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

81–90 of 105 posts

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

#81

Post by superb_dev »

PrimeMcFly wrote: post #40
sbuk wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> " 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.

They aren’t “crippling” anything?

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

#82

Post by superb_dev »

snailmailman wrote: post #4

iMessage is just about the only form of communication that I’ve NEVER received any spam through. I get spam SMS all the time and spam calls all the time . I get spam emails 24/7, and even spam DMs on any social media platform that has DMs. There is no iMessage spam. Apple has it tightly controlled and locked down. I can kinda see why Apple wants to preserve their ecosystem. But also, there are so many other options i…

I’ve had the same experience, never had any spam through iMessage. It certainly happens, but it’s pretty rare and doesn’t happen to everyone

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

#84

Post by averageRoyalty »

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…

> 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.

I don't think most users do either of these things. Most people don't care - they either find a common messaging platform, or their socioeconomic or cultural relationships lead to compatibility anyway.

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

#85

Post by averageRoyalty »

PrimeMcFly wrote: post #69
sbuk wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is simply incorrect. iMessage is the default for iPhones. You're an Android user, right? Suffice to say that you are wrong. Messages.app, not iMessage is the default. It is designed to handle SMS, MMS and Apple iMessage service. iMessage exists for Apple-to-Apple messaging and for those iPhone customers that choose not to have a carrier messaging plan. This is not an opinion. > I'm not here in bad faith at all…

> Messages.app, not iMessage is the default. This is semantics and you know it. > iMessage exists for Apple-to-Apple messaging There we go. iMessage is the default for Apple phones contacting other phones. Given that iPhones are a majority in the US, iMessage is the default for most phones in the US. > What? That is certainly a take. I don't see how. I think it's perfectly rational. I'm surprsied you disagree so stro…

> > Messages.app, not iMessage is the default. > This is semantics and you know it.

I think you are arguing in good faith here, but maybe confused.

iMessage is a system - a protocol and backend for relaying rich messages one to one or one to many.

SMS and MMS are their own systems - following a standard protocol and with backends implemented on a carrier level.

Messages.app is an application on iOS. It is the default (and only available) app for SMS, MMS and iMessage. You can disable iMessage in this app if you choose and it is still a perfectly functional SMS/MMS app.

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

#87

Post by PrimeMcFly »

averageRoyalty wrote: post #85
PrimeMcFly wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Messages.app, not iMessage is the default. This is semantics and you know it. > iMessage exists for Apple-to-Apple messaging There we go. iMessage is the default for Apple phones contacting other phones. Given that iPhones are a majority in the US, iMessage is the default for most phones in the US. > What? That is certainly a take. I don't see how. I think it's perfectly rational. I'm surprsied you disagree so stro…

> > Messages.app, not iMessage is the default. > This is semantics and you know it. I think you are arguing in good faith here, but maybe confused. iMessage is a system - a protocol and backend for relaying rich messages one to one or one to many. SMS and MMS are their own systems - following a standard protocol and with backends implemented on a carrier level. Messages.app is an application on iOS. It is the default…

I'm not confused, I just don't think messages.app being separate from iMessage is relevant. I acknowledge it's technically correct. I was aware messages.app and iMessage are separate things, but I think it's fair to say iMessage is the default preferred communication method.

If one iPhone messages another iPhone they will use iMessage, without having to do anything.

If an iPhone messages an android, it will try iMessage, realize it can't use it, and fall back to SMS.

I think therefore it's fair to say iMessage is the default.

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

#88

Post by PrimeMcFly »

superb_dev wrote: post #81
PrimeMcFly wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They aren’t “crippling” anything?

Sure they are. That's why iPhone users dislike texting with Android users.

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

#89

Post by lol768 »

MBCook wrote: post #37
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,…

It's bizarre though; despite the apparent lack of friction I don't know anyone who uses RCS or SMS (and frankly I'm unimpressed by its design - why involve carriers at all? Your mobile network should be dumb and provide you with a simple, neutral, fast and unmetered TCP/IP connection. RCS also launched without E2E encryption. Frankly the whole protocol seems like garbage to me and nobody in the UK cares about it, there are countless messaging apps to choose from that architected this properly, that are unrelated to your mobile carrier).

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

#90

Post by labcomputer »

turquoisevar wrote: post #74
1123581321 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoofs masquerade using confirmed serial numbers. In the case of Hackintoshes you manually repeat activation until you get a valid serial number; I don't know what Beeper's implementation does. So Apple can maintain this database but they still have the problem of proving that a serial number attestation, sending all the right information, is from that actual hardware and not a spoof of the hardware. Without intensel…

> Spoofs masquerade using confirmed serial numbers. Most Hackintosh users use a plausible, but non-legitimate serial number. The community has found it immoral to potentially cause issues to random people by using their device’s serial number and that is why they stay away from it and tutorials typically instruct against it. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t actually happen, but I’ve seen only a handful of people who openly ad…

> Already Apple seems to have no qualms to ban Apple IDs of legitimate customers who entirely legitimately have bought gift cards and loaded them up on their account, on the simple premise that their algorithm flags accounts that top up more than $1k as suspicious

I wonder if that’s an AML thing? Buying apps from a small (15%) developer account using gift cards (paid with cash) could be an efficient way to clean money. I would guess that the number of legitimate customers inconvenienced by a $1k heuristic is fairly small.

Post reply on HN