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

681–690 of 1001 posts

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#681

Post by macNchz »

phonon wrote: post #598
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…

You could say the same thing about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samba_(software)

I think Samba was my first introduction to the idea that using a non-official/reverse-engineered implementation of something to piggyback into a closed ecosystem may not actually be preferable to either shunning that ecosystem entirely, or just buying into it. I loved it in concept, but in practice not so much.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#682

Post by jpc0 »

phonon wrote: post #643
fahhem wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Samba is a protocol, Microsoft doesn't have any costs associated with more users of it. GP is asking about APNS, which involves Apple servers and therefore costs Apple to handle more requests, however minimal per individual request/message

Support costs for Microsoft definitely go up.

Explain your perspective on this. Here is a probing question.

How does support costs for Microsoft go up when I communicate from my linux workstation to my linux server using SMB implemented by Samba.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#683

Post by selectodude »

abrouwers wrote: post #663
bogantech wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because I want to talk to my friends without being locked into Apple's ecosystem. Simple as that, I don't need any other reason. You can't do that now with SMS and a plethora of other messaging apps?

I think the "send my grandmother non-pixelated photos of my kid using the default messaging app" is a fair ask.

She doesn’t have an email address? You’re not in a walled garden, just self host it and send her a link.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#684

Post by wmf »

raydev wrote: post #680
segasaturn wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why does everybody feel entitled to use it if they're not using Apple products? Because I want to talk to my friends without being locked into Apple's ecosystem. Simple as that, I don't need any other reason. This language about "entitlement" feels like when Google complains about people using adblockers on YT - I don't care because they're both $2T corporations, and the only "entitlement" I see is the way Apple and…

Why are you entitled to use Apple's messaging servers without paying for access?

People are willing to pay but Apple won't take their money.

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#686

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#687

Post by kelnos »

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…

> Why does everybody feel entitled to use it if they're not using Apple products?

I'm only speaking for myself here, but I don't look at it as "being entitled to use Apple's services". I look at it as closed, non-interoperable systems as being fundamentally bad for people and for the internet. I hesitate to call them immoral, but I feel like I could argue that competently as well, if pushed to do so.

So if Apple isn't willing to allow interoperability with their messaging service that is used by hundreds of millions (billions?) of people, then I support every effort to "sneak in" and make that happen anyway. And if that means using some Apple service that isn't intended for use outside the Apple ecosystem, that's just how it has to be.

On the other hand, I would frankly just prefer that non-interoperable systems die, instead, and be replaced by functionally equivalent, but more open, systems. So I am also uncomfortable with Beeper Mini pushing more people into Apple's closed ecosystem, even if overall (in the short term, at least) it will mean a better, more secure experience for both iOS and Android users. (It's gross that Apple talks about the security and privacy afforded to users of their products, but at the same time forces their own iPhone users to send unencrypted SMS/MMS messages to anyone who doesn't have an iPhone, because keeping non-iPhone users off iMessage is a competitive advantage for them.)

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#688

Post by dhosek »

gorjusborg wrote: post #630
babl-yc wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> The only blocker is that Apple doesn't want it to exist. This is my main source of excitement around this project. The existence of this project shows that there is no technical reason it can't exist. So, what is the reason it doesn't exist? Exactly what you said: Apple thinks it is in its best interest not to.

There’s also the fact that iMessages have a cost to them. An individual message might not amount to much, but millions of them? Apple is hosting the computing to manage the delivery of iMessages. Should they provide that free of charge to the world out of the goodness of their heart?

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#689

Post by Tommstein »

lancesells wrote: post #647
unshavedyak wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it free? I have it bundled as part of my hardware purchases. Is there somewhere to get it without paying?

It is free even without purchase. I could give someone an old iPhone and they can use it without issue.

"Cars/TVs/insert-other-thing-here are free, because I could just give an old one to someone!" That ain't how it works bro . . . .

Re: Beeper Mini is back

#690

Post by sneak »

sircastor wrote: post #234
lacker wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best case outcome is to get publicity leading to US and EU antitrust regulators to file a lawsuit against Apple, both of which Apple loses. The conclusion of this lawsuit is that not only must Apple allow access to iMessage, they also must allow changing the default for every component of iOS - messaging app, browser, app store, let you replace Siri with other voice assistants - and to lower the 30% app store fee…

> and to lower the 30% app store fee to 10%. In danger of being an Apple apologist, the app store fee for the vast majority of sellers is 15%.

...which is still more than 5x the normal rate for payment processing.

Reducing your price gouging from 10x to 5x isn’t exactly a kindness.

Post reply on HN