Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

android.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#611

Post by a2128 »

altairprime wrote: post #59

Most businesses, consumers, and developers universally continue to ignore the primary reason that iMessage is a closed platform, rather than an app on every platform as iTunes is: Apple is using device serial numbers for anti-spam, supported by a fully-authenticated hardware and software stack that does not allow user modification. This permits Apple to simply “console ban” any Apple device that spams on iMessage. Th…

I'm having trouble understanding how this is a good solution... If a customer purchases a used iPhone from another person, and that person had used it for spam, is the customer now screwed and unable to message their friends without buying a new phone?

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#612

Post by kelnos »

thomasahle wrote: post #442
kelnos wrote: post #138

I don't love RCS[0], but Apple implementing it (including the E2EE extensions) would strike a huge blow to messaging fragmentation immediately, at least in the US. Hell, Apple doesn't have to ditch iMessage; they just have to support RCS for messaging with Android users, or group messaging with mixed Android/iOS devices. I would also (grudgingly) accept an opening of the iMessage protocol so Google could implement it…

> the current state of affairs is just a result of an anti-consumer corporate pissing match. This would be true if Google didn't want to implement the iMessage protocol as you predict; but in the current state of affairs it's just Apple being anticompetitive.

Has Google said that they'd implement iMessage if Apple were to open up the protocol/service? Given Google's history with messaging, I'd be surprised if they'd be so interested in doing this.

More likely they'd prefer Apple just build a standalone iMessage app for Android. (And I feel like this option would be more palatable to Apple too, if the alternative is opening up the protocol to third parties.)

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#613

Post by Victerius »

tonymet wrote: post #503

RCS rollout has been a mess with a poor UX , unclear consent etc. Apple definitely doesn't want to inconvenience users with that garbage. There are tons of great cross-device messaging apps e.g. Whatsapp , Signal, Telegram. The market has provided solutions.

How does have RCS have poor UX?

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#614

Post by remram »

Arathorn wrote: post #383
zaik wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use XMPP because unlike Matrix, XMPP is properly standardized and not a product by a single VC funded startup. If you ever have multiple independent implementations a single monolithic spec will always only be partially supported (or there is only a single useable implementation like Synapse), so no different than having extensions.

Have you ever considered that your constant FUD against Matrix just ends up hurting open communications in general? How about putting your energy into improving XMPP rather than constantly whining about the existence of Matrix. Matrix is properly standardised at https://spec.matrix.org by a non-profit foundation: https://matrix.org/foundation . Just because the core team created a startup to fund our work (3 years in…

I don't see any "whining" or "attack" before your comment. Sure the comment mentioning Matrix is a little confused about Matrix the foundation vs the startup, but did it really warrant what you just wrote?

Putting a notification on "matrix" on HN so you can jump on every critic and yell "leave us the hell alone" is not kind.

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#615

Post by kelnos »

alfalfasprout wrote: post #509
kelnos wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defaults matter. I too have WhatsApp, Signal, Google Chat and a few others on my phone, but the fragmentation is annoying to deal with, and getting social groups (or even individuals) to move to a single consolidating messaging platform turns out to be much more difficult than I expected. If the default chat app is featureful and universally supported, people tend not to stray toward non-default alternatives unless t…

Perhaps you're missing the point though? Maybe your friends simply don't care enough to switch. Bottom line is iMessage works really well and people like it. Same with FB messenger and Whatsapp. You want to move friends to something else? There needs to be a selling point much larger than just security.

> Perhaps you're missing the point though? Maybe your friends simply don't care enough to switch.

Right, I mean, that's exactly the point. I can't force someone else to install a messaging app I'd prefer to use. But if we had an actually-good, cross-platform messaging standard that was implemented in the default, stock messaging app of both Android and iOS, I would not have to depend on my friends caring or not. I could just use it, and know that they will receive the messages.

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#616

Post by kelnos »

tcfhgj wrote: post #492
kelnos wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defaults matter. I too have WhatsApp, Signal, Google Chat and a few others on my phone, but the fragmentation is annoying to deal with, and getting social groups (or even individuals) to move to a single consolidating messaging platform turns out to be much more difficult than I expected. If the default chat app is featureful and universally supported, people tend not to stray toward non-default alternatives unless t…

Matrix solved federated messaging already

Is Matrix built into the default, stock messaging apps of Android and iOS? No, it's not, so it does not solve the problem I've posed in any useful way.

(Beyond that, I've found the usability of Matrix on both desktop and mobile to be atrocious.)

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#617

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

stusmall wrote: post #309
altairprime wrote: post #59

Most businesses, consumers, and developers universally continue to ignore the primary reason that iMessage is a closed platform, rather than an app on every platform as iTunes is: Apple is using device serial numbers for anti-spam, supported by a fully-authenticated hardware and software stack that does not allow user modification. This permits Apple to simply “console ban” any Apple device that spams on iMessage. Th…

It isn't about opening up iMessage. The article is about using RCS instead of SMS/MMS as the fallback. It's a pretty reasonable ask that will raise the quality of service when texting with the majority of the market. They can continue to lock down iMessage however they want.

It's not a "reasonable" ask if you're Apple, selfish, and therefore want iMessage to remain superior to SMS at all costs, because it's part of your luxury appeal.

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#618

Post by kelnos »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #540
kelnos wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Defaults matter. I too have WhatsApp, Signal, Google Chat and a few others on my phone, but the fragmentation is annoying to deal with, and getting social groups (or even individuals) to move to a single consolidating messaging platform turns out to be much more difficult than I expected. If the default chat app is featureful and universally supported, people tend not to stray toward non-default alternatives unless t…

> But everyone already has the default messaging app installed, so that problem just goes away. Okay, so let's say Apple implements RCS support. Should they support the version of RCS that the carriers want? The version Google implemented? Are they now going to be required to implement support for proprietary Google extensions? Will they have to run their own RCS servers because carriers don't support this version of…

They should implement the version (and extensions) that gives them interoperability with the most users. Which, yes, would probably be whatever Google implemented, including the E2EE extensions. This... isn't really hard?

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#619

Post by f38zf5vdt »

inferiorhuman wrote: post #443
alphabetting wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RCS is infinitely better than the current state. Google isn't pretending it's a standard. They're trying to improve messaging between android and iphone uers. Apple won't because the current standard helps their business. It's pretty simple.

RCS has zero carrier support (in fact carriers are trying to develop their own competing standard). Why would anyone (Apple or otherwise) buy into an already fragmented Google "standard" knowing full well that Google has a pernicious habit of killing off messaging products?

There are at least a few major carriers in North America offering RCS support.

One-on-one E2EE is a big deal and I would to see Apple on-board with it too, including without iCloud exceptions.

Re: “It’s time for Apple to fix texting”

#620

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

altairprime wrote: post #598
pxeboot wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is using device serial numbers for anti-spam, supported by a fully-authenticated hardware and software stack that does not allow user modification. This can't be true. It is trivial to get iMessage working in a macOS VM with randomly generated hardware IDs.

If it was as simple as that, we would all endlessly be plagued by iMessage spam. It isn’t.

Roll IPs...? What else needed?
Post reply on HN