It lasted 3 days? :)
Surprisingly long, really. I expected it to die much faster.
Maybe Apple was waiting for a Friday afternoon to issue their update.
Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
201–210 of 1001 posts
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#202Do 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".
You think it would be a good idea for android to reject all SMSes?
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many people are still using safari on Mac? Everyone I know uses chrome, but maybe that’s just in the states?
I know a few people who use safari on Mac. Either because they just don’t care enough to install another browser, or because they prefer the more “native Mac” look and feel.
the password manager integration tempts me to switch on my mac...
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because I want the pictures and videos my iPhone-using parents send me to not be crunched to shit, and I'm not going through the effort of teaching non-technical users to use a different messaging client. Same with the group chats that my partner's extended family keep including me in.
Apple announced RCS support. That will provide what you want.
Right, but that's likely not coming out for another year yet, and requires everyone involved to update their phones (yet another hassle for non-technical users, they will put updates off for as long as they can). As the quote in the article says, Apple clearly recognizes the issue, and beeper mini fixes it now, not "at some point in the future".
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#205> "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…
(1) is exactly what that quote is pointing out. If Apple actually cared about its users' security, they would see this as a gap, and would have addressed it already. The fact that they haven't means that, despite all their posturing about being a security-first platform, they care more about lock-in and marketing than they do about user security.
It's a pretty indirect gap, since it has nothing to do with Apple's infrastructure, it's about users choosing to interact with users of non-Apple platforms using insecure means. There are dozens of secure cross-platform messenger apps that they could be using, and SMS is a legacy technology.
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to think like this before I saw companies like Instagram and Tiktok thrive in the app store, which they absolutely cannot control. It is often worth a shot.
Relying on the App Store to distribute your app is more than a little different than building an extension to iMessages. Apple and Google want you to use their app stores in this way. Apple does not want you to bridge iMessages to other platforms.
True, but I think this sentence buries the key point:
“Apple and Google want you to use their app stores in this way.”
…they want you to use their app stores, their way, because they retain 100% control of what you can and cannot do.
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#207Blue bubbles is not a business model.
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find this a bit confusing though. It seems like this was an inevitable outcome, but what do they gain from this technical investment aside from exposure. Their website doesn't steer users to anything other than the now cut-off Beeper mini?
Exposure is something. The fact the developer had the chops to do this is now on the public record. That could be very valuable for getting a job or a college scholarship (since they’re in HS).
Are you referring to the developer of the GitHub project they bought or the Beeper Mini devs?
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#209> "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.
What? Does a fire extinguisher connect to Apple servers? Does a fire extinguisher secretly being a bomb affect the security of others? I don’t know if you could have come up with a worse metaphor.
Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access
#210As usual, Gruber was right on the money. Via Threads yesterday: "My prediction is that Apple will make changes—fixing bugs and/or closing loopholes—that break Beeper Mini. It’s untenable that there’s unsanctioned client software for a messaging platform for which privacy and security are a primary feature. It’s a very nice app, remarkably clever, and for now works like a charm, but if Apple wanted an iMessage client…
>It’s untenable that there’s unsanctioned client software for a messaging platform for which privacy and security are a primary feature.
I don't follow this logic at all. Shouldn't supporting thirdparty clients be desirable if security is a primary feature in the interest of transparency? Especially if the reference client is proprietary and undocumented.