×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

First Google Voice App Hits the App Store

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the waiting-for-cheaper-data dept.

Cellphones 95

silverpig writes "The first Google Voice app has hit the app store, and it's called GV Connect. Providing a front end to the Google Voice service, GV Connect allows users of devices running Apple iOS platform to have a native app with which to interact with Google Voice. What will be interesting to note is the order that these apps are approved in. I know Sean Kovacs was first out with GV Mobile back before Apple banned Google Voice, and while he is in the approval pipeline, this other app has some first mover advantage. I wonder what it means when Google gets their app officially approved, as surely it'll be free."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

95 comments

Fail (5, Insightful)

Kickboy12 (913888) | more than 3 years ago | (#33616914)

No Push Notifications = Fail
Basically just a front-end for the web interface. Not worth the money.

Re:Fail (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33616922)

plus its for the iphone = fail

Re:Fail (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33616938)

translation: my shift key is broken and i can't afford an iphone

Re:Fail (2, Informative)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617122)

woh you have a keyboard where "=" doesn't require a shift key?

Re:Fail (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617186)

What? On US keyboards, = doesn't require a shift key.

Re:Fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33618180)

On US keyboards, = doesn't require a shift key.

On the virtual keyboard on Android phones, "=" is not available.

Re:Fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33618614)

And are too poor to afford On Screen Keyboard?

Re:Fail (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618328)

plus its for the iphone = fail

translation: my shift key is broken and i can't afford an iphone

translation: my apostrophe key is broken and i can't afford an iphone FTFY

Re:Fail (-1, Flamebait)

Kickboy12 (913888) | more than 3 years ago | (#33616956)

As someone who has owned both an iPhone and an Android phone, I have to say the iPhone is better (in terms of UI and hardware). In terms of software obviously having an open platform is way better.

Though I'd prefer this thread not turn into a giant iPhone vs. Android flame-war. Maybe we need a Nokia fan-boy somewhere to even the playing field.

Re:Fail (-1, Troll)

MogNuts (97512) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617040)

If you didn't want a flame war, why did you then start one? Your reply had absolutely nothing to do with the parent post.

Re:Fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617102)

Your Android phone must not have been an HTC Evo 4G.

Re:Fail (3, Interesting)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617174)

The iOS versus Android argument to me comes down to that I prefer open source but what is the point of having the source to crap. Not that Android is really crap but the UI is poorly designed and the lack of control of end devices by Google results in a wide, and confusing, user experience. I get frustrated at the number of people new to open source or not even developers that like to rant about the evil that is Apple and the good that is Google. Obviously they haven't a lot of experience with the nice way Google makes it difficult to hack around on other devices they sell such as the Google Search Appliances (which I have). I think both Apple and Google are leading technology companies and both make some great products.

If I was going to make my own device I'd start with Android to build from but I'd copy a lot of iOS design decisions at the UI level and iDevice design decisions. I'd also keep a lot more control than Google has done as I think Android gets a lot of the negative light coming off of the devices it runs on. And many devices are difficult to even run an unlocked copy of Android on which defeats the entire benefit of having the source. And comparable Android devices are no cheaper, and often are even more expensive, than an iDevice. I'm looking for a good Android tablet to develop on but there Google seems to be unsure if they want to push Android or Chrome OS.

Apple's biggest short coming is lack of third party devices. If I was Google, along with fixing the UI and ecosystem issues, I'd be all over that as a way to really be better than Apple. I'm not talking supporting USB and SD, which are anti-features IMO, but defining good interfaces for mobile devices, licensing it for free, and really pushing it.

Since nobody is paying me to make my own device I'm going to choose to own iDevices. At least until I see an equal Android device and see the Android ecosystem become equal.

Re:Fail (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617656)

I actually prefer many of the UI features of Android over that of iOS. I don't have a huge amount of exposure to either, but from a small amount of exposure to both, I prefer Android. Perhaps it's a matter of what you get used to.

Re:Fail (1, Insightful)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617820)

And many devices are difficult to even run an unlocked copy of Android

Even with a locked Android phone, I can still do things that an iPhone user couldn't possibly dream of doing because his phone is so locked down. And besides, not all Android phones are like that, some get rooted right away.

on which defeats the entire benefit of having the source.

Not if you're a developer, if you're doing anything complex, having access to the source can significantly cut down your development time.

And comparable Android devices are no cheaper, and often are even more expensive, than an iDevice.

And for good reason, superior hardware is expensive. For instance, Steve Jobs was given the chance to make the iPhone 4 with a Super-AMOLED screen, a bigger screen, and with a GPU three times faster. He just chose not to have those. Now, the Android devices, that have superior hardware, are definitely more expensive. That's certainly true enough, but you should only blame Steve Jobs for skimping on hardware.

I'm looking for a good Android tablet to develop on but there Google seems to be unsure if they want to push Android or Chrome OS.

To develop on?? Developing what? Right now, I do not know of any good tablets that are good for development purposes. In any case, your statement is true enough about Google not wanting to push Android on tablets yet, but don't think it's because of Chrome OS. Chrome OS can only run on netbooks/tablets that require a lot of power, active cooling, and plenty of swap memory space. And Android is just the opposite, it uses passive cooling, less power, and has no swap memory. In other words, Chrome OS and Android are **not** interchangeable. It would be like somebody comparing the OS on an iPad with the OS of a Mac Book Pro. Each requires a very different architecture and a very different way of programming. And neither architecture is going away anytime soon.

I'm not talking supporting USB and SD, which are anti-features IMO

And what do you think of having a phone with a replaceable battery, is that an anti-feature too?

Obviously they haven't a lot of experience with the nice way Google makes it difficult to hack around on other devices they sell such as the Google Search Appliances (which I have).

Are you kidding me? The Google Search Appliance was never directed at people who could roll their own solution. If they could roll their own solution, why even bother with an expensive time-limited Enterprise-level appliance anyway?

Re:Fail (1)

rsborg (111459) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617918)

Even with a locked Android phone, I can still do things that an iPhone user couldn't possibly dream of doing because his phone is so locked down.

Care to elucidate?

Re:Fail (1)

Zagadka (6641) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618404)

A few things off the top of my head:

Install an alternate input method (eg: Swype), run an emulator that lets you run downloaded software (eg: Ftodo 64 or NESoid), automatically adjust volume settings based on criteria like location, time or phone orientation (eg: Locale, Off the hook or Volume timer), automatically upload photos/videos to sharing services (eg: Pic push).

Don't forget that it wasn't too long ago that you couldn't even play Pandora in the background on the iPhone, and even now the multitasking on iOS is bizarrely restricted (eg: you can do arbitrary things in the background as long as you also audio).

Re:Fail (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33618272)

"And for good reason, superior hardware is expensive. For instance, Steve Jobs was given the chance to make the iPhone 4 with a Super-AMOLED screen, a bigger screen, and with a GPU three times faster."

You know, I can understand if you complain about one of the actual disadvantages in an iPhone 4, but you're making shit up at this point. Super-AMOLED is fail, and even Samsung is moving away from it now. As for a bigger screen, how big do you want? I think some of the 5" devices are a little bit big. I'd rather not go back to wearing a beltclip from 1996 for my phone, thanks. If that works for you, that's great --- but it's not a coincidence that nearly all other phones on the planet are smaller than that. And which phone has a 3x better GPU? I'm genuinely curious. What benchmarks?

I'm not even going to bother breaking down your ChromeOS v. Android comparison. Do you even understand basic computer technology? Your introduction of active/passive cooling into the argument is so ridiculous that it's mind-boggling.

Re:Fail (0)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 3 years ago | (#33621926)

which phone has a 3x better GPU? I'm genuinely curious. What benchmarks?

The GPU of the iPhone 4 can render 28 million triangles per second. [educatedsquirrel.com] The GPU of the Samsung Galaxy S can do 90 million triangles per second. [intomobile.com] Both those phones are using the same Samsung processor, the Hummingbird (even if Apple is calling it something else), so don't get any idea about the iPhone 4 having a faster processor in this case (but an inferior GPU), you couldn't even make that point if you wanted to.

As for a bigger screen, how big do you want? I think some of the 5" devices are a little bit big. I'd rather not go back to wearing a beltclip from 1996 for my phone, thanks.

Give it to me as big as the iPhone 4, except without the large ridiculous border around it. Go into a store, compare some of the high end HTC Android phones with your iPhone 4, and I think you'll reluctantly see what I'm talking about.

it's not a coincidence that nearly all other phones on the planet are smaller than that.

Of course not, but the parent was arguing about why some of the Android phones were some of the most expensive ones on the market (even more expensive than the iPhones). So it stands to reason "that nearly all other [smaller] phones on the planet" are not necessarily an indication of anything, aside from the obvious that they're probably cheaper than the ones with larger screens. In any case, my original point remains. Make me a phone as big as the iPhone 4, but without the ridiculous large border around it.

Super-AMOLED is fail, and even Samsung is moving away from it now.

I'll need a citation from you. The two latest Galaxy Tablets are using LCD screens, granted, but that's because they have much larger screens to cover and the supply chain (even the one that Samsung owns) wouldn't be able to keep up for Christmas. Otherwise, everything else that I've found so far shows the opposite, so I'll assume that you must know something new that contradicts the mainstream technical press. The Samsung Super-AMOLED screens are amazingly awesome compared to the iPhone 4 screen, or even the large HTC screens.

I'm not even going to bother breaking down your ChromeOS v. Android comparison.

Good, because this wasn't even a point I was arguing, nor was it relevant to the main points, I was just clarifying the difference for the parent (and many of the other posters on Slashdot) who seem to think that Android and Chrome OS are somehow completely interchangeable (And yes, before someone says it, you can put an Android OS on a Netbook originally designed for Windows, but being able to do so doesn't mean that it's actually a good idea).

Re:Fail (1)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 3 years ago | (#33639470)

I'm not sure why this was modded down and the post I was replying to up? Is one of my claims incorrect? Anyone????

Re:Fail (1)

LodCrappo (705968) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618638)

"I'd copy a lot of iOS design decisions at the UI level "

please god no. have you actually used an Android device? The UI is much more powerful and well designed. prettier, no. able to do more, with less effort on my part, absolutely.

Re:Fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33622880)

I have used and developed for both. Only a freetard that likes Ubuntu could love the android UI.

Re:Fail (1)

MogNuts (97512) | more than 3 years ago | (#33619198)

Seriously, just stop. Don't start a flamewar yet again, fanboy.

How the hell did this get modded up???

Re:Fail (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617486)

In terms of software obviously having an open platform is way better.

The carriers certainly agree, and they love the fact that Android is open, because it allows them to maintain control of the device and lock users to their own services!

Yay for open source: maintaining the "wireless carriers fuck over their customers" status quo. What a triumph of the noble ideals of FOSS.

If all you can say is "Android is open," as an improvement over iOS, then it's not an improvement, because for the vast majority of people, it's just as locked down as an iPhone. For about .001% of the phone-buying market, it's "open". For the rest, it's simply a tool the carriers will use to control the customers.

Fail? On what planet? (0, Offtopic)

symbolset (646467) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618262)

You do know that Android being open means you can choose the least fucked wireless provider, right? Android is common less than a year, so less than half of the people on contract who might choose it have done so, given that the standard contract is two years. Android is open. Google doesn't force the wireless providers to do the right thing and keep it open. Google trusts us to choose the wireless providers that let Android be the most open. They give, and though they don't require anything back it's permissible that they hope we will see that it is better to be free.

I like that. I like that Google isn't trying to force my choice - they're trying to be the best choice and attract me to choose them. That's not evil.

Microsoft paying Verizon to cripple all their Android phones with Bing that can't be removed and depriving their customers of choice, that's evil.

Re:Fail (1)

Spliffster (755587) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618314)

If all you can say is "Android is open," as an improvement over iOS, then it's not an improvement, because for the vast majority of people, it's just as locked down as an iPhone. For about .001% of the phone-buying market, it's "open". For the rest, it's simply a tool the carriers will use to control the customers.

Not everyone lives in the USA, well actually most people don't! I mean, lockdown by carriers seems to be pretty bad in the US if it's true what people say here on slashdot. But this doesn't apply to most other countries (our telco market over here is regulated, once you own a phone you really own that phone).

Re:Fail (1)

Zagadka (6641) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618466)

Your argument would hold more weight if it weren't for the fact that AT&T has had many negative effects on iOS despite the fact that iOS isn't open. (recent example: tethering) So yes, carriers can exploit the openness of Android to screw their customers, but they also can, and have, make Apple do their bidding. So it appears that the issue of whether your carrier will screw up your phone is orthogonal to whether the OS is "open". In that case, I'll take open.

Re:Fail (3, Informative)

rickyb (898092) | more than 3 years ago | (#33616988)

No, this [apple.com] is a front-end to the web interface. At least it has all the other Google Apps as well.

Re:Fail (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33616994)

Sean has said he wants to implement push notifications ASAP... Look for it in the future I'm sure.

Re:Fail (1)

MogNuts (97512) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617002)

Google's mobile version of GV is so elegant I'd rather use it. This app however does 1 thing the web app can't: using your GV phone device & not only your cell.

The only way I've found to work around this is load the desktop version on Safari via the older interface, & initiate the call that way.

Re:Fail (1)

MogNuts (97512) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617034)

Are you sure you want push notifications? The way the IPhone interrupts you, lately the less notifications I get, the better. :)

Re:Fail (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617208)

I haven't tried this one and I really don't enjoy GV Mobile, so I'll likely continue using the web interface. Notifications about SMS and voice to my Google number get sent to my gmail and then I see them. I don't see how it is that different than push, unless your phone is silent or you ignore e-mail. The only time it has caused problems for me was a conference in Berkley, but it was cause AT&T had little service, so I was screwed whether folks had my Google number or my AT&T number.

Re:Fail (1)

yeshuawatso (1774190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617336)

Considering how long it took Apple to approve this app, push notifications won't come via an update any time soon. At least this settles the FCC inquiry. I was worried when Apple reviewed my app for three days, I couldn't imagine the anxiety of waiting on Apple to finish a year long "In Review" status update.

Re:Fail (1)

yeshuawatso (1774190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617348)

Should have read at least the /. summary before posting. I got excited and thought Apple was trying to play nice with Google again. Well, nothing to see here. Everyone back to work and/or batin'

first piss (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33616918)

on YOU!

Anonymous Coward (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33616950)

Thanks for posting this. Cincinnati Bengals Jerseys [overbestjersey.com] nice recap of some of the key points in my talk. I hope you and your readers find it useful! Thanks again

A Better Google Story (0, Redundant)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 3 years ago | (#33616958)

Just scanned this from the Economist, Google trying to muscle out a competitor on Android platform for their ad (their whole) business

http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2010/09/skyhook_sues_google [economist.com]

Re:A Better Google Story (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617110)

@oldhack it was already on #slashdot http://tiny.cc/qpacj [tiny.cc]

Re:A Better Google Story (4, Insightful)

wmbetts (1306001) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617146)

wtf is going on with people pretending slashdot comments are twitter now?

Re:A Better Google Story (2, Funny)

jdong (1378773) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617158)

@wmbetts it's not?

*Apple App Store (2, Informative)

placatedmayhem (816456) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617210)

Can people quit saying "the app store" when they mean "the Apple app store"? This usage bothers me because it assumes there are no other app stores (or at least none worth mentioning). Android Market is the notable rub here and there are at least ruminations plenty more popping up all the time. On top of this, and probably more importantly, it's confusing and ambiguous until you get half way through the summary and realize they're talking about something else entirely.

Re:*Apple App Store (4, Insightful)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617232)

There is no other "app store" worth mentioning. You are speaking of "Android Market"

Re:*Apple App Store (1)

Gazzonyx (982402) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617398)

What about Cydia?
Just because it isn't official doesn't mean it isn't worth mentioning. I got my google voice app from Cydia a long time ago.

Re:*Apple App Store (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617772)

What about Cydia? Just because it isn't official doesn't mean it isn't worth mentioning. I got my google voice app from Cydia a long time ago.

Yeah, and from now on, in articles about eBay, can everybody be sure to mention Bidz.com ? It is an auction site too, you know.

Re:*Apple App Store (1)

Gazzonyx (982402) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617932)

Right. If the article stated that for the first time ever you could purchase widgets online at Ebay, when in fact I got a widget online from Bidz about a year ago, wouldn't it be worth mentioning?

Re:*Apple App Store (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33618028)

Right. If the article stated that for the first time ever you could purchase widgets online at Ebay, when in fact I got a widget online from Bidz about a year ago, wouldn't it be worth mentioning?

Honestly, no.

Re:*Apple App Store (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33619736)

Why would it be worth mentioning? The story is about the first Google Voice app to hit the App Store, not about "the first time a Google Voice app is available!"

The Cydia version of the GV app wasn't the first time GV was available, either, was it? So why does Cydia deserve special mention?

Re:*Apple App Store (1)

socsoc (1116769) | more than 3 years ago | (#33644902)

Right. If the article stated that for the first time ever you could purchase widgets online at Ebay, when in fact I got a widget online from Bidz about a year ago, wouldn't it be worth mentioning?

Ummm no? I once bought a burrito at Taco Bell, but it still would be worth mentioning if Subway started selling them.

Re:*Apple App Store (2, Insightful)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33619716)

What about Cydia?

Like the man said... "There is no other app store worth mentioning."

Re:*Apple App Store (5, Insightful)

rickyb (898092) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617246)

Probably has something to do with the fact that it's the only one with "App Store" it its name. Notice that "App Store" is capitalized?

Re:*Apple App Store (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617432)

Notice that "App Store" is capitalized?

So is "First", "Google", "Voice", "App", and "Hits".

This is kind of a nitpicky who-gives-a-crap thing, but I agree. I initially thought they were talking about the Android Market too and was like..uh, yeah, we've had that for like a year an a half...

Re:*Apple App Store (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33618300)

How can you think of Android when someone mentions the App Store? It's Android Marketplace.

It's not the editor's fault if you misunderstand the two.

Re:*Apple App Store (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33619888)

It is not capitalized. Only in title, like all the words of the title are, regardless if they refer to names or not.

Re:*Apple App Store (1)

govenar (835665) | more than 3 years ago | (#33622256)

The title in my browser for this page is "Slashdot Apple Story : First Google...", the title above the summary says "Apple: First Google...", and the URL of this page starts with apple.slashdot.org.

hallelujah (-1, Troll)

fermion (181285) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617240)

We are now free from the Apple supplied phone application for the phone we chose to $500 for instead of buying a cheaper Android phone and can now use a phone application not integrated into the phone. I know that google voice gives us free calls, but Skype already does that. It seems like if google voice was a critical feature, one would buy an android phone that had it built in.

Not that I don't understand the issue of choice. Just that I use skype o the iphone, and the issue is that it is not well integrated. Given that I don't use my minutes as it is, the inconvenience of skype simply is not worth the trouble. Now Skype for iPad, that will be something I want, especially if the iPad can work with my earbud.

Re:hallelujah (2, Informative)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617550)

Uh... who spent $500 on an iPhone?

On ATT's website, an iPhone 4 cost you $199 for a 16GB version, vs. $199 for a comparable Samsung Android model: Samsung Captivate, 16GB.

On Verizon, a Droid X is $199. HTC Droid Incredible is $199. Samsung Fascinate - $199. Motorola Droid 2 - $199.

Pray tell, where are the iPhones that cost 2.5x as much as these Android phones sold?

Re:hallelujah (1)

Reaperducer (871695) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617638)

Uh... who spent $500 on an iPhone?

I know someone who did. A week after she got her 3G it was snatched right out of her hands by a thief in Rome. You only get the discount from AT&T once every 18 months, so to replace it she had to fork out around $700. This was before "Find My iPhone" was available.

Re:hallelujah (0, Troll)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 3 years ago | (#33631598)

She didn't have it insured? Not too bright.

Re:hallelujah (0, Flamebait)

Reaperducer (871695) | more than 3 years ago | (#33631692)

Not an option with her carrier, and neither third-party nor homeowners' insurance would cover it out of the country.

But, thanks for the insult. It's that sort of helpfulness that makes all geeks look bad.

Retard.

Re:hallelujah (1)

boreddotter (1836042) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617790)

those are most likely subsidised prices with a mandatory 18-24 month contract depending on your carrier.

a factory unlocked available in many countries but not the US iPhone with no contract costs around $500-$700 depending on which model you want. almost every other smart phone will cost around that much with no contract.

Re:hallelujah (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33619386)

Sure it's subsidized - all the android phone prices are, too.

If you want comparable features, you will be paying about the same amount for an android phone, so the point that everybodys spending 500 on an iPhone when they could be getting much cheaper android phones is bullshit, presuming you're not also sacrificing features and capability.

Re:hallelujah (1)

Chosen Reject (842143) | more than 3 years ago | (#33640740)

Isn't the iPod Touch just an iPhone with out the 3G antenna? The 64GB version of that is only $400. Does it really cost that much more to add an antenna?

Re:hallelujah (1)

boreddotter (1836042) | more than 3 years ago | (#33657532)

well the previous iPhones had a camera and the iPod Touch didn't, the new iPhone 4 has a better screen and better camera, also it's built differently using different more expensive techniques. Also I am not sure of the numbers but maybe the iPod Touch benefits more from economies of scale?

It also might be licenses they have to pay for the chips and technology?

Re:hallelujah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617822)

Do you realize that not everyone wants to sign a 2 year contract all the time? If you pay full price for the phone, you don't need to sign a new contract. If you switch to T-mobile, they will actually give you a discount on your monthly bill for not signing a new contract. I would rather pay an extra 200-300 for a phone, than pay the extra $480 over the life of the contract. Plus, your phone will have more resale value if you decide to sell and buy a new one before 2 years. If I keept my $350 phone just 18months, it would have 100% paid itself off, and anything I get from a sale would be pure profit. I have 500 minutes, but since I hardly use any of them, that is basically unlimited, plus unlimited text, and UNLIMITED data, not this 2GB bullshit, with free "almost 4G" tethering speeds. T-mobile 3G is fast enough to wireless tether and watch Hulu on here. My speed tests approach 2M/1M. this is for $59.99. Let me know when ATT can offer that!

Re:hallelujah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617902)

those android phones also cost around 500 when you look at their unsubsidized no contract prices.

Re:hallelujah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33618454)

I need the one with the most Gee Bees

Re:hallelujah (1)

appleguru (1030562) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618490)

I just spent $1000 on mine (Well, $1000AUD; ~$940USD today)... 32GB unlocked iPhone 4 from Apple in Australia...

Re:hallelujah (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33619748)

And how much does a *comparable*, unlocked, 32GB Android phone cost from Motorola, HTC, or Samsung? Not the cheapest phone that runs Android, mind you - one comparable to an iPhone 4.

Re:hallelujah (1)

peted56 (1842988) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618508)

And you only have to lock in for 2 years and have a minimum plan. There are Android phones that are only a little more than this and no plan and no lock in. To buy outright with no plan they are not $199.

Re:hallelujah (0, Troll)

Americano (920576) | more than 3 years ago | (#33619394)

Those android phones are not anywhere near feature parity if they're 199 factory unlocked. Thanks for playing.

Re:hallelujah (1)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#33631858)

Pray tell, where are the iPhones that cost 2.5x as much as these Android phones sold?

Try looking at the unsubsidised market. These prices are from the UK and before you rabbit on about tax, being from outside the EU, we dont pay VAT (tax).

Iphone 3GS 8GB GBP 425/US$670 [expansys.com]

Iphone 4 16GB GBP 698/US$1095 [expansys.com]

HTC Desire GBP 340/US$535 [expansys.com]

Samsung Galaxy S GBP 375/US$590 [expansys.com]

Brand new HTC Desire HD GBP 430/US$675 [expansys.com]

So do you see that an Iphone that is over a year old is competing with the latest Android releases. For phones that are barely older then the latest Iphone you're looking at almost half the price.

I love the tears of fanboys in the morning, comparing subsidised phones to subsidised phones is pointless as carriers will just try to bilk as much money out of you as possible without you noticing.

Not first (2, Interesting)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 3 years ago | (#33617466)

Technically this isn't the first Google Voice app in the app store. There were GV apps years ago, then Apple yanked them in short order. This marks the return of GV apps, not a new arrival of the kind.

fail not the first (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33617988)

pleasetag slashvertisement gwiz has had this for a while.

Yawn (0, Troll)

chucklebutte (921447) | more than 3 years ago | (#33618902)

Like Google made an app for their voice on blackberrys a long time ago. Yay for the best smartphone on the market!

Wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33624212)

iOS is already caught up to where the long-entrenched Android was this time last year! Why, it can't be long before someone gets lapped!

http://www.clothes6.us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33707278)

Wonderful.

Share a website with you ,

(======= http://www.clothes6.us =======)

Believe you will love it.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...