Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#181

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:36 PM UTC

diligiant wrote: post #125

CivBase wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. Since Apple has no control over the Beeper mini client, they would not consider it safe, it could easily be spying on users without their knowledge. Since I have no control over iMessage, I would not consider it safe. It could easily be spying on me without my knowledge.

The basic assumption here is trusting Apple, provided that numerous security researchers have access to the platform. If you don't trust Apple, don't buy their products.

It’s a two party marketplace. Even if I don’t like Apple, the alternative is not great either.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#182

Post by MBCook » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:36 PM UTC

Banditoz wrote: post #69

mh8h wrote: post #49

An open source client for iMessage is going to be used for fraud and spam. Before this, a device being blocked by Apple because it was used for fraud or spam would increase the cost of business for fraudsters and spammers. But now it's a matter of picking a new phone number. Of course Apple would try hard to stop this.

Is spam a good reason for Apple to keep their iMessage garden exclusive? SMS is also widely used for spam.

Yes. It exists but (for me) is non-existent. I know others do get it.

I’ve never thought about it but that would be a huge black mark and could end up pushing a lot of people to WhatsApp/FaceBook Messenger/whatever.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#183

Post by robertoandred » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:36 PM UTC

throw310822 wrote: post #59

Do sms/mms received from iMessage users on Android look anything in particular? Because a possible move for Google would be to reject them by default in some future version (hm hm, "security reasons"). End of "yes you're still in but you look like a cripple" and begin of "this app doesn't allow me to talk to that person, if I want to reach him I need to switch to something that supports Android".

iMessage doesn't send SMS/MMS messages.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#184

Post by jgaxn » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:37 PM UTC

StressedDev wrote: post #143

One thing which is really confusing is why are Android users obsessed with iMessage? Android users can send text messages to iPhones, the can call iPhone users, and they can use third party messaging apps to communicate with iPhone users. It really isn’t clear to me why so many people are so angry they cannot use iMessage on Android.

The iPhone user experience for messaging with Android users (especially MMS) is awful and the Android users in the group chat get blamed for it. Having blue text bubbles show up when someone texts you can be seen in some circles as a status symbol.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#185

Post by doublerabbit » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:37 PM UTC

schrodinger wrote: post #148

z7 wrote: post #114

This is a wake-up call. It's high time we demand open-source messaging standards across all platforms. Imagine a world where communication isn't dictated by corporate interests but by user needs and innovation.

Apple is probably the company that most has my interests at heart: they're very privacy focused, masterful at encryption and making it simple, and makes products I love. Do you really think they're the worlds most valuable company because of "corporate interests" and not because people like their products?

> Apple is probably the company that most has my interests at heart: they're very privacy focused, masterful at encryption and making it simple, and makes products I love.

Apple is a business, they have no users interests at heart. They may be very privacy focused, and maybe masterful at encryption but for sure they do not make products I love. Their instant change of UI, forceful updates and territoriality behaviour are some of the toxic behaviours that drive me mad.

As the same of Google. After Google banning my email for "non-inclusive" reasons wolfcub@gmail.com when I was 17, I will never return.

So within mobile, while only real alternative is Apple. Apart from my computer which is FreeBSD which will soon to be Haiku once it matures. I just couldn't get everything working with OpenIndiana and how I wanted it to be.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#186

Post by MBCook » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:37 PM UTC

makeitdouble wrote: post #118

blindriver wrote: post #108

As someone in tech, I think it's awesome they were able to find a way into iMessage. As an iPhone user, I hate the idea that spammers can now use iMessage, and I'm glad the service was taken down. Both things can be true at once.

Won't spammers just continue using the macos bridged other services instead of the direct to Apple way ?

What do you mean? There are no services bridged to iMessage.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#187

Post by trynumber9 » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:37 PM UTC

samcat116 wrote: post #85

trynumber9 wrote: post #47

The EU should, like they did years ago with PC operating systems, mandate a default browser selection screen. And a default messenger selection screen. And a default app store selection screen. Not that we'd get it in the US but it would help reduce Apple/Google market capture efforts.

Famously those default selection screens for browsers failed horrendously.

Did it? Firefox still has lingering popularity in Europe it doesn't have elsewhere.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#188

Post by increscent » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:38 PM UTC

StressedDev wrote: post #143

One thing which is really confusing is why are Android users obsessed with iMessage? Android users can send text messages to iPhones, the can call iPhone users, and they can use third party messaging apps to communicate with iPhone users. It really isn’t clear to me why so many people are so angry they cannot use iMessage on Android.

I recently switched from Android to iOS just for iMessage. SMS is quite unreliable even in 2023. SMS messages don't have the same delivery guarantees as IP-based messaging services. And often I have internet access, but spotty cellular service. The thing that pushed me over the edge was that my carrier happened to block all my SMS for a day. I only found out about it later in the day, after I had missed many (unrecoverable) messages. To avoid this, I could either blindly trust some other carrier, or use IP-based messaging. In my area, all my friends use iMessage. Ideally, people would use Telegram, WhatsApp, or even Matrix, but they don't. It's not uncommon to leave someone out of a group chat just because they don't have iMessage--the alternative is a subpar MMS experience. At some point, I'll probably buy a cheap Mac Mini and run BlueBubbles, but for now it's nice to not have to worry about messaging reliability, and I get the added bonus of being able to Facetime my family members, who all use iOS.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#189

Post by LordDragonfang » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:38 PM UTC

graphe wrote: post #166

ElijahLynn wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good thing though is that Apple finally announced RCS support > https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/

Good? RCS isn't universal. Am I gonna be sending and receiving Google, Verizon, TMobile, or Samsung messages? It's not universally encrypted either. No way am I turning it on.

So instead of being possibly unencrypted RCS when sending outside iMessage, you'd rather guarantee it be unencrypted?

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#190

Post by georgespencer » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:38 PM UTC

maxlin wrote: post #153

Grustaf wrote: post #81

> "if Apple truly cares about the privacy and security of their own iPhone users, why would they stop a service that enables their own users to now send encrypted messages to Android users, rather than using unsecure SMS?" - Eric Migicovsky 1. If Apple sees this as a gap, it is very obvious that they would address that themselves, rather than by allowing a hack to exploit loopholes in their architecture 2. Since Appl…

Since apple has no control over your fire extinguisher, they sent a man to securely take it from your house and dispose of it. It could have been a bomb for all you know.

Do you really consider Apple's control over a proprietary protocol which they invented and maintain to be comparable to a scenario in which Apple "sends a man" to take "your fire extinguisher […] from your house"?

I've re-written this comment five or six times in an attempt to find the most charitable interpretation, but I just cannot comprehend how it made it through your filter and out onto the internet.