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

Apple Invites

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 956 posts

Re: Apple Invites

#661

Post by viraptor »

basisword wrote: post #546
lordofgibbons wrote: post #362

I really hope this fails. Apple will use it's dominant position to create lock in like how they did with iMessage instead of cooperating with other platforms on a common standard. Oder friends and family are surprised when they want to video call over Facetime and find it hard to believe other people's phones don't have Apple apps.

Just a tip but sometimes it’s good to read the article before commenting. The app allows iPhone users to create an event. Anybody on any device or browser can RSVP. The event can be shared as a link. Making an event invite app that only works for users on one platform would be pointless. Also - non-Apple users have been able to join FaceTime calls via. A link for several years.

Yet, there's nothing iPhone specific about this idea. They didn't have to limit it in the way they did. In the future they can change the approach too and both remove and restrict features, because they will always go iPhone-first. Being able to use this in a restricted way today is just that. I share the "apple (and any corp)-first solution should fail" hope.

Re: Apple Invites

#662

Post by worthless-trash »

bloggie wrote: post #654
brailsafe wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only problem I have with this, as an android user, is that there's probably no API available for someone to build an integration for other platforms if the market was there. I don't expect Apple to go and create cross platform clients for every service they put out, they're not a service first company, they're an Apple service first company.

Pull requests welcome.

[Citation needed]

Re: Apple Invites

#663

Post by kyawzazaw »

lordofgibbons wrote: post #362

I really hope this fails. Apple will use it's dominant position to create lock in like how they did with iMessage instead of cooperating with other platforms on a common standard. Oder friends and family are surprised when they want to video call over Facetime and find it hard to believe other people's phones don't have Apple apps.

more should start using partiful then

Re: Apple Invites

#664

Post by lostlogin »

Schiendelman wrote: post #570
ryandrake wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This tracks so well as an indicator, with many other products. As soon as the company starts making money, their product is going to become awful and it's time to find an alternative. Why can't tech escape this cycle?

It has. Apple escaped this cycle. Their software is great. Instead of you being the product, you buy the product. People then just complain the product is expensive. On this website, I roll my eyes.

I want nice things, zero cost and complete privacy without adverts. Why is this so hard?

/s

Re: Apple Invites

#665

Post by JohnBooty »

viraptor wrote: post #661
basisword wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a tip but sometimes it’s good to read the article before commenting. The app allows iPhone users to create an event. Anybody on any device or browser can RSVP. The event can be shared as a link. Making an event invite app that only works for users on one platform would be pointless. Also - non-Apple users have been able to join FaceTime calls via. A link for several years.

Yet, there's nothing iPhone specific about this idea. They didn't have to limit it in the way they did. In the future they can change the approach too and both remove and restrict features, because they will always go iPhone-first. Being able to use this in a restricted way today is just that. I share the "apple (and any corp)-first solution should fail" hope.

    In the future they can change the approach too and 
    both remove and restrict features
Unlike a lot of product categories... I don't really see a strong lock-in factor here?

Example: If you are heavily invested in Apple Music or Spotify, there's a lot of momentum there to keep you from switching. All your stuff is there (songs, favorites, playlists) and it would take a lot of time to re-find it on the other service, if it even exists there.

And streaming services like Netflix lock you in with constant reams of new content.

But what would be keeping me on some particular invite service? If I used Apple Invites for my last party two months ago... but I have decided that Apple Invites sucks now... I really don't see a lot of friction keeping me from switching away? The inconvenience would not be zero but seems minor.

Re: Apple Invites

#666

Post by worthless-trash »

viraptor wrote: post #659
plandis wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last I looked into this, iMessage offers end to end encryption and RCS doesn't by default. Apple (rightfully, IMO) refuses to use Googles non open source end to end encryption extension that also would require key exchange on Google owned servers.

As opposed to apples non open source solution that requires device authentication on apple owned servers... I think none of them really care about interoperability here, or they would release something open and able to do e2ee instead of this dance. I mean signal protocol is right there and available to everyone.

This debate is dead, no amount of education can fix it. Any amount of logical discussion is a waste of time.

Re: Apple Invites

#667

Post by sdjcse1 »

Apples kinda tending towards status game, it can be called as leveraging the ecosystem from their pov. But the impact it has on younger generation is more of a status symbol / peer pressure to have an iPhone over other phones.

Re: Apple Invites

#668

Post by igor47 »

bloggie wrote: post #654
brailsafe wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only problem I have with this, as an android user, is that there's probably no API available for someone to build an integration for other platforms if the market was there. I don't expect Apple to go and create cross platform clients for every service they put out, they're not a service first company, they're an Apple service first company.

Pull requests welcome.

Can you direct me to where I can make pull requests to unlock Apple's walled garden?

Re: Apple Invites

#669

Post by notpushkin »

borski wrote: post #637
pishpash wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it guarantees nothing of the sort.

Say more.

There are ways to send iMessages programmatically. Apple does check for spam, but it’s not foolproof. And of course, it won’t help you against a targeted attack.

Re: Apple Invites

#670

Post by StressedDev »

Schiendelman wrote: post #570
ryandrake wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This tracks so well as an indicator, with many other products. As soon as the company starts making money, their product is going to become awful and it's time to find an alternative. Why can't tech escape this cycle?

It has. Apple escaped this cycle. Their software is great. Instead of you being the product, you buy the product. People then just complain the product is expensive. On this website, I roll my eyes.

Agreed - If you want good products, you should support the people who create them. That means paying. If you want a privacy destroying enshitified product, keep using "free" products.
Post reply on HN