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

EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

protocol.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 645 posts

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#311

Post by gambiting »

tekknik wrote: post #220
gambiting wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>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.

Then what’s the point of forcing these companies to allow it? If it only affects such a small user base then money regulating it is clearly being wasted and should be used for something that will affect more people’s lives? Clearly they believe that number is much higher.

I think you are looking at it from the wrong perspective. It will affect hundreds of millions of iOS users. Whether these users choose to use their newly given freedom to install software not controlled by Apple is up to them - but the legislation affects 100% of iOS userbase.

(in hindsight I shouldn't have said it will affect 0.0001% users - maybe I should have said that I guess only that many users will choose to sideload software instead)

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#312

Post by guestbest »

djtango wrote: post #143
willyt wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I forgot email. Even better, integrate messages with my email client and then they would all be in one place. Can't wait. Don't care how they are sent, just want to know if I write something to someone it gets there. Don't want random strangers to be able to write to me without my consent. That's my spec for the ideal setup.

I had a globally distributed family and WhatsApp was literally a life changer for me back in 2009/2010. I'm sure other people in a similar position will also know what I'm talking about. It was super lightweight, cheap, multiplatform - when I was interning in Singapore in 2012, I was able to stretch a 2MB pay as you go SIM plan over 2 months using WhatsApp over WAP on a Symbian iPhone. There are few things I will be…

Is whatsapp data traffic free, but email traffic isn’t?

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#313

Post by iSnow »

rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #300

I can't quite wrap my head around why people think that it is a good thing for Apple to be regulated into "opening up" (i.e. as opposed to being a "walled garden" platform). If I were an entrepreneur, and say that I wanted to fork a Unix-like OS so that I could make a cross-device OS for consumer hardware that I, too, make---shouldn't I have the right to program my OS to seamlessly integrate only with the apps and th…

If you are starting to corner the market and are able to use your leverage to block competitors in a way that threatens to undermine their business, then the EU (and to an extend the USA) will regulate you.

I can flip your question around and ask "should you have the right to play dirty?". Which is what Apple has been doing, there's exactly zero good reason to not license out access to the protocol.

I don't own Apple, I am a consumer. If this leads to me not having to install 5 different chat clients, I am grateful. It was the exact same with all the proprietary charging plugs for smartphones.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#314

Post by CastFX »

minton wrote: post #95
ddevault wrote: post #26

I'm very excited about the Digital Markets Act. Some things that excite me which are definitely in scope: - Interopability between walled gardens like messenger apps - Side-loading software on your devices I'm also hoping that we see this specifically lead to the following: - Installing your own operating system on any electronic device - Third-party video games running on proprietary consoles without the vendor's ap…

Also - Less tech-savvy folks side loading viruses Can’t wait for all the calls for help from my parents and friends. It’ll be just like the good old days. /s

I bet Apple will include a switch (off by default) to allow side-loading. Less tech-savvy folks will not even know how to enable side-loading.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#315

Post by Zash »

vanilla_nut wrote: post #307
brandon272 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss this a lot. Trillian and Adium were a couple of other clients that allowed this. It was really nice to have some choice among what client to use.

I fondly remember iChat from my younger years. XMPP was incredibly powerful -- I would kill for a single client app for signal, telegram, facebook messenger, whatsapp, and more today.

XMPP is still around and alive. Have you seen https://sr.ht/~nicoco/slidge/ ? No need to resort to murder.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#316

Post by jrm4 »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #265
jrm4 wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation please? Seriously, there's no serious argument that suggests that this is the likelihood. Sometimes it gets better, sometimes it doesn't. The problem is, no one notices the good stuff due to regulation because you're just used to it. Frankly, it's getting irritating that people aren't understanding this more?

Why is a citation needed for something that's logically obvious? Why do we need to provide links to an "expert" telling us 3+3=6 when we can just use a calculator?

Are you suggesting that 3+3=6 is as axiomatically "truthful" as "regulation is bad for business?"

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#317

Post by asimpletune »

justapassenger wrote: post #136
asimpletune wrote: post #18

The main benefit of iMessage over all the other messaging platforms is there's a lot less spam. I hope this decision doesn't threaten that.

Is that a personal anecdote or is there data to back this up? My anecdote is that iMessage is only place where I get spam almost daily. All other messengers - once per month, at most.

No I don't have data to back it up. I say this because I vaguely recall reading somewhere that the reason why apple/google cooperation broke down was because apple insisted on banning spammers and google didn't want to. I have no idea where I saw that other than it was mentioned in a HN comment somewhere.

I remember that it made sense and seemed plausible to me at the time because I've also actually never received a spam iMessage in my whole life. It never even occurred to me in that moment this was the case until I read that comment and was like, "O yeah, right, I've actually never gotten spam on iMessage come to think of it." I just assumed that to spend spam via iMessage required apple hardware or that for one reason or another it just wasn't very viable.

On the other hand, I have gotten a lot of sms spam in the past, and I continue to get spam on WhatsApp.

As a side note, my sms spam has decreased dramatically after I ported my mobile number to google voice vs. when my carrier was T-Mobile. It's anecdotal but still telling.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#319

Post by jedberg »

vanilla_nut wrote: post #307
brandon272 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss this a lot. Trillian and Adium were a couple of other clients that allowed this. It was really nice to have some choice among what client to use.

I fondly remember iChat from my younger years. XMPP was incredibly powerful -- I would kill for a single client app for signal, telegram, facebook messenger, whatsapp, and more today.

> I would kill for a single client app for signal, telegram, facebook messenger, whatsapp, and more today.

https://www.beeper.com

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#320

Post by idiotsecant »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #278
idiotsecant wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it is actually going to make things worse, that's what regulation does in most cases. Yes all those regulations that actually make things worse. Which ones are those again? specifically? I find that generally people who make hand-wavey boogeyman 'regulation is bad' arguments typically struggle to identify which regulations are bad and why, and conveniently forget about the thousands of regulations that make their li…

Please accept all cookies to receive your response.

I have to admit this is a clever response but it's also an example of a meaningful regulation that corporations are trying to work around. They are annoying on purpose. The law doesn't say to make an annoying popup, only that you can't do user hostile things with cookies.
Post reply on HN