Google Now has not been submitted to Apple

Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said that Google Now has been submitted to Apple’s App Store and is waiting for approval, but Apple says that’s not true.

Apple told me today Google Now has not been submitted at all.

Why would Schmidt lie about this? Besides the fact he’s Eric Schmidt and works for Google.

  • It’s good Google has someone who talks made up shit about Apple as the company markets itself to customers who talk made up shit about Apple.

  • mvcmendes

    Trying to remember the last time Google provided some news I was happy about.

  • Did I misread or did he never say it was submitted? Maybe he was leaning on “we can’t submit now because it violates their policies” than the assumed “Apple is holding things up.”

    What am I missing in this story other than assumptions on his intent?

    • Steven Fisher

      Apple’s policy for something like this is to be clear about what you’re doing. Schmidt’s statement included “You’ll need to discuss that with Apple. Apple has a policy of approving or disapproving apps that are submitted into its store, and some of them they approve and some of them they don’t.”

      That’s a pretty clear statement that the ball is in Apple’s court. But it isn’t. The ball is not only firmly on Google’s side of the court, it appears to be shoved part way up Schmidt’s ass as he waddles around trying to hide it.

      Also, Schmidt? PUT SOME @#$%ING PANTS ON.

      • Where were they not clear about what they were doing?

        (serious question, no sarcasm)

        • Steven Fisher

          Nowhere. They’re twisting this policy of clarity into a policy of outright rejection, then using it as an excuse for not submitting the app.

          I doubt they’ve even done the work. Why would they?

          The bullshit reason for the app not being there is the problem, not the lack of the app.

          • I didn’t say they submitted. I merely posited the idea since everyone is throwing assumptions around on his intent.

            Why would they? To get their service in use on iOS just like Google Search and the other 12 Google apps I have installed.

          • Steven Fisher

            Well, they can submit or not. If they want it on iOS? Submit it. If they want it to be a competitive advantage for Android? Great, hold it back. This is a balance for them, and I can see them making either choice.

            But the deceit is wrong. It isn’t ignorance. You can see that Google knows how to walk this like in their Maps app.

          • What deceit? LMBO. Show me the statement where it said “We submitted and talk to Apple about approval.”

            I’m seeing nothing but conjecture.

          • MightyBob

            Apple fanboys with rose tinted glasses. Google has an entire division devoted to making Apple apps like Google Maps and they all happily rock iPhones. The funny thing is, Schmidt also stated that Apple was a “tremendous technology innovator.” I will probably die before Apple says anything remotely as nice to Google.

          • lol. Yeah, I doubt they mention Google in any positive light.

          • Steven Fisher

            I have lots nice to say about Google. Saying the ball is in Apple’s court on this issue is not one of them.

          • kibbles

            “I did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky…” that’s you, John. dicking around on the definition of “relations”

          • LOL. Nah, there isn’t a definition to be *** around w/.

    • Google Now comes to iPhone and iPad with new Search app update:

      There ya go. What Schmidt was talking about…don’t know but it seems a bunch of folks on here are chewing some nice chowder. 😉

  • EzraWard

    Are we overlooking the fact that Google Now is just an update to their iOS Google app? Did Apple say that they did not recieve a Google Now app, or that Google hasn’t submitted an update to their Google app?

  • I believe Now was to be part of the Google Search app on iOS. So did your source say “no Google Now app has been submitted” or “no update to Google Search app has been submitted”?

  • BOOM

  • Walt French

    The quote that I saw wasn’t that Google had submitted Now, it was that the questioner would have to ask Apple.

    You did, and the answer was “WTF?”

    Business as Usual, I guess. Maybe Schmidt is being played by his own people. He should be used to that crap by now.

  • Perhaps the “Talk to Apple about that” has nothing to do with submission to the App Store. Perhaps there is already language in the developer agreement that already prohibits the way that Google wants to make a ‘Now” app, and that’s what is preventing submission or causing delay in the first place.

  • Schmidt didn’t say Google has submitted. Jim, that was lazy analysis. He implied it, but did not say it.

    Sounds like what Schmidt was really saying was “Apple hasn’t told us if they would or would not approve a Google Now app.”

    Weasel words.

    • kibbles

      that’s quite a stretch. did it hurt?

  • dmarcoot

    Has Schmidt made any claims in the last 2 years that were even remotely actuate?

  • Did he lie, is he confused, did he misspeak, is it within another app, does the framework make it hard to develop, etc? Without knowing, “lie” seems like an irresponsible choice of words. But good for traffic I imagine.

  • Looking back at history, it just seems that nobody at Google knows what’s going on.

  • MightyBob

    Read the article properly. Schmidt didn’t say anything about submitting Google Now to Apple. He simply remarked that Apple has had a history of having a difficult review process. Similarly, Apple did not say anything about whether or not they would actually approve of Google Now. Put your pitchforks down.

    • Space Gorilla

      If the quote in the article is accurate then the intent is clear, to imply that it is Apple’s fault that Google Now isn’t on iOS. There’s no other way to read it.

      • Yes, that’s the intent but he never said it was because Apple was holding up the app approval.

        • Space Gorilla

          Doesn’t matter if he technically said the exact words or not, he clearly meant to convey that meaning, to put that thought in the minds of the listeners/readers, that’s what intent is. Sorry pal, being technically correct doesn’t cut it.

          • Haha…ok. Let’s get it straight. You no longer have to say specific words…the interwebs will just interpret what you meant in your mind and make a decision from that?

            Got it.

          • Space Gorilla

            Obtuse. Look it up.

          • Nice, another assumption. (I know the definition) 😉

            Have a good day Space.

          • Space Gorilla

            You can’t really be this dense. When asked about whether Google Now would be made available to iOS devices, Schmidt’s reply (assuming the accuracy of the quote) was: “You’ll need to discuss that with Apple.” So if he was telling the truth that meant it was up to Apple at the time of the question, otherwise why would anyone need to ask Apple about whether Google Now would be made available to iOS devices?

            Let’s pretend my company makes some kind of fancy new drill, the Gorilla Drill, and it’s great. Now some reporter asks me if the Gorilla Drill is going to be available in Home Depot, and I say “You’ll need to discuss that with Home Depot. Home Depot has a policy of approving or disapproving tools that are submitted to be sold in their store, and some of them they approve and some of them they don’t.” Now, I didn’t technically say I submitted my tool to Home Depot, but I’m implying very strongly that some issue on Home Depot’s end is preventing my Gorilla Drill from being on their shelves. I don’t expect you to agree, you’re a right fightin’ last worder. Have at it.

          • Sweet, now insults. You rock! 😉

            Maybe there is a policy preventing them from putting Google Now in the Store.

            (didn’t read your example; don’t care to continue this conversation)

          • Space Gorilla

            Sounds good to me.

          • kibbles

            John – you “didn’t read” the example? yeah, right. you read it, and know that it owns you…only a madman would say otherwise, so instead you’re pretending not to have read it.

            grow up, son.

          • No, seriously…I didn’t. I was stepping away and only read the first part. I’ll read it now though.

          • So, read it. The analogy is accurate to the situation but does not convince me Schmidt’s intimation is 100% a lie.

            Look, I have no issue calling Schmidt out just like I did Schiller. When Schiller said “a year old Android” would be on the S4 I didn’t argue one bit. I had no knowledge of whether that was true. It then turned out to be a lie (or just bad intel he reiterated).

            I’m doing the same here and waiting for the truth to come out.

          • Space Gorilla

            But we already know the truth. Google has commented on this and said they have not submitted Google Now to the app store. Back to my analogy, it’s as if I have a number of other tools on the shelves at Home Depot, I create this great new Gorilla Drill, a reporter asks me if this new tool will also be available in Home Depot and I say “You’ll need to discuss that with Home Depot.” And the reality is I haven’t even talked to Home Depot about putting the Gorilla Drill in their store. It makes no sense. I suppose another option is that Schmidt is batshit crazy.

            Given what we know to be the truth, what Schmidt said makes little sense. Any way you look at it, Schmidt was acting like a dick, saying something he knew wasn’t true. Unless we assume he isn’t aware of whether key apps are being submitted to the app store, and I don’t buy that for a second. But heck, even if that’s true, he was still being a dick, trying to make it look like there was an issue on Apple’s end. There’s no way to look at this that doesn’t end with Schmidt looking like a dick.

          • Your “another option” could have some weight. It seems every time he talks there is a controversy over it. 🙂

            Your truth is based on the assumption he meant the app was submitted. I’m merely positing another option of him referring to a policy preventing them from even approaching the app for iOS.

            In translated words: “Apple will block the app due to Store policies so we are waiting on Apple to allow this type of app.”

            I don’t know the Store policies like that so it is possible Now doesn’t break any rules and if true…I would 100% agree w/ you.

            As noted, I save my judgement for the truth but…maybe he’ll never clarify (he’s left floaters out there before).

          • Space Gorilla

            What is clear is that he was obfuscating the issue, that is the truth that we know. What he actually meant re: the app being submitted or not is irrelevant. What is true is that Schmidt was being disingenuous. That’s also business as usual, the more he can make Apple look like the bad guy, the better.

          • Now we come to a consensus. 100% agree on those points.

            And yeah…Schmidt is Google’s Schiller. I’d personally like to see someone else doing the speaking there as this is too common an occurrence.

          • dvdphn

            He really is, and you can see it in his other comments throughout the site. There’s no point in discussing anything with him because he’ll either brush you off, (like he did to you below), or he finally understands after several responses, and writes, “LMBO”.

            He has ruined comments for me. I try to read the articles as soon as they show up in my feed just to avoid his unintelligent remarks. Sadly, it also means I miss out on the good commenters as well, (I liked your Home Depot analogy by the way).

            “Do not feed the trolls” seems to be the best advice when it comes to certain people.

          • So me laughing (LMBO) is me understanding. Awesome. 😀

            I only check out when it gets personal (you both calling me dense) or it is a perpetual loop (back and forth). Once the convo stops being productive it is no longer worth our time, IMHO.

            Seriously…learn to engage in discussion and you’ll find commenting here enjoyable. I’m far from a troll. I just have a different perspective.

          • kibbles

            I’ve never seen anyone try so hard, bending over backwards and squinting his eyes, in order to defend such absurd bullshit.

            either you’re a blindly loyal fandroid trolling this site, or just a contrarian. either way, a waste of signal-to-noise ratio.

          • Not at all.

            I just don’t make assumptions like the one’s made here, regardless of the company. I’ll defend Apple just as I do Apple as I have more Apple products than Android.

        • Space Gorilla

          Confirmed by Google this afternoon that they did not submit the app to Apple: “Yes, I can confirm for you: We have not submitted Google Now to Apple’s App Store.” So it’s a very strange thing to say ‘Hey, talk to Apple about that’ when they never submitted the app. Any way you cut it Schmidt comes off as a weasel.

    • BC2009

      You: When I am going to get my tax refund?

      Your accountant: That’s something you will need to talk to the IRS about. They have a process for approving or denying refunds.

      Reality: Your account has not yet submitted the tax return that you signed two months ago. But you would be okay with his response. Sure.

  • Bob

    “Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said that Google Now has been submitted to Apple’s App Store.”


    • BC2009

      Q: When can I get Google Now on my iPhone?

      A: On your iPhone? You’ll need to discuss that with Apple. Apple has a policy of approving or disapproving apps that are submitted into its store, and some of the apps we make they approve and some of them they don’t. They recently did approve Google Maps, thank goodness. [laughter] And without being too obnoxious, you have excellent vendors of Android choices for you in London, from many different suppliers.

      Isn’t that kinda like your accountant telling you to go talk to the IRS about when your tax refund is coming when he has yet to submit your tax return to the IRS?

  • DT

    FFS, instead of this ambiguous language designed to cause misinterpretation, Schmidt should have simply said:

    “We haven’t completed development/we haven’t submitted it, but when we do, it will be up to Apple to approve it, if they don’t, take it up with them”.


    ‘We’ve submitted it and it hasn’t been approved yet, was rejected, take it up with Apple”

    Either of those cases clearly indicates where Google is in the process (pending development, pending approval, rejected”, no blahblahblah take it up with Apple blahblahblah Apple has a policy doublespeak.

  • Popura_Taneshima

    Don’t be evil.

    Believe me, lying is not evil.