As part of their response to the FCC’s investigation into the rejection of Google Voice, Apple stated that they 1) receive about 8500 apps and app updates to review each week, 2) each app is reviewed by two reviewers, and 3) employ more than 40 full-time, trained reviewers.

Assuming that (3) doesn’t mean there are scads more part-time, untrained reviewers doing grunt work in the dark, sweaty back room (more on that in a moment), some math has been run by Mike Ash:

With 17,000 [8500 x 2] reviews per week and 45 reviewers, that means each reviewer performs 378 reviews per week. At 40 hours per week, this is 9.4 reviews per hour, or one review every 6.4 minutes.

Ash points out how this means months of work by a developer is left to the tender mercies of less than 10 minutes (counting overtime) with someone tasked to look at almost 400 other apps that same week. Can we get a “yikes!”

Back to part-time, untrained reviewers, Marco.org hazards to guess:

There could be 41 full-timers and 40 more part-timers. There’s a lot of evidence to indicate that most (if not all) of the front-line reviews are by non-native-English speakers and on schedules that strongly imply that they’re offshore. This may be the cause of a lot of the frustrating rejections in which the reviewer didn’t understand something about the application or description that seems clear to most Americans.

To recapitulate. Between iPhone users and 8500 weekly app submissions (each reviewed twice), stands possibly an unknown number of outsourced, untrained frontliners, 40 odd trained, full-time second liners, an unquantified star-chamber of executive reviews, and ultimately one Phil Schiller who may or may not email the developer or a blog (or two) about it?

Oh, and Steve Jobs.

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Apple: 8500 Apps to Review a Week by 40 Odd Reviews

Mike Ash (via Marco.org) makes this point following the FCC responses today:

Ignoring the question of why it’s Apple’s job to prevent their customers from breaking AT&T’s terms of service, it’s interesting to note just how much this policy is centered on the United States. The iPhone is sold in dozens of different countries and works with dozens of different cellular carriers all over the world. You can be certain that each one of those carriers has different terms of service. Why is AT&T so privileged that their terms of service, and theirs alone, are the ones that Apple looks at when deciding whether to reject or accept any given app? It’s quite likely that people all over the world are missing out on great iPhone apps that their cellular carriers would permit them to use just because AT&T does not permit Americans to use them.

This by way of saying, for example, because AT&T prohibits SlingPlayer from running over 3G, users in Canada (on Rogers), the UK (on 02), Japan (on SoftBank), etc. are also prevented from using SlingPlayer of 3G.

Apple certainly makes only specific mention of AT&T in their consideration process. However, AT&T was the first iPhone carrier signed, so perhaps there’s something in that original deal that makes it so — or is it just that Apple is headquartered in the US?

Now, presuming those other, international carriers aren’t just sighing in relief that AT&T takes the hit on this so they don’t have to (anyone think Rogers, O2, SoftBank, et al. are dying to take the network hit that comes with an uber-popular, functionality surfacing device like the iPhone doing high-bandwidth tasks like streaming TV shows and movies?

There are certainly examples enough of region-specific apps (AT&T’s own apps are just in the US), and apps that are missing from just one regional app store (Skype is not in the Canadian App Store, reportedly due to a patent dispute).

As mentioned previously, Sling has submitted a 3G-enabled version of SlingPlayer for non-US App Stores (Canada, UK, Japan, etc.), so we’ll soon see.

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Do Other Countries Lose Out on Apps Because of AT&T Policies?

As part of the responses to the FCC’s inquiry into the rejection of Google Voice from the iPhone App Store, AT&T stated the following:

As noted above, AT&T regularly reviews its policies regarding features and capabilities available through the devices we offer in order to provide an attractive range of options for our customers. Consistent with this approach, we plan to take a fresh look at possibly authorizing VoIP capabilities on the iPhone for use on AT&T’s 3G network.

This was couched in some legal arguments stating economists and jurists allow deals where one party’s core business is protected against adverse actions taken by another party — in this case AT&T is saying VoIP would hurt their revenue from voice plans, so it’s okay for Apple to protect AT&T from that hurt.

However, AT&T also says that while Apple agreed not to produce a VoIP app for the iPhone without AT&T’s consent, they had no obligation to “take action against” a third party app.

So, presumably Apple is not allowed to make a VoIP app unless AT&T says okay, but Apple’s just being kind to AT&T by not allowing Skype (for example) to use the 3G network?

And if AT&T is changing their mind and thinking of allowing a VoIP app, and the only VoIP app they say they’re allowed to allow is one by Apple…

Conspiracy theorists, where does that leave us?

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

AT&T To Reconsider VoIP Applications Over 3G? Yeahbuwhat Apple VoIP apps?

Filed under: iPhone, App Store

Hmmmm. Seems that FCC pressure might be doing wonders for those App Store approvals. Qik, which we reviewed earlier this month, had been pretty well kneecapped by either AT&T or Apple; choose your villain.

But lo and behold, today Qik [iTunes link] was updated so now it can upload video over the 3G network, not just WiFi as was the case in the first release of the app. I just tried it and it worked fine, happily uploading a video with no WiFi in sight. That realy improves Qik, but on every other smartphone Qik allows live streaming. Only the best and most powerful smartphone in the world has the no live restriction.

Coincidence or conspiracy? I downloaded the update, and yes, it works over 3G now. It's clear that something is causing Apple/AT&T to loosen up a bit. May that continue. Kinda hard to argue that Sling Mobile can't work over 3G now, isn't it? As most know, Sling Mobile was crippled for the iPhone even though it is allowed on every other capable phone on AT&T.

Let us know your results with Qik, and if you get a moment, send the FCC some flowers.

Qik for iPhone updated, now uploads video over 3G originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Qik for iPhone updated, now uploads video over 3G originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Good Reader is a file viewer primarily boasting the ability to store and show large PDF files with ease. Using their own viewing engine, large text files, PDFs and large images load quickly and don't strain the application. With the download of a third-party desktop application, you can get started with Good Reader today!

Filed under: Apple Corporate, iPhone, App Store

Along with Apple's and AT&T's response, Google has also responded to the FCC's inquiry on the Google Voice rejection. Unfortunately, the contact between Apple and Google on the rejection has been removed from the letter, which will not clear up everything just yet. There's no apparent reason why these details have been kept confidential. Anyway, Google's letter states first the features of their Google Voice app, mainly the standard features of Google Voice on other smartphones.

Next, in the question below, the FCC asks what Apple's explanation was for rejecting and for any communication Google has had with Apple.

What explanation was given (if any) for Apple's rejection of the Google Voice application (and for any other Google applications for iPhone that have been rejected, such as Google Latitude)? Please describe any communications between Google and AT&T or Apple on this topic and a summary of any meetings or discussion.

Google's answer to this question simply states "[BEGIN CONFIDENTIAL]" and "[END CONFIDENTIAL]"

Next, they go on to asking if Google has any other applications that have been approved on the App Store. They answer that they have Google Earth and Google Mobile (search) already approved and currently on the App Store. They also note Google provides the map data for the "Maps" application on the iPhone.

In the next question, they state that they don't have any other proposed applications pending to be submitted to the App Store.

When asked about other methods to access Google Voice on the iPhone, they answer that a user can can call in to their Google Voice number or visit Google Voice on Safari to access some Google Voice features on their iPhone.

Finally, they ask about the practices of Google's Android Market, Google's competitor to the App Store for devices that run Google's Android OS.

You can read the entire letter over at our sister site, Engadget.

FCC Responses: Google's turn to answer to the FCC originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

FCC Responses: Google's turn to answer to the FCC originally appeared on The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW) on Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:30:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

In light of today’s response by Apple to the FCC about the Google Voice rejection, and anticipating the likely, negative reaction it will engender, I’m again left thinking that Apple and their iPhone are closer akin to a restaurant, not a super market.

Steve Jobs is like one of those screaming, perfectionistic executive chefs concerned more with his haut cuisine than his customers, whose palettes he believes tempered by years of McRosoft (or whatever). He — and they — will serve you a beautiful, delicious, premium plate but will also decide every single ingredient that goes on it, if not tell you exactly how they want you to eat it. If you go to a restaurant, you know what you’re in for. You don’t go to Nobu and throw a fit because they refuse to serve you spaghetti, or let you run into the kitchen and whip up your own meal.

Other companies might be more like super markets, where you can indeed assemble your own meal from whatever they sell — though they’ll still stock the shelves with what they want, and not what they don’t want. More freedom, more work for the customer, and some will gladly take control over ease of use.

Typically, most of us go to restaurants AND shop at super markets, depending on what we feel like at the time. Likewise, some of us want that Apple-polished experience, others want more ability to roll their own.

With Google Voice specifically, Apple’s not letting that hot new sous-chef in the door, perhaps because they suspect he’s going to alter the menu in a profound way, then open up down the street and take all their customers. IBM learned that very painfully when they licensed DOS from Microsoft for the PC — sometimes you create your own killer.

Ultimately, the iPhone is Apple’s restaurant and Steve Jobs is the executive chef, and whether the lease with the booze supplier (AT&T) prohibits certain other cocktails (Skype, SlingPlayer), or Apple refused to let certain food in the place, it’s still their restaurant, and they control the menu.

Apple should just be honest about it and tell users and developers like it is — an iPhone is an appliance, no different than a Nintendo Wii or any other closed box. Right now, they’re feigning greater openness than they’re actually providing, causing prolonged confusion and ill-will. Say it straight, it’s our iPhone point finale, take the hit from users and developers who’ll leave, and then everyone else knows what it is when they pick it up and sign the contract, and it’s their responsibility.

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Apple iPhone is a Restaurant, Not a Super Market, and They Should Say So on the Sign

Vocalia is a voice-recognition application that recognizes your voice and chooses the closest match in your iPod, Address Book or Bookmarks. Allowing you to use the app in either French, German or English and it is claimed to work even faster than voice recognition in the 3GS.

Wolfenstein RPG [$2.99 - iTunes link] brings the classic mobile game to the iPhone (and iPod touch) platform with all its spiked brass knuckled, sub machine gunning, dynamite exploding glory.

And the folks behind it want to give you a chance to not only get the App Store version, but the Xbox 360 game as well!

How can you get the give-away? Just head on over to the TiPb iPhone Forums and tell us your favorite Wolfenstein moment (and if by some crazy chance you don’t have one — make one up!)

Ready, set… schnell!

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

TiPb Give-Away: Wolfenstein RPG for iPhone — and Xbox 360!

Apple has responded to the FCC’s questions, issued following the controversial rejection of Google’s Google Voice application (though, in their response, it looks like Apple is claiming they haven’t rejected Google Voice, but are merely reviewing it (updated: under the dubious “duplicates functionality” rationale, due to independent and different dialing and voice mail interfaces and) to see if it violates Apple’s contract with AT&T not to allow VoIP over AT&T’s data network.)

We are pleased to respond to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau’s inquiry dated July 31, 2009, requesting information regarding Apple’s App Store and its application approval process. In order to give the Bureau some context for our responses, we begin with some background information about the iPhone and the App Store.

The entire document is available via Apple.com.

Google and AT&T responded as well, though not on their own websites yet. Engadget is hosting their letters. AT&T claims they were never contacted about Google Voice, however if their contract with Apple forbids it, like Skype and other VoIP apps, Apple wouldn’t have to contact them, so again — huge round of jeers for AT&T’s non-denial denials.

[Thanks to Doug for the tip)

This is a story by the iPhone Blog. This feed is sponsored by The iPhone Blog Store.

Apple Responds to FCC Questions (Google and AT&T as Well)