211–220 of 645 posts
There was a brief period of time where I was able to use IRC, Facebook and MSN from the same client: Pidgin https://pidgin.im/
Many clients including Empathy and Kopete allowed this at the time.
If everyone's messaging has to be compatible with everyone else's then maybe we will finally only need one messaging app on our phones again instead of 5. Sounds great. I just want to be able to send messages without thinking about which app I need to go into to communicate with a particular person; that really breaks my flow when I'm trying to get something done. I don't give a shit about any features apart from pic…
You don't care about any features, apart from the features you care about. Just like everyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that SMS is nowadays a poor fallback, lacking support for a number of widespread features that are part of the EU's required baseline for interoperability.
Why is it a poor fallback? It supports less but mostly it’s a message size limitation. This seems like exactly what they want.
It also requires that features such as group messaging and audio/video calling.
If everyone's messaging has to be compatible with everyone else's then maybe we will finally only need one messaging app on our phones again instead of 5. Sounds great. I just want to be able to send messages without thinking about which app I need to go into to communicate with a particular person; that really breaks my flow when I'm trying to get something done. I don't give a shit about any features apart from pic…
I thought email already did all of this
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twenty two minutes ago you cared about groups, pictures and emojis. Email clients don't do emojis well or groups well, SMS doesn't do any of them, and IIRC Blackberry did everything in one program 15 years ago. Downvoted because this is the comment equivalent of the manager walking into a technical discussion of how something should work and demanding "just make it work" and leaving. Or commenting on a war topic "I j…
Users just want simple direct communications to work (yes, with more features than that, E2EE, image sending, and such; but those features are not the focus). Companies want to get users into a walled-garden where they can target them for financial and political gains. Democracy trying to push things away from the latter seems good. Do you agree?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you pull out of the EU you've now created a unified market of half a billion consumers that need a alternative to your product. That seems like a good way to kickstart a competitor.
Except EU is not a single market: there's 27 countries, speaking multiple languages, having different laws, so to serve the EU you need at least a dozen versions of your app. Also, EU has just decided that this half billion of consumers will be downgraded to the third world standard of living (google "Fit for 55"), so they won't really have much money to spend on tech toys anyway...
"Fit for 55 is a package by the European Union designed to reduce the European Union's greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030."
I call bullshit on your statement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought email already did all of this
Most of my friends don't frequently read their emails and have such bad inbox hygiene that I would expect them to miss half of my emails.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Isn't this going to kill features that only some apps have or offer? What if one day Signal, Telegram or WhatsApp... Okay, this is where I think we need to make clear who this requirement applies to. If we click through the first link, found in the first sentence in the article, to the actual source text[0] and run it through Google Translate, we can find that this requirement only applies to companies... >... whose…
Aren't there only, say, two or three companies that fit that criteria? The legislators may as well have called them out by name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Isn't this going to kill features that only some apps have or offer? What if one day Signal, Telegram or WhatsApp... Okay, this is where I think we need to make clear who this requirement applies to. If we click through the first link, found in the first sentence in the article, to the actual source text[0] and run it through Google Translate, we can find that this requirement only applies to companies... >... whose…
Aren't there only, say, two or three companies that fit that criteria? The legislators may as well have called them out by name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Id say is that today anyone who wants to sell a “smart” product has to write a proper clean iOS app that gets reviewed. Tomorrow I can guarantee they will immediately cut costs and ship out piles of sideloaded garbage Sure, it’s up to the consumer to choose, but they’re not going to write that on the package
>>Tomorrow I can guarantee they will immediately cut costs and ship out piles of sideloaded garbage Yeah except that's absolute nonsense because you could already do that on Android and yet I recall only one instance where a developer explicitly asked me to sideload an app(for Fortnite, no less). It's going to remain an incredible niche that will affect 0.00001% users at most.
Clearly they believe that number is much higher.