Google is moving into your market.

For tech companies, few words are more frightening, and yesterday we saw why. The mere announcement of Google Maps Navigation sent shares of established GPS device makers like Garmin (GRMN) and TomTom into an ugly downward spiral.

Shares of Garmin lost 16 percent of their value and shares of TomTom plummeted more than 20 percent to a new 52-week low. This, despite the fact that Google’s (GOOG) new turn-by-turn mapping service is currently only available for Android 2.0 smart phones like the Droid from Motorola (MOT).

Clearly, investors already see where this is headed. Who will pay for a Garmin or TomTom unit when they’ve got an Internet-connected smart phone that offers turn-by-turn voice guidance for free? It might be a bit slow coming out of the gate given the current paucity of Android-based smart phones, but once more handsets arrive at market, Google Maps Navigation will undoubtedly have a significant impact on sales of dedicated GPS units.

And if Google brings the service to Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, as the company hopes to, it’s going to be even worse.

“With this product, Google injects itself into a new market and has the potential to cause serious pain for the existing players, like Garmin and TomTom, while giving potential customers one more solid reason to switch to a Google-powered phone,” said Gabriel Consulting Group analyst Dan Olds. “It’s a lot easier to justify the switch to a new device if it takes the place of two devices, like a phone and a navigation device, and if it does the job better.”

In a 13-page letter to the Federal Communications Commission Wednesday, the carrier again said that Google should play by the same rules as its telecom competitors. AT&T also took issue with the search giant’s claim that Google Voice restricts calls to certain rural areas to avoid the so-called traffic pumpers that route calls there to drive up charges.

“Contrary to the public pronouncements of Google and its allies, Google’s rural call blocking regime is not limited to Google simply blocking calls to ‘adult sex chat lines’ and ‘free’ conference calling services to avoid high access charges,” wrote AT&T’s senior vice president, Bob Quinn, in the letter to the FCC’s wireline bureau. “In fact, Google is blocking calls to, among others, an ambulance service, church, bank, law firm, automobile dealer, day spa, orchard, health clinic, tax preparation service, community center, eye doctor, tribal community college, school, residential consumers, a convent of Benedictine nuns, and the campaign office of a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives.”

My God. Google, the company whose business philosophy proudly proclaims “you can make money without doing evil,” blocking calls to small businesses? To Benedictine nuns? Don’t be evil?

Don’t be evil, my ass.

“We can now see the power of Internet-based applications providers to act as gatekeepers who can threaten the ‘free and open’ Internet,” Quinn continues. “Google’s double standard for ‘openness’–where Google does what it wants while other providers are subject to Commission regulations–is plainly inconsistent with the goal of preserving a ‘free and open’ Internet ecosystem.”

That established, Quinn goes in for the kill, arguing that the FCC should regulate the search giant not just on the wires, but on the Web as well.

“Google’s call blocking begs an even more important question that the Commission must consider as it evaluates whether to adopt rules regarding Internet openness,” he writes. “If the Commission is going to be a ’smart cop on the beat preserving a free and open Internet,’ then shouldn’t its ‘beat’ necessarily cover the entire Internet neighborhood, including Google? Indeed, if the Commission cannot stop Google from blocking disfavored telephone calls as Google contends, then how could the Commission ever stop Google from also blocking disfavored websites from appearing in the results of its search engine; or prohibit Google from blocking access to applications that compete with its own email, text messaging, cloud computing and other services; or otherwise prevent Google from abusing the gatekeeper control it wields over the Internet?”

An interesting question. And one for which Google (GOOG) is presumably already preparing a long-winded answer. This is far from over yet, and we’ll continue to go round and round until the FCC puts a stop to it.

Historically, Apple (AAPL) has shunned subscription music services, and fearing they might compete for dollars best spent on iTunes, made it impossible for them to interoperate with the iPod. A few months back, Apple would have likely done the same with Rhapsody, if only to tweak Real Networks (RNWK) CEO Rob Glaser, who infamously disparaged CEO Steve Jobs for his “pigheadedness” at the Digital Living Conference in 2005.

But things are a bit different today. With the Federal Communications Commission’s inquiry into Apple’s rejection continuing consideration of Google Voice for iPhone still fresh in its mind and the outcome of that inquiry still undetermined, Apple might be a bit more inclined to allow Rhapsody into the App Store. It certainly can’t withhold it by claiming it replaces core iPhone functions, as it did with the Google (GOOG) app.

And so we find Apple in a uniquely uncomfortable spot: Accept into the App Store an on-demand streaming music application that will compete for the attention of iTunes users or reject it and suffer further unwanted scrutiny by the FCC, not to mention a nasty public relations nightmare.

During a call with analysts Thursday to discuss second-quarter earnings, Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin said the app, which is currently the iTune App Store’s fourth most popular app in the music category and the 88th most popular overall, was intended more as a means of tempering subscriber churn than a means of driving new subscriptions.

“…unlike an awful lot of applications on the iPhone…we’re not offering free service,” Karmazin said. “What we are offering is the free download and a week’s trial, so this was never designed that we believe we were going to get a significant number of new subscribers. We are seeing an increase in the number of subscribers who are signing up for the $2.99 fee, to be able to stream the product in addition to having it, so a satellite radio subscriber who also has an iPhone is now able to do that with an incremental $2.99.”

So the app is bringing in some new revenue. How much isn’t clear though, since Sirius doesn’t break iPhone app numbers (subscribers or revenue) out. Karmazin admits, however, that it’s not much. “You should not consider them to be a very significant number related to our number of subscribers,” he said, adding, “It’s the right thing for us to do, we continue to believe in it, we’ll continue to do more of these things.”

For free.

Which says quite a bit about the competitive pressures Microsoft (MSFT) is feeling right now, particularly from Google (GOOG), which first challenged Office two years ago and is now taking on Windows as well. “The fact that Microsoft is developing it at all is a response to Google,” said analyst Matt Rosoff of Directions On Microsoft. “This is a move that they probably wouldn’t have made if they didn’t have to, but there is enough competition bubbling up that they thought they needed a response.”

And a measured response that trumps Google’s offerings, which Office Web Apps will do on a few levels. First, it’s free of user-separation anxiety. Companies attached to Outlook, Word and whatnot will find in Office Web Apps the same familiar interfaces and functionality. No need to grudgingly replicate the Office experience as Google recently had to do with it Outlook synchronization tool for Apps, because Office Web Apps is Office.

Second, Microsoft’s approach offers enterprise an on-premises hosting option. Which means companies that aren’t comfortable running the suite on Microsoft’s remote data centers can run it on their own servers. And, as Gartner (IT) fellow Tom Austin notes, that could do much to distinguish it from Google Apps in the marketplace. “The hybrid hosting model removes a barrier to entry that Google cannot remove, so it is somewhat of a big thing,” Austin told Digital Daily.

“Interesting question is whether this hybrid hosting model is the Lockheed Prop-jet Electra of the era. Lockheed brought out a propjet at the same time Boeing and Douglas were coming out with turbojets (the 707 and DC-8 respectively). Boeing and Douglas won out, of course, but it didn’t help that the Electras had a problem with staying in the air….I am not saying that Microsoft Cloud-Office offering is a prop-jet Electra. I am saying firms will likely opt out of choosing the hybrid model because it’s less effective (like the electra).”

“Reaching more than 1 million downloads so quickly is a strong testament to our world-class programming and Sirius XM’s instant brand recognition,” Scott Greenstein, president and chief content officer, said in a release trumpeting the milestone. “Our goal is to give people access to the best audio entertainment wherever they go with what we think is the best music and audio entertainment application available on the App Store.”

The app, which debuted on June 18, quickly became the top free offering in the the App Store’s music category and has held that spot for some time now. So it’s certainly one of the more popular music apps available. That said, it’s also one of the most poorly rated. Sirius XM’s app has an average rating of just two stars out of a possible five. Of its 56,952 user reviews, just 8,822 give it five stars. But 37,818 rate it a single star. And most of those do so citing Stern’s absence as the reason. So while it’s true that Sirius XM Premium Online is the the top free app in the music category, it’s also seems to be its leading disappointment. Makes you wonder how many of those one million downloads were deleted, either after the user noticed Stern’s absence or the $2.99/month subscription fee.

HP, which is now well practiced in programs like these thanks to three prior recalls, is providing free replacement batteries to those with affected machines.

Now Martin has circled back with a new version of his wireless broadband plan, one free of the content-filtering requirements that had made it so controversial. “[If filtering] is a problem for people, let’s take it away,” Martin told Ars Technica. “A lot of public interest advocates have said they would support this, but [they were] concerned about the filter. Well, now there’s an item in front of the Commissioners and it no longer has the filter. And I’ve already voted for it without the filter now. So it’s already got one vote.”

If Martin can muster more support for this revised plan, it could be put up for a vote as early as Jan. 15.

10,000 apps. An impressively broad ecosystem for just under five months of development. Apple’s (AAPL) year-end list of Top App Store Downloads for 2008, then, is both handy and timely (Click on the image below to see the top 10 paid and free apps). It’s largely what you’d expect, with the Games and Entertainment categories proving most popular, Facebook and Pandora dominating the Free App category, and Texas Hold ‘Em and Moto Chaser topping the Paid App category. Fascinating to see the breadth on display here. Were you to purchase every app currently for sale at the store, it would set you back in excess of $30,000.