Obviously, there's some kind of communication/PR/spin gap between Apple and Google. The distinction is so tiny and cosmetic that it's not worth getting all worked up over: Apple is weaseling around its decision, and it's pretty slimy, but it's going a little far to shout "you lie." (A "nuke"? Seriously?)
Personally, I wish the hotheaded folks at the 'Crunch would move on to the larger questions: what's the real reason the app was "not accepted"? Is the decision anticompetitive? What can Google (and its customers) do about it?
Comments
This is just a big, semantic muddle. Gruber put it best:
Google doesn’t see the difference between "not accepted" and "rejected" that Apple claims to see. (http://daringfireball.net/linked/2009/09/18/google-unredacts)
Obviously, there's some kind of communication/PR/spin gap between Apple and Google. The distinction is so tiny and cosmetic that it's not worth getting all worked up over: Apple is weaseling around its decision, and it's pretty slimy, but it's going a little far to shout "you lie." (A "nuke"? Seriously?)
Personally, I wish the hotheaded folks at the 'Crunch would move on to the larger questions: what's the real reason the app was "not accepted"? Is the decision anticompetitive? What can Google (and its customers) do about it?
Agreed, I'm trying to work out what the story actually is here.
Apple said that they hadn't rejected Voice, just they hadn't accepted it yet because of concerns it competed with the iPhone's core functionality.
The truth is they had rejected Voice, for the above reasons. Is that it?