Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 105 posts

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#31

Post by zappb »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #10
crazygringo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not zero. I receive a few spam iMessages a year. But it's definitely orders of magnitude below SMS/calls.

>But it's definitely orders of magnitude below SMS/calls. SMS and call spam are big annoyances but can also be dealt with. On my Android, the Google messaging app is really good at stopping them. I doubt that Apple doesn't have the tech competency or the money to either build, license or acquire a really good spam filter. Heck, they can acquire every single spam filter company and start-up in the world and their mone…

The Messages app supports filtering extensions. I use a free one called Bouncer where I configured some regular expressions to auto-junk things, but there are far more sophisticated extensions available.

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#32

Post by nixgeek »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #19
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #3

I've asked this 3 times across the various threads on this, and have yet to get a 100% confirmed "you are right" answer because I don't know the specifics and I haven't come into anybody who has taken the time to research the answer: When you log in to iMessage and the various underlying protocols/services, you do it with an Apple ID. Is that Apple ID tied in a one-to-many (but you need at least one) fashion of regis…

Microsoft is the company trying the hardest to force users to dial back to Microsoft before using their products, as far as I know. Quite a wide base of users detest the process & loath it. It feels incredibly tacky & I would not recommend Apple lower themselves so. And it's still nowhere near what you are asking for. What exactly is "validating" a serial number? Are you saying users need to present receipt of purcha…

Apple devices already phone home when you reimage them - Activation Lock - this already causes some headaches when your MDM doesn’t consider the implications:

https://learn.jamf.com/bundle/jamf-now-documentation/page/Us...

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#33

Post by MBCook »

throw310822 wrote: post #29
notyourwork wrote: post #2

In other words, Apple wants to control who enters their garden. Not surprised and not sure I disagree. Why is it that Beeper, or anyone else that isn’t Apple gets to decide who uses iMessage?

The question is not why Apple should give access to their messaging system to third parties- they have the full right of doing whatever they want. The question is why the customers don't give Apple and its pathetic excuses the middle finger- and instead praise the wisdom of the company and whine about Android users not buying iPhones. This in the face of a perfectly clear example of Apple making the life of its own c…

Personally I like Apple not allowing other companies who hacked into their infrastructure to using it without permission.

That seems incredibly reasonable to me. Beeper’s statements seem almost like parody to me.

“I know I broke into your house, but someone else figured out the key. Now I’m here I should be able to rent out your couch! The renters deserve it, you’re discriminating. I’ll give you a cut!”

People want iMessage open, or at least available on other platforms. That’s fine. I get it.

This is NOT how you do that. As a customer I would find it weird and disconcerting if Apple said “You found a way in? Congrats! Start setting up camp!”

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#35

Post by MBCook »

wutwutwat wrote: post #16
notyourwork wrote: post #2

In other words, Apple wants to control who enters their garden. Not surprised and not sure I disagree. Why is it that Beeper, or anyone else that isn’t Apple gets to decide who uses iMessage?

Not defending Apple but this question makes no sense. They created iMessage and they own the services that provide it. Why would they not get to decide who can use their service the same as any other company with a TOS and any brick and mortar store who can refuse service. I don’t understand the logic around this that people feel they are owed access to shit they dont own or operate. I’m all for open protocols and wo…

“I figured out how to stream HBO Max without a subscription! What do you mean I can’t give other people free access? That’s my right!”

I agree. It’s weird. This isn’t about if/how iMessage should be available on other platforms. It’s about if Beeper should be able to sell/give access to an Apple service by fiat against Apple’s will.

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#36

Post by nixgeek »

throw310822 wrote: post #29
notyourwork wrote: post #2

In other words, Apple wants to control who enters their garden. Not surprised and not sure I disagree. Why is it that Beeper, or anyone else that isn’t Apple gets to decide who uses iMessage?

The question is not why Apple should give access to their messaging system to third parties- they have the full right of doing whatever they want. The question is why the customers don't give Apple and its pathetic excuses the middle finger- and instead praise the wisdom of the company and whine about Android users not buying iPhones. This in the face of a perfectly clear example of Apple making the life of its own c…

I give Apple a good amount of my personal money every year precisely because Apple works well with Apple, and because when you switch on all the features like Advanced Data Protection and Lockdown Mode their vertical integration across hardware, software and services gives them a strong security story.

I have Signal and WhatsApp for talking to people on other platforms, and I’m personally fine with Apple maintaining strong control over iMessage and introducing things like Contact Key Verification [1] to further enhance security within that closed system (things like Signal have alternatives to this, too!). That is to say: there’s plenty of competition in cross-platform messaging already, this is good, many of those alternatives have hundreds of millions of users. We’re really not at the point where we need regulators to step in and force Apple to open up iMessage!

[1] https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213465

You are obviously free to spend your dollars as you wish, but don’t conflate the lack of interoperability with Android as “making the life of its own customers miserable”, it’s really the opposite: everything Apple works well with Apple and that’s a real upgrade for me and likely others over the piecemeal, fragmented, and harder to secure ecosystem that is Android.

Your opinions likely do vary to my own and that’s why it’s good there are options and competition.

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#37

Post by MBCook »

lol768 wrote: post #13

This isn't a technical problem. Nobody really uses iMessage enough in the EU, but in the USA where people seem to shun use of third-party messaging apps like WhatsApp, the solution would be to deem Apple a "gatekeeper" under legislation equivalent to the Digital Markets Act and force interoperability via regulation given Apple's market dominance. The regulatory process has worked with side-loading, and EU citizens wi…

It’s not that it’s active shunning, things just evolved here into two systems (RCS and iMessage) and a lowest common denominator (SMS) they both fall back to automatically.

So there is VERY little friction. You can message anyone easily without downloading anything, though the experience varies.

So the idea of downloading an additional app for certain people is kind of odd.

If you live somewhere everyone uses WeChat, you download that once when you setup your phone and you’re done. If everyone uses a mix then you’re used to swapping between apps.

A lot of Americans aren’t, historically it hasn’t been needed by a lot of people who only communicate with other Americans.

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#38

Post by MBCook »

unshavedyak wrote: post #12
dawnerd wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get iMessage spam all the time, Apple even has a report spam feature so it’s clearly an issue. I guess you’re just lucky but it definitely exists. I got four just in the last day even.

Wonder what the cause is? I don’t think I’ve literally ever received a spam on iMessage

I think I’ve maybe gotten two in the entire history of owning an iPhone.

I know people who have never gotten a single one, I know people who have gotten a bunch and hate it.

Peoples experience seems to really vary.

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#39

Post by PrimeMcFly »

refulgentis wrote: post #26
not_your_vase wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it isn't, why doesn't Apple do this Not sure if there would be any real benefit in that. Consider the over-abused Macs at university campuses as an example, used by 10s-100s of persons/day, each potentially logging in with their own user ID. Suddenly their ID is tied to a legit HW, if it wasn't the case already. Of course, technically, Apple could ban the IDs or these computers... but why would they?

I think you're right -- You piqued my curiosity with your example, though. 10-100s of people logging into the same Mac with their Apple ID? Is that possible? I thought there was a 1:1 mapping of, say, Apple ID signed into ID : *NIX account. Does OS X have something more ephemeral these days? That would be fantastic for shared computing.

I don't think they meant 10-100s of people logging in simultaneously.

Re: Apple responds to the Beeper iMessage saga: 'We took steps to protect our users'

#40

Post by PrimeMcFly »

sbuk wrote: post #30
throw310822 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is not why Apple should give access to their messaging system to third parties- they have the full right of doing whatever they want. The question is why the customers don't give Apple and its pathetic excuses the middle finger- and instead praise the wisdom of the company and whine about Android users not buying iPhones. This in the face of a perfectly clear example of Apple making the life of its own c…

> " The question is why the customers don't give Apple and its pathetic excuses the middle finger- and instead praise the wisdom of the company and whine about Android users not buying iPhones " Likewise, Android users "whine" about being not let in an use all sorts of logical fallacies to make their case. The solution, which the rest of the Android and iOS using planet has come to, is to simply use another cross pla…

Everyone uses phones. One phone manufacturer shouldn't be able to ostracize customers of every other phone manufacturer, punish them, and deliberately cripple the experience for its users.

> Android users whine about being not let in an use all sorts of logical fallacies to make their case

Name 5.

Post reply on HN