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

Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

ericmigi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#731

Post by boringg »

chamanbuga wrote: post #191
vessenes wrote: post #101

I guess I’ll take the contra here on messages integration — moving a message over BLE to untrusted hardware and worse accepting them back into iMessage is a massive, massive change in the security boundary and therefore security architecture and therefore security promises that apple makes on iMessage. I do not believe average smartwatch users understand what they’d be doing if they got this. I do not believe vendors…

This is cap. I worked on heads up glasses, and one of our issues was the lack of integration with Apple's iMessage ecosystem. Device makers are willing to go through several security measures, like deploying the MFi chips and certification. However, at best this gives you access to the notification system, not iMessage itself. You are able to respond to messages via the notification framework, but not integrate direc…

It might be a walled garden (which is a form of security) but thats also why a lot of people buy their products. Know your demographic.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#732

Post by mkehrt »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #708
seanp2k2 wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, Apple made Lightning because USB-C wasn't a thing yet and MicroUSB is awful. Lightning is a whole lot better than MicroUSB, and they've been using it since 2012 . MiniUSB B was pretty OK, Micro was just way too thin to be stable and would snap off frequently, in addition to being not very secure and hard to orient. Mini was thicker though, so while it worked fine for the HTC Apache and other Windows Mobile phone…

MicroUSB is fine, and Apple should've just used that (like every other phone manufacturer did, with great success). But Apple also has the world's biggest NIH complex, so they decided to invent a proprietary standard rather than go with something interoperable.

MicroUSB is a terrible connector. Every time I have to use one, it's impossible to get into the slot; it's finicky, breakable and has a one way orientation. Lightning is delightful to use.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#733

Post by boringg »

windexh8er wrote: post #706
vessenes wrote: post #101

I guess I’ll take the contra here on messages integration — moving a message over BLE to untrusted hardware and worse accepting them back into iMessage is a massive, massive change in the security boundary and therefore security architecture and therefore security promises that apple makes on iMessage. I do not believe average smartwatch users understand what they’d be doing if they got this. I do not believe vendors…

If you don't think that a walled garden locked into an ecosystem of hardware isn't already a cess pool - then I don't know what is. Hardware should be able to be interoperable. Apple chooses not to, it's in their best interest because they claim "security" and "privacy" for it's users. Security theater for the masses.

Your not wrong but it is significantly better then microsoft which was its main competitor.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#734

Post by RockRobotRock »

vessenes wrote: post #101

I guess I’ll take the contra here on messages integration — moving a message over BLE to untrusted hardware and worse accepting them back into iMessage is a massive, massive change in the security boundary and therefore security architecture and therefore security promises that apple makes on iMessage. I do not believe average smartwatch users understand what they’d be doing if they got this. I do not believe vendors…

>One reason iMessage is less of a total cesspit than SMS is that the ecosystem is closed

Would like to add my personal experience: I get way more spam iMessages coming from random Apple IDs than I do spam SMSes.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#735

Post by thunderfork »

shuckles wrote: post #495
mrlatinos wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You obviously know that's not possible. They are private APIs kept for Apple's ecosystem lock-in.

Private API is an oxymoron. If it’s a private implementation, then there’s a lot of work that would need to be done to make it API!

[dead]

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#736

Post by dingnuts »

lanyard-textile wrote: post #668
liquid_thyme wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you could. It's indeed troubling to see this mindset on HN. We have an overflow of professional "explainers" these days, we need more doers and fighters.

Oh whatever :P Don’t be condescending about a mindset you don’t experience yourself. I ran debian as my daily driver for like half my life; now I’m on mac and never have to worry about my friggin wifi driver.

I haven't had a problem with my Wi-Fi in Linux since 2006, what are you on about?

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#737

Post by liquid_thyme »

frollogaston wrote: post #347
liquid_thyme wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you could. It's indeed troubling to see this mindset on HN. We have an overflow of professional "explainers" these days, we need more doers and fighters.

If you want to do and fight, use Linux. Apple made their intentions clear decades ago.

Sure, but I hope you recognize that it is possible to do two things at once.

Corporations have pressure points and there are a myriad of ways to contribute to the overall progress that each one wants to see for themselves.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#738

Post by liquid_thyme »

lanyard-textile wrote: post #668
liquid_thyme wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you could. It's indeed troubling to see this mindset on HN. We have an overflow of professional "explainers" these days, we need more doers and fighters.

Oh whatever :P Don’t be condescending about a mindset you don’t experience yourself. I ran debian as my daily driver for like half my life; now I’m on mac and never have to worry about my friggin wifi driver.

You can both use macs and criticize Apple to be and do better. Why would they change for no reason? I've heard this myth about companies listening to customers :)

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#739

Post by ch4s3 »

captainmuon wrote: post #462
ch4s3 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware that apple blocks certain functionality to maintain a cohesive and secure experience. It is THE reason I buy their products, I want the curation. Otherwise I'd buy an android device.

That's their justification . I never had security problems on Android, and I actually find Android to be more cohesive. Just a few things where iOS is uncohesive to me: You can customize the keyboard, but it will not work everywhere the same. Apps will send you randomly through hoops to click some permissions things in settings. App settings are sometimes centralized, sometimes in the app. There is no single way to "…

That’s fine then, there clearly exists an open alternative that works for people.

Re: Apple restricts Pebble from being awesome with iPhones

#740

Post by ch4s3 »

sunshowers wrote: post #168
EA-3167 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I learned a while ago is that there's a particular brand of very vocal person online who has a bone to pick with Apple. Sometimes it's for a good reason, sometimes less so, but the point is that they come to discussions of any Apple topic with a conclusion ready in hand and then work backwards from that. In this case the conclusion is, "Apple is wicked, perfidious, and monopolistic." Truthfully there isn't…

I think trillion dollar companies should not exist. They are inherently destructive to humanity.

This seems arbitrary. What is the limiting principle here? Should there be no 100 billion dollar company? How about after 50 years of inflation?
Post reply on HN