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

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#581

Post by wrboyce »

globular-toast wrote: post #278
kernal wrote: post #166

Why 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.

I'm going to go with a combination of Stockholm syndrome, crabs in a bucket and snobbery. Apple users like to think they're in a special little club.

Speaking as one Apple user, I don’t think of myself in a special club - I just like that my shit works. What I don’t understand is why Android users are so vested in ruining it for me.

Can’t have nice things.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#582

Post by rplnt »

tinus_hn wrote: post #329
Nextgrid wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Default option is still usual phone call/iMessage in a lot of places - in some you can long press and select another option, but not all. Also, merely opening a separate app doesn't really help. How about instead of having 5 different apps (that the system one sometimes generously allows you to open), you had one app that can seamlessly speak all protocols? You can add multiple e-mail or contacts accounts (even from…

You wonder how anyone survives in all of the world where nobody uses iMessage (which is everywhere except the US). How do people even manage to open WhatsApp? How do people survive this horror!

I have an iPhone (and macbook if that matters) and have no idea what all the rage is about.

Is iMessage the default sms client? It's just called Messages on my phone. What does it offer? Mine looks like the stock android one. I see virtually zero options to do anything else than to send a message. Is it US only thing?

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#583

Post by beejiu »

kevinsync wrote: post #528

Maybe this came up in the earlier threads (announcement, outage) so I apologize if it's been discussed ... This project is fantastic. The hacker spirit is in full force, and I love a good David and Goliath story. However, all the comments about demanding interoperability and protocols keep confusing me -- I don't consider APNS a protocol (like TCP anyways), it's also not incidental, extra header space to stuff data i…

It's my understanding that in the European Union, the new Digital Markets regulations will require interoperability. It's still not 100% what it will cover, but it could become a requirement.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#584

Post by haswell »

modeless wrote: post #554
haswell wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For sake of argument, if they acquire the Beeper team and continue supporting it, there is no further incentive for more Beeper-like apps to emerge. Apple would at that point have a leg to stand on when they go after non-native apps, and I think this would actually be a deterrent for copycat attempts and not something that encourages the behavior.

If Apple wanted iMessage on Android they would have done it already. There are emails from executives made public in lawsuits discussing the possibility many years ago.

It’s very clear that Apple does not want iMessage on Android.

My point was that if they chose to give in and acquire something like Beeper (presumably due to bad press, concerns about regulatory action, etc), it does not follow that this incentivizes more Beeper-like products.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#585

Post by stillwithit »

Stuff like this feels petty by all parties.

Use an app that’s already universal if users are so desperate.

Playing whack a mole back and forth over a chat app as if it’s some high minded fight for speech when countless options exist is melodrama for the sake of melodrama and engagement farming

Beeper real goal is like everyone else in tech; get rich. It found the perfect marketing meme, the old David and Goliath story, to piggyback its business goals on.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#586

Post by Ajedi32 »

mike_d wrote: post #370
radlad wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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... )

> If Apple continues to cut off Beeper's access, it makes an antitrust argument stronger I'm not sure why everyone thinks it is an antitrust issue when it isn't. There is no legal obligation to support your services and software on third party platforms.

I'd argue that's not the right framing of the issue. Taking active steps to prevent your services from being used on competing platforms is more than merely "not supporting" them.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#587

Post by mrajcok »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #534
LordKeren wrote: post #26

I think one of the underlying issues is that many are now going to be hesitant to even bother with Beeper Mini anymore. I don’t think there is going to be a high tolerance for this game of cat and mouse from the end user perspective I also don’t think goading apple is going to do much here either. Regardless of the current feelings around apple’s walled garden, they are not going to suddenly keel over and give up on…

All Apple needs to do is send a few scary C&D letters from their army of lawyers and this will be done. If they run the infrastructure for imessage, I'm sure there's something in a ToS somewhere that talks about spoofing device IDs and unauthorized use of their services blah blah Apple's sole discretion. In theory I love it but in reality it'll be dead soon as Apple has too much to gain from the walled garden they've…

I've been on the receiving end of this - as an individual maybe, but as a committed startup not necessarily. Rooting for them!

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#588

Post by _rs »

Was really hoping to read about what Apple changed to break things, even if they won't explain how they worked around it

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#589

Post by rezonant »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #539
grishka wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they generate legit-looking fake device serial numbers, that just happen to match real devices most of the time?

How does Apple not know a database of real serial #s that match products it has sold? Why would an API that goes to the lengths of expecting a serial # not validate and instead accept a fake "real-looking" serial # instead of a known- matched-in-the-database real serial #?

Well, Apple does not actually know which serial numbers have been sold. You can still buy Apple products outside of an Apple store, and even at an Apple Store, knowing which serials are sold is logistically difficult.

They could probably implement a process at Apple stores but to do it for third party stores would be more difficult. To avoid simply adding a step for a user to claim a serial number as sold when they set up their Hackintosh or HackiPhone (can we coin this?), you'd probably need a way to authenticate as the store when you mark one off. But there's nothing stopping stores who have excess inventory from selling it off at cost or even a discount when a particular product isn't doing well- and at that point those purchasers will need to be able to mark off serial numbers when they sell those devices.

It's not impossible but it's not terribly likely, at least any time soon.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#590

Post by oneplane »

babl-yc wrote: post #565
kevinsync wrote: post #528

Maybe this came up in the earlier threads (announcement, outage) so I apologize if it's been discussed ... This project is fantastic. The hacker spirit is in full force, and I love a good David and Goliath story. However, all the comments about demanding interoperability and protocols keep confusing me -- I don't consider APNS a protocol (like TCP anyways), it's also not incidental, extra header space to stuff data i…

Selfishly I'm most excited about this project as a demonstration that secure and reliable communication across platforms is pretty straightforward. The only blocker is that Apple doesn't want it to exist. If Apple were truly acting in their users best interest, they would want their users to have encrypted and fast communication with all devices, through an open protocol or otherwise. And yes, iOS allows 3rd party ap…

Don't WhatsApp and Signal already do exactly that?
Post reply on HN