“Foxconn Electronics (Hon Hai Precision Industry) will be the manufacturing partner for an upcoming tablet PC device from Apple, according to market sources,” the publication claims. “The sources indicated they believe the tablet PC features will focus more on e-book functionality rather than music, and that based on Apple’s marketing strategy, long battery life, quick Internet connectivity and an easy-to-use user interface will be key features of the device.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Rumored Apple Netbook Actually an E-book?
• Coming Soon From Apple: Big Touch?
• iTablet: Apple’s Killer App for Higher Ed

Not a week after confirming its interest in the netbook market, Nokia leapt into it, uncrating the Booklet 3G–a 2.8-pound “mini-laptop” with 3G, WiFi and A-GPS support, a 10-inch HD-ready display and a claimed 12 hours of battery life. The machine will feature an Intel (INTC) Atom processor and likely run a version of Microsoft’s (MSFT) Windows. Finally, it will support Ovi, Nokia’s (NOK) version of Apple’s (AAPL) App Store.

“A growing number of people want the computing power of a PC with the full benefits of mobility,” Kai Oistamo, Nokia’s executive vice president for devices, said in a statement. “We are in the business of connecting people and the Nokia Booklet 3G is a natural evolution for us. Nokia has a long and rich heritage in mobility and with the outstanding battery life, premium design and all day, always on connectivity, we will create something quite compelling. In doing so we will make the personal computer more social, more helpful and more personal.”
 
Quite a pledge. And one that Nokia must deliver on if it’s to become a full-fledged mobile solution provider.

“Nokia is not trying to move into the extremely competitive market for PCs in general, even though it describes the Booklet 3G as a mini-laptop. What it is doing is moving to protect its key markets,” said Gold Associates analyst Jack E. Gold. “Indeed, netbooks are increasingly being sold as mobile device alternatives (or supplements) to smartphones. Many have 3G radios included, can make voice calls (via VoIP) and are increasingly being sold and subsidized by traditional wireless carriers. Therefore, it is logical to see Nokia make this move.”

“Contrary to published reports, Apple has not rejected the Google Voice application, and continues to study it.”

So begins Apple’s response to the Federal Communication Commission’s inquiry into its rejection of the app and of its App Store approval process. Seems Google Voice was withheld from the App Store not because of any ill feeling toward Google or a nefarious request from AT&T, but because it too closely mimics the iPhone OS, including management of calls, voicemail and text messages. From Apple’s statement:

Question 1. Why did Apple reject the Google Voice application for iPhone and remove related third-party applications from its App Store?

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 voicemail. Apple spent a lot of time and effort developing this distinct and innovative way to seamlessly deliver core functionality of the iPhone. For example, on an iPhone, the “Phone” icon that is always shown at the bottom of the Home Screen launches Apple’s mobile telephone application, providing access to Favorites, Recents, Contacts, a Keypad, and Visual Voicemail. 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. Similarly, SMS text messages are managed through the Google hub—replacing the iPhone’s text messaging feature. In addition, the iPhone user’s entire Contacts database is transferred to Google’s servers, and we have yet to obtain any assurances from Google that this data will only be used in appropriate ways. These factors present several new issues and questions to us that we are still pondering at this time.

Question 2. Did Apple act alone, or in consultation with AT&T, in deciding to reject the Google Voice application and related applications? If the latter, please describe the communications between Apple and AT&T in connection with the decision to reject Google Voice. Are there any contractual conditions or non-contractual understandings with AT&T that affected Apple’s decision in this matter?

Apple is acting alone and has not consulted with AT&T about whether or not to approve the Google Voice application. No contractual conditions or non-contractual understandings with AT&T have been a factor in Apple’s decision-making process in this matter.

In a response of its own, AT&T (T) also said this was the case:

1(a). What role, if any, did AT&T play in Apple’s consideration of the Google Voice and related applications?

AT&T had no role in Apple’s consideration of Google Voice or related applications.

1(b). What role, if any, does AT&T play in consideration of iPhone applications generally?

The Apple App Store is owned, operated and controlled by Apple, not AT&T, and Apple makes the decisions regarding the specific applications that are approved for use on the iPhone or included in the Apple App Store. AT&T does not participate in Apple’s day-to-day consideration of specific applications, nor does Apple typically notify AT&T prior to including applications in the App Store. Apple also does not usually advise AT&T after specific applications have been added to the App Store, which reportedly contains more than 65,000 applications. AT&T has had discussions with Apple regarding only a handful of applications that have been submitted to Apple for review where, as described below, there were concerns that the application might create significant network congestion.

And what is Google’s (GOOG) public reply to the whole affair? Nada. The company had more to say to the government, via a response to FCC queries. But in the copy of the document that’s been released for public consumption, the most interesting stuff has been redacted. To wit: “What explanation was given (if any) for Apple’s rejection of the Google Voice application?…Please describe any communications between Google and AT&T or Apple on this topic and a summary of any meetings or discussion.” (Click on text below to enlarge.)

Now that’s a little odd, isn’t it? Why would Google ask the FCC to redact portions of its statement? Says Google: “[Because the redacted] 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.’”

That satisfy your curiosity? Doesn’t satisfy mine, either.

(Peter Kafka contributed to this post.)

UPDATE: AT&T may not participate in “Apple’s day-to-day consideration of specific applications,” but its presence is still felt during the approval process. From Apple’s (AAPL) response:

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.

UPDATE: An interesting nugget from AT&T’s statement:

It is widely recognized by economists and jurists that parties to strategic alliances in competitive markets may enter into contracts to promote and protect their respective business interests and to refrain from taking actions adverse to those interests.12 Consistent with such lawful, economically efficient practices common among parties to strategic alliances, including participants in the mobile wireless marketplace,13 AT&T and Apple agreed that Apple would not take affirmative steps to enable an iPhone to use AT&T’s wireless service (including 2G, 3G and Wi-Fi) to make VoIP calls without first obtaining AT&T’s consent. AT&T and Apple also agreed, however, that if a third party enables an iPhone to make VoIP calls using AT&T’s wireless service, Apple would have no obligation to take action against that third party….AT&T indicated to Apple that it does not object to Apple enabling VoIP applications for the iPhone that use Wi-Fi connectivity (including connectivity at more than 20,000 Wi-Fi hotspots operated by AT&T that may be used by iPhone customers for no additional charge) rather than AT&T’s 2G or 3G wireless data services….we plan to take a fresh look at possibly authorizing VoIP capabilities on the iPhone for use on AT&T’s 3G network.

That breathless and swooning introduction aside, ngmoco co-founder Neil Young’s keynote address at the Game Developers Conference in San Francisco today was noteworthy in that it really heralds the arrival of the iPhone as a gaming platform. The GDC is the largest annual gathering of professional videogame developers, so the fact that Young, an Electronic Arts (ERTS) alum turned iPhone developer, delivered his remarks from a stage that will soon host Nintendo president Satoru Iwata and Metal Gear creator Hideo Kojima says a lot about the esteem in which game developers hold the device–dismissive comments from Sony (SNE) be damned.

Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone is still in its early stages as a gaming platform and make no mistake, it is a viable gaming platform, said Young. And he should know; ngmoco–the developer of popular iPhone game titles like Rolando, Dropship, and Topple–just closed a $10 million second-round of funding after only nine months in business.

“Don’t let the haters tell you it sucks compared to the [Nintendo] DS or the [Sony] PSP,” Young said of the iPhone. “It doesn’t. It’s good. It’s clear that the quality of iPhone games is eclipsing its console counterparts, and that’s even more acute when you compare it against the prior generation.” Why?

Unlike its console rivals, the iPhone is always connected, users always carry it, it offers unique features that can’t be found anywhere else–a touchscreen, an accelerometer, connectivity. In this way, said Young, the iPhone is similar to the Nintendo DS. When that device first launched, many thought it would be beaten into whimpering submission by the far more robust PSP. But that never happened. “Nintendo was able to win that battle by combining great software with hardware that it understood very well,” Young said. “If Nintendo made the iPhone, what would they focus on? I think they would build games that could only be on the iPhone. The designs would be progressive, discontinuous, and would have the user and the user’s context always in mind. They would have great underlying game design with native device functionality at the core.”

His point: Graphics and sound alone don’t necessarily make a great app. As Nintendo has shown us with the DS and the Wii, gaming is all about the platform. And Apple has clearly created one to be reckoned with.

Long a partner to the big server makers, the networking equipment giant today became a competitor, announcing an aggressive push into the server market. No longer content to peddle switches and routers alone, Cisco (CSCO) is now selling what it calls a unified computing system–a full-blown data center solution that encompasses everything from servers and storage to connectivity and virtualization services. The move is a brazen challenge to IBM (IBM), HP (HPQ) and other vendor partners with whom Cisco had once cooperated. “We’re going to compete with HP,” Cisco CTO Padmasree Warrior told The Wall Street Journal. “I don’t want to sugarcoat that. There is bound to be change in the landscape of who you compete with and who you partner with.”

Of course, but “change” is rather a tame word for a potentially market-disrupting expansion of Cisco’s business. This is a power grab, plain and simple. A game-changer. Cisco is offering an integrated approach to what’s long been a multivendor arrangement. Whereas before, CIOs would purchase servers from one company, virtualization software from another and networking from yet another, the networking giant is proposing they now purchase them together from a single vendor: Cisco. And that puts it on a collision course with IBM and HP.

“H-P, IBM and Cisco are the new four horsemen of IT infrastructure and they are all fighting to increase their share of the enterprise IT wallet,” Forrester Research analyst James Staten told Marketwatch. “They have all benefited from growth of the market and by taking share from weaker players, but are now needing to go after each other’s strongholds to keep growing. They are definitely leveraging technology evolutions that drive unification, so customers win through this competition, but it’s going to be a bloody fight.”

So 12 years from now our work lives will be our lives entire?

That’s an unsettling thought. But if we’re always connected, always on the grid, then what’s to stop it from coming to pass? What’s to stop “the expansion of the work to encompass all time and all space,” as Nick Carr described it in his comments to Pew researchers. A reassertion of the same boundaries we’re seeing erased, I imagine. Otherwise we may have this to look forward to…

Said Benjamin Ben-Baruch, senior market intelligence consultant and applied sociologist for Aquent: “In 2020…a myth will develop that outside of formally scheduled activities, work and play can be seamlessly integrated in most of these workers’ lives. Employers will attempt to convince us that this is a net positive for people because we will be able to blend personal/professional duties…. However the reality will be quite different. Because we can be surveilled whenever we are ‘connected’ and especially because we can be surveilled whenever we are connected using our employer-provided devices, we can and will be controlled. Our employers will gain even more control over work-time discipline and over our lives and will be able to force even more productive working hours from us. Our lives will in fact be increasingly controlled by those who provide us with the devices that will have become increasingly necessary for us in both our work and personal lives as well as those who own and control the networks and network sites that we use and visit. Some companies will try to distinguish themselves as companies that do not actually use their power to watch and control us–but most companies will do the ‘fiscally responsible’ thing of using available technology to assert control.”

The T-Mobile (DT) handset is expected to price out at $150 and arrive at market in September, as Digital Daily noted in June.