Google has been actively collecting feedback on Google Wave with an ongoing survey, which was distributed via email, the help center, and Twitter. Today they’ve published the initial findings for public dissection.

So far results indicate that users love the concept of Wave, appreciate the collobartion features, and like the extensions, gadgets, and robots. On the flip side, however, the most perplexing part of the Wave experience is that users’ friends and contacts don’t have access to Wave. Respondents also complained of speed issues and indicated a desire for integration with more tools like email.

Based on our experience with Google Wave, the results that Google has published are spot on and point to some of the reasons why the system is both a game changer and, on the other hand, still not ready for mainstream attention.

Google does say that they will be acting on your feedback and opinions:

“With these responses and other data, we’re organizing our team around the core issues that are important to making waving better. We’re working hard to scale our systems so you can invite your friends and colleagues to wave with you. We’re also thinking about how to integrate with existing communication and collaboration tools. And since we all know that fast is better than slow, a large portion of the team is working to make Google Wave faster.”

Do your Google Wave likes and dislikes fall in line with survey data? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Image from watch4u on Flickr

Wiggio, the a communication application for college students, has added a slew of new features to its collaborative product. Similar to Yammer, Wiggio provides a Twitter-like message stream from all the group members, lets users share calendars, use text and voice messaging, share files and more.

Wiggio, which is free, now lets users host free, Web-Ex like “virtual meetings” for a group, which includes live video conferencing, screen sharing and whiteboard collaboration. The application has also added integration with Facebook, letting users create a group and then import group members directly from their list of Facebook friends. Wiggio users can also use the “Wiggio Boards” Facebook application which lets you communicate in real- time with group members through text message, email and Facebook messaging in one centralized stream. The app will also sync group calendars with calendars in Outlook, Google, Yahoo! and iCal.

Launched in January 2009, Wiggio was founded by Dana Lampert and Rob and Derek Doyle, sons of Bob Doyle, the creator of MacPublisher (the first desktop publishing program) and the 1970s electronic game Merlin. The elder Doyle is an adviser and investor in Wiggio, and houses the four-person startup in his lab a block away from Harvard. Wiggio raised $450,000 in an angel round last August.

Lampert says that Wiggio is is currently growing by over 1,500 new members per day and recently passed 200,000 total users. Although the product faces competition from bigger players like WizeHive, Yammer and Basecamp, Wiggio it is steadily gaining traction among college students and is even expanding its reach to small businesses and non-profits.

This post is sponsored by IBM’s A Smarter Planet blog, where it has also been cross-posted.

In recent posts we’ve looked at three of the world’s leading RFID-powered Smart Cards: Japan’s cutting edge Suica Card, London’s Oyster Card and Hong Kong’s long-running Octopus Card. The most conservative of those three, the Oyster card, can only be used on London’s public transport system. However that alone is a huge mainstream market for RFID chips. What’s more interesting though is how Smart Cards are being used in Japan and Hong Kong.

In both countries the cards (and other devices, such as phones and watches) may be used to purchase goods from selected shops. It’s more pervasive in Hong Kong, where the Octopus can be used at more than 1,000 merchants. Furthermore, in Hong Kong the card can be used as an access device for places like apartment buildings and schools.

Hong Kong is leading the way in the use of smart cards, but how is the overall RFID smart card market tracking?

A report released last month by VDC Research Group looked at the global demand for RFID Smartcards. Despite the economy and difficulties in implementing RFID products, VDC believes that "the future remains bright for the RFID Smartcards market."

According to VDC Research Group, RFID smartcards revenues were nearly US$700M in 2008 and are predicted to grow at more than 26% per annum through 2013.

Image: VDC Research Group

Most interestingly, VDC stated that "several emerging applications are quickly approaching their tipping points." VDC mentions contactless payment and ticketing as examples. Both are already features of the Octopus Card in Hong Kong.

At ReadWriteWeb we’d argue that RFID smart cards for ticketing on public transport has already tipped. Just look at the number of cities across the world that use smart cards for that purpose.

What hasn’t yet tipped, in our estimation, is using smart cards for a wider range of purposes – shopping, access to buildings, e-commerce, a range of identity purposes. Hong Kong has, over the past decade, developed into a great test case for many of those things. What’s more, the citizens of Hong Kong appear to have few privacy and security concerns. However we suspect those issues would be much more high profile in, say, the United States.

We’ve only seen the beginning of RFID smart card use cases, although Asia is clearly ahead of the curve. What we’re most looking forward to is web applications built off an RFID smart card platform. Japan’s Suica Card has begun to do that, with its Suica-enabled posters. But there’s much more to come.

Last November we all knew Yahoo cofounder Jerry Yang would be stepping down after a disastrous tenure as CEO. He spurned Microsoft without realizing the consequences, and he had no ability to describe an alternate path for the company. We weren’t alone in calling for his dismissal, and the hope was that Yahoo would find the right leader to restore their former glory. They didn’t.

In the few months between Jerry’s resignation and the beginning of the Carol Bartz era at Yahoo, there was much speculation in Silicon Valley about who might lead the once great company. People I spoke with thought Yahoo would go one of two ways. The first would be to try to find the great product visionary to lead the company forward. Their Bill Gates or Steve Jobs (Mark Zuckerberg may someday be on that list). With the right product vision Yahoo could push boldly into new territory and renew its bid to create a lasting brand and company. The second way to go would be to hire someone to sell the company, whole or in parts, and maximize shareholder value in the short run.

It’s pretty clear Yahoo went with door number 2 and chose someone who could negotiate a deal over the next great product visionary of our time. You can’t really blame them – true visionaries are by definition rare. And it’s unlikely they’d want to go to swim upstream at Yahoo during the hard rebuilding years.

So in came Bartz, and the deals started happening. We’ve mostly kept quiet. Any new CEO deserves a honeymoon phase, and Bartz barked at journalists to keep their opinions to themselves on her first day at Yahoo: “It’s been too crazy. People outside Yahoo deciding what Yahoo should do, shouldn’t do. That’s got to stop.”

But the honeymoon ended when Yahoo signed away its most important asset for next to nothing. Yahoo went from being in the enviable position of no. 2 in search to just another portal, albeit a big one. And despite what Bartz said, she held out hard for a big up front cash payment. Microsoft never gave in, and Yahoo caved. Now they’ll watch their search market share dwindle, just as AOL’s did after surrendering search to Google earlier this decade. And since all the people have left or are leaving, there is no way for Yahoo to ever recover what they once had. What in the world will happen to them if the government rejects the search deal? They’d be in very serious financial trouble almost immediately. I almost wonder if Microsoft secretly hopes for exactly that to happen.

Bartz played an excellent game of checkers. It’s just that her opponent was playing chess. And the history books will not be kind.

So what’s next for Yahoo? There’s talk of social stuff, but no one believes it. Products are being sold and shut down left and right. Yahoo may stumble along for years without a forced sale. But there are no real product gurus left there to do anything spectacular and risky. What’s Yahoo’s equivalent of the iPhone? They don’t have the stomach to try it, whatever it is.

Bartz says not to worry, that middle America still loves them: “When you get outside New York and Silicon Valley, everyone loves Yahoo.” You know who else used to say that as they began their long, slow decline? MySpace. But what they miss is that the new generation of Internet users is all about Facebook and Google, no matter where they live. Without a bold and risky plan to reshape the company, there is no way to get back those users.

Do I really want Yahoo to bring Jerry Yang back? No, not really. He loves the company but he certainly wasn’t the leader Yahoo needed. His tenure as CEO was a sad affair. But he did have passion for the product, something Bartz lacks. And frankly, he seemed willing to turn down every offer from Microsoft. After declining the initial takeover offer, maybe that was the best strategy. Giving away search hardly seems strategic.

I miss Yahoo. They used to be warriors, with a bite to back up their bark. You can throw F-bombs all day long, but if you don’t have the product muscle to back up the bluster, eventually it just gets old.

Kai-fu Lee, who announced his departure from Google China last week, has cause the Internet to erupt with speculation on the reasons for his departure and future plans.

News on this hot topic has been difficult to report, as many original sources are difficult or impossible for tech bloggers with limited resources to translate. However, according to a Reuters report, the former president of Google China is planning to start an angel investment firm with the equivalent of $117 million.

Lee confirmed his plans on his verified Twitter account, and this blog post seems to speak to his desire to “provide [a] business platform that provides angel investment funds and to assist and guide young entrepreneurs.”

Recent tweets suggest that Lee is already shopping his new company to analysts and media. He will hold a press conference Monday to give more details on the investment firm.

We and the rest of the tech world wait with bated breath to hear more about Lee’s new venture and what it will mean for the startup ecosystem in China.

Apple has never been one to be overly communicative with their developer community and the iTunes App Store is no exception. There is often little communication between Apple and developers when it comes to why an app is rejected or why its launch in the store is delayed. Now with the recent removal of all Google Voice related applications from the App Store – and again, with no explanations – at least one developer has had enough.

But lack of communication is only one of the issues with today’s App Store approval process. O’Reilly Research is reporting today that the incubation period for apps is now trending upward – a figure that seems to speak to Apple’s becoming overwhelmed by the number of submissions. And finally, courtesy of Apple’s mysterious approval process, they’ve accidentally let yet another “adult”-themed application into the App Store once again.

“I Can’t Say. It’s Just Against Our Policy”

For four months, the developer of a third-party Google Voice application known as VoiceCentral hosted his application in the iTunes App Store. Then, one day, it was gone. There was no advanced notice and absolutely no explanation from the company. He contacted Apple for help. After a frustrating conversation with Apple employee “Richard,” the developer realized that Apple was simply refusing to discuss the problem. The conversation, a snippet of which is embedded below, is beyond absurd (Note – the developer says the conversation is not verbatim):

Richard: “I’m calling to let you know that VoiceCentral has been removed from the App Store because it duplicates features of the iPhone.”

Me: “I don’t understand that reasoning. By that logic wouldn’t apps like Textfree, Skype, fring, or iCall be considered duplicates?”

Richard: “I can’t discuss other apps with you.”

Me: “It’s not the apps themselves I want to discuss just the lack of consistency in rule enforcement.”

Richard: “I can only say that yours duplicates features of the iPhone and was causing confusion in the user community. It’s against our policy.”

Me: “So what has changed that it is now against policy? It has been in the store for the last 4 months with no problem. There wasn’t a problem for the 1.5 months prior to that when you were ‘reviewing’ it. And this didn’t come up with any of the updates we submitted after it was already in the store.”

Richard: “I can’t say – only that yours is not complying with our policy.”

Me: “Can you tell me what portions of the app were duplicate features?”

Richard: “I can’t go into granular detail.”

Me: “Is there something we can change or alter in order to regain compliance and get back in the Store?”

Richard: “I can’t say.”

Me: “Well if we can’t figure out the issue then how will we know whether to resubmit the app. And how will we know whether to invest in any other development efforts? Future apps could be impacted.”

Richard: “I can’t help you with that”

Along with the removal of the third-party applications, Apple also gave the boot to the official Google Voice Application at the same time.

Some tech pundits reported it was AT&T; who was behind the removal of these apps, since the Google Voice app essentially turns the iPhone into a dumb data device that routes calls over the iPhone’s data connection instead of over AT&T;’s network – you know, the network where they get to charge you big money for long distance phone calls and such. Others weren’t so sure that AT&T; was to blame, since there are still a number of other VoIP applications available in the App Store now including My Skype, TruPhone, Nimbuzz, and Fring.

Sadly, the real truth may never be known because Apple isn’t talking.

For one Apple developer, Steven Frank, watching the Google Voice debacle unfold was enough to put him off developing applications for Apple products altogether. Interestingly enough, Frank is not an iPhone developer – he develops apps for the Mac. But seeing how Apple was treating the mobile developer community left him “frustrated and disappointed,” he wrote in a candid blog post.

“I’ve reached a point where I can no longer just sit back and watch this. The iPhone ecosystem is toxic, and I can’t participate any more until it is fixed. As people have told me so many times: It’s Apple’s ballgame, and Apple gets to make the rules, and if I don’t like it, I can leave. So, I don’t like it, and I’m leaving.”

As for Google themselves, they aren’t sharing what (if any) conversation occurred between the two companies about the Voice app’s removal. But given the somewhat incestuous relationship between both industry giants (Apple and Google share two board members: Google CEO Eric Schmidt and former Genentech CEO Arthur Levinson), we’ll probably never hear from them either.

Delays, Delays, Delays

When it comes to getting an application published, there’s no doubt that Apple’s queue of apps pending approval is likely the largest in the business. That’s probably why the company is unable to offer consistent and reliable lead times for app approval to their developers. Some apps seem to get approved in a reasonable amount of time while others have actually sat in limbo for as much as six months.

And it’s not just approvals that are subjected to this process. Application updates – patches that add features and fix major problems – are stalled for weeks on end at times, too. Says one iPhone developer: “I’m not happy with delays involved, and the seemingly arbitrary favoritism that’s evident. It’s either favoritism or just general chaos.”

Today, new findings from O’Reilly Research put hard numbers to these sorts of complaints. They show that Apple’s incubation times are now trending upward. The “incubation time” is the period between the release date of an app and the date it first appears in iTunes. The release date of an app refers to the date developers upload their apps to iTunes Connect, the area where apps are managed. In between the release date and when the app appears in iTunes, Apple performs a number of undisclosed QA tests before making the app live in their store. Because a shorter incubation period translates to a more favorable position when users sort apps by release date, developers prefer to see the shortest incubation periods possible.

As more apps are launched each week, the incubation period for these apps is increasing, says O’Reilly. They found that the mean incubation period for all app categories except for Travel is now on the rise.

The findings also reveal some other interesting trends, too. For example, although more games are launched each week, Mu
sic apps spend more time in the approval process. (No doubt while Apple verifies whether or not the app competes with iTunes).

Then there is the issue of Apple telling a developer that their app will go live on a particular date but it doesn’t happen. The most recent example of this was with the new my6sense application. Because the company’s PR department had already briefed a number of bloggers with the information, articles were published anyway, albeit with an update about the delay. Unfortunately for the company, this was not the ideal situation. How awful must it have been to see post after post about the app go live without any download link included in any of them. That’s not just disappointing for the blog readers who can’t try the app right away, it no doubt affected the company’s bottom line, too.

That App Should Not Have Been Approved

Although Apple won’t reveal any details of their mysterious approval process, a number of “oopsies” and oversights lead some to wonder if there isn’t some sort of automation involved. That’s the only explanation as to why some apps, like the horrid “Baby Shaker” game (where you shake the baby until red X’s appear over his eyes) could have ever made it through. Such an oversight surely was not made by an actual person – at least not one who wanted to keep their job, that is.

Other questionable applications have also been pulled like BeautyMeter, a “Hot or Not” type of app where user-submitted photos are voted on and rated. Some users went too far with their photos, leaving Apple to finally pull the app when a 15-year-old girl uploaded nude photos of herself. That occurrence made the app go from being risque to downright illegal in an instant. Perhaps Apple just didn’t see the potential dangers of that type of application, but their latest mistake again highlights the obvious holes in their approval process.

For a brief period of time yesterday, Apple was hosting an app called theXchange whose sole purpose is to connect people who want to have sex. Clearly, this app should not have made the cut given Apple’s policies. So again, one has to wonder: what is going on with the approval process?

Apple Needs to Shape Up

There’s no doubt that Apple is struggling with the large number of apps, the high visibility of their platform, and having to balance their goals with those of their carriers like AT&T.; However, the problems, the delays, and, most importantly, their refusal to discuss the issues, is starting to give the company a bad reputation. For now, the souring feelings for Apple are probably just occurring in the developer community and among and tech pundits who watch the company closely. Still, it’s already been bad enough for some developers to bow out and for some high-profile tech bloggers to announce they’re ditching the iPhone for good.

If Apple can’t address these issues in a timely fashion, then maybe it’s time for them to lift their cone of silence and say – if not why the issues have happened – then at the very least, “We’re Sorry.”

Right about now, Apple probably wishes it had never rejected Google Voice and related apps from the iPhone. Or maybe it was AT&T who rejected the apps. Nobody really knows. But the FCC launched an investigation last night to find out, sending letters to all three companies (Apple, AT&T, and Google) asking them to explain exactly what happened.

On its face, it might seem odd to some people that the FCC is investigating the rejection of a single iPhone app. After all, iPhone apps are rejected every day. But the Google Voice rejection caused an unusual amount of uproar, and there is nothing like a high-profile case to make an example out of in pursuit of pushing a bigger policy agenda. The FCC investigation is not just about the arbitrary rejection of a single app. It is the FCC’s way of putting a stake in the ground for making the wireless networks controlled by cell phone carriers as open as the Internet.

Today there are two different sets of rules for applications and devices on the Internet. On the wired Internet, we can connect any type of PC or other computing device and use any applications we want on those devices. On the wireless Internet controlled by cellular carriers like AT&T, we can only use the phones they allow on their networks and can only use the applications they approve. This was fine when the wireless networks were used mostly just for voice calls. But now that they are increasingly becoming our mobile connections to the Internet and mobile phones are becoming full-fledged mobile computers, an argument has been growing that the same rules of open access that rule the wired Internet should apply to the wireless Internet.

While Apple and AT&T cannot be too happy about the FCC investigation, Google must secretly be pleased as punch. It was only two years ago, prior to the 700MHz wireless spectrum auctions, that it was pleading with the FCC to adopt principles guaranteeing open access for applications, devices, services, and other networks. Now two years later, in a different context and under a different administration, the FCC is pushing for the same principles.

In its letters requesting more information from all three companies, the FCC cites “pending FCC proceedings regarding wireless open access (RM-11361) and handset exclusivity (RM-11497). That first proceeding on open access dates back to 2007 when Skype requested that cell phone carriers open up their networks to all applications (see Skype’s petition here). Like Google Voice, Skype helps consumers bypass the carriers. The carriers don’t like that because it erodes their core business and turns them into dumb pipes.

But dumb pipes are what we need. They are good for consumers and good for competition because they allow any application and any device, within reason, to flower on the wireless Internet. So if you look at the questions the FCC is asking, it wants to know why the Google Voice app was rejected and whether AT&T (the carrier) had anything to do with that rejection:

2. Did Apple act alone, or in consultation with AT&T, in deciding to reject the Google Voice application and related applications? . . .

3. Does AT&T have any role in the approval of iPhone applications generally (or in certain cases)? If so, under what circumstances, and what role does it play?

The FCC also wants Apple to explain the arbitrariness of its app approval process:

4. Please explain any differences between the Google Voice iPhone application and any Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) applications that Apple has approved for the iPhone. Are any of the approved VoIP applications allowed to operate on AT&T’s 3G network?

5. What other applications have been rejected for use on the iPhone and for what reasons? Is there a list of prohibited applications or of categories of applications that is provided to potential vendors/developers? If so, is this posted on the iTunes website or otherwise disclosed to consumers?

6. What are the standards for considering and approving iPhone applications? What is the approval process for such applications (timing, reasons for rejection, appeal process, etc.)? What is the percentage of applications that are rejected? What are the major reasons for rejecting an application?

Good questions. Hopefully, the FCC will share Apple’s answers with the rest of the us. It is all a bit absurd, though. Why does it take a formal request from a government agency to get Apple (and AT&T) to explain what the rules are to get on the wireless Internet? More importantly, why are these companies allowed to be the gatekeepers to the wireless Internet? The iPhone needs to be smashed open, and the FCC is swinging the hammer.

Update: AT&T responded to this post with the following statements:

AT&T does not manage or approve applications for the App Store. We have received the letter and will, of course, respond to it.

Customers can use any compatible GSM phone on our network, not just the ones we’ve approved and sell. And they also can use apps we don’t approve. We don’t approve iPhone applications.

So there you have it. You can use any mobile app you like on AT&T—unless it is an iPhone app (that’s been rejected by Apple). Does Apple ever reject apps at the request of AT&T though? Maybe they’ll give the FCC a straight answer.

(Flickr photo credit:Stephen Heywood).

Well, the world didn’t come to an end after the demo of the SMS bug in the iPhone yesterday by a bunch of hackers. Actually, nothing seems to have happened at all. My guess is that the hackers demoed the bug to a small audience instead of hacking hundreds of iPhones, which would have probably led to legal issues.

The good thing about this is that Apple is said to release a patch for the bug sometimes this weekend, according to the UK network operator 02.

An O2 spokesperson said the patch would be available Saturday through iTunes.

The hackers had tried to warn Apple of the consequences, and as usual, Apple had completely ignored them. Put on the spot, Apple didn’t have much choice but react and release a patch…

What’s this patch going to be? 3.1 or 3.0.1? If it is true that Apple will release a patch tomorrow, I bet that it’s going to be version 3.0.1 as I think it’s still a little early for Apple to release version 3.1. But hey, I might be totally way off.

As usual, in the event that a software update would be available this weekend, jailbreakers and unlockers should NOT update as it will remove the jailbreak/unlock.

Thank you Twitter follower @lambsypie for the tip.

“iPhone OS 3.1 Coming This Weekend?” is an article by the iPhone Download Blog sponsored by the iPhone Store. Feel free to leave a comment or discuss this topic in the forum. For the latest iPhone info, don’t forget to follow me on Twitter.

Available In: Cydia

Price: Free

Apple has recently started blocking applications from the App Store that allow your iPhone to use your Google Voice account with calls, text messaging, and voicemail. It seems that one developer has taken this to the next level by releasing an app in Cydia for free. I’d write all about the drama but the fact is, right now, here’s a sweet way to get a Google Voice app on your iPhone. For the record, this app is not made by Google.

The app is called GV Mobile and it’s free! The first version was crashing for me when I would log in but now, after an update, it’s working great! To make an outgoing call you dial the number or find it in your contact list. Once you send the call, your iPhone’s stock Phone app will ring. Once you answer, it will automatically call the number you called but come from your Google Voice number.

The best features of this app are access to text messaging and voicemail. I was very impressed how both apps work just like the stock Messages and Phone apps. What’s nice is the SMS feature doesn’t use up your normal text messages and even better? You can use this on a fake activated iPhone that doesn’t have service. You can’t make calls, but you can access voicemail and text messaging as long as you’re on wifi! If you try to make a call, it will ring your actuall line set up on the account and connect the call. Let us know if this will install on an iPod Touch.

Here’s a couple things I’ve noticed that could be changed. If you’re on a non activated iPhone or just on wifi, you will get no pop up alert. Also, if you don’t have a contact in your Google Voice account but you do have it on your iPhone, it won’t show up in the Google Voice app when receiving a text message. Another thing is you can’t copy or forward SMS messages. You also can’t move around with the magnifying glass when typing a text, so if you mess up, you have to delete all the way back… I’m sure they’ll get this cleared up eventually. We’ll see how Apple & Google respond to this.

Twitter just announced its new home page redesign complete with trending topics and search. Publicly launched at the 2006 South by South West interactive festival, users first flocked to the site as a way to communicate with friends and festival attendees. However, as we’ve seen in the past few years, the site has evolved into a multifaceted real-time tool. The community has given timely updates on earthquakes, the Iran election and we’ve even seen professional poker players bluff in real-time Tweets. Twitter has evolved into a community where users can discover breaking news and trends and the new home page certainly matches that.

Says Twitter cofounder Biz Stone in a blog post , “Demonstrating the power of Twitter as a discovery engine for what is happening right now through our Search and Trends often awakens a sense of wonder which inevitably leads to a much more compelling question, “How do I get involved?”

And it seems at this point, if you haven’t gotten involved you’ve been living under a rock. While the site always contained the ability to search and discover trends, these features were buried. Today, with the new design, all of those television viewers who refused to give into the peer pressure of Oprah and Ashton Kutcher’s hour-long Twitter tutorial will finally understand the value of the service. Twitter isn’t just an emotional weather report generator, it’s a taste of zeitgeist.

In some cases, the spirit of our times is simply our lust to win an iPhone in a Twitter sweepstakes or our willingness to spam our friends with Spymaster, and in other cases it is breaking news about the events, companies and issues that effect our lives. One of the interesting aspects of the new trends section is that unlike real-time search engine One Riot, Twitter not only offers the list of related-tweets, but it also offers a short rationale for a topic’s popularity. This contextualization makes it particularly useful for news discovery.

Those who’ve abandoned their Twitter accounts might point to the frivolity of some of the home page’s current trending topics; however, Twitter’s ebb and flow is only as silly or intelligent as our society dictates. When the President of the United States encourages you to tweet your senator to support health insurance reform, you know you should probably continue to keep an eye on this micro blogging superstar.