voice Central. Sean Kovacs, main developer of GV Mobile, says that he had personal approval for his app from Phil Shiller, Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing, last April. TechCrunch's Jason Kincaid suspects AT&T behind the move."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Kills Google Voice Apps On the iPhone

Comments Filter:
  • YAWN (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:10PM (#28858049)
    Is anyone else bored of the endless stories about Apple rejecting apps?
  • by ZackSchil (560462) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:12PM (#28858095)

    How long can Apple keep this up? The iPhone app store has been a great thing, but slam after slam of bad press against it is slowly turning the opinion of the technically inclined. If they don't do something soon, they're going to end up like Sony circa 2007.

  • Wow... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Xpendable (1605485) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:13PM (#28858099)

    Wow, that's pretty scary. I'd hate to have developed software for a platform, only to find it removed from the platform a few months later as an anti-competitive action because the company that owns the platfrom decides to release their own versions of the same thing. That could put me out of business! And I'm sure the developer agreement with Apple gives them full rights to do this. Yikes. Well, I'm one of the few around here that doesn't have an iphone anyway.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:13PM (#28858115)

    Why on earth geeks continue to view Apple as a Good Company boggles my mind. They've shown themselves time and time again to be evil, controlling, and dedicated to being as closed as possible. This is just the latest in a long, long line of anti-customer things they've done. Why do people continue to support this behavior?

  • by Arimus (198136) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:17PM (#28858173)

    Why on earth geeks continue to view Apple as a Good Company boggles my mind.

    Wny on earth **some** geeks would be more accurate.

    I'm a geek I'd guess by most definitions and while I own and like my ipod touch I do not think Apple, Google, Microsoft et al are good 'companies' in the sense you mean. All companies, if they wish to remain in buisness, have just one goal: make the most money they can out of each individual customer.

  • by CannonballHead (842625) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:17PM (#28858177)
    Apple has Good PR. They are a "Good" Company in that respect?
  • by akcpe (1438869) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:18PM (#28858195)
    So.. I'm a little confused here. There's all sorts of talk about Google Voice competing with the iPhone (at least on some other news sites that have published this) Not sure I understand the comparison. Google Voice for phone calls uses at&t minutes, which don't cost Apple. Its simply call forwarding. This is not VOIP folks. Google Voice SMS doesnt cost Apple either. There are PLENTY of other free SMS apps on the App Store already, why not Google Voice? Voicemail transcriptions surely don't duplicate functionality of either Apple or at&t. As far as alternative visual voicemail, again there are already apps on the App Store for that. (ie. YouMail). Can someone please enlighten me how this is due to Google trying to compete with Apple, or even at&t?
  • by sean.peters (568334) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:19PM (#28858207) Homepage
    ... the App Store sucks. This is yet another example of why it's bad that for a given platform, you are required to get your software from a manufacturer approved repository. Don't get me wrong, repositories are great. But not if you're forced to use them, and especially not when the repository owner manipulates the software selection to suit themselves. I smell an anti-competitive lawsuit in the making here.
  • by GimpyE (1607443) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:20PM (#28858227)
    Apple, making Android look good since 2008.
  • by hodet (620484) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:21PM (#28858257)
    I bought mine in 2004 and I have to pull out the antenna to use it. Works great and only costs me like $10/month. I don't get all the hype with cell phones these days. I have a BB at work and i would never pay the outrageous fees to own one myself. As for developers, are there not other platforms that can be profitable for you that don't have Sybil as the gatekeeper. Why would you subject yourself to the stress.
  • Sigh...TechCrunch (Score:5, Insightful)

    by basementman (1475159) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:22PM (#28858279) Homepage

    TechCrunch is citing AT&T is behind it, yet they have absolutely no evidence to indicate that. It is in both Apples and AT&Ts interest to keep the Google Voice app off the iPhone. TechCrunch is just blaming AT&T so they can keep their Apple fanboyism going.

  • by Tridus (79566) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:27PM (#28858371) Homepage

    It's always nice when companies go and make the case for why closed platforms suck with no effort required on anybody elses part. Apple is just another example. Having a gatekeeper say what you can and can't run on your phone like this was never a good idea, and now we're seeing why.

    Apple fanboys will put up with anything, of course. I hope this type of nonsense gets through to the more sensible people out there though.

  • by mcgrew (92797) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:28PM (#28858377) Homepage Journal

    I don't think it's so much "A Good Company" as "A company that makes well designed, albeit expensive, products." If I had the cash my PC would be a mac and my phone would be an iPhone... at least, if I could use anybody but AT&T with the iPhone. That's a bigger hurde than the cost.

    I don't dislike Microsoft because of their business practices; I dislike Microsoft because I don't like the way they design most of their products. YMMV as always.

  • by dzym (544085) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:28PM (#28858393) Homepage Journal

    I'm sure it's occurred to more than a few of us that citing "duplication of functionality" is a gigantic fucking can of worms.

    And Apple opened it.

  • by erroneus (253617) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:29PM (#28858397) Homepage

    In a word? NO. Apple+AT&T are clearly operating under their own agenda and any agreements, past, present and future, are subject to change without notice or compensation. You will not be able to depend on them any more than you can depend on Amazon not to delete your books from your Kindle.

    This is a risk of putting yourself under the control of companies like these -- they might seem cool now, but are quite subject to change without notice or compensation. The only protection anyone might enjoy is legislative or judicial relief. We have had such relief in the past and it has worked well for "we the people." We seriously need to break the agreement between AT&T and Apple as well as other handset exclusivity agreements along with all manner of other problems associated with mobile phone technologies.

    The continuous merging and dealing among technology companies are in need of deeper scrutiny as at every turn they seem to limit or control technological advancement for their own anti-competitive and price-controlling purposes.

  • Re:Wow... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by megamerican (1073936) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:30PM (#28858419)

    This is going to happen with any platform is tethered. It won't matter if it is the Apple's iPhone, Amazon's Kindle or anything else. Unless the purchasers demand a change this won't stop. Don't expect any miracles.

  • by atomic_bomberman (1602061) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:32PM (#28858439)
    "If they don't do something soon..."

    And what would you have Apple do? Tell AT&T, their one sales partner, to bugger off?

    I'd love to hear what any one of you would do (and how) if in Apple's position. But I'm sure most of you will just complain and compare Apple to Sony, Microsoft, Cheney,...
  • by akcpe (1438869) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:33PM (#28858453)
    Skype is there to offer cheap international rates, albeit crippled with WiFi, However, how many people are actually using their cell for international calls? I wish i could take a poll, cause i doubt its many, if any unless someone else is footing the bill. I cant imagine paying exorbitant international cell rates for any of my calls.
  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dustwun (662589) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:35PM (#28858485) Homepage
    Google doesn't even have to do this themselves. They could simply drop the code into code.google.com and let someone else build/submit it to cydia. Then they can appear to be playing by Apple/AT&T rules, and still get their app used the way they want.
  • by cabjf (710106) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:37PM (#28858517)
    I bet that kind of veto power by AT&T is written into their contract. Once the exclusivity is up, I would also bet they need a new contract. At that point Apple can either stipulate less control from AT&T or take their phones to another provider, or both. Their strategy in the cell market seems to be similar to the music store market. They started out giving in to those that held the power, then after they grew their market share more than anyone thought they would, the tables turned.
  • SMS, etc. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dan East (318230) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:48PM (#28858729) Homepage Journal

    Google voice provides unlimited incoming AND outgoing SMS for free. I've been using it on my blackberry because I have unlimited data, but no SMS plan (costs me 25 cents to send a single message). I'm not familiar with the AT&T plans, but if SMS packages are optional add-ons then they would certainly lose money as people realize they have unlimited texting through their google phone number.

  • Re:Wow... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Scootin159 (557129) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:49PM (#28858733) Homepage
    This also raises an interesting legal question - can a "platform" lock-out non-platform apps? For instance, imagine the fallout if Microsoft released a "patch" which removed all copies of Firefox, Chrome, Safari and Opera from user's machines. They are just a "duplication of functionality" found within IE, right?
  • by Chyeld (713439) <chyeldNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:49PM (#28858743)

    As a certain other famous 'evil' CEO said "Developers, Developers, Developers".

    It may not matter to the end users, but if you are a developer thinking of working out that cool new killer app for the iPhone, hearing that not only does Apple have a horrible record for inconsistent approvals, but even when you are as big as Google and get a signoff from the top levels of the company, you can still have your app pulled retroactively, might mean the difference between giving the project a green light and considering someone else's platform.

  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TooMuchToDo (882796) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:51PM (#28858763)

    I am really sick of them making the most retarded decisions regarding what applications I can install on MY device

    It's really easy to ensure Apple doesn't control what software run on YOUR device. Buy your device from a manufacturer who doesn't suck. iPhone users deserve what they get, knowing Apple tightly controls the ecosystem.

  • by mini me (132455) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:52PM (#28858775)

    The iPhone already has carrier specific stores in a sense; by country. Netshare has already shown us that AT&T calls the shots for all carriers. Rogers, for example, at the time, allowed tethering on all of their data plans. There is no reason why the app should not have been in the Canadian store, even if AT&T wanted it pulled from the U.S. market.

  • by bertoelcon (1557907) <berto DOT el DOT con AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:54PM (#28858813)
    Fanboys never win.

    But being one and playing devil's advocate gets you insightful mods, that's nice I guess.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:56PM (#28858849)

    Apple has a lot of pull. They have a very, very desirable device that phone companies want badly. I have no doubt that, had Apple actually wanted to, they could have worked a very advantageous-to-them contract out.

    The problem is that Apple is just as bad, if not worse, than the phone companies themselves when it comes to control.

  • Re:It was AT&T (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @04:58PM (#28858877) Homepage

    This isn't too surprising. At the time the App store was announced, there were vague implications that one of the major reason Apple wanted approval over applications (beyond issues like maintaining battery life, stability, user experience) was that AT&T wanted to control what was and wasn't allowed.

    It was stated outright at launch that VOIP apps that allowed use over the cell networks wouldn't be allowed at all. It was implied that tethering applications and IM clients (which compete with SMS) would probably not be allowed. (Chat clients are now allowed, though.) Apple even said something about, "Since we have been given unprecedented access to AT&T's network, we're going to have to limit what we allow in order to be very careful about security,"... whatever that's supposed to mean.

    I really hope that, as the iPhone/iPod-Touch platform matures a bit, the wireless networks also become faster and, just as important, more open, and that Apple opens the whole system up. I want to be able to access the filesystem on my iPhone (and not have my MP3 collection hidden), install applications as easily as I install applications on my computer, and run whatever I want. On that day, if the wireless network is any good, I'll drop my cell phone service, buy an iPod touch, and install a VOIP application.

  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Mike Buddha (10734) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:00PM (#28858913)

    And by the same token, manufacturers should stop shoveling crap to us and crank out some hardware worth buying. As much as I despise Apple's closed mindedness, I despise the crappy hardware coming from HTC, the crappy OS coming from Samsung, and the unfinished work coming from Google and Palm even worse.

  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TooMuchToDo (882796) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:06PM (#28858995)
    Crappy hardware > Locked Down OS
  • Re:Wow... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Jeff Carr (684298) <slashdot.com@jef ... o minus math_god> on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:07PM (#28859013) Homepage
    Android isn't on AT&T yet, I wouldn't be surprised if they hold off as long as they possibly can. I know Apple would like that, and the two have a pretty sweet deal together at the moment.

    That said, my next phone will be on Android, and that'll be enough to switch me from AT&T if they don't get one in the near future.
  • by greenbird (859670) * on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:10PM (#28859051)

    I don't dislike Microsoft because of their business practices; I dislike Microsoft because I don't like the way they design most of their products.

    And Apple designs their products such that they are owned and controlled completely by Apple even after you've bought them from Apple. You consider that a good design? I consider that just like Microsoft. Apple's may be a bit easier to use but they suffer from the same primary flaw. You have no control over them.

    The only reason I can see for buying an Apple product is that they have excellent marketing. They do a fantastic job of luring in the mindless masses who don't have the wherewithal to actually think through the consequences of their purchases. When I buy something I want to control it.

  • by DragonWriter (970822) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:10PM (#28859057)

    And what would you have Apple do? Tell AT&T, their one sales partner, to bugger off?

    Sure, tell AT&T that they have no interest in renewing their exclusivity agreement regardless of financial incentives if AT&T insists on prohibiting access to basic features of the phone. AT&T needs Apple more than Apple needs AT&T. People aren't buying iPhones because they are on AT&T's network, as much as they are paying for AT&T data plans because its the only way they can use an iPhone.

    Apple is, with the iPhone, in a position of strength. But that only lasts as long as other premium smartphones, like those running Android, don't offer a better all-around experience, and if AT&T tries to defend its existing business model by hamstringing the iPhone, it may work in the short-term, but in the long-term its going to make it easier for other phones to displace the iPhone as the mobile device of choice, which will hurt Apple and AT&T both.

  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Mike Buddha (10734) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:11PM (#28859069)

    Your opinion My opinion :)

  • Re:YAWN (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Lemmy Caution (8378) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:21PM (#28859215) Homepage

    The Google Voice app is an official application. GV Mobile was not. The latter was pulled from the market yesterday; the former was rejected today.

  • by scorp1us (235526) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:26PM (#28859269) Journal
    As an iPhone fan boy, I am not under the impression that the iPhone is the end-all-be-all for all time. I only think it is the end-all-be-all for the duration of my contract. I am eagerly awaiting the day when I can get an Android or Qt-based phone. But even if they are available, I might stick with Apple. Apple can get away with the AppStore BS because they have market momentum. But as these stories proliferate, developers will become wary and port to other platforms. Apple will then be forced to let go, or let the market slip away. In the end I will win, iPhone or not because competition will always ensure my next phone is better. I want Android and Nokia to make my iPhone suck, because Apple will be forced to do better. I think this is why they may be making a tablet that isn't bundled to a carrier. It gets them out of the phone market, but keeps them in the mobile market space. Leave the phones to the phone companies, let Apple focus on computers.
  • by SlashV (1069110) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:28PM (#28859311) Homepage
    Rofl. I had a neighbor with humor like that. Wonderful :).
    I keep hearing stories about AI getting there and that they'll be able to build a human brain in ten years or so. Once this 'brain' comes up with a joke like this I'll start to believe those stories.
  • by TwinkieStix (571736) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:34PM (#28859379) Homepage
    Visual voicemail is considered a "value add" for the iPhone and is one of the selling points for the phone. Apple has an incentive to keep users away from the non-apple (and in my opinion, superior) visual voicemail service offered for free by Google.

    But to your point. I think AT&T has a much stronger incentive to disallow Google Voice, (no more SMS, no more long distance fees, less of a reason to charge extra for a special iPhone package that includes Visual Voicemail, potential to have voice calls driven over the cheaper data network).
  • Re:Wow... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geekboy642 (799087) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:34PM (#28859395) Journal

    Geeks would scream bloody murder. My parents wouldn't even notice. The EU would slap MS with another "giant" fine. The US *might*, possibly, bring suit against them. Said suit would last 8 years and resolve with a series of fines and injunctions against certain vaguely-defined anti-competitive behaviors. Meanwhile MS would still retain control over 3/4 of the OS and office apps market.

  • Re:It was AT&T (Score:4, Insightful)

    by recoiledsnake (879048) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:50PM (#28859587)

    Why doesn't Apple just get a list of phone uses that AT&T doesn't like and put them in the dev agreement for the SDK? Just state that any apps involving voice, or tethering etc. are banned. That way developers don't waste their time and money making such apps.

  • by presidenteloco (659168) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:55PM (#28859661)

    The carriers think that voice is different than data.

    The Internet (and service providers like Google / Skype etc) think that
    voice is just another kind of data. (Though a bit of priority for the
    packets to reduce latency would be splendid.)

    This is just a replay of the old Bellhead vs Nethead battle.

    I'm pretty sure the Netheads are going to win eventually, by the
    logic of the usefulness of having general data networking to every
    device.

    But there will be much gnashing of teeth between here and there.

  • Use your words (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tetsujin (103070) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @05:58PM (#28859697) Homepage Journal

    Oh, fuck this. Stripping the character. Damn /.
    We'll go with "!>" then.

    You know, you could avoid the whole problem by expressing your thoughts with actual words instead of misappropriated mathematical symbols which don't really fit the sentence you're trying to form...

    "Is greater than", as used in math, does not have the same meaning as "is better than". The fact that the readings can take the same meaning is somewhat irrelevant: it's the same sort of thing as using an image of paw-prints in a GUI to represent "pause" - the conceptual link isn't as direct as it should be.

    So, please, leave magnitude comparison to domains where they have some meaning... Elsewhere, use words.

  • Re:YAWN (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CarpetShark (865376) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @06:01PM (#28859733)

    Kind of. As a non-iphone-user, it's still interesting to see how far Apple will go before the realise they're working against their hard-won customer loyalty. On the other hand, customers complaining about DRM when they specifically went and bought something that was DRM'd is pretty dumb.

  • Re:Hmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by shutdown -p now (807394) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @06:25PM (#28859993) Journal

    Ironically, I don't recall any case of Microsoft ever locking developers out of its platforms. Definitely not on the desktop, nor on Windows Mobile (not so sure about XBox). In fact, it's quite the opposite - someone "Developers..." already.

  • Google (Score:3, Insightful)

    by omb (759389) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @06:29PM (#28860023)
    Should sue Apples ass.
  • Re:YAWN (Score:5, Insightful)

    by E IS mC(Square) (721736) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @06:38PM (#28860135) Journal
    Or

    It's still interesting to see how far "ooh, that's shiny and popular - I must buy it" crowd will go before the realize Apple is working against their hard-earned money. On the other hand, as far as they keep on giving money to Apple, Apple's not giving fuck about few who complain is pretty obvious.
  • by binarylarry (1338699) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @06:42PM (#28860155)

    Don't worry, in 3 or 4 years Apple fanbois will be raving about the revolutionary new iTalk and iTrack system that just debuted on the iPhone 6G.

  • by Eil (82413) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @06:46PM (#28860201) Homepage Journal

    "Personal approval" is rather different than a legally enforceable contract.

    Getting your app shot down without rhyme or reason is the danger any iPhone developer faces. Not only does it lock out open source, but it locks out commercial development as well because nobody wants to face that risk. Eventually, the only people who will be developing iPhone apps are "bottom-feeders" who spend about an hour whipping up some trivial crap and then putting it up for sale hoping that once in a while, somebody will accidentally click the Buy button.

  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Goaway (82658) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @08:19PM (#28860849) Homepage

    The map is not the territory, and neither is the spec list the device.

  • Re:Breakup (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LodCrappo (705968) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @08:24PM (#28860893) Homepage

    An interesting point.. perhaps Google should cut off all iphone users from Google services such as search, maps, gmail, etc. etc.
    Truth is that many things iphone users like to do come from google, not apple.

  • by amiga3D (567632) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @08:40PM (#28860981)
    The only problem with the iPhone...is apple. I swear I love everything about it...it's beautiful. If only apple would quit trying to kill it.
  • Re:Hmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CodeBuster (516420) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @08:44PM (#28861005)
    Microsoft has a long history of courting developers because they know that more developers means more software for their platform and more software for their platform means more users and more sales. Apple doesn't care about 3d party Apps, they prefer to sell their own iApp instead, and historically hasn't treated 3d party developers very well. The Mac developer community is almost non-existent compared to the Windows and even Linux developer communities. Apple doesn't care about 3d party apps and their developers because they don't care about offering a wide variety of software on their devices or at best they will tolerate 3d parties only so long as they don't cost Apple one penny in lost sales. Who in their right mind wants to develop for Mac? Actions like removing competing apps makes Apple look even worse. The iPhone is just about the only platform from Apple that 3d party developers want to develop for right now and apple is disrespecting them...again. It's a wonder that anyone outside of Apple writes software for their platform considering how they treat 3d party developers.
  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:3, Insightful)

    by dunkelfalke (91624) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @09:07PM (#28861163)

    Okay, let's put the specs aside.
    Please, explain how the Touch HD hardware is crappy. I am very curious.

  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AmigaMMC (1103025) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @11:02PM (#28861839)
    I did not buy an iPhone, I refuse to follow Apple's rules, and I they don't tell me what to do. That simple. BTW, this is not gonna fly in Europe where the European Anti-Trust Commission will see Apple as pushing a monopoly, but in the U.S. as usual they'll do whatever they want because corporations come before individuals.
  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:5, Insightful)

    by forand (530402) on Tuesday July 28, 2009 @11:24PM (#28861955) Homepage
    Google wants to push SMS. AT&T wants to screw customers over for SMS and has pull with Apple. You can't do push on Cydia and since you can't, then the already available Google Voice App on Cydia is all one needs. Google doesn't even need to drop their code onto Google code.
  • Re:Coming to Cydia (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dunkelfalke (91624) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @03:17AM (#28863133)

    Most of your arguments are about software. GP stated that HTC hardware sucks. My Touch HD has got an extended battery of 1700 mAh with the same size of the original battery (albeit somewhat heavier). There are still more applications for Windows Mobile (especially useful application like turn to turn navigation systems). Windows Mobile 6.5 works fine on my Touch HD and even 6.1 supports multitasking while iPhone OS does not allow it.

    So the only valid point of yours is a somewhat weaker CPU, but I think that the huge, high resolution screen and all the other options more than balance the weaker CPU out.

  • by jbarr (2233) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @08:19AM (#28864577) Homepage

    For sake of argument, in a twisted way, I can see Apple pulling the app from iPhone use, but what about us iPod Touch users? There is ABSOLUTELY NO DUPLICATION of application here on the iPod Touch. It's adding functionality that is simply not available on the iPod Touch.

"When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest." -- Bullwinkle Moose

Working...