“What I’d heard from ex-on2 folks was that there is some philosophical disagreement about how to optimize [encoder] tuning, and the tune for PSNR camp mostly won out.“ Apparently around the time of VP6, On2 went the full-retard route and optimized purely for PSNR, completely ignoring visual considerations. This explains quite well why VP7 looked so blurry and ugly."
-- http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=292
"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."
How does a 3rd party app prevent voicemail from being stored on the iPhone? I don't understand.
Google Voice works by sending an API call to Google, asking Google to dial your phone.
After you answer the phone, Google then dials out to the number specified in the API request.
For instance, if I wanted to call my parents, the app on my iPhone would send a HTTP request to Google with their number. Google then dials me, and once I pick up, it would dial my parents.
My parents would see the Caller-ID from Google, not from my Phone.
If they call back this Caller-ID, Google would answer the call, and then dial my phone, so I could speak with them.
If I didn't answer, then Google would record a voicemail message. This message would be both emailed to me, and accessible via API from the application that I originally dialed them with.
Google's ultimate plan is to allow you to "port" your number to their service, so that your normal, regular number becomes the one on their caller-id, and AT&T assigns you a new number that you would never give out.
I was (am?) still confused by this. I had assumed all this time that the FCC questions were regarding the approved-then-removed GV Dialer application.
My understanding is that on other platforms, the Google Voice dialer does actually hijack the actual phone application. (see [1] for a testimonial) To do that, you would need to reach into unauthorized API's. Google has done that in the past and gotten away with it. They used the proximity sensor to detect when they were near the user's ear for their search app. In my reading of it, Apple is implying that this is what the Google app does, and seemingly wants you to connect those dots to the other three apps.
If it is the case that they are reaching into unofficial API's, then Apple had every right to deny that application. What I still don't have an answer for is why was GV Dialer approved and later pulled?
If you actually use Google Voice all calls go through it, and get sent to the GV voicemail, instead of whatever voicemail your phone uses. This would make the Visual Voicemail and SMS that ship with the phone useless.
My understanding is that you can use both in the sense of alternating between them, but for any given message, it only appears in one place.
From a user experience perspective, this means that some fraction of users will be confused, annoyed, or downright furious that they now have two completely disconnected ways of making calls, recieving messages, listening to voicemails, etc. I think that's what bothers Apple about it.
I don't understand this point which someone tried to make above. If GV actually came pre-installed you may have a point, but the fact is that the users seeking to use GV will not be confused, annoyed, or furious at all. We understand exactly what GV is and what we want out of it. Apple's point is completely bullshit about confusing users because only users specifically seeking this functionality will have it.
Maybe you do, but can you guarantee that every potential GV user does? Of course not. This is what I mean by "some fraction of users". That fraction is unknown, but as GV creates a significantly different parallel method of accomplishing core phone functions, it is quite plausible that users with an imperfect understanding of how it works and why would suffer as described--for instance, a user who does not understand why his voicemails might show up in two different places. While it is true that it is ultimately the user's responsibility to understand the software he is using, this potentially impacts the core functionality of Apple's device, so it would be only natural for Apple to want to consider it carefully.
Apple's point is completely bullshit about confusing users because only users specifically seeking this functionality will have it.
Does not follow. Users who specifically seek to purchase (say) Microsoft Office are entirely capable of being confused, annoyed, or infuriated by it. The same can be said of most software, hardware, and machines in general. Have you ever seen someone try to push a pull door or pull a push door?
Yup, that's exactly right. But honestly, what if I want this to happen? Apple assumes that people will get confused. At least put some warning note or something. Though I'm sure that most people who download GV will be aware of what's happening...
Are you serious? You couldn't possibly be smarter than Apple! And, since you pay $299+ to effectively rent your device, because of the DMCA, you're out of luck.
