Arrington to Apple: Liar liar pants on fire
Arrington on The Charlie Rose Show. Image: TechCrunch
"A total lie." "Untrue." "Misleading." "Complete fabrication." "Way beyond misleading."
Those are some of the nicer things Michael Arrington had to say about Apple (AAPL) in his analysis of what he calls "Apple's long rambling letter to the FCC."
Arrington, for those who don't have Techmeme on their morning reading list, is the former securities lawyer and serial entrepreneur who runs TechCrunch, arguably Silicon Valley's most influential tech blog.
The letter he's referring to is Apple's formal response to an inquiry by the Federal Communications Commission into the role AT&T (T) played in Apple's rejection of Google's (GOOG) powerful Google Voice app. See here.
AT&T's answer: we played no role. Google's answer: redacted. Apple's answer: we never rejected the app; we just haven't, for various reasons, approved it yet. (link)
Arrington's response: Apple is lying through its teeth. In particular, he writes:
Apple: “Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it.”
Reality: One third party Google Voice app developer disclosed to us in July that Apple SVP Phil Schiller told them that Google’s own app would be or already was rejected. Google also confirmed this to us later. There is overwhelming evidence that Apple did in fact reject the application.
Apple: “The application has not been approved because, as submitted for review, it appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voicemail …”
Reality: This strongly suggests that the Google Voice app replaces much of the core Apple iPhone OS function. This certainly isn’t accurate, and we believe the statement is misleading …
Apple: “… The Google Voice application replaces Apple’s Visual Voicemail by routing calls through a separate Google Voice telephone number that stores any voicemail, preventing voicemail from being stored on the iPhone, i.e., disabling Apple’s Visual Voicemail.”
Reality: Not true and misleading. The Google Voice application has its own voicemail function, which also transcribes messages. But it only works for incoming Google Voice calls, not calls to the iPhone. The Google Voice app in no way “replaces” Apple’s voicemail function.
Apple: “Similarly, SMS text messages are managed through the Google hub — replacing the iPhone’s text messaging feature.”
Reality: Not true and misleading. The Google Voice app doesn’t replace or in any way interfere with the iPhone’s text messaging feature. If someone sends a text message to your Google Voice number, the Google Voice app shows it. If it is sent directly to the iPhone phone number, nothing is different.
Apple: “In addition, the iPhone user’s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways. These factors present several new issues and questions to us that we are still pondering at this time.”
Reality: Complete fabrication, way beyond misleading. The Google Voice app can access the iPhone’s contacts database, like thousands of other iPhone apps. But the Google Voice app never syncs the contacts database to their own servers. There is no option for users to do this … (link)
Apple has not yet responded to a request for comment.
Arrington it must be said, is not an entirely disinterested party. His company is preparing to market a Web tablet — the CrunchPad — that might compete directly with the tablet Apple is rumored to be building. And after enthusiastically embracing Apple's iPhone, he announced in July that he was abandoning it for a BlackBerry Curve that will run Google Voice (see here).
Moreover, Arrington's TechCrunch 50 conference, now in its third year, is scheduled to begin Sept. 14 (tickets cost $2,995 at the door), which gives him even more motivation than usual to make himself the center of attention.
In the end, Arrington believes, Apple will find a face-saving way to accept the Google Voice application. "They have to," he writes. "Any serious investigation into the app by the FCC will show that the complaints around the app are unfounded and that it does none of the things Apple accuses it of doing."
Arrington's colleague Steve Gillmor goes one step further. He writes in TechCrunchIT that the whole Google Voice affair is a Machiavellian plot against — you guessed it — AT&T.
"Strip away the religious fervor of the Arrington plan … and you might glimpse the true reality of what’s going on. Namely, that Apple is conspiring with Google to force the FCC to 'force' Apple to, regrettably, open the door to VoIP and the Universal Inbox."
We won't hold our breath.
See also:
THE KEY: Arrington it must be said, is not an entirely disinterested party.
Personally I don't believe either of them.
ex ped: We agree about Arrington, and made that point in our Aug. 22 piece.
" I'm not a great fan of Michael Arrington, but he is not just "any idiot" and you know it."
Believe it or not, I do happen to agree with you on that point (although I'm sure that others would be perfectly willing to debate you on it). He's smart enough to understand that he does possess enough notoriety to put a few ripples in the pond when it serves his purpose.
"I quoted Arrington's remarks because I thought they were likely to spark an interesting conversation about how Apple operates the App Store — which they did."
If this is your justification, then I guess any idiot can spout off in any way he likes, knowing he can count on someone such as yourself to parrot his remarks for the sake of stimulating discussion. I just wish someone had the gonads to say, "This guy is a jerk, and I'm not going to give him the satisfaction of expanding his pulpit to my readership." But I suppose in this day and age of trolling for hits that would be way too much to ask.
ex ped: I'm not a great fan of Michael Arrington, but he is not just "any idiot" and you know it.
Phil,
In the future you might want to stick to quoting people who have at least a modicum of credibility. Arrington does not qualify.
First of all, the last entity you would want to say anything to which you could not back up (with the possible exception of the SEC) is the FCC. Secondly, Arrington has conflict of interest coming out of his ass on this one, and he has already shown on numerous previous occasions that he is not above spewing scads of self-serving rhetoric.
ex ped: Thanks for the advice. I quoted Arrington's remarks because I thought they were likely to spark an interesting conversation about how Apple operates the App Store — which they did. As for Arrington's conflicts of interest, I believe they were duly noted in the piece.
Guess what? AT&T and Apple are in the business to make money. AT&T built and maintains their network with revenue from their voice and data plans. Why should Google get a free ride. I have a google voice number and love it, but it's obvious that using my iphone with such a application is a form of bypassing. Apple has created itunes and should control it. If you don't like it take you google voice app and run over to sprint and that pre crowd.
Back to deleting comments that exposes you for being stupid?
ex ped: Only the ones in which the nouns don't agree with the verbs.
>>>Namely, that Apple is conspiring with Google to force the FCC to 'force' Apple to, regrettably, open the door to VoIP and the Universal Inbox."<<<
Apple is forcing FCC to force Apple to open the door ????
If you say so ….
Please hold your breath! Maybe this is the only way this blog will cease to exist.
Hey Arrington, why don't you spend your inordinate amount of time and money on better things.
http://www.latimes.com/la-weekinreview0821-pictures,0,2071953.photogallery
If google wants to get on Iphone they can pay ATT for the cost of the network until then they should build their own and stop freeloading off of everyone elses.
Arrington either knows nothing about interface design or is pretending to. A device that offers multiple, independent ways to perform roughly the same fundamental function (eg, make a phone call) is fragmented, and inelegant. Weak, unclear interactions among such methods is worse, a kind of UI malignancy. Graceful, integrated design is more difficult, but isn't that what Apple is good at?
The rumor is that Apple will soon sign a deal with Chinese mobile carrier for 5 million iPhone deal. If you think FCC probing is interesting, wait for Chinese government/regulators probe Apple for any fishy practice 
Yes, Apple has never rejected Google Voice app. Actually Apple had never rejected anyone's app ever. They are simply studying some of these apps for an indefinitely period of time.
I love this story!
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
Time for the Justice Department to investigate this monopolitic practices. But there is a lot of jailbroken and unlocked iphones. Wonder how the phones react to other networks like the speed because everyone is blaming ATT for poor signal. Just look at the number of people thanking the hackers.
Say what you want about Apple, but it is not their style to lie to the Federal Government. They were commended by the SEC for their honesty and cooperation during the inquiry into backdating.
Which is a better deal:
1. Paying 3 Grand to listen to a nobody pontificate.
2. Spending the money on Cool Apple producst that run Killer apps?
AAPL $169 and rising…
any questions?
I'm an iPhone user as well as a Google Voice user. I want the GV app available on my iPhone for a couple reasons:
1) I like providing a single number that will route calls to both my landline and cellphone so I can be reached on either. I also like being able to screen certain numbers.
2) I Like the idea of voicemails being transcribed. GV does that fairly well.
3) AT&T's Edge service is trash in my area. It barely works in my town. My visual voicemail often gets delayed by several days. GV voicemail alleviates this problem.
I despise Apple for making a choice for me and removing/not approving GV apps. I may pretty soon jailbreak my phone if I can't get it through the App store.
All that said, I understand their arguments to some extent. Apple above all others is pretty big on the whole user experience thing and the GV app does in fact replace some of the core functionality of the iPhone as Apple states. Arrington really has no idea what he is talking about.
For example, by using my Google Voice number, I can effectively bypass my iPhone's voicemail capabilities. What Apple should do is allow Google Voice to integrate into the iPhone's VVM, and Google at the same time should allow users to turn off its Voicemail in GV settings in case people which to use the iPhone VVM.
I think Apple is afraid that Google_World might become so attractive that in 5 years or so, the Apple experience might be just one of multiple ways for users to access Google_World.
Apple wants Apple_World where people buy Apple and optionally choose some Google experience.
The winner of this contest will become hugely profitable.
First of all Michael Arrington has no idea what he is talking about. Apple has the authority to accept or reject any application for any reason. Google is a competitor- end of story. Its so simple Michael fails to see that Google is struggling to make $ and needs this. Apple doens't Google as much as Google needs them. The Andriod is laughed at and no one takes Google seriously for anthing but Ads. Apple has that god like power. Michel and others may not like it but hey its their right. Why doesn't Google make the same lame application for its also has been phones? No one cares thats why.
Not all comments will be posted as only the voices that agree are truthfull and valid. all others are not worthy.
I itouch is the one bright star we have. All Google is trying to do is to remake the already working fine and make a second path of doom.
Google wants the itouch to become vista, the attempt to give everything to everyone. It failed and died. Hackers don't hit MAC as the doors are guarded. Google wants to open them up and corupt them. If Google has such an awesome idea make it on another phone till users beg like verizon subscribers do for the itouch. Steve Jpbs has been put down and down and keeps rising up with awesome stuff. How about we accept his dream and let him run with it!
But the corporate sellouts have google and want to rule the world. I thought the usa was a free.
You can crack an itouch to run it on Verizon. Crack it to do the google. just don't force apple into babysitting like they did microsoft, the land of the loser programs promising all and failing and blameing the os.
I, like many here find this lawyer to be disingenuous at best.
A 30 year investor in technology, I've seen too many like him try to make a buck. Should I sue Microsoft because I can't run iPhone apps on WindowsCE? Should Disney be forced to allow Looney Tunes to sell it's wares in the Disney store?
All of this is a can of worms stirred up by greed.
Sorry people. Arrington is right on this one. A Google Voice application doesn't REPLACE any of the functionality of the iPhone. It's provided alongside the iPhone native functionality.
Apple's response it designed to mislead and confuse the technically gullible.
Further, the app isn't a threat to Apple like it is to AT&T. It's a direct and immediate threat to AT&T SMS packages. It's hard to believe AT&T and Apple did not discuss this application.
The part about contacts being shared with Google is laughable. They should reject Flickr apps because who knows what Flickr might do with my photos.
Arrington is being silly. But I think the Gilmor comment is spot on, although it's not specifically about AT&T, but about all carriers. Apple's current iPhone business model is fuelled by the excess revenues from the carrier cartel's ring-fenced cellular voice service, while delivering the other parts of the mobile internet. Apple is of course ready for this to collapse and usher in "VoIP and the Universal Inbox", but they can't afford Google and others to gallop off ahead while Apple is pinned down holding the starting gate open via the leverage of their exclusive carrier contracts.
So – yes – the FCC needs to clarify, and no, Apple won't let Google Voice off the leash, and it's not Machiavellian, but a very reasonable position Apple is actually forced to occupy because, with IPhone, Apple has stepped in and done the job the FCC should have done ten years ago.
Just to play devil's advocate to Arrington's statements, if Google Voice gives the customer the ABILITY to do those things (forward calls to GV's voicemail, send and receive SMS via GV instead of using ATT's, etc), then in fact it DOES replace those features of the iPhone. If you look at it from that perspective, that the capability is there for the customer to choose to use (vs it happening automatically when GV is installed), then Apple's statements are, in fact, true.
As Kahuna pointed out. With Arrington releasing his tablet shortly he has every reason to knock Apple because when they release theirs he is going to get shafted.
Look for the "but Apple are just talking out the little guys" articles when it happens.
Who is he and why is he or his opinion important again please explain? Heres a bet. No one in an Apple store today, worldwide knows who he is or cares.
total bull from Arrington… just making hype for himself… I respect Apple's decision, as an Apple Authorized Reseller business owner I see nothing wrong in Apple just delaying an App approval over gray areas… Apple would not bluntly lie to the FCC from my point of view, they would just lose. I just dont see any emails or papers that say that Apple is doing something wrong.
Arrington is in no position to call someone else a liar.
He has been hyping his Crunchpad since earlier this year. First the price was going to be under $300, then $300, and now the rumors are $400.
Of course, what the Crunchpad will be is nothing but rumor. (Yes, there was a demonstration using some prototypes previously, but they looked nothing like the final product.) There was supposed to be a dramatic announcement for the Crunchpad "end of July/early August."
Mike, we are still waiting.
why all the concern, the app store is a store and can sell or not sell anything they want, just like all other stores? Does the government force ford dealers sell gm cars?
or force target to sell walmart brand ice cream? or force delta to offer flights on both boeing and airbus jets? Give me a break.
With all due respect, it sounds as if Michael Arrington is a "yenta" and Steve Gillmore is simply not very smart.
I don't think Mike was ever a securities analyst
ex ped: Right you are. Former securities lawyer. Fixed. Thanks.
I don't get why it's such a bad things for phone companies to block their competitors things!!! If you want an iPhone then you have to pay the bill like the rest of us. Big whoop die do. Ur gonna have to pay the bill for the phone either way, if ur paying for it, why not use it?