251–260 of 1001 posts
Because of how likely it is to be killed though I don't think I shall be adopting it personally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way I see it Beeper are deliberately poking the bear. They knew Apple would block their implementation (I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they had this replacement ready to go). You don’t have to trust them, if you don’t want to use the service then don’t. They’re highlighting the closed nature of Apple’s messaging system more effectively than anyone has in a long time. I support them in doing that.
> They’re highlighting the closed nature of Apple’s messaging system more effectively than anyone has in a long time. I support them in doing that. Every major chat app is closed though? For example, I use LINE regularly, there's no way to access that chat system through anything but LINE apps.
Living in the country where absolutely no one uses iMessage, the whole kerfuffle about the colour of the message bubble leaves me completely flabbergasted. I mean, probably the curvature of the Earth is involved, but from here this looks like a very small hill to die on.
Fantastic, right?
Beeper has caught a ton of media attention in recent weeks but I truly do not understand it. The SMS protocol has been around for decades and works perfectly fine with iPhones. If you want rich media and other bells and whistles, use WhatsApp. How often does someone whine so loudly about insisting on using the closed, Apple-proprietary protocol that their friends need to pay a monthly subscription for a third party i…
It's not that simple, you get discriminated against for having a different color bubble and using up people's SMS allocation.
We should whine about (communication) interoperability, it's critically important for everyone. Purposefully or negligently creating incompatibilities is anticompetitive and generally toxic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
US? When has that ever happened in the last 30 years? I’d buy the EU stepping in to mandate interoperability though. I’d welcome that! But… shouldn’t mostly everyone here view needing the EU to force the behaviour of a US company kind of against the entire supposed benefit of the US system and the purpose of the domain this forum is hosted on?
> But… shouldn’t mostly everyone here view needing the EU to force the behaviour of a US company kind of against the entire supposed benefit of the US system and the purpose of the domain this forum is hosted on? European here. From my POV it seems as if the USA have forgotten that for a truly free market to exist, there needs to be serious oversight to prevent capitalism from devolving into "corporate Darwinism" - a…
A capitalist economy needs the government for some very key laws like upholding private property rights but how does that extend to "mandating interoperable message systems"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
As is their right?
The amount of corporate bootlickers who wish to surrender that right is staggering though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's anti-competitive with what Apple does with iMessage? iMessage's lack of popularity everywhere else in the world is proof that competition is able to flourish. Apple is under no obligation to make an Android app, and it's silly to pretend not making an app for another platform is somehow anti-competetive. The market simply chosing a preference is not anti-competive. iPhone and iMessage is able to compete on it'…
When you have market power, your behavior has to be held to a higher standard. Apple has huge amounts of market power in the US cell phone market. It is totally clear to any reasonable observer that they are using that market power to dissuade people from purchasing Android devices via the green bubble system.
How does Apple abuse this power in the US but not EU with no differences in the product?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
US? When has that ever happened in the last 30 years? I’d buy the EU stepping in to mandate interoperability though. I’d welcome that! But… shouldn’t mostly everyone here view needing the EU to force the behaviour of a US company kind of against the entire supposed benefit of the US system and the purpose of the domain this forum is hosted on?
> US? When has that ever happened in the last 30 years? United States vs. Microsoft Corp, 2001? [0] And ongoing: United States vs. Google LLC (2020) [1] and United States vs Google LLC (2023) [2]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Google_LLC_(2... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Google_LLC_(2... Edited: formatting
As the wikipedia page you yourself are citing, overturned on appeal.
> And ongoing: United States vs. Google LLC (2020) [1] and United States vs Google LLC (2023) [2].
Ongoing, so a bit hard to count these as evidence of successful market regulation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
It’s false based on what? Your own anecdotal experience? I have a friend group that has iPhones and Androids. We went on vacation and had to jump through so many hoops just to share our pictures. We don’t care what devices everybody uses, because why the heck should that matter? The fact that it can be simple to share high fidelity pictures and videos, but it isn’t just because Apple wants their walled garden benefit…
Living in the country where absolutely no one uses iMessage, the whole kerfuffle about the colour of the message bubble leaves me completely flabbergasted. I mean, probably the curvature of the Earth is involved, but from here this looks like a very small hill to die on.
1. Unable to rename group chats
2. Photo sharing quality is lowered
3. Video sharing quality is abysmal
4. Messages traverse carrier networks in plain-text
5. Loss of undo send and delete
6. Loss of inline replies
7. Loss of typing indicators and read-receipts (if enabled)