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

111–120 of 1001 posts

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#111

Post by Nextgrid »

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…

> I do not want to have my Apple ID login routed through a third party

Then don't use Beeper.

> I trust an established, trillion dollar company far more with that sensitive info than I do a fast-moving, eager-to-break-things startup. And the list goes on.

Thankfully, you don't necessarily have to trust them since the entire process runs on your device.

> I really don't believe they're entitled to parasite off the undocumented iMessage API.

Do you also believe it's "parasitism" for a tool manufacturer to create a screwdriver that fits another manufacturer's screw shapes? That's more or less exactly what's happening here - they made a tool that fits the existing proprietary API and interacts with it.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#112

Post by xd1936 »

knowald wrote: post #106

It might be a controversial topic, but this post had some oddly rapid upvotes for HN. I'm trying to understand what the target of this hacky iMessage spin-off of Beeper is. The whole idea of subscription-based monetization. Rather no way of Apple not patching quickly, dealing with this as soon as it raises attention. But maybe that was the intent of a hack they found? A clever marketing strategy, to gain some rapid t…

For me, it's less about craving a specific service, and more about watching tech drama and idealism at war.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#113

Post by doublerabbit »

richwater wrote: post #48
campbel wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they are rightly calling out that iMessage as part of Apple's moat building is both bad for their customers and people their customers interact with. And while I agree with you, and I won't be using the service, I think from their POV it is the correct messaging.

> Apple's moat building is both bad for their customers and people their customers interact with I bought into the ecosystem exactly because of the quality and functionality of iMessage. There's absolutely no spam, everything works and the ecosystem is tight-knit.

But other side of the Apple reality is your then stuck when all your other relatives use Android.

I am then forced to use some $app, persuade my contacts to use said app. Defeating the point of iMessage when I just want native support all around.

Something that Apple had never implemented anywhere else and for which it could decades ago.

I wouldn't switch to an Android because the feature became available.

If all your contacts use Apple Devices, sure go nuts. But when others don't iMessage becomes unpractical.

But hey, vendor device lock-in money is very nice. It's unfortunate that they don't water the lawns of the walled-garden nor restock the bird feeder. We are expected to do that ourselves using a wooden ladder with missing prongs.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#114

Post by wvenable »

starkparker wrote: post #89
qrohlf wrote: post #29

I’m curious what their best-case outcome is here. It’s fully transparent at this point that Apple has no appetite for a third party iMessage client on any platform and will take whatever technical steps needed to prevent this from happening. I’d wager heavily that even if Beeper plays cat-and-mouse to the point where they’ve exhausted Apple’s budget for blocking them and somehow managed to avoid Apple’s legal team pu…

Best-case outcome is that Apple decides engaging in an arms race with a motivated competitor isn't worth the time or effort and they enable some (probably limited) interop. I can imagine a "blue-green" type of message that's encrypted but not from an Apple device; Apple keeps their status symbology and users on both ends get E2E encrypted messages to and from Apple device users without Apple users switching to a thir…

> Worst case is Apple keeps escalating the fight knowing that Beeper can't outlast them.

I feel like this is in Apple's DNA. Perhaps Beeper is lucky that Apple needs to support a lot of legacy devices and they might not be able to fully plug this hole without creating a big support nightmare.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#115

Post by ciabattabread »

bsenftner wrote: post #21

This is subtle and much bigger issue than it looks. Marketing people have a real issue with the inability for a single messaging solution, and paying the Apple tax. And unless you did not realize, marketing kind of run/control a lot, far more than it appears.

Who gives marketing their phone number? Email or bust.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#116

Post by vineyardmike »

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.

A walled down proprietary messaging platform is so common as to be unremarkable. Google has probably 5 in the works right now. Meta has a few, and there’s dozens of others to choose from.

It was really cool news when they reverse engineered the API. It was less cool when they sold paid access to this unofficial API. Beeper is barely pro-consumer because again, they’re charging for something open sourced by a 16yo kid which has no official support.

The green bubble blue bubble story is really tired. Yea it’s real, but it’s not a technical problem it’s a social problem. Haven’t we learned that you can’t out-hacker a social problem?

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#117

Post by I_Am_Nous »

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.

Hackers do things because they can. Apple is entitled to gatekeep their own technology until it is regulated as a utility. To me the anti-hacker spirit is a company thinking just because they did something they subjectively think is good that Apple is then obligated to keep it running.

In what world is Apple obligated to keep a service running which allows unauthorized security related behavior? Such a hole in a service is usually called a security vulnerability and is patched away asap.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#118

Post by robertoandred »

haswell wrote: post #61
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…

If the only thing Beeper does is continue to make Apple look anti-competitive, they've succeeded as far as I'm concerned. I'm deep into the Apple ecosystem and don't see myself getting out anytime soon. But I think their stance on iMessage sucks, even while understanding the strategic reasons they're doing it. I don't see this as "leeching off an undocumented API" as much as demonstrating that iMessage is already in…

Imitating a first-party user isn't the same as being a third-party user.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#119

Post by glasshug »

PrimeMcFly wrote: post #77
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…

They are not entitled at all, they are filling a void in the market that Apple doesn't want filled. As I understand it this is explicitly legal under the DMCA and the EU DSA,

Anyone have some detail on the copyright law connection here?

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#120

Post by solardev »

KerrAvon wrote: post #100
fooey wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Beeper vs Apple battle is already getting the attention of US legislators https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/10/senator-warren-calls-out-a...

Apple needs better critics. Senator Warren would be a lot more effective if she or her staff understood how technology actually works. Senator Markey is another person who cares about this stuff but is also incompetent to regulate it.

I don't think it's just a matter of not understanding technology, but not having any sway in politics. Most of their peers care more about personal brands and culture wars and virtue signaling than doing the boring day to day task of regulating minituae for consumers.

People like Warren and Bernie are like the determined sergeants in the trenches, while most of Congress is busy grandstanding and trying to become the next Napoleons or Trump.

They just don't care to actually do anything useful, instead focusing on optics and pork barrels and revolving doors.

Post reply on HN