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

741–750 of 1001 posts

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

#741

Post by sneak »

giantrobot wrote: post #702
sneak wrote: post #226

This is spam for the Android operating system, nothing more. Google claiming that RCS includes end-to-end encryption here is misleading. Encryption got explicitly axed from the RCS spec because carriers don't like it. The end-to-end crypto they're talking about is a custom Google thing and not part of RCS. Friends don't let friends use unencrypted everyday communications. Reject RCS and reject Google platform marketi…

> Note also that iMessage has a crypto backdoor maintained by Apple for the FBI Describing iMessage as having an encryption back door is disingenuous at best. There's no known encryption back doors in iMessage. As far as can be determined iMessage is fully E2EE. There is however a caveat that the unencrypted local messages backed up to iCloud can be turned over to LEAs/governments. This caveat holds for any unencrypt…

> Disabling syncing of Messages with iCloud closes this hole.

It does not. The people you iMessage with still have it turned on, because it is on by default, and Apple will get it from those devices instead.

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

#742

Post by mongol »

mynameisvlad wrote: post #306
mongol wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so sure about that. We still call these devices "phones", with the expectation that any phone in the world can call any phone number in the world. With no other information than a phone number, you need to involve the carriers to deliver a message texted to an arbitrary phone number. That is why Apple need to fallback to SMS. They have no other means to deliver the message. If Apple and Google teams up without ca…

Why, exactly, would Apple and Google not be able to fallback to SMS? Without involving carriers at all? It's not like there's any real benefit to having the carriers in that conversation, you can already text from either device just fine. That would continue into the future.

SMS is not transferred over the internet. It is transferred over a telecoms network. Only the carriers can deliver a SMS message. I guess it is possible to deliver a message over the internet to a SMS gateway somewhere, but as SMS is telecoms technology, only internet is not enough.

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

#743

Post by bergenty »

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…

What’s the point though. People still receive spam that doesn’t originate in the iMessage ecosystem. The end result is the same.

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

#744

Post by donatj »

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 don't see what any of this has to do with Apple not supporting RCS.

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

#745

Post by camillomiller »

In Europe it’s WhatsApp or Telegram all over. I have maybe four people I know I can reliably text on iMessage. This green vs blue bubble is rather an example of how self centered America is, always thinking its own big bubble is actually the world. In Tech that’s quite clear to see.

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

#746

Post by NonNefarious »

throwntoday wrote: post #355
NonNefarious wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple commits many UI offenses, but the alleged illegibility of SMS messages is BS. Not to mention that Apple's messaging is hideously broken in more ways than Android integration. iMessage will simply delete your phone number from its "can be reached at" list, which breaks years-long threads with a single (iPhone-using) friend into inexplicable new threads. Ever go overseas? Try putting a local SIM into your USA pho…

I have quite literally never had that issue. I think people forget that Apple support a very fragmented and wide range of devices on multiple major OS releases and various version numbers. The long-term support period means some devices can be forgotten about even though they are receiving the latest updates. If you have found some edge-case bug, feel free to submit it. There is almost no other way for Apple to know…

This is not an "edge case." This is a readily reproducible defect. I've encountered it on different iPhones running current iOS in two countries with a gap of at least two years in between.

I have a paid-up developer account, so you can be assured that I filed a well-supported bug report on it.

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

#747

Post by sneak »

GeekyBear wrote: post #733
vinay427 wrote: post #680

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those aren’t iMessage group chats if they’re using SMS/MMS.

They are SMS/MMS sent from iMessage. It automatically falls back on SMS/MMS when you message someone who is not signed into iMessage.

You are conflating iMessage the service with "Messages" the app. An iMessage is definitionally not an SMS/MMS.

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

#748

Post by zaik »

altairprime wrote: post #712
shireboy wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The gist of the article has been a soapbox of mine for years. We wouldn't stand for "you can only send Gmail email to other Gmail users" (Fidonet people know), and shouldn't settle for similar with messaging. That said, this spam angle is an aspect I hadn't fully considered.

Google closed down their Jabber gateway because they couldn’t stop the endless flood of spam into their userbase. If they had instead required device identifier attestations to accompany all Jabber messages, they could have left that API open for everyone to use, and simply banned device identifiers used for spamming. I wish they’d done so, instead of just giving up and closing their doors to Jabber.

Do you have any good source on why Google decided to shut down their XMPP service? I'd really like to read about it.

Not sure about the spam thing, after all they also provide a federating email service.

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

#749

Post by sneak »

dhritzkiv wrote: post #627
InitialLastName wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “standard” tied to a phone number subscription that brings along all the retrograde privacy nightmares of Big Telecom since the bell system broke up. Is there a way to make an account with Apple that isn't tied to a mobile phone number? If so, I've never been able to find it.

In the past, AppleIDs could be created with only email address, and not phone numbers. I see that the current account creation step requires a phone number for verification via SMS/phone call. That said, I don't believe you need to use that phone number for messaging – an email address is used as the contact information when messaging with iMessage. This is especially important for iPads/iPod Touches and Macs, which…

Only in US region. You can make Ukraine region Apple IDs without a phone number still.
Post reply on HN