Apple

It's been over a year since Apple inaugurated its App Store, but we finally have a sense of how the approval process works.

Apple has been reluctant to publicly discuss how developer-created applications get approved, but the federal government forced its hand by sending an official query regarding the rejection of Google Voice several weeks ago. On Friday, Apple answered a series of questions posed by the FCC regarding the App Store and its evaluation policies, and there were several interesting revelations.

First, Apple says Google Voice was not rejected, it just hasn't been approved, and that AT&T was not consulted in that decision at all. AT&T told the FCC the same thing in its own response to the agency's questions Friday.

But, Apple said in its response letter that while AT&T is not consulted regarding submitted applications, that hasn't stopped AT&T from complaining about apps it doesn't like.

"From time to time, AT&T has expressed concerns regarding network efficiency and potential network congestion associated with certain applications, and Apple takes such concerns into consideration," the company told the FCC.

Beyond the Google Voice dustup, however, we now have a broader understanding of how the App Store works. First of all, it's a monstrous administrative challenge. Apple says it receives 8,500 new applications and updates to existing ones every week. There are 40 people responsible for reviewing every application submitted and each app gets reviewed by two people. Eighty percent are approved as submitted with no changes necessary, and 95 percent of applications are approved in two weeks or less. In total, since the App Store was opened last year, Apple says it has evaluated 200,000 apps and updates.

If you do the actual math, the task is sort of mind-boggling. Forty people looking at 8,500 apps and updates during a regular five-day work week comes out to approximately 212 apps per week. But since each app gets evaluated by two different people, that doubles the load to 424 apps per week, or about 85 apps per day. Assuming a standard eight-hour workday (which, let's be honest, is probably not what these employees are getting away with), that comes out to each member of the App Store team reviewing an app every six minutes. So, it's understandable that some apps that violate the rules might accidentally get by the reviewer.

For the controversial or otherwise special cases, Apple has established an App Store "executive review board." While there's no mention of how many members there are, we do know it's made up of senior management responsible for the App Store who meet weekly to determine review process policy as well as take a look at applications that "raise new or complex issues."

The things the reviewers check for when apps are submitted: buggy software, apps that crash too much, use of unauthorized APIs (Google, apparently, excepted), privacy violation, inappropriate content for children, and anything that "degrades the core experience of the iPhone."

Apple is also obligated by a contract with AT&T as its exclusive carrier in the U.S. to weed out apps that allow iPhone owners to make VoIP calls without AT&T's express permission, or any that violate the carrier's terms of service. This included SlingPlayer Mobile, which was rejected by Apple and only allowed to use the iPhone's Wi-Fi and not its 3G cellular signal. Apple says in the letter that the Sling app, which allows video content from a set-top box to be watched remotely, was rejected "because redirecting a TV signal to an iPhone using AT&T's cellular network is prohibited by AT&T's customer Terms of Service."

AT&T said much the same thing back in May when the application's Wi-Fi-only mode created a stir when it finally made it to the App Store.

Apple has started in recent weeks to acknowledge the often confusing and frustrating process that the App Store had become for developers and consumers, including some public communication from Apple Chief Marketing Officer Phil Schiller to developers and a blogger. But this is the first real look at how the process works.

"We're covering new ground and doing things that had never been done before. Many of the issues we face are difficult and new, and while we may make occasional mistakes, we try to learn from them and continually improve," Apple's Friday statement reads.

Updated at 3:50 p.m. PDT.

Updated at 3 p.m. PDT with additional information and background.

AT&T told federal regulators on Friday that it played no part in Apple's decision to keep the Google Voice application from the App Store, while Apple said it never actually rejected the application.

In response to inquiries from the Federal Communications Commission, AT&T's Jim Cicconi, senior executive vice president for external and legislative affairs, told the agency, "Let me state unequivocally: AT&T had no role in any decision by Apple to not accept the Google Voice application for inclusion in the Apple App Store."

Google Voice, which allows users to receive calls placed to a single telephone number in multiple places and make cheap international calls, was deemed unfit for App Store inclusion in July, after it was released for BlackBerry and Android smartphones. Several days after the story broke, the FCC requested that AT&T, Apple, and Google all comment on what led to the exclusion of Google Voice.

Apple, for its part, claimed that the application was never actually rejected. "Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application and continues to study it. 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 voice mail," Apple said in a statement.

Google also filed a letter in response to the FCC inquiry but redacted a significant portion of that letter when releasing it to the media. A PDF copy can be found here.

Suspicion immediately fell upon AT&T after the Google Voice application did not make it through the approval process, based on the fact that the application lets users bypass hefty rates on international calls. AT&T has also been believed to be behind the delay or rejection of several other applications that could have placed a strain on its network, such as Sling Media's SlingPlayer Mobile application.

But AT&T said it has little influence over the approval process.

"AT&T was not asked about the matter by Apple at any time, nor did we offer any view one way or the other. More broadly, AT&T does not own, operate, or control the Apple App Store, and is not typically consulted regarding the approval or rejection of applications for the App Store, or informed when an application is approved or rejected," Cicconi said in the letter, a PDF copy of which can be found here.

Still, Apple said it's not like AT&T is an innocent bystander.

"There is a provision in Apple's agreement with AT&T that obligates Apple not to include functionality in any Apple phone that enables a customer to use AT&T's cellular network service to originate or terminate a VoIP (voice over Internet Protocol) session without obtaining AT&T's permission. Apple honors this obligation, in addition to respecting AT&T's customer terms of service, which, for example, prohibit an AT&T customer from using AT&T's cellular service to redirect a TV signal to an iPhone. From time to time, AT&T has expressed concerns regarding network efficiency and potential network congestion associated with certain applications, and Apple takes such concerns into consideration," Apple said in its statement.

Skype, perhaps the most well-known VoIP service, seized upon part of AT&T's letter that promised a review of policies regarding VoIP apps running on 3G network as a hopeful sign that Skype would soon be allowed to work on cellular networks.

"We welcome AT&T's willingness to take a fresh look at authorizing VoIP capabilities on the iPhone over AT&T's 3G network," Skype said in a statement e-mailed to reporters. "Skype hopes this is a step forward in enabling consumers to be able to use Skype together with their iPhones and 3G connections and looks forward to hearing more about any potential change to AT&T's policy, in connection with the pending FCC proceeding related to the Skype petition."

As for Google's part, its decision to redact a key portion of its letter to the FCC will raise many eyebrows. The company asked the FCC to redact its part of its answer to the FCC's because "the redaction information relates specifically to private business discussions between Apple and Google and, as such, it constitutes commercial data 'which would customarily be guarded from competitors'...The Internet service industry is highly competitive, and the redacted material relates to business and operations of Google, warranting protection from disclosure under the commission's rules," Google said in a letter to the FCC asking for confidential treatment.

Slowly but surely, we're reaching the point where future mobile computers will be able to hook up to the wireless Internet just like a PC.

Verizon Wireless' announcement that it will open its network to outside devices and applications by the end of next year is the latest step in the dismantling of the traditional wireless industry. For years in the U.S., we've been locked to networks, saddled with expensive two-year contracts, and restricted from doing things we'd like to do with the products we buy.

It seems like that is finally starting to change. Verizon's strategy is very simple, assuming it follows through on the promises made Tuesday. Any phone or device maker will build a CDMA-compatible (code division multiple access) device, have it tested to meet minimum technical requirements, and sell that device as capable of running on Verizon's network. And it will let any application on that phone access its network. The company said it will release the technical requirements early next year and host a conference around the same time to discuss those standards, with the goal of having devices ready by the end of next year.

The idea is that you'd be able to use any CDMA-compatible phone like you do with a Wi-Fi equipped computer or wireless PC card: When you need to connect, just log onto the nearest Verizon access point without having to sign up for a long-term contract. The cellular industry is starting to realize that it has a chance to capture the huge projected increase in wireless Internet traffic as mobile computers become capable of so much more.

Carriers such as Verizon are drooling over the potential revenue from data usage fees, and while Verizon executives seemed to still be kicking around how much to charge for this open-access service, CEO Lowell McAdam said on a conference call Tuesday that it would be akin to reading a utility meter and charging a price per bit.

CEO Lowell McAdam

(Credit: Verizon Wireless)

They're also feeling the pressure from outside forces. Google's Open Handset Alliance is trying to bring handset makers, software developers, and wireless carriers together to build devices that can run any kind of application across multiple phones and networks. The Federal Communications Commission also plans to impose "open requirements" for a small portion of the 700MHz spectrum slated to be auctioned off next year, and Verizon and the rest of the carriers want very much to be part of that auction.

This is about more than just phones, though. There's an emerging category of devices that fit in your hand and do something really well, yet offer the capability to do so much more: like, say, compute. These include portable game players like the PSP, digital cameras, in-car navigation systems, Intel's evolving Mobile Internet Device concept, and, of course, the traditional smart phone.

Verizon wants those devices to run on its network. But in order to cash in the proliferation of these devices--all of which use very different software--the company had to abandon its "walled garden" approach.

"Over time, expect to see those walled gardens come down some as we think we can continue to provide the most reliable wireless experience to our customers," McAdam said. Om Malik at first compared this morning's announcement to former President Ronald Reagan's exhortation for Mikhail Gorbechev to "tear down that wall," but his enthusiasm was tempered after giving it a bit more thought.

"The about-face taken by Verizon Wireless today when it said it will open up its network and platform is, at first blush, a good thing for consumers and developers. But I just got off the company's conference call, and there are certain details that have left me with eyebrows raised," wrote Malik, a veteran reporter who has extensively covered telecommunications companies.

Until recently, Verizon was notorious for exercising near-total control over its phones, forbidding customers to use even simple Bluetooth applications unless they were meant for use with one of those ridiculous-looking headsets. By next year, that will no longer be the case.

"The provider of the device will determine the OS, distribution system, and whether to include Java applications. It is not ours to make that determination, that is up to the provider," said John Stratton, Verizon's chief marketing officer.

The Federal Communications Commission and consumer groups have been calling on the wireless industry to make moves like this for some time, and McAdam acknowledged that customer demand was forcing Verizon's hand. "A competitive market responds to market forces and customer needs," he said, appearing to make the point that forced regulation of these matters is unnecessary.

Malik points out that Verizon's move could have several benefits for both phone users and phone makers. For one, cheap data-capable CDMA phones designed for the Asian market could arrive in the U.S., and many of those phones are beyond what we're used to in this country. You could get a VoIP capable phone for voice calls and just pay a metered fee, which might work out better for some people who don't place a ton of calls but like to do e-mail or browse the Web.

It could also hasten the end of the subsidy model, and make buying a phone more like buying a computer. As Apple showed us this summer, people are ready to buy phones from a retailer or direct from phone makers like Nokia, Motorola, or Samsung. You'd get your support from them, and all Verizon would do is hook you up to the world. This might make for more expensive phones up front, but it could also give phone makers the opportunity to come up with more innovative devices without having to get approval from Verizon for every last piece of software.

This change isn't going to happen overnight, however. The so-called "full-service" customer option will not go away, and McAdam said that he thinks most customers will want to stay with the traditional plans.

Verizon thinks that restricting the number and type of applications that access its network makes for a more reliable network, which is the centerpiece of its marketing campaign. Apple CEO Steve Jobs made a similar argument in the early days of the iPhone, that opening up the device to applications could cause all kinds of unforeseen security and reliability problems.

Before Tuesday's announcement, Verizon was known for its tight control over what ran on its phones, such as the LG Venus.

(Credit: Verizon Wireless)

However, that's clearly not always going to be the case, and Apple plans to open the iPhone to outside application development next year. Mobile software development grows more sophisticated by the day, and as we all start to realize what we can do with a fast Internet connection available at all times, we're going to want to do more than whatever a certain company's executives decide is appropriate for us to do.

"Customers' needs are increasing and diverging, Verizon won't be able to meet every customers needs with our specific devices and applications," McAdam said. Verizon's current business model forces it to only choose devices that it thinks will sell in large volumes. That's difficult to consistently pick what fickle phone users will want to buy 8 to 12 months ahead of time: just ask Motorola.

CMDA world
One problem for Verizon is its use of CDMA technology. According to the GSM Association, more than 80 percent of the cell phones in the world use the GSM standard to get connectivity. If you're a developer that has come up with an incredible new idea for a phone, do you want to address 20 percent of the worldwide market or 80 percent?

In some ways, Verizon's move actually catches it up to the rest of the world. In the GSM cell phone market (AT&T, T-Mobile, and practically the entire rest of the world), unlocking a phone to run on another company's GSM network is simple. Perhaps a little too simple for some, but swapping in a T-Mobile SIM card once you've grown tired of AT&T (and are free of your contractual obligations) is like changing CDs.

But in the CDMA world (Verizon, Sprint, and countries like South Korea and Japan), it isn't quite that simple. If I wanted to leave Sprint and take my Treo 700p to Verizon, they could make it happen, but they wouldn't honor the manufacturer's warranty for that device if something went wrong. And Sprint only accepts outside phones under the table: I once bought a cheap old Nokia CDMA phone on eBay to use with Sprint, and the representative activated it even though they said they weren't really supposed to do that.

Now it will be simple. Sprint has announced that it plans to allow customers to unlock their phones after settling a class-action lawsuit. The dozens of companies gearing up to build phones based on Google's Android software will have a huge network to design for in the U.S. And application developers will have 63 million potential new customers.

Verizon CTO Dick Lynch even responded enthusiastically to a question from Gizmodo about the potential for home-built CDMA devices. "If somebody has the technical capability of building a device in their basement on a breadboard, the philosophy and structure of this program would say, 'have at it.'"

There are lots of details to be ironed out, perhaps most importantly how much this is going to cost and how the billing will work. But for now, the move is a very interesting look at how cellular networks could evolve into something that resembles physical or Wi-Fi networks, where you just plug and play.

And if you're Sprint, you'd better be thinking about some way to keep customers from defecting en masse to Verizon next year.

The fellas at the freakin' FCC have given their blessing to Nokia's latest product, a 3G version of the N95 slider phone.

A faster version of Nokia's N95 phone is set to make its U.S. debut.

(Credit: Federal Communications Commission)

Before any wireless device can be sold in the U.S., the Federal Communications Commission has to test it to make sure its emissions won't cause brain damage or summon aliens from another planet. One nice side effect of that (other than the lack of brain damage) is that the FCC publishes the results of those tests on its Web site before the device is formally released, complete with photos and a user manual.

Wirelessinfo.com (via Engadget) has a report up on the new N95. The proposed 3G N95 will run on HSDPA (high-speed downlink packet access) networks currently being rolled out by AT&T and T-Mobile in the U.S., but it only supports the 850MHz and 1900MHz bands used by AT&T; T-Mobile's HSDPA network will use the 1700MHz band. It will use all four GSM bands for both U.S. and international networks.

Other than that, the new version appears to be the same N95 that is already available here for EDGE networks. It's got pretty much everything: Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, and slider controls for a numeric keypad and multimedia controls, but you'll pay between $599 and $699 for an unlocked EDGE version. No word yet on when the 3G model might become available.