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

Beeper Mini is back

blog.beeper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 1001 posts

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#51

Post by chewmieser »

radlad wrote: post #18
CharlesW wrote: post #6

As an Apple customer, I applaud their tenacity. Every time Beeper's protocol hacks are fixed, Messages gets more secure.

By what metric? Arguably, users are less secure since "fixing" Messages (i.e. breaking Beeper) means Apple and Android users lose a secure communication channel. Beeper isn't "hacking" Messages... they've implemented the protocol.

I don't think the parent is that concerned with Android Apple communications with that statement.

Reverse-engineering a closed protocol and distributing an Apple Binary (IIRC correctly) are a bit more than just "implementing a protocol."

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#52

Post by jessekv »

> Beeper Mini made communication between Android and iPhone users more secure. That is a fact.

It seemed like it would make spam and scamming over iMessage worse. At least it requires an Apple Id now.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#53

Post by SpaceManNabs »

oefrha wrote: post #15

> Android and iPhone customers desperately want to be able to chat together with high quality images/video, encryption, emojis, typing status, read receipts, and all modern chat features. There are numerous chat apps with those features, so I can’t see why people were “desperate” about it at all. Better yet, those existing chat apps aren’t likely to stop working tomorrow.

> iPhone customers desperately want to be able to chat together

is also laughably false lol. iPhone users just want android users to get an iphone.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#54

Post by doublerabbit »

not_your_vase wrote: post #16
rpmisms wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Force Apple to either allow or implement iMessage interoperability via competitive tactics, not regulatory means.

They don't implement it exactly due to their competitive tactics... (It was exposed in a recent courtroom hearing that Apple has seriously considered making it available on Android, but they decided that having it Apple-only is a serious benefit for them)

Of course. This now puts Apple in a prickly situation.

One which paints a negative light on Apple which of, if a crowd following gathered "why isn't there iMessage for Android?". As I see, it would result of one of the following:

- They sue and cause a backlash of Apple users.

- They do nothing, shows Apple solely interest is in itself.

- They create, happy times.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#56

Post by rpmisms »

matsemann wrote: post #46
martinky24 wrote: post #13

These Beeper folk sound a bit entitled. As was repeatedly mentioned in the other thread [1], building production applications on top of an undocumented and unsupported (in terms of backwards compatability, etc) API is a nightmare that should be avoided. Apple has every right to change their API, if they do Beeper will go down, and Beeper will blame Apple. I understand Apple's incentives to not want to be in this situ…

When did HN get so anti-consumer, anti- hacker , anti-freedom, pro-proprietary? Them taking the fight with Apple should be applauded. A walled down proprietary message platform only a few can use is stupid to fight in favor of.

There is nothing quite as hard as making a man understand something that his paycheck depends on him not understanding.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#57

Post by solardev »

radlad wrote: post #33
solardev wrote: post #11

> We’ve made Beeper free to use. > Our Play Store ranking dropped precipitously on Friday. Really have to wonder what their play here is. What did they think would happen? Isn't it always going to be a cat and mouse game with Apple? Who would want to use a messaging service that works some days but not others, much less pay for it?

It seems clear to me that Beeper is playing a game of chicken with Apple. If Apple continues to cut off Beeper's access, it makes an antitrust argument stronger (a la https://9to5mac.com/2023/12/06/eus-imessage-antitrust-invest... )

In the event Apple loses in Europe, I wonder what would happen. Would they really open up iMessage worldwide? Just in Europe? Shut it down there altogether since WhatsApp is already so popular there anyway, and their US market is bigger?

And what does this do for Beeper, anyway? If they open it up, wouldn't Google and Samsung just integrate it into their first party messaging clients?

It seems as precarious a position as Trillian was back in the day: only usable if the source protocols don't shut them out, but only valuable if those protocols don't open up completely. The moment either happens, they die.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#58

Post by oldandboring »

sgerenser wrote: post #7

What’s the over/under on how long before Apple blocks it again?

I would give it up to 48 hours. It's important for Apple to architect their fix carefully so that they don't break the world for legitimate users.

For my part, I had fun using Beeper Mini last week while it lasted but I cancelled my subscription and I'm likely not going to use it again due to the risk of incoming messages getting dropped on the floor when Apple blocks it again.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#59

Post by CharlesW »

radlad wrote: post #18
CharlesW wrote: post #6

As an Apple customer, I applaud their tenacity. Every time Beeper's protocol hacks are fixed, Messages gets more secure.

By what metric? Arguably, users are less secure since "fixing" Messages (i.e. breaking Beeper) means Apple and Android users lose a secure communication channel. Beeper isn't "hacking" Messages... they've implemented the protocol.

> Arguably, users are less secure since "fixing" Messages (i.e. breaking Beeper) means Apple and Android users lose a secure communication channel.

If you hack a secure communications channel so that unauthorized client software/hardware can pretend to be authorized software/hardware, how does that make the channel more secure?

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#60

Post by barnabee »

martinky24 wrote: post #13

These Beeper folk sound a bit entitled. As was repeatedly mentioned in the other thread [1], building production applications on top of an undocumented and unsupported (in terms of backwards compatability, etc) API is a nightmare that should be avoided. Apple has every right to change their API, if they do Beeper will go down, and Beeper will blame Apple. I understand Apple's incentives to not want to be in this situ…

No. Apple given their scale and position in the market should be forced to operate and interoperate with an open standard for messaging. iMessage should no longer allowed to be proprietary and stay part of Apple.
Post reply on HN