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

881–890 of 956 posts

Re: Apple Invites

#881

Post by n0rdy »

teitoklien wrote: post #803
n0rdy wrote: post #405

I have 2 conflicting feelings about this: - I'm glad to see this, as it might be an easily accessible alternative to Facebook events, which I tend to miss as I'm checking my FB only once in a while - on the other hand, each new Apple release adds apps that might kill some small start-ups that are offering similar services for the small fee. Having a free alternative on your phone out of the box with most of your cont…

Not necessarily, I used to use Apple Reminders initially because it was free, i found the value of a good TODOs app by using it extensively. Then once I loved using Todo apps, I migrated to Todoist and started paying for a Todo app. Apple Reminders is the reason why I pay for Todoist app, it helped me learn it, same reason why I moved from free iMovies app to a paid video editing app. Same reason why I moved from Fre…

That's a great way to view it, I haven't looked at it from this angle before, thanks.

> What is anti-competitive tho, is stuff like Apple Music and Spotify, where spotify has to pay 30% cut to apple while apple music doesnt have to pay anything.

Yeah, that's why the monopoly is rarely a good idea for the customers, in my opinion.

Re: Apple Invites

#882

Post by TheDong »

dwaite wrote: post #776
TheDong wrote: post #766

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the other messenger apps you can use on iOS, like whatsapp, telegram, signal, etc, have no degradation with android users present. Why can't apple publish an iMessage app for linux, windows, and android? Telegram and signal have no trouble maintaining applications for this, and they've got far less money than apple does. RCS and SMS have been a total mess, yes, but every other chat protocol I've used has been bet…

> All the other messenger apps you can use on iOS, like whatsapp, telegram, signal, etc, have no degradation with android users present Yes, those all work and each require that you download and install their app, go through setup, potentially some identity verification steps, etc. If you want that functionality, all of them are available as options. What would make an Apple iMessage app for Android better than any o…

I want Apple iMessage to be clearer on iOS.

Right now, iOS users can't as easily understand the difference between iMessage and SMS, and I think it would make what's happening clearer to users if the apps were separate.

If you opened the "SMS" app to get your sms 2fa codes and talk to android users, and your "iMessage" app separately to talk to iPhone users, it would make people less mad when they open their iMessage app to iMessage, and instead weirdly get green bubble SMS.

It would be like if when I installed the "firefox" app on iOS it instead installed "safari" and touching the "firefox" icon opened "safari", and didn't have any firefox addons. Oh weird, sorry, bad example.

The point is not that iMessage is better than whatsapp, it's not. The point is that iPhone users try to use iMessage, and right now apple's weird SMS integration with it makes them accidentally use SMS and get annoyed.

Re: Apple Invites

#883

Post by aidenn0 »

GiorgioG wrote: post #609
aidenn0 wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But lots of features are likely to be unavailable to invitees (indeed the article specifically mentions a couple) without Apple devices. Apple loves to use network effects to make people with Android phones feel like outsiders.

The paranoia is real.

Almost weekly I have someone annoyed at me because I don't have an iPhone, so they can't AirDrop or iMessage or FaceTime me.

Re: Apple Invites

#884

Post by pkamb »

ben7799 wrote: post #879
pkamb wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the USA, someone insisting on using an Android when everyone else in their social circle has an iPhone (and they do!) is what's seen as anti-social. No one wants to use the degraded green bubble SMS experience so they simply exclude the Android user and continue using blue bubble iMessage.

This is not really true since RCS launched. It does most of what people care about. Everyone sees Emojis and a few other special Fx and videos and pictures now look good for everyone and don't get nerfed as soon as one user is on Android. Maybe RCS doesn't do all the esoteric iMessage stuff but it doesn't necessarily have to, half those extra features are gatekeeped on having the latest iPhone or whatever and so they…

This is potentially true; I've noticed green-bubble chats are much less annoying in the last year. Do they send over Wifi now? That was also a killer iMessage feature on trips with bad cell coverage.

Re: Apple Invites

#885

Post by fsflover »

EA-3167 wrote: post #874
fsflover wrote: post #799

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you ever see any Linux laptop in a store? They do have some market share but never existed to the ordinary people. Also, GNU/Linux phones exist (Librem 5 is my daily driver). However without Apple's budgets, you can't create the same smooth experience. You just can't compete with the duopoly.

So what you're saying is that alternatives do exist, but they aren't popular... that doesn't sound like a "duopoly" exists, it just sounds like Android and Apple cover the needs of the vast majority of people. I'm sure it's difficult to be part of a niche, but that doesn't mean that there's some conspiracy against you.

> I'm sure it's difficult to be part of a niche, but that doesn't mean that there's some conspiracy against you.

Yes, it does: https://puri.sm/posts/breaking-ground/. Purism tried to created their own smartphone not relying on Apple and Google and it was almost impossible to find the necessary chips. Nobody wanted to share the schematics or open the drivers. People are just locked-in into the duopoly. It's impossible to use popular apps without it, like Whatsapp or even Signal (!).

Re: Apple Invites

#886

Post by olyjohn »

pkamb wrote: post #377
Zak wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's only true if everyone in the group has an Apple phone, which has decreasing probability with every additional member. Excluding people from a conversation because they don't have the right brand of phone would be pretty antisocial.

In the USA, someone insisting on using an Android when everyone else in their social circle has an iPhone (and they do!) is what's seen as anti-social. No one wants to use the degraded green bubble SMS experience so they simply exclude the Android user and continue using blue bubble iMessage.

Sounds like those people weren't good friends anyways. What kind of friends exclude you for petty shit like this?

Re: Apple Invites

#887

Post by JohnBooty »

TheDong wrote: post #882
dwaite wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the other messenger apps you can use on iOS, like whatsapp, telegram, signal, etc, have no degradation with android users present Yes, those all work and each require that you download and install their app, go through setup, potentially some identity verification steps, etc. If you want that functionality, all of them are available as options. What would make an Apple iMessage app for Android better than any o…

I want Apple iMessage to be clearer on iOS. Right now, iOS users can't as easily understand the difference between iMessage and SMS, and I think it would make what's happening clearer to users if the apps were separate. If you opened the "SMS" app to get your sms 2fa codes and talk to android users, and your "iMessage" app separately to talk to iPhone users, it would make people less mad when they open their iMessage…

    The point is that iPhone users try to use 
    iMessage, and right now apple's weird SMS 
    integration with it makes them accidentally 
    use SMS and get annoyed.
I disagree that the "annoyed" people are "trying to use iMessage." I think they're just trying to message their friends. They are annoyed because the only common protocol supported by all parties in the conversation kind of sucks sometimes.

Apple has made the correct set of trade offs. If you just want to send a text message and don't care about the particulars you can do that and you'll automagically get the best possible experience based on the best lowest common denominator protocol whether it is iMessage, RCS, or SMS.

And if you and your buddies are savvy enough to want more than that you can install Signal or Whatsapp or whatever.

But that baseline out-of-the-box experience for mobile phones has always been "if I have somebody's number I can text/call them using my phone's out-of-the-box functionality and the network sorts out the details."

I think it's kind of nuts to throw that in the trash and you don't appreciate what a huge step backwards that would be for most of the people who buy and use phones.

Also, would you not agree that out of the box E2EE is a huge deal!?

But the keys and key exchange protocol for E2EE have to be managed by somebody. Signal, Google, Apple, whoever.

Re: Apple Invites

#888

Post by JohnBooty »

Rohansi wrote: post #690
JohnBooty wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poor technical understanding. It's not "degradation." They will use the iMessage protocol if supported by all clients. If not, they fall back to the next best thing supported by all clients whether RCS or SMS/MMS. In your case (possibly before iPhones supported RCS) the "next best thing" was apparently SMS/MMS. This is the correct behavior. I think you're also falling into the common trap of automatically thinking wh…

At least RCS is an attempt at being a cross platform standard, even if it still sucks. iMessage is locked down to Apple devices only. Even if you reverse engineered the protocol you wouldn't be able to get it on Android because Apple will shut you down. Best option is to just use a different app that just works on all platforms. No RCS, no iMessage.

    At least RCS is an attempt at being a cross platform 
    standard, even if it still sucks.
The E2EE part, which does not exist in the RCS standard itself, is a proprietary Google thing with keys managed by Google. It is not open, and opening it is not trivial because somebody has to be an authoritative key source etc.

If not for that part I'd agree with you.

    Best option is to just use a different app that just works 
    on all platforms. No RCS, no iMessage.
Well, I think there's obviously a huge place for these apps and there always has been. There is certainly nothing stopping you and your buddies from all standardizing on Signal, Telegram, or uh.... buying the rights to ICQ and resurrecting that or whatever.

The value of iMessage/RCS/SMS is that it is effectively universal. I just need somebody's mobile number and I can call or text them. They are (more or less) guaranteed to be able to receive that call or text. I can buy the most advanced iPhone or Pixel and I can send a text message to some dude on a 2001 flip phone in a jungle somewhere. That is a huge huge huge value.

Re: Apple Invites

#889

Post by therealfigtree »

abenga wrote: post #778
pinoy420 wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this a problem? Typical HN downvoting because of “muh vendor lockin” without giving an answer as to why exactly this matters for the general population. It is a fantastic business model.

Because we want to interact with our friends and family without being forced to switch platforms. I don't care about Apple's business model.

This is a weird way to think about it. You are basically saying a company should not launch something exclusive to their platform or ecosystem, but rather should consider launch a generic product compatible with everything out there. Why would they ? How will they stand different if everyone does that ?

Exclusivity is a basic part of business model. Look at PS4 with exclusive titles. Hell, look at your local store with exclusive products only available in their stores.

I would have agreed with you if Apple had done this for a basic feature like calling. But this sure is a privileged feature and there is nothing wrong in making it exclusive to iPhone (but they haven't you see).

Re: Apple Invites

#890

Post by rconti »

Zak wrote: post #408
rconti wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't use WhatsApp, though I probably have it installed on my phone. I'm in a birthday party planning group on Signal, which is another app I hadn't used in years. It's easy to forget I have messages there because it's not on my home screen, or the notification settings are different from my normal Messages app, or I just forget to look. Each time you use a "different" app for something that's not in your habit loo…

I would expect most people to turn on notifications for anything that's reasonably described as a messaging app with similar settings to the ones they're already in the habit of using. Certainly disabling or silencing notifications would make it less useful.

Sure. I'm describing the real-world difference between using an app you're familiar with vs adding a new one to your repertoire. You're describing the ideal state, which is not one we all live in.

IOW: When I started using signal again, I didn't set aside 5 minutes to analyze the differences in notification settings between my messaging apps and consider the implications of them. I just opened the app and typed a message.

Post reply on HN