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

Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 665 posts

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#261

Post by dghlsakjg »

ants_everywhere wrote: post #239
function_seven wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Ma Bell was a regulated monopoly, and iMessage is not a monopoly. People routinely use WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, SMS, FB Messenger, etc. Don't get me wrong, I love that these guys are poking the bear. I wish Apple would do something to let me send high-quality photos and videos to my Android-owning friends via "text". But I don't think the government has a place to force that issue. Plenty of alternatives e…

> SMS Can you change the SMS app on Apple devices now?

You can choose to use sms only, and not use iMessage messages.

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#262

Post by stavros »

nextos wrote: post #210
paulryanrogers wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A brief period (~2008-2015) when XMPP had momentum and federation was trendy, if incomplete. Apps like Trillian, Pidgin (Gaim), Adium actually allowed chatting across many platforms on the client side. To some extent they still can, with add-ons.

This was a great time, and I indeed miss XMPP, with proper federation to lots of different servers, including Google Talk, and Jingle videocalls! Modern XMPP is really great, Conversations is a fantastic client, supports E2E encryption, is open source, and makes minimal use of resources.

But there's nobody on it :(

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#263

Post by GeekyBear »

camkego wrote: post #249
function_seven wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Ma Bell was a regulated monopoly, and iMessage is not a monopoly. People routinely use WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, SMS, FB Messenger, etc. Don't get me wrong, I love that these guys are poking the bear. I wish Apple would do something to let me send high-quality photos and videos to my Android-owning friends via "text". But I don't think the government has a place to force that issue. Plenty of alternatives e…

"Jury Rules Google App Store Operates as Monopoly" is in the headlines this week. So it seems maybe there is some risk to Apple with regards to iMessage.

Google was found guilty of antitrust violations, not of having a monopoly.

Having a monopoly is not illegal.

Here's an explanation of the verdict from a lawyer familiar with tech and antitrust.

> EPIC WIN | Why Google Lost and What it Means For Apple

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ23ExDJSec

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#264

Post by JoshuaRogers »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #157
albert180 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the EU will be closely watching with Digital Services Act

Unfortunately, the EU isn't going to save us with this one. iMessage usage is minimal in the EU because so many people use alternate messaging services, and the EU already ruled that iMessage won't be forced open because it isn't widely used by business users. In the US, iMessage market share is much higher because back in the aughts we didn't have the sky high SMS rates which forced so many users to other messaging…

I would suggest that as often as not, when the EU intervenes in technological affairs the result isn’t that things get massively better but rather that people are forced to deal with corporations finding ways to maliciously comply with the letter of the law.

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#265

Post by shrimpx »

jmye wrote: post #233
josephcsible wrote: post #126

When Ma Bell didn't let people use third-party phones with their service, the government made them change their ways. Why is the government letting Apple get away with the equivalent?

Why are y’all so intent on using iMessage? I (honestly) don’t understand the serious passion behind forcing Apple to open it to everyone. SMS still gets through, and other apps still work. It seems weird to focus so much on this and not on just using something that fits your use case, but maybe I’m missing something.

It's because SMS is unencrypted, and this is an effort to have secure communication between iOS users and Android users (since iMessage is Apple-device-only). There's also a status factor, where Android users are lowly "green bubbles" in iMessage, which signals decreased security and questionable support for the interactions available to iMessage users.

Of course everyone can switch to Signal and this is a moot point, but millions of Apple users use iMessage and aren't likely to switch.

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#266

Post by skeaker »

freedomben wrote: post #245
kbenson wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because usually precedents are not so narrow as to apply towards trillion dollar companies only, and even if they are they can be expanded upon. If you would be against a trillion dollar company forcing a small competitor to open up, you should rightly be worried about allowing the reverse, because the principles by which they justify it are unlikely to discern based on company size.

I (mostly) do favor government intervention with Apple, but you make a good point. Originally the income tax was only to apply to the uber mega rich. It didn't take long for it to apply to all the middle class too.

Yes, that's a fair point, but it hinges on the law being weak and poorly worded. Obviously I would not be happy with that either. But loopholes like that are a risk with any action that the market or the government would take, and ideally I would like the government to make a strong, well-worded law that accomplishes only the original intent, which can and does happen frequently as well.

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#267

Post by standardUser »

I_Am_Nous wrote: post #67
NettleBurr wrote: post #28

>Apple on Wednesday appeared to have blocked what Beeper described as "~5% of Beeper Mini users" from accessing iMessages >Apple previously issued a (somewhat uncommon) statement about Beeper's iMessage access, stating that it "took steps to protect our users by blocking techniques that exploit fake credentials in order to gain access to iMessage." Citing privacy, security, and spam concerns, Apple stated it would "c…

Seems like a chess move. Apple blocks a small percentage of users instead of all of them, which casts uncertainty on using Beeper Mini at all. It also allows them to A/B test various methods of blocking or honeypotting Beeper Mini logins without giving away any big secrets. From Beeper's perspective, they now have to figure out why only those logins were blocked and if they need to patch something or not. Apple could…

Ugh, it is beyond depressing to imagine Apple bigwigs sitting around discussing ways to make absolutely certain teens keep getting ostracized until they buy their overpriced product.

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#268

Post by willseth »

vikramkr wrote: post #177
cdme wrote: post #42

I miss the days when chat wasn't fragmented across apps and platforms or could at least be unified in apps like Adium. Having to have a different app installed for myriad different contacts is, at best, irritating.

It's interesting to simultaneously see takes complaining about fragmentation and apple having monopoly power in this thread. In sympathetic to the fragmentation take honestly, apple doesn't stop you from installing Whatsapp, but it's an interesting situation where it's folks who opted into a closed system that are complaining about the system being closed

> where it's folks who opted into a closed system that are complaining about the system being closed

The folks complaining are a vocal minority of Android users. Everyone else doesn't care.

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#269

Post by jen20 »

ljm wrote: post #128
jedberg wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2001, when Adium launched. It pretty much had every messaging app that anyone was on. I used it exclusively for years. It supported all those things (or I should say if someone had multiple ways to get to them, Adium supported at least one of them).

Adium was a total lifesaver on Mac since there was never an official MSN messenger client there. Back then a lot of services also used XMPP but that has been readily abandoned - Slack used to do XMPP, doesn't any more. Google used to do XMPP, doesn't any more... I suppose one reason for it is E2E encryption.

> since there was never an official MSN messenger client there.

There certainly was: https://www.macintoshrepository.org/989-msn-messenger-2-5-1

Re: Apple partly halts Beeper's iMessage app again, suggesting a long fight ahead

#270

Post by tshirthoodie »

JoblessWonder wrote: post #122

As I mentioned in the previous discussion[1], users are going to have to put up with the system going down... and I just don't see that happening. From the article: "It was losing messages during the outage and never being entirely certain they had been sent or received. There was a gathering on Saturday, and she had to double-check with a couple people about the details after showing up inadvertently early at the wr…

Apple's iMessage implementation loses messages all the time. It happens about once every month between my girlfriend and I.

I have also had iMesages be sent to the wrong recipient. In one ongoing case, my aunt and uncle frequently receive each other's iMessages, suggesting it's related to their group carrier plan but it's hard to say. The extended family all knows to use SMS instead, which reliably goes to the intended recipient. They are both retired and always together so they haven't reached the point of getting a new plan.

Post reply on HN