Live data from Hacker News

iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

neosmart.net

471–480 of 480 posts

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#471
post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s often not malice or conscious choice as you seem to think. It’s that technical designs have effects on social dynamics. Here’s an example I wrote elsewhere: > Social dynamics are subtle. For example, group SMS doesn’t support contact names. If you add someone to a group SMS, the other people only see a phone number unless they go out of their way to add the new guy to their contact list. Likewise, the new person…

But how difficult is it to move to whatsapp or something that everyone has supported, and most likely has on their phone anyway?

Americans do not have WhatsApp on their phones.

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Even little frictions like these can go a long way to curb such spamming behavior. As evidenced on HN itself.

The propaganda spread on Whatsapp is happening because of external issues. There are groups of people paid or motivated to spread it on that platform. Such a minor thing wouldn't make any difference in reduction of propaganda spread to people dedicated enough to spread it.

> Such a minor thing wouldn't make any difference in reduction of propaganda spread to people dedicated enough to spread it.

You may have missed the part where I said it wasn’t even available at all until a recent-ish update.

Don’t forget that propaganda is created by dedicated people but it’s viral spread is via innocent, gullible victims. That’s where the inertia in forwarding comes in to play.

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AirPods are Bluetooth. The Beats division of Apple was already profitably selling headphones before Apple bought them. You act as if it would be a great technical hurdle to make the Watch work with Android. Apple is making the Watch a more standalone deceive with every release. There is also the iPad that gets you another 10%. If just 10% of Apple’s revenue from the Mac puts it in the top 100, what does 30% do? If Ap…

> The Beats division of Apple was already profitably selling headphones before Apple bought them. It made a few billions in revenue, that's far cry from trillions a tech giant is expected to make. > You act as if it would be a great technical hurdle to make the Watch work with Android. That's exactly my point. They shouldn't be making such closed ecosystem, their products will be more popular if anyone could use them…

It made a few billions in revenue, that's far cry from trillions a tech giant is expected to make.

Apple doesn't make trillions in revenue....

That's exactly my point. They shouldn't be making such closed ecosystem, their products will be more popular if anyone could use them. This is why they caved in on Apple Music and TV like services which are available on Android, Roku, Fire TV etc.

Why because the "open" ecosystems are doing so much better? Android manufacturers aren't exactly bringing in boatloads of money. In fact, Google isn't even bringing in boatloads of money from Android. It came out in the Oracle trial that Google had only made $23 billion in profit from Android from inception to the time of discovery. Google reportedly pays Apple $8 billion a year just to be the default search engine on Apple devices. It seems like Apple makes more on mobile from Google than Google makes from Android. That whole open thing doesn't seem to be working...

Nobody cares about "Mac Company" or "iPad Company". They don't have any clout. Hundreds of companies come and go from the top 100 but only a few can last for decades

You realize Apple lasted "for decades" - from 1984 - 2001 just from selling Macs. It lasted another 6 years selling Macs and iPods. Apple went public before Microsoft.

Microsoft is still standing today even after a failed Mobile venture only because of the money they made during desktop era and still cashing in on that success.

And Apple survived almost going bankrupt by selling desktops....

If iPhones stopped getting manufactured it's pretty much the end of Apple today regardless of their Mac, iPad or Airpods business.

We have an existence proof that Apple could survive just selling computers and one or two other devices --- they did so for almost four decades.

Since when did whataboutism became a valid rebuttal?

Apple is better diversified than most of the tech companies and they have been around for longer and pivoted better than any of the big 5.

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#474
post #471
post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how difficult is it to move to whatsapp or something that everyone has supported, and most likely has on their phone anyway?

Americans do not have WhatsApp on their phones.

[citation needed]

I know americans that use it, and south africans, and elsewhere.

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#475
I feel like there was probably a way to publish this. Maybe the author couldn't brand it with their name, logo and other identifying information, and clearly that's a compromise they weren't comfortable with. That is, of course, their choice, but the large number of screenshots of the resulting application felt like a bit much. This work could increase accessibility to iMessage e.g. for those with physical or other disabilities were there a way to use it, and the post just ended up feeling like an exercise in navel-gazing to me.

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like pretty much every other messaging app on every phone platform currently existence?

Other messaging apps have the same features as iMessage, but not the same user experience. For example, WhatsApp has a pretty massive spam and fake news problem, and Facebook messenger is significantly slower and applies a high degree of compression on media. iMessage offers the best UX, and that’s why, in my experience, iOS users will almost always opt to use iMessage over competitors when communicating with other i…

The ux is very debatable. It's the same as every other messaging app now adays.

They will opt to use imessage just the same as everyone pretty much opts to whatever is already installed. You could swap out imessage with a 1990s version of aol messenger and people would opt to use that.

Apple does not have a monopoly on good ux. In fact a lot of it is just garbage

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#477
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like pretty much every other messaging app on every phone platform currently existence?

End-to-end encryption by default and seamless multi-device support. It's a combination of features that's currently limited to iMessage.

No it's not. Seamless multi device support on android includes multi vendor support too.

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#478
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

End-to-end encryption by default and seamless multi-device support. It's a combination of features that's currently limited to iMessage.

No it's not. Seamless multi device support on android includes multi vendor support too.

I don't understand this. What is the messenger you are talking about?

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#479
post #225
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the most disappointing anecdotes I've read recently.

Wow. There’s been a lot going on lately?

Yeah my feeling is that there are a lot more important things going on than the color of chat bubbles (or the status/system it implies). Sorry if it came off as though I meant this is more important than other serious things going on.

edit: typo

Re: iMessage for Windows: A labor of love that will never see light of day (2018)

#480
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... which appears to be explicitly incorrect.

If M is the set of all imessage users and S is "has received a blue dot spam message", then: gkoberger said: ∃m∈M ¬S(m) then mmlgr said pardon me, but: ∃m∈M S(m) and then you were like: ∃m∈M S(m)≡¬∃m∈M ¬S(m) but I've got to tell you: ∃m∈M S(m)≡¬∀m∈M ¬S(m) ∃m∈M ¬S(m)≡¬∀m∈M S(m) ∃m∈M S(m)≢∀m∈M S(m)

I would have been able to read this in school. Now I only know what it means from context.
Post reply on HN