I'm surprised people are defending these guys. This is paid-for illegal breaking into systems.
Beeper Mini is back
181–190 of 1001 posts
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#182Why are Apple users so upset about this? It's almost as if they don't want interoperability with Android users. And please spare me the spam excuse.
Why do android users want something they have everything else ahead? I don’t want interoperability. If I did I’d use the other messaging apps that are far beyond apple’s. The only value I see is stubbornness with older family as many see iPhones as a simpler device
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#183I’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…
> Apple’s next move would likely be to release some kind of official iMessage Android client rather than cede control of the space to Beeper.
You say this as if it's a bad thing, I think that would be mission accomplished for Beeper... tbf, though I suppose their moment would be over by then.
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#184I have a feeling they're not going to stop being a thorn in Apple's side for quite a while...
They're either going to keep getting their access cut, or sued into bankruptcy. You can't really piggyback off another companies service in violation of their TOS without things working out poorly for you IMO.
>sued into bankruptcy
Good luck with that. I'd like to see this play out in court with a technically inclined judge. Be careful what you wish for.
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#185I’m hoping Apple find a perm shut down solution. A proper iMessage client for android can’t come from a hack.
I do applaud them for getting a home run in PR for themselves
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#186These 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…
The part that's wild to me is that Beeper is collecting revenue from their users for this. Apple doesn't charge for iMessage, and instead that service is funded by device purchases. Beeper is charging people who haven't purchased devices to help them parasitize the infrastructure of the service, and instead of contributing to Apple's operational expenses, they're pocketing the money. There's no scenario where this st…
> Beeper is charging people who haven't purchased devices
Do you have numbers for that? Sure, some of the users haven't purchased devices, but many of them have an apple device or two and just want access to the network across all the devices they use.
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#187These 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…
>building production applications on top of an undocumented API
Sort of like how Apple builds their apps?
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're either going to keep getting their access cut, or sued into bankruptcy. You can't really piggyback off another companies service in violation of their TOS without things working out poorly for you IMO.
Yeah, not the point. The point is to prove that it's possible and relatively simple, and the only reason Apple operates this way is to lock people into the ecosystem.
Seems like an expensive way to tell us all something we've known since the iphone was released.
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I don't think this is painting Apple in a negative light for their actual customers, who pay them money. It's painting them in a negative light for a small segment of Android users who obviously are unlikely to switch to Apple anyway.
Re: Beeper Mini is back
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a Google Android user using a Google Pixel and Google's RCS on Google Fi, the messaging system is a total clusterfuck. There's no way to reliably send or receive messages, and sometimes my images will be degraded silently, group messages to other Fi users often don't work before several retries, reactions are totally hit and miss... IMessage is a much much much better experience. It's not at all bad for their cust…
GNU Jami or similar messaging systems are the solution, not some proprietary vendor locking solution.
Olvid [0,1] seems interesting too.
[0]: https://olvid.io