https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it?
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com> >> wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04 AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com>It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service. >>>>> To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple >>>> would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it? >>>
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally "green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04 AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com> >>> wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service. >>>> To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple >>> would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally "green with envy".
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
Alan Browne wrote:
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
Why would I want to pay £2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it?
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com> >> wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
Nope. It is Android users wanting to use iMessage. No iPhone users are wanting to be Android users.
On 09.12.23 05:43, Andy Burns wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
Why would I want to pay £2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
You misunderstand what will happen: The *bubbles* stay green with RCS
and it will not solve the inferiority complex of Android users.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
Why would I want to pay 2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
Andy Burns wrote
Why would I want to pay Ł2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden
The value of this beeper app eludes me...
Interestingly, the app itself 'says' that it's free with no ads.
But it does say that it has "in app purchases".
I communicate with iPhone users all the time.
The app is marketed with the following splash screens:'
a. Finally get blue bubbles on Android
b. Join iPhone-only group chats
c. Full size photos and videos, plus replies and reactions
d. Secured with end-to-end encryption
e. Continue with Google
I'm struggling to see who would care about any of that
(given you already have all of that already, don't you)?
The value of this beeper app eludes me...
Interestingly, the app itself 'says' that it's free with no ads.
But it does say that it has "in app purchases".
Articles I read elsewhere (TheVerge, ArsTechnica etc) all said 7 day
free trial, then $2/month.
I communicate with iPhone users all the time.
I can send SMS "free" out of my SIM bundle, I could send MMS but I
rarely do because of the cost (approx 63 each).
I'm struggling to see who would care about any of that
(given you already have all of that already, don't you)?
ignore the colour of bubbles, I can't participate in group chats without every message being a MMS, hopefully RCS will allow photos/videos to
iPhones next year, if Apple are sniffy about E2EE we may not get that to iPhones.
But I'm looking for what the "value equation" is, as I don't get it
yet.
Alan Browne wrote:
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of
service. To be seen.
Why would I want to pay £2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com> >> wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04 AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne"
<bitbucket@blackhole.com>
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of
service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think
Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over
it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
On 09.12.23 05:43, Andy Burns wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
Why would I want to pay £2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
You misunderstand what will happen: The *bubbles* stay green with RCS
and it will not solve the inferiority complex of Android users.
On 09.12.23 01:12, Alan Browne wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
Why The Fuck are *Android-users* so keen to enter the Apple world in the first place?! Inferiority complex?
*Ridiculous*!
On Dec 9, 2023 at 1:00:18?AM EST, ""Carlos E. R."" <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04?AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02?PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com>It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non >>>>> Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada. >>>>>
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service. >>>>> To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it? >>>
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
Nope. It is Android users wanting to use iMessage. No iPhone users are wanting to be Android users.
On 2023-12-09 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04?AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02?PM EST, "Alan Browne"
<bitbucket@blackhole.com>
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non >>>>> Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada. >>>>>
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of
service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think
Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over >>>> it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Owned by Meta (Facebook) where the user is the product.
I'd try to get people to switch to something independent such as Signal.
But I get that people ended up on WhatsApp because of their Facebook
account. Pity - hard to break such bonds.
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
No walled garden: Apple devices roam wherever they want. A walled
garden means self contained and limiting.
Fabulous eco-system, OTOH.
It used to shock me how incredibly insecure Apple's code is, what with ten times the number of exploits than Android and many times the zero day bugs.
On 09/12/2023 10:24, Wally J wrote:
It used to shock me how incredibly insecure Apple's code is, what with
ten
times the number of exploits than Android and many times the zero day
bugs.
I'm not an Apple fan but I don't think that's true.
Based on the information available up to 2021, Android had a total of
574 vulnerabilities discovered in that year, which was a reduction from
the 859 in 2020. However, 79% of these were characterized by low attack complexity. On the other hand, iOS had fewer vulnerabilities but tended
to have more serious ones, including zero-days
WhatsApp is quite seperate from Facebook. WhatsApp's legal documents
are quite specific about WhatsAppnot sharing user data with Facebook.
Frank Slootweg wrote:
WhatsApp is quite seperate from Facebook. WhatsApp's legal documents
are quite specific about WhatsAppnot sharing user data with Facebook.
You might class *this* as FUD, but what's to stop them changing the
legal arrangements?
On 2023-12-09 01:41, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 05:43, Andy Burns wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service. >>>> To be seen.
Why would I want to pay £2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
You misunderstand what will happen: The *bubbles* stay green with RCS
and it will not solve the inferiority complex of Android users.
It's not about the colour of the bubbles - it's about the underlying functionality of iMessage.
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
It's not about the "blue", it's about the functionality of iMessage.
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02?PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple would permit this?
On 2023-12-09 01:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 01:12, Alan Browne wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
Why The Fuck are *Android-users* so keen to enter the Apple world in the
first place?! Inferiority complex?
It would be nice to have the functionality of iMessage on Android and
that's what this attempted.
IAC, much (if not all) of this will be moot when Apple aligns with RCS
next year - although some iMessage features will remain exclusive to the Apple eco-sphere.
*Ridiculous*!
Yes, you are.
The (Android) app is still on the Google Play website [1] [2]. I
downloaded and installed it, so the app itself is not (yet) 'killed'.
Tyrone wrote:
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple
would permit this?
Do have any reference/proof for this? (I didn't see any such thing in
the article, nor in the original Business Insider article.)
So *what* exactly *did* Apple 'kill'?
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
On 09.12.23 16:06, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The (Android) app is still on the Google Play website [1] [2]. I
downloaded and installed it, so the app itself is not (yet) 'killed'.
Do you feel better now?
Tyrone <none@none.none> wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 1:00:18?AM EST, ""Carlos E. R."" <robin_listas@es.invalid> >> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04?AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02?PM EST, "Alan Browne" <bitbucket@blackhole.com>It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a >>>>> bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non >>>>>>> Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada. >>>>>>>
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>>>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service. >>>>>>> To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over it? >>>>>
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
Nope. It is Android users wanting to use iMessage. No iPhone users are
wanting to be Android users.
And vice versa, but that's not the point Carlos is making.
The point is that except for the US - and maybe NA - nobody cares
about iMessage, because everyone - yes, *including* iPhone users - is
using an IM platform which *is* cross-OS-platform. As Carlos said, for
most that's WhatsApp.
So we hate to break it to you, but the world does not revolve around Apple, nor the US (nor Android, nor ... ad infinitum).
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
WhatsApp is quite seperate from Facebook. WhatsApp's legal documents
are quite specific about WhatsAppnot sharing user data with Facebook.
You might class *this* as FUD, but what's to stop them changing the
legal arrangements?
Well, those legal arrangements are documented on their website (<https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/>) and if they want to change them,
they'll have to inform their users. (IIRC, quite some time ago they were planning to change some privacy related aspect, but backed down when it
came known in the press.)
Also note that the legal situation in the 'European Region' (which includes the UK) is much more strict than elsewhere.
Bottom line is that there is a lot of FUD, urban legends, etc. about WhatsApp's alleged lack of privacy, but no facts, proof, etc..
We (SWMBO and I) can only speak from experience. Two WhatsApp accounts
for nearly eight years without any ill effect whatsoever. Our
acquaintances (family, friends, etc.) have similar experience.
On 2023-12-09 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04 AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne"
<bitbucket@blackhole.com>
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non >>>>>> Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada. >>>>>>
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's
phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of
service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think
Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get
over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Owned by Meta (Facebook) where the user is the product.
I'd try to get people to switch to something independent such as Signal.
But I get that people ended up on WhatsApp because of their Facebook account. Pity - hard to break such bonds.
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
No walled garden: Apple devices roam wherever they want. A walled
garden means self contained and limiting.
Fabulous eco-system, OTOH.
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
It's not about the "blue", it's about the functionality of iMessage.
Bullshit. If Android- and iPhone-users want exchange messages there are
much superior solutions around: Mancufacturer-independent messengers
like Signal, Telegram, Threema, WhatsApp and a lot more with absolutely
the same functionality.
There are only two reasons why iPhone-users prefer iMsg:
1. The blue bubbles. :-D
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the provider Apple.
You have no clue.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04?AM EST, "Your Name" <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone
REALLY think Apple would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get over >>>>>> it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a >>>>> bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Owned by Meta (Facebook) where the user is the product.
WhatsApp is quite seperate from Facebook. WhatsApp's legal documents
are quite specific about WhatsApp *not* sharing user data with Facebook.
But of course some people revel on FUD, urban legends, etc., so this
kind of misinformation will never cease.
People actually *using* WhatsApp, know better.
I'd try to get people to switch to something independent such as Signal.
But I get that people ended up on WhatsApp because of their Facebook
account. Pity - hard to break such bonds.
In Europe and probably also elsewhere where WhatsApp is popular, it's probably mostly the other way around. Many people already used WhatsApp before it was bought by Facebook and many people use WhatsApp without
having a Facebook account.
FWIW, I've a WhatsApp 'account', but no Facebook account. [This space
is intentionally left blank for the 'shadow Facdebook account' urban
legend.]
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be able
to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
No walled garden: Apple devices roam wherever they want. A walled
garden means self contained and limiting.
I think Carlos is referring to Apple (and others) needing to open up
to interoperate with other (than iMessage) IM platforms to conform to upcoming EU regulation.
Fabulous eco-system, OTOH.
Good on you!
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
Who cares about the color of bubbles?
There aren't even bubbles on Android to care about the color of.
And I communicate with iPhone users all the time.
What's this about "iPhone-only chats" that anyone could care about?
The app is marketed with the following splash screens:'
a. Finally get blue bubbles on Android
b. Join iPhone-only group chats
c. Full size photos and videos, plus replies and reactions
d. Secured with end-to-end encryption
e. Continue with Google
I'm struggling to see who would care about any of that
(given you already have all of that already, don't you)?
I participate in several group chats which include iOS and Android users.
If there is a single Android user then the entire chat turns green. Personally I don’t like the white letters on green background because it’s
harder to read than white letters on blue background. But even more importantly, if a person is added or deleted from the group chat then an entire new chat/conversation has to be created. If everyone was using iMessage then the same conversation can be edited easily without creating a new one.
In iOS there are reactions you can use by long pressing a message. These do not transfer over to the chat properly if it is green. There are also automated animated reactions such as Happy Birthday which pops up balloons and confetti in iMessage conversations which does not work in green chats.
These type of limitations are what iOS users don’t like when an Android user enters a group chat. If everyone used something like WhatsApp then
this would be a moot point, but here in America we haven’t adopted third party messaging apps like the rest of the world. I have relatives overseas with iPhones who have turned off the iMessage function on their phone
because they don’t use it.
I can understand why Android users are trying to break into the iMessage world and why Apple is resisting. Ultimately it would work best for
everyone if the systems were compatible, but Apple would then lose the one advantage they have which maintains their loyal user base.
On 09.12.23 14:18, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 01:12, Alan Browne wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone >>>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service. >>>> To be seen.
Why The Fuck are *Android-users* so keen to enter the Apple world in the >>> first place?! Inferiority complex?
It would be nice to have the functionality of iMessage on Android and
that's what this attempted.
IAC, much (if not all) of this will be moot when Apple aligns with RCS
next year - although some iMessage features will remain exclusive to the
Apple eco-sphere.
*Ridiculous*!
Yes, you are.
Like always you are spot on right!
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
It's not about the "blue", it's about the functionality of iMessage.
Bullshit. If Android- and iPhone-users want exchange messages there are
much superior solutions around: Mancufacturer-independent messengers
like Signal, Telegram, Threema, WhatsApp and a lot more with absolutely
the same functionality.
There are only two reasons why iPhone-users prefer iMsg:
1. The blue bubbles. :-D
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the provider Apple.
You are really expert at this.
On 09.12.23 16:06, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The (Android) app is still on the Google Play website [1] [2]. I
downloaded and installed it, so the app itself is not (yet) 'killed'.
Do you feel better now?
Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
On 09.12.23 16:06, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The (Android) app is still on the Google Play website [1] [2]. I
downloaded and installed it, so the app itself is not (yet) 'killed'.
Do you feel better now?
Not really! I've a totally useless (for me) app on my phone, polluting
my Apps screen (well, the last page of it)! :-)
I think I'll keep it till the dust has settled down. (As I mentioned,
I couldn't care less about this app or iMessage in general. It's a
non-issue in the real world.)
On 09.12.23 01:12, Alan Browne wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of service.
To be seen.
The app requires a *$1.99 monthly* subscription. Beeper Mini cofounder
Eric Migicovsky told Business Insider the fee is to show that it's a trustworthy service and keeps it free of ads.
An idiot's business model. Grasping android users? Never ever!
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Tyrone wrote:
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think
Apple
would permit this?
Do have any reference/proof for this? (I didn't see any such thing in >> the article, nor in the original Business Insider article.)
<https://www.androidpolice.com/beeper-mini-outage-b/>
<https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/08/apple-cuts-off-beeper-minis-access-after-launch-of-service-that-brought-imessage-to-android/>
So *what* exactly *did* Apple 'kill'?
At a rough guess, Apple have initially blocked Beeper's IPs from their firewall?
On 2023-12-09 14:16, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04 AM EST, "Your Name"
<YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne"
<bitbucket@blackhole.com>
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non >>>>>>> Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada. >>>>>>>
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's >>>>>>> phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of
service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY
think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get
over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a >>>>> bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Owned by Meta (Facebook) where the user is the product.
Sure, but Meta doesn't sniff the conversations.
I'd try to get people to switch to something independent such as Signal.
Not going to happen.
Years ago there was lots of noise about WhatsApp not being secure.
People tried other apps. Me myself have Signal an Telegram also
installed. I mananged to exchange a few messages on T, none on S. I know
some people ditched W. In the end, everybody is using W, except some
security concerned people in their islands.
But I get that people ended up on WhatsApp because of their Facebook
account. Pity - hard to break such bonds.
Not at all. I don't have FB on the phone, many people don't have
accounts there. You got it wrong.
W is used by preference because everybody uses it.
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be
able to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
No walled garden: Apple devices roam wherever they want. A walled
garden means self contained and limiting.
Fabulous eco-system, OTOH.
You got the point wrong :-D
Owned by Meta (Facebook) where the user is the product.
But I simply meant that those on iMessage here can only talk with the
21% of users that have an iPhone, the rest are on Android. We don't have
any envy as you claim :-)
WhatsApp is quite seperate from Facebook. WhatsApp's legal documents
are quite specific about WhatsAppnot sharing user data with Facebook.
You might class *this* as FUD, but what's to stop them changing the
legal arrangements?
The point is that except for the US - and maybe NA - nobody cares
about iMessage, because everyone - yes, *including* iPhone users - is
using an IM platform which *is* cross-OS-platform. As Carlos said, for
most that's WhatsApp.
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jrg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
It's not about the "blue", it's about the functionality of iMessage.
Bullshit. If Android- and iPhone-users want exchange messages there are much superior solutions around: Mancufacturer-independent messengers
like Signal, Telegram, Threema, WhatsApp and a lot more with absolutely
the same functionality.
iMessage is a subset (or co-set) of the iCloud functionality that makes
the Apple "ecosphere" work seamlessly between Apple devices. This is
not practically feasible between Android devices from different
manufacturers (who want to lock in users themselves), Linux and Windows
as keeping the specs in-line and up-to-date would be a nightmare. (aka: dependencies).
So while messaging with, eg, Signal, can be a full and valuable
experience, it is "islanded" within Signal's feature set.
There are only two reasons why iPhone-users prefer iMsg:
1. The blue bubbles. :-D
Not relevant in itself - just the way Apple presents it. (Oddly too
since in later iOS and Mac versions the Message app icon is green - not blue... mysterious).
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the provider Apple.
Yes indeed - but there are other 'functions' within iMessage such as
being able to edit a sent text (that the receiver also sees), reply to
and have the reply connected to the specific individual message,
deleting messages (that are deleted on the receiver's phone), etc.
So, much more than the blue-bubble and encryption.
You are really expert at this.
True.
I'm not an Apple fan but I don't think that's true.
Based on the information available up to 2021, Android had a total of
574 vulnerabilities discovered in that year, which was a reduction from
the 859 in 2020. However, 79% of these were characterized by low attack complexity. On the other hand, iOS had fewer vulnerabilities but tended
to have more serious ones, including zero-days
<https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/2021-mobile-security-android-more-vulnerabilities-ios-more-zero-days/>
These type of limitations are what iOS users don't like
I can understand why Android users are trying to break into the iMessage world and why Apple is resisting.
On 2023-12-09 10:38, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Jrg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
On 09.12.23 16:06, Frank Slootweg wrote:
The (Android) app is still on the Google Play website [1] [2]. I
downloaded and installed it, so the app itself is not (yet) 'killed'.
Do you feel better now?
Not really! I've a totally useless (for me) app on my phone, polluting my Apps screen (well, the last page of it)! :-)
I think I'll keep it till the dust has settled down. (As I mentioned,
I couldn't care less about this app or iMessage in general. It's a non-issue in the real world.)
It may be a non-issue in -your- world, but in the real world there are Android users who would want this sort of ability.
Why would I want to pay 2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
What walled garden? Apple devices roam wherever they like. No walls.
OTOH, they have a superb eco-system between Apple devices that excludes
non Apple systems. iMessage service is one of them.
Those IM platforms *are* available on multiple OS platforms. For
example WhatsApp is available on Android, iOS, macOS and for other
platforms there's WhatsApp Web. So WhatsApp not only works between
Apple devices, but also with/between the other mentioned devices.
So what you say "is not practically feasible", *is* actually possible.
An idiot's business model. Grasping android users? Never ever!
It also came with a free period so people could decide if it was of
value to them. $2/month is cheap ... if you get that much value from
it. If you don't, nobody is forcing you.
iMessage is a subset (or co-set) of the iCloud functionality that makes
the Apple "ecosphere" work seamlessly between Apple devices. This is
not practically feasible between Android devices from different
manufacturers (who want to lock in users themselves), Linux and Windows
as keeping the specs in-line and up-to-date would be a nightmare. (aka: dependencies).
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a >>>>> bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
It's not about the "blue", it's about the functionality of iMessage.
Bullshit. If Android- and iPhone-users want exchange messages there are
much superior solutions around: Mancufacturer-independent messengers
like Signal, Telegram, Threema, WhatsApp and a lot more with absolutely
the same functionality.
iMessage is a subset (or co-set) of the iCloud functionality that makes
the Apple "ecosphere" work seamlessly between Apple devices. This is
not practically feasible between Android devices from different
manufacturers (who want to lock in users themselves), Linux and Windows
as keeping the specs in-line and up-to-date would be a nightmare. (aka:
dependencies).
So while messaging with, eg, Signal, can be a full and valuable
experience, it is "islanded" within Signal's feature set.
Note that Jörg is comparing iMessage to the other mentioned IM
platforms.
Those IM platforms *are* available on multiple OS platforms. For
example WhatsApp is available on Android, iOS, macOS and for other
platforms there's WhatsApp Web. So WhatsApp not only works between
Apple devices, but also with/between the other mentioned devices.
So what you say "is not practically feasible", *is* actually possible.
And how's iMessage's "feature set" only on/between Apple devices
supposed to be better than - for example - WhatsApp's feature set
on/between Apple *and* non-Apple devices?
There are only two reasons why iPhone-users prefer iMsg:
1. The blue bubbles. :-D
Not relevant in itself - just the way Apple presents it. (Oddly too
since in later iOS and Mac versions the Message app icon is green - not
blue... mysterious).
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the
provider Apple.
Yes indeed - but there are other 'functions' within iMessage such as
being able to edit a sent text (that the receiver also sees), reply to
and have the reply connected to the specific individual message,
deleting messages (that are deleted on the receiver's phone), etc.
WhatsApp can do most of that as well, with the possible exception of
"and have the reply connected to the specific individual message", if
that means threading (like is done in NetNews).
So, much more than the blue-bubble and encryption.
You are really expert at this.
True.
I fully accept that you know what iMessage can do, but don't -
implicitly - assume that another IM platform - which you do *not* use - cannot do something.
Yes, we have a fair share of people who claim all kinds of (negative) things about products which they do not use, but most of us are not in
that set of people. We just use stuff without getting all religious
about it.
But I'm looking for what the "value equation" is, as I don't get it
yet.
I have to break it to you, but there are lots and lots of people who care mostly about what other people think of them, and measure that by superficialities like fashion, or blue bubbles.
Indeed - however - what the android "complainers and moaners" keep
missing about Apple's eco-sphere is the integration within the "club".
Thus the devices I use daily - a lot - Mac, iPhone, Watch and to a
lesser extent iPad are quite seamlessly integrated - iMessage is part of that.
On 2023-12-09 11:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 14:16, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04 AM EST, "Your Name"
<YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne"
<bitbucket@blackhole.com>
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register non >>>>>>>> Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and Canada. >>>>>>>>
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's >>>>>>>> phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of >>>>>>>> service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY
think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get
over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid colour a >>>>>> bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Owned by Meta (Facebook) where the user is the product.
Sure, but Meta doesn't sniff the conversations.
In proper E2E they wouldn't be able to. But you have to trust that that
is what is happening.
Here they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be
able to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
No walled garden: Apple devices roam wherever they want. A walled
garden means self contained and limiting.
Fabulous eco-system, OTOH.
You got the point wrong :-D
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off
of the club you want.
On 2023-12-09 13:47, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jrg Lorenz wrote:
Note that Jrg is comparing iMessage to the other mentioned IM platforms.
Those IM platforms *are* available on multiple OS platforms. For
example WhatsApp is available on Android, iOS, macOS and for other platforms there's WhatsApp Web. So WhatsApp not only works between
Apple devices, but also with/between the other mentioned devices.
So what you say "is not practically feasible", *is* actually possible.
And how's iMessage's "feature set" only on/between Apple devices supposed to be better than - for example - WhatsApp's feature set on/between Apple *and* non-Apple devices?
Where iMessage (the service and/or the app) provides extensions related
to various Apple devices, 3rd party extensions and so on.
I fully accept that you know what iMessage can do, but don't - implicitly - assume that another IM platform - which you do *not* use - cannot do something.
Oh - of course I know they do all sorts of useful things. Indeed I was
on a Facetime meeting yesterday and missed some functionality of MS
Teams. (or Zoom for that matter).
Where it all falls apart for such is how one would do deep integration
as Apple does when one has a Windows machine at work, a Linux machine at home, and Android in their pocket... you can integrate, there is nothing technical barring it ... but doing such across the span of many devices, OS's, manufacturers (all pining to lock in customers to their products)
is not likely to be "seamless" or easy to maintain.
Yes, we have a fair share of people who claim all kinds of (negative) things about products which they do not use, but most of us are not in
that set of people. We just use stuff without getting all religious
about it.
Indeed - however - what the android "complainers and moaners" keep
missing about Apple's eco-sphere is the integration within the "club".
Thus the devices I use daily - a lot - Mac, iPhone, Watch and to a
lesser extent iPad are quite seamlessly integrated - iMessage is part of that.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the
provider Apple.
Yes indeed - but there are other 'functions' within iMessage such as
being able to edit a sent text (that the receiver also sees), reply to
and have the reply connected to the specific individual message,
deleting messages (that are deleted on the receiver's phone), etc.
WhatsApp can do most of that as well, with the possible exception of
"and have the reply connected to the specific individual message", if
that means threading (like is done in NetNews).
So, much more than the blue-bubble and encryption.
You are really expert at this.
True.
I fully accept that you know what iMessage can do, but don't -
implicitly - assume that another IM platform - which you do *not* use - cannot do something.
Yes, we have a fair share of people who claim all kinds of (negative) things about products which they do not use, but most of us are not in
that set of people. We just use stuff without getting all religious
about it.
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off
of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users
have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of
which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
It's not about the colour of the bubbles - it's about the underlying functionality of iMessage.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple
would permit this?
Do have any reference/proof for this? (I didn't see any such thing in
the article, nor in the original Business Insider article.)
On 2023-12-09 19:47, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jrg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
...
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the
provider Apple.
Yes indeed - but there are other 'functions' within iMessage such as
being able to edit a sent text (that the receiver also sees), reply to
and have the reply connected to the specific individual message,
deleting messages (that are deleted on the receiver's phone), etc.
WhatsApp can do most of that as well, with the possible exception of "and have the reply connected to the specific individual message", if
that means threading (like is done in NetNews).
I think I saw a reply to poster thing in WA.
On 2023-12-09 19:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 11:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 14:16, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:00, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 06:46, Tyrone wrote:
On Dec 9, 2023 at 12:21:04 AM EST, "Your Name"
<YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 01:57:47 +0000, Tyrone said:
On Dec 8, 2023 at 7:12:02 PM EST, "Alan Browne"
<bitbucket@blackhole.com>
wrote:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/app-gives-android-users-ability-092001890.html
Beeper Mini reverse engineers iMessage's protocol's to register >>>>>>>>> non
Apple phones on the Apple iCloud data base.
Reverse engineering a protocol is not illegal in the US and
Canada.
I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple
device's phone
number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of >>>>>>>>> service.
To be seen.
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY
think Apple
would permit this?
Why don't you jealous Android dweebs just get an iPhone and get >>>>>>>> over it?
It's only brainless morons who give a crap about what stupid
colour a
bubble is in a messaging app anyway. :-\
Yep. Brainless morons = jealous Android users. They are literally
"green with
envy".
Us? Not at all. There is only 21% users of iphones here, they have
nobody to talk with on iMessage, so they come to WhatsApp :-P
Owned by Meta (Facebook) where the user is the product.
Sure, but Meta doesn't sniff the conversations.
In proper E2E they wouldn't be able to. But you have to trust that
that is what is happening.
The goal of Meta is profit, obviously. If they sniff messages, that
would be noticed when trying to monetize it somehow.
iPhone users don't have to leave the club at all. The world outside theHere they need to open up their walled garden, if they want to be
able to talk with anyone. Not our problem, but theirs.
No walled garden: Apple devices roam wherever they want. A walled
garden means self contained and limiting.
Fabulous eco-system, OTOH.
You got the point wrong :-D
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off
of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users
have to get out or their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of
which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off
of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users
have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of
which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on Android, and most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 19:47, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
...
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the >>>>> provider Apple.
Yes indeed - but there are other 'functions' within iMessage such as
being able to edit a sent text (that the receiver also sees), reply to >>>> and have the reply connected to the specific individual message,
deleting messages (that are deleted on the receiver's phone), etc.
WhatsApp can do most of that as well, with the possible exception of >>> "and have the reply connected to the specific individual message", if
that means threading (like is done in NetNews).
I think I saw a reply to poster thing in WA.
Yes, you can address a particular user in a group with "@<user>", but
it is not threaded, i.e. your message is just at the bottom of the
screen, not somewhere in the middle where <user>'s message is.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 13:47, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
Note that Jörg is comparing iMessage to the other mentioned IM
platforms.
Those IM platforms *are* available on multiple OS platforms. For
example WhatsApp is available on Android, iOS, macOS and for other
platforms there's WhatsApp Web. So WhatsApp not only works between
Apple devices, but also with/between the other mentioned devices.
So what you say "is not practically feasible", *is* actually possible. >>>
And how's iMessage's "feature set" only on/between Apple devices
supposed to be better than - for example - WhatsApp's feature set
on/between Apple *and* non-Apple devices?
Where iMessage (the service and/or the app) provides extensions related
to various Apple devices, 3rd party extensions and so on.
Can you eloborate on that? What kind of extensions? What kind of extra functionality do they offer, which is not or not likely to be available
on other IM platforms?
[...]
I fully accept that you know what iMessage can do, but don't -
implicitly - assume that another IM platform - which you do *not* use -
cannot do something.
Oh - of course I know they do all sorts of useful things. Indeed I was
on a Facetime meeting yesterday and missed some functionality of MS
Teams. (or Zoom for that matter).
Where it all falls apart for such is how one would do deep integration
as Apple does when one has a Windows machine at work, a Linux machine at
home, and Android in their pocket... you can integrate, there is nothing
technical barring it ... but doing such across the span of many devices,
OS's, manufacturers (all pining to lock in customers to their products)
is not likely to be "seamless" or easy to maintain.
Yes, I fully understand that and why you appreciate the "deep integration", "seamless", etc.. But hopefully you realize that also
comes at a price / with limits, as this iMessage versus other IM
platforms example shows. Yes, you can step outside the "ecosystem", but
while you're in the ecosystem, there are limits, which people outside
the ecosystem do not have. Bbut they do have other costs/limits. Nothing
is perfect, nothing is 'better' ('Frank's law' at work) and all that
jazz.
Yes, we have a fair share of people who claim all kinds of (negative) >>> things about products which they do not use, but most of us are not in
that set of people. We just use stuff without getting all religious
about it.
Indeed - however - what the android "complainers and moaners" keep
missing about Apple's eco-sphere is the integration within the "club".
Thus the devices I use daily - a lot - Mac, iPhone, Watch and to a
lesser extent iPad are quite seamlessly integrated - iMessage is part of
that.
I've a loved one who keeps me on the straight and narrow and vice
versa. That helps both me and hir! But (s)he *does* use WhatsApp,
after all, we both live in 'the real world'! :-)
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
Why would I want to pay Ł2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
What walled garden? Apple devices roam wherever they like. No walls.
OTOH, they have a superb eco-system between Apple devices that excludes
non Apple systems. iMessage service is one of them.
Alan Browne is wrong. Dead wrong. He doesn't know how iOS works.
He's never tried _not logging into the walled garden_ for example.
I have.
It is rather telling that this Apple iKook has absolutely no idea he's logging into _many_ different Apple servers every day of his entire life.
<https://i.postimg.cc/7P7NCctS/locked-01.jpg> AppleID is locked by Apple
Where if you don't log in constantly, Apple _bricks_ the walled garden!
<https://i.postimg.cc/4dHQQFfk/locked-02.jpg> Password was always good
For example, here's the prompt when you don't log in daily to iMessages.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rwyGPpV9/locked-05.jpg> iMessage walled garden
And, as another example, here's the prompt if you don't log into iCloud.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rpmJKw7p/locked-04.jpg> iCloud walled garden
Worse... if you _refuse_ to log into the walled garden, Apple bricks the device in terms of making everything inside the walled garden lock up.
<https://i.postimg.cc/vTdfLY2f/locked-03.jpg> Apple wants a gov license!!!
And the only way to unbrick your own device, is to lose all your privacy because Apple requires you to present a government ID in person to get your own iPad back from them if you don't log into Apple servers every day of
your life for the rest of your life.
Ask me how I know this...
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off >>>> of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users
have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of
which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on
Android, and
most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage
anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third party
tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient protocols
like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many countries it is expensive, or is being phased out.
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 19:47, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
...
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the >>>>> provider Apple.
Yes indeed - but there are other 'functions' within iMessage such as
being able to edit a sent text (that the receiver also sees), reply to >>>> and have the reply connected to the specific individual message,
deleting messages (that are deleted on the receiver's phone), etc.
WhatsApp can do most of that as well, with the possible exception of >>> "and have the reply connected to the specific individual message", if
that means threading (like is done in NetNews).
I think I saw a reply to poster thing in WA.
Yes, you can address a particular user in a group with "@<user>", but
it is not threaded, i.e. your message is just at the bottom of the
screen, not somewhere in the middle where <user>'s message is.
Based on previous history, I assume you're not telling the entire story.
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Tyrone wrote:
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple >>> would permit this?
Do have any reference/proof for this? (I didn't see any such thing in
the article, nor in the original Business Insider article.)
<https://www.androidpolice.com/beeper-mini-outage-b/>
<https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/08/apple-cuts-off-beeper-minis-access-after-launch-of-service-that-brought-imessage-to-android/>
So *what* exactly *did* Apple 'kill'?
At a rough guess, Apple have initially blocked Beeper's IPs from their firewall?
On 2023-12-09 15:22, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 19:47, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 14:12, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 00:21, Your Name wrote:
...
2. The reliable end-to-end-encryption and the associated trust in the >>>>>> provider Apple.
Yes indeed - but there are other 'functions' within iMessage such as >>>>> being able to edit a sent text (that the receiver also sees), reply to >>>>> and have the reply connected to the specific individual message,
deleting messages (that are deleted on the receiver's phone), etc.
WhatsApp can do most of that as well, with the possible
exception of
"and have the reply connected to the specific individual message", if
that means threading (like is done in NetNews).
I think I saw a reply to poster thing in WA.
Yes, you can address a particular user in a group with "@<user>", but >> it is not threaded, i.e. your message is just at the bottom of the
screen, not somewhere in the middle where <user>'s message is.
On iPhone if someone "replies" to an older message, then the original
message is replayed in grey/smaller font, and the reply goes below it.
Little "hook" graphic linking them
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on Android, and >> most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage
anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third party
tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient protocols
like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many countries it is expensive, or is being phased out.
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third party
tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient protocols
like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many countries it is
expensive, or is being phased out.
MMS has no additional cost here but may contribute to the user's monthly bandwidth plan limit.
I guess any feature can be replicated, it is just a question to design
it (just tell the engineers to do it), and assign the resources to it (machines and money, I'd guess). And of course, estimate if it is going
to be worth it, revenue vs cost.
Your Name wrote on Sun, 10 Dec 2023 11:50:20 +1300 :
so it may not work for long before being blocked again.
The last thing Apple wants is iOS to communicate effectively with Android.
Based on previous history, I assume you're not telling the entire story.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
Based on previous history, I assume you're not telling the entire story.
I have Alan Baker & Snit blocked, so I didn't see this until Alan Browne's post, which shows how deathly afraid these iKooks are of the basic facts.
They deny all facts about Apple simply because they don't like the facts.
No other reason.
They just don't like the facts.
I had never logged out.
And yet, Apple _constantly requires_ you to log into the walled garden.
That's just a fact.
so it may not work for long before being blocked again.
This is also why it is not a "walled garden" - by the way.
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off >>>> of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users
have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of
which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on Android, and >> most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage
anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third party
tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient protocols
like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many countries it is expensive, or is being phased out.
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
On 2023-12-09 16:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off >>>>> of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users >>>> have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of >>>> which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on
Android, and
most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage
anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server). >>>
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third party
tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient protocols
like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many countries it is
expensive, or is being phased out.
MMS has no additional cost here but may contribute to the user's monthly bandwidth plan limit.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on Android, and most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
On 2023-12-10 04:44:53 +0000, Andrew said:
Your Name wrote on Sun, 10 Dec 2023 11:50:20 +1300 :
so it may not work for long before being blocked again.
The last thing Apple wants is iOS to communicate effectively with Android.
Apple doesn't really give a damn about Android.
The last thing *any* company wants is for some scum to be making money
off of them by stealing, not to mention breaking the terms and
conditions of any services that person has signed up for. If the fool continues to fix Beeper Mini, Apple will no doubt bring out the lawyers
to sue them out of existence.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
It's not about the colour of the bubbles - it's about the underlying
functionality of iMessage.
*iMessage === WhatsApp*
(works the same)
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
What's the problem on Android that needs to be solved in messaging?
There are two ways to look at that question, which are fundamental:
A. What's the problem when Android users interact with Android users?
B. What's the problem when Android users interact with iOS users?
If there's a problem, why don't I experience it interacting with both?
On 09.12.23 22:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an
exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off >>>>> of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users >>>> have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of >>>> which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on Android, and >>> most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage
anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server). >>>
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third party
tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient protocols
like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many countries it is
expensive, or is being phased out.
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
On 09.12.23 21:05, Wally J wrote:
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on Android, and >> most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage
anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server).
Bullshit. In the US more than 50% of the installed base are iPhones.
Hence the discussion here which in most other regions of the world are absolutely irrelevant.
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
Even more bullshit. Apple devices have their own software and systems. Android not. That is the reason why Google tries to spread such an
inferior chat tool like RCS. The American market is the driving force
idiot. And stop try to spread FUD and lies.
Your Name wrote on Sun, 10 Dec 2023 11:50:20 +1300 :
so it may not work for long before being blocked again.
The last thing Apple wants is iOS to communicate effectively with Android.
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 00:21:45 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I guess any feature can be replicated, it is just a question to design
it (just tell the engineers to do it), and assign the resources to it
(machines and money, I'd guess). And of course, estimate if it is
going to be worth it, revenue vs cost.
Apple designs the walled garden on purpose, so it's not that simple.
Apple designs it to exclude people from outside the Apple community.
On 2023-12-10 10:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 22:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to WhatsApp.
On 09.12.23 23:04, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-09 16:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wroteThat is not so.
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an >>>>>> exclusive country club where you get more but can also go anywhere off >>>>>> of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those users >>>>> have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the people, 80% of >>>>> which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on
Android, and
most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the same as iMessage >>>> anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a middleman mothership server). >>>>
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with >>>> iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it. >>>
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third party
tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient protocols >>> like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many countries it is >>> expensive, or is being phased out.
MMS has no additional cost here but may contribute to the user's monthly
bandwidth plan limit.
In advanced markets MMS does not exist anymore.
I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
users can be integrated into their conversations. I hear Android users creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.
badgolferman wrote:
I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
users can be integrated into their conversations. I hear Android users creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.
I can send SMS (and if justified) MMS messages to people with iPhones, I neither know or care what application they view them in, or what colour bubble I get. If in a few months I can also send them RCS messages, all
the better.
On 2023-12-09 14:56, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 13:47, Frank Slootweg wrote:[...]
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 10:03, Jrg Lorenz wrote:
Note that Jrg is comparing iMessage to the other mentioned IM
platforms.
Those IM platforms *are* available on multiple OS platforms. For
example WhatsApp is available on Android, iOS, macOS and for other
platforms there's WhatsApp Web. So WhatsApp not only works between
Apple devices, but also with/between the other mentioned devices.
So what you say "is not practically feasible", *is* actually possible.
And how's iMessage's "feature set" only on/between Apple devices
supposed to be better than - for example - WhatsApp's feature set
on/between Apple *and* non-Apple devices?
Where iMessage (the service and/or the app) provides extensions related
to various Apple devices, 3rd party extensions and so on.
Can you eloborate on that? What kind of extensions? What kind of extra functionality do they offer, which is not or not likely to be available
on other IM platforms?
Payments, use the camera from messages, location, Dropbox integration,
etc. "Check-in" to auto-message someone when you've arrived at a planned destination, graphical messages (time-oriented playback of how you gen'd
the message), maps ... etc. too many to list.
On 2023-12-10 10:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 22:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an >>>>>> exclusive country club where you get more but can also go
anywhere off of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those
users have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the
people, 80% of which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on
Android, and most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the
same as iMessage anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a
middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating
with iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain
about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third
party tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient
protocols like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many
countries it is expensive, or is being phased out.
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia
What's the problem on Android that needs to be solved in messaging?
There are two ways to look at that question, which are fundamental:
A. What's the problem when Android users interact with Android users?
B. What's the problem when Android users interact with iOS users?
For me, no photos or any multimedia content, just plain text, unless
they use WhatsApp.
If there's a problem, why don't I experience it interacting with both?
You have free MMS. I don't.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to
WhatsApp.
Eh? I send/receive photos and videos to/from people with Android phones
all the time - using basic message service (cell phone). Of course such
is covered in data plans here as part of overall "data" so there are no ridiculous charges as one may see in Europe and elsewhere.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third
party tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient
protocols like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many
countries it is expensive, or is being phased out.
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia
No, they can send photos and multimedia.
Bullshit. In the US more than 50% of the installed base are iPhones.
Hence the discussion here which in most other regions of the world are
absolutely irrelevant.
It is relevant for me, who don't live in the USA.
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
Even more bullshit. Apple devices have their own software and systems.
Android not. That is the reason why Google tries to spread such an
inferior chat tool like RCS. The American market is the driving force
idiot. And stop try to spread FUD and lies.
Bullshit. :-P
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to WhatsApp.
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R."" <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to
WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 14:56, Frank Slootweg wrote:
BTW, in our country (NL) we have a payment system ('Tikkie', nudge)
which works with WhatsApp (and other messaging systems), so the
integration is there, but generic, instead of IM platform specific.
On 2023-12-09 23:44, Andrew wrote:
Your Name wrote on Sun, 10 Dec 2023 11:50:20 +1300 :
so it may not work for long before being blocked again.
The last thing Apple wants is iOS to communicate effectively with
Android.
iOS already communicates effectively with Android:
-phone (cell network)
-SMS
-MMS
-AirTag detection (malicious intent prevention).
and next year
-RCS
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
badgolferman wrote:
I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
users can be integrated into their conversations. I hear Android users
creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.
FTR, Android *users* do no such thing. In this case it's an app *developper* which tries "to integrate into iMessage".
I can send SMS (and if justified) MMS messages to people with iPhones, I
neither know or care what application they view them in, or what colour
bubble I get. If in a few months I can also send them RCS messages, all
the better.
Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on *'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
On 2023-12-10, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-10 10:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 22:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Not at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an >>>>>>> exclusive country club where you get more but can also go
anywhere off of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those
users have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the
people, 80% of which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages.
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is on
Android, and most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the
same as iMessage anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a
middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating
with iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain
about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third
party tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient
protocols like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many
countries it is expensive, or is being phased out.
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia
No, they can send photos and multimedia.
On 2023-12-10 07:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-10 10:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 22:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch
to WhatsApp.
Eh? I send/receive photos and videos to/from people with Android phones
all the time - using basic message service (cell phone). Of course such
is covered in data plans here as part of overall "data" so there are no ridiculous charges as one may see in Europe and elsewhere.
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R."" <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to
WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
Eh? I send/receive photos and videos to/from people with Android phones
all the time - using basic message service (cell phone). Of course such
is covered in data plans here as part of overall "data" so there are no
ridiculous charges as one may see in Europe and elsewhere.
In Europe, and probably the entire world excep NA, iphone users can not
send photos to android users using imessage.
Two reasons: if MMS is available, it is expensive. And in several
countries or providers, MMS has been removed.
On 2023-12-10 14:29, Alan Browne wrote:[AAA]____________
On 2023-12-10 07:22, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-10 10:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 22:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and
can not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and
switch to WhatsApp.
Eh? I send/receive photos and videos to/from people with Android
phones all the time - using basic message service (cell phone). Of
course such is covered in data plans here as part of overall "data" so
there are no ridiculous charges as one may see in Europe and elsewhere.
In Europe, and probably the entire world excep NA, iphone users can not
send photos to android users using imessage.
Two reasons: if MMS is available, it is expensive. And in several
countries or providers, MMS has been removed.
On 2023-12-11 03:19, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R.""
<robin_listas@es.invalid>
wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to >>> WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging
pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
That's not what's being discussed. What is: is how iPhone Messages
users can send phots/vids to Android users.
They can. And do.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to
WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
On 2023-12-11 15:15, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 03:19, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R.""
<robin_listas@es.invalid>
wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can >>>> not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and
switch to
WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging
pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
That's not what's being discussed. What is: is how iPhone Messages
users can send phots/vids to Android users.
They can. And do.
With WhatsApp, yes, certainly they can. With imessages, no, not here.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to >>> WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging
pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
That's not what's being discussed. What is: is how iPhone Messages
users can send phots/vids to Android users.
They can. And do.
Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
*'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.
To gain access to the club, simply purchase Apple devices.
Your technical understanding is very limited.
These are two completely different protocols iMsg being far superior in
terms of security and especially privacy.
On 2023-12-10 16:20, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 14:56, Frank Slootweg wrote:
BTW, in our country (NL) we have a payment system ('Tikkie', nudge) which works with WhatsApp (and other messaging systems), so the
integration is there, but generic, instead of IM platform specific.
Yeah, we just need (to agree on a) a system that is EU wide.
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 08:18:23 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
To gain access to the club, simply purchase Apple devices.
If you believe what you say, which is that the only way an Apple device
will ever communicate easily with the rest of the world is for everyone
in the world to be only on Apple devices, then there's no sense in
continuing this conversation. The walled garden is very real and highly restrictive.
On 2023-12-11 09:38, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 15:15, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 03:19, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R.""
<robin_listas@es.invalid>
wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can >>>> not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and
switch to
WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging
pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
That's not what's being discussed. What is: is how iPhone Messages
users can send phots/vids to Android users.
They can. And do.
With WhatsApp, yes, certainly they can. With imessages, no, not here.
Yes - you've made the point a thousand times now.
With an Apple device there are no restrictions on using "outside the
Apple eco-system" apps and means. Apple users who are part of a
non-Apple grouping just use the apps and means that the group uses. Life
goes on without restriction.
But, when "in the eco-system" one gets those things that those not in
the club can't have. Such as the seamless integration between Apple
devices and apps.
This is why Apple's "eco system" is not a walled garden as you're so desperate to label it.
It is a fenced-in country club that members can enter and leave as they
like or need. The members get everything of both worlds, the
non-members only get their world and can only gaze through the fence and
wish they had the benefits of the club (or rant about the club members
if that is therapeutic to them).
Meanwhile companies like Samsung make their own "clubby" setups such as integration between phones and watches - but this falls into messy once
one uses a Windows PC, Mac or Linux. Very messy to keep all the parts singing in harmony.
I'm trying to understand the problem (as I don't have it in the states).
*The main problem appears to be a carrier-imposed fee on 'sending MMS'*
*The other problem appears to be iOS uses a primitive messaging system.* (Substituted "closed" if you have a visceral dislike to "primitive".)
One part of the problem appears to be...
1. Android users who are charged those fees can send MMS via RCS for free.
2. But iOS users can't receive them (it appears).
3. So in that respect, the problem is on the iOS recipient's side.
Another part of the problem appears to be...
A. Android users who are charged those fees can send MMS via RCS for free.
B. But Android users can't receive them unless they use an RCS messenger.
C. So in that respect, the problem is on the Android recipient's side.
Meanwhile... the third part of the problem appears to be...
a. iOS users can send "things" (e.g., pictures) via their Internet app
b. Which is no different than Telegram, Signal, Threema or WhatsApp
c. The only difference being all iPhones have that proprietary messaging
Is this an accurate summary of the problem set yet?
On 2023-12-11 09:19, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R."" <robin_listas@es.invalid> >> wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and switch to >>> WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
Certainly, but we are talking of their native messaging tool that they
are so happy about, imessages.
As I said, two reasons: in Europe, and probably most of the world except
NA, MMS which is used to send photos to non Apple users is expensive or
has been removed, it is not even available.
On 2023-12-10 18:14, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-12-10, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-10 10:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 09.12.23 22:21, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-09 21:05, Wally J wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Carlos brings up the valid points that most of the world is onNot at all. Apple's system is not a walled garden. More like an >>>>>>>> exclusive country club where you get more but can also go
anywhere off of the club you want.
The point is that *here* there are only 21% of iPhones, so those >>>>>>> users have to get out of their walled garden to talk with the
people, 80% of which are on Android. So, they don't use iMessages. >>>>>>
Android, and most of the world seems to use WhatsApp (which is the >>>>>> same as iMessage anyway, in terms of needing to connect to a
middleman mothership server).
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating
with iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain >>>>>> about it.
That is not so.
Android users have to communicate with iPhone users using third
party tools, like WhatsApp, thats not popular in the USA, or ancient >>>>> protocols like SMS, which lack features. Or use MMS, which in many
countries it is expensive, or is being phased out.
So yes, we do have problems and we do complain.
I think this is a fair statement. iPhone users do not complain.
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can
not send photos or multimedia
No, they can send photos and multimedia.
Not in Europe, not probably in most of the world. Not using imessages.
On 12/10/2023 4:02 AM, Jrg Lorenz wrote:
Your technical understanding is very limited. These are two
completely different protocols iMsg being far superior in terms of
security and especially privacy.
Apple's iMessage is clearly not as secure and not as private as you
think.
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 08:18:23 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
To gain access to the club, simply purchase Apple devices.
the only way an Apple device will ever communicate easily with the
rest of the world is for everyone in the world to be only on Apple
devices
On 12/10/2023 4:02 AM, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
Your technical understanding is very limited.
These are two completely different protocols iMsg being far superior in
terms of security and especially privacy.
Apple's iMessage is clearly not as secure and not as private as you think.
Do you know the kid who recently easily broke into that "secure" &
"private" iMessage you speak of isn't even near college age yet?
On Sun, 10 Dec 2023 08:18:23 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
To gain access to the club, simply purchase Apple devices.
If you believe what you say, which is that the only way an Apple device
will ever communicate easily with the rest of the world is for everyone in the world to be only on Apple devices, then there's no sense in continuing this conversation. The walled garden is very real and highly restrictive.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-11 09:38, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 15:15, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 03:19, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R.""
<robin_listas@es.invalid>
wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can >>>>>> not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and
switch to
WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging >>>>> pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
That's not what's being discussed. What is: is how iPhone Messages
users can send phots/vids to Android users.
They can. And do.
With WhatsApp, yes, certainly they can. With imessages, no, not here.
Yes - you've made the point a thousand times now.
Well, if you make your (non (read NA-only)) point a thousand times,
you can only expect that the favour will be returned, can't you!?
On 2023-12-10 16:27, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
badgolferman wrote:
I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
users can be integrated into their conversations. I hear Android users >>>> creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.
FTR, Android *users* do no such thing. In this case it's an app
*developper* which tries "to integrate into iMessage".
Right.
I can send SMS (and if justified) MMS messages to people with iPhones, I
neither know or care what application they view them in, or what colour
bubble I get. If in a few months I can also send them RCS messages, all >>> the better.
Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument >> is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
*'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
[...]
With an Apple device there are no restrictions on using "outside the
Apple eco-system" apps and means. Apple users who are part of a
non-Apple grouping just use the apps and means that the group uses. Life
goes on without restriction.
But, when "in the eco-system" one gets those things that those not in
the club can't have. Such as the seamless integration between Apple
devices and apps.
This is why Apple's "eco system" is not a walled garden as you're so
desperate to label it.
It is a fenced-in country club that members can enter and leave as they
like or need. The members get everything of both worlds, the
non-members only get their world and can only gaze through the fence and
wish they had the benefits of the club (or rant about the club members
if that is therapeutic to them).
Meanwhile companies like Samsung make their own "clubby" setups such as
integration between phones and watches - but this falls into messy once
one uses a Windows PC, Mac or Linux. Very messy to keep all the parts
singing in harmony.
From Samsung's (commercial) newsletters, I get the impression that
there is also quite a lot of intergration, *if* you buy all your stuff, including all kinds of other stuff, like appliances, TV, home
automation, etc., etc. from *Samsung*. So for your example, that would
be a *Samsung* Windows PC (versus an Apple Mac).
So apples to apples :-) comparison: Buy *all* your stuff from Apple
versus buy *all* your stuff from Samsung.
N.B. I'm not implying that Samsung's integration is as intricate as Apple's, but it's much better than just a bay of islands as is the case
when everything/most_things come from different manufacturers.
And Samsung makes some stuff which Apple doesn't, so let's call it a *different* country club, where both Apple users and non-Samsung users
"can only gaze through the fence and wish they had the benefits of the
club (or rant about the club members if that is therapeutic to them)".
:-)
On 11 Dec 2023 10:38:27 -0400 Wally J wrote:
The 'problem', which is shared by (some) users of both Android and iOS, is ...
"A user of a modern smartphone cannot be confident of sending a
feature-rich message (having features equivalent to the GSMA's RCS
Universal Profile) irrespective of both sender's and recipient's make of phone, both sender and receiver using their phone's _default_ messaging facility."
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-10 16:20, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-09 14:56, Frank Slootweg wrote:
BTW, in our country (NL) we have a payment system ('Tikkie', nudge)
which works with WhatsApp (and other messaging systems), so the
integration is there, but generic, instead of IM platform specific.
Yeah, we just need (to agree on a) a system that is EU wide.
The Dutch iDEAL [1] payment system is planned to become the European
(not just EU) acount-to-account payment system. Perhaps that will also incorporate 'Tikkie' [2] functionality, which is more person-to-person payment than acount-to-account.
[1] 'iDEAL' <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDEAL>
[2] 'Tikkie' <https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkie> (Dutch)
On 2023-12-11 10:23, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-11 09:38, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 15:15, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 03:19, Bernd Froehlich wrote:
On 10. Dec 2023 at 13:22:31 CET, ""Carlos E. R.""
<robin_listas@es.invalid>
wrote:
Yes, they do, when they want to communicate with Android users and can >>>>>> not send photos or multimedia, unless they ditch iMessages and
switch to
WhatsApp.
Sorry, you are missing something:
Telegram, Signal, Threema for instance.
No WhatsApp over here and still happily communicating (and exchanging >>>>> pictures) with lots of Androids :-)
That's not what's being discussed. What is: is how iPhone Messages
users can send phots/vids to Android users.
They can. And do.
With WhatsApp, yes, certainly they can. With imessages, no, not here.
Yes - you've made the point a thousand times now.
Well, if you make your (non (read NA-only)) point a thousand times,
you can only expect that the favour will be returned, can't you!?
They didn't have to reply - again. Now you'll say "you too!". But I am
the OP on this thread. That has privileges ?
"A user of a modern smartphone cannot be confident of sending a
feature-rich message (having features equivalent to the GSMA's RCS
Universal Profile) irrespective of both sender's and recipient's make of phone, both sender and receiver using their phone's _default_ messaging facility."
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
At the moment only SMS messages can be confidently sent and reliably received.
MMS has been discontinued in many territories: <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_Messaging_Service#Decline_and_discontinuation
It is rumoured that Apple will enable RCS in their default message app in
2024 (not replacing iMessage) which is to be welcomed IMO. No doubt people will continue to use proprietary apps and protocols when they want extra features - eg e2ee.
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Is this yet an accurate summary of the problem set?
Since most people in the US don’t pay for MMS I don’t think that’s the problem. My opinion is Android users break group chats for iOS users since Android doesn’t support some iOS features.
Now you can say it’s iOS users complaining about this, but it seems it’s Android users who keep trying to get around it somehow.
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument >>> is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on >>> *'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.
For badgolferman,
Is my summary understanding of the problem set below accurate yet?
I respectfully change my assessment that we previously disagreed upon as it seems to be both Apple & Android users complaining - but only a subset of each group.
As I try to understand all these problems, it appears the problem is a mix
of the proprietary messaging iOS uses versus the open messaging of Android.
*First problem: free Android MMS to Android*
Some Android users get charged for MMS so they prefer a method that sends
MMS for free.
There are two fundamental solutions to that problem set.
1. Use any messaging app that allows MMS for free (there are many)
2. Use RCS in the messaging (there are a half dozen free Android RCS apps)
3. But the problem with both is the recipient has to use a similar app
*Second problem: free Android MMS to iOS*
For the same subset who are charged by their carrier for MMS...
1. Use RCS (but iOS doesn't support RCS)
2. Use Beeper (but iOS doesn't support Beeper)
3. Use anything else such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Theema, whatever
Given that iOS Messages is the same as WhatsApp (and all the rest), the problem is nobody on Android is using the iOS Messages app while everyone
on iOS (practically) is using the proprietary closed iOS Messages app.
So it's a conundrum only for the following subsets of Android/iOS users:a2. Users in countries where MMS is not supported.
a. Android users who are charged for sending MMS, and,
b. iOS users who want to receive those MMS messages.
Is this yet an accurate summary of the problem set?
On 2023-12-11 17:08, Dave Royal wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 10:38:27 -0400 Wally J wrote:
...
The 'problem', which is shared by (some) users of both Android and iOS, is >> ...
"A user of a modern smartphone cannot be confident of sending a
feature-rich message (having features equivalent to the GSMA's RCS
Universal Profile) irrespective of both sender's and recipient's make of
phone, both sender and receiver using their phone's _default_ messaging
facility."
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
It does if you use the Google Messages App.
On 2023-12-11 10:44, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
[...]
With an Apple device there are no restrictions on using "outside the
Apple eco-system" apps and means. Apple users who are part of a
non-Apple grouping just use the apps and means that the group uses. Life >> goes on without restriction.
But, when "in the eco-system" one gets those things that those not in
the club can't have. Such as the seamless integration between Apple
devices and apps.
This is why Apple's "eco system" is not a walled garden as you're so
desperate to label it.
It is a fenced-in country club that members can enter and leave as they
like or need. The members get everything of both worlds, the
non-members only get their world and can only gaze through the fence and >> wish they had the benefits of the club (or rant about the club members
if that is therapeutic to them).
Meanwhile companies like Samsung make their own "clubby" setups such as
integration between phones and watches - but this falls into messy once
one uses a Windows PC, Mac or Linux. Very messy to keep all the parts
singing in harmony.
From Samsung's (commercial) newsletters, I get the impression that
there is also quite a lot of intergration, *if* you buy all your stuff, including all kinds of other stuff, like appliances, TV, home
automation, etc., etc. from *Samsung*. So for your example, that would
be a *Samsung* Windows PC (versus an Apple Mac).
Not a very good comparison, alas. Apple has the Home Kit to extend
one's reach over to all sorts of appliances.
So apples to apples :-) comparison: Buy *all* your stuff from Apple versus buy *all* your stuff from Samsung.
N.B. I'm not implying that Samsung's integration is as intricate as Apple's, but it's much better than just a bay of islands as is the case when everything/most_things come from different manufacturers.
This is where open standards are a good thing for _basic_ integration.
Doesn't mean that when one co. goes the extra distance that they have to
open it up to all and sundry to take advantage of their investment in
more advanced features. Certainly the shareholders would not stand for it.
And Samsung makes some stuff which Apple doesn't, so let's call it a *different* country club, where both Apple users and non-Samsung users
"can only gaze through the fence and wish they had the benefits of the
club (or rant about the club members if that is therapeutic to them)".
:-)
I can't think of a thing Samsung makes where I wouldn't consider some
other company's wares over them. Not to say Samsung doesn't make things
I may want.
But their disjointed eco-system is certainly not a draw.
Countries that have discontinued MMS include:
India (BSNL; from 1 November 2015),
Philippines (SunCel, SmartCommunications, TNT; from 28 September 2018), Singapore (Singtel, M1, Starhub; from 16 November 2021),
Kazakhstan (Kcell; from 6 May 2022),
Switzerland (Swisscom, Salt Mobile; from 10 January 2023),
Germany (Vodafone; from 17 January 2023).
On 11 Dec 2023 19:25:56 +0100 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:08, Dave Royal wrote:
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
It does if you use the Google Messages App.
GSMA's RCS Universal Profile does not.
Yes, but that's just a bay of islands, not tight integration as the
rest of the Apple eco-system. You can't have it both ways: It's either
part of the Apple eco-system - and hence (most likely) tightly
integrated - or it's not - and hence the *user* is the 'systems
integrator', not Apple.
Of course Apple *can* keep iMessage closed. Likewise we *can* call it silly, stupid, <whatever>.
"A user of a modern smartphone cannot be confident of sending a
feature-rich message (having features equivalent to the GSMA's RCS
Universal Profile) irrespective of both sender's and recipient's make of
phone, both sender and receiver using their phone's _default_ messaging
facility."
Which is a sad argument. There are other means to move large files if
one avenue doesn't work. E-mail, text a link to a repository (Dropbox), e-mail a link to ... etc.
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
At the moment only SMS messages can be confidently sent and reliably
received.
MMS has been discontinued in many territories:
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_Messaging_Service#Decline_and_discontinuation
6 countries. Oooooooohhhh the horror.
It is rumoured that Apple will enable RCS in their default message app in
No rumour. Apple have said they will.
2024 (not replacing iMessage) which is to be welcomed IMO. No doubt people >> will continue to use proprietary apps and protocols when they want extra
features - eg e2ee.
It does E2E already in some instances. But Apple is seeking a
non-3rd-party solution to E2E in RCS. https://www.techradar.com/phones/iphone/breaking-apple-will-support-rcs-in-2024
Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.
Since most people in the US don?t pay for MMS I don?t think that?s the problem. My opinion is Android users break group chats for iOS users since Android doesn?t support some iOS features.
Now you can say it?s iOS users complaining about this, but it seems it?s Android users who keep trying to get around it somehow.
Since most people in the US don't pay for MMS I don't think that's the problem. My opinion is Android users break group chats for iOS users since Android doesn't support some iOS features.
Now you can say it's iOS users complaining about this, but it seems it's Android users who keep trying to get around it somehow.
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
On 2023-12-11 10:44, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote:
[...]
With an Apple device there are no restrictions on using "outside the
Apple eco-system" apps and means. Apple users who are part of a
non-Apple grouping just use the apps and means that the group uses. Life >>>> goes on without restriction.
But, when "in the eco-system" one gets those things that those not in
the club can't have. Such as the seamless integration between Apple
devices and apps.
This is why Apple's "eco system" is not a walled garden as you're so
desperate to label it.
It is a fenced-in country club that members can enter and leave as they >>>> like or need. The members get everything of both worlds, the
non-members only get their world and can only gaze through the fence and >>>> wish they had the benefits of the club (or rant about the club members >>>> if that is therapeutic to them).
Meanwhile companies like Samsung make their own "clubby" setups such as >>>> integration between phones and watches - but this falls into messy once >>>> one uses a Windows PC, Mac or Linux. Very messy to keep all the parts >>>> singing in harmony.
From Samsung's (commercial) newsletters, I get the impression that
there is also quite a lot of intergration, *if* you buy all your stuff,
including all kinds of other stuff, like appliances, TV, home
automation, etc., etc. from *Samsung*. So for your example, that would
be a *Samsung* Windows PC (versus an Apple Mac).
Not a very good comparison, alas. Apple has the Home Kit to extend
one's reach over to all sorts of appliances.
Yes, but that's just a bay of islands, not tight integration as the
rest of the Apple eco-system. You can't have it both ways: It's either
part of the Apple eco-system - and hence (most likely) tightly
integrated - or it's not - and hence the *user* is the 'systems
integrator', not Apple.
So apples to apples :-) comparison: Buy *all* your stuff from Apple
versus buy *all* your stuff from Samsung.
N.B. I'm not implying that Samsung's integration is as intricate as
Apple's, but it's much better than just a bay of islands as is the case
when everything/most_things come from different manufacturers.
This is where open standards are a good thing for _basic_ integration.
Indeed. But in that case the user is the systems integrator and if
stuff doesn't work, tough luck and over to unofficial help sources (such
as these groups).
Doesn't mean that when one co. goes the extra distance that they have to
open it up to all and sundry to take advantage of their investment in
more advanced features. Certainly the shareholders would not stand for it.
I - and most sane people - am not saying they have to open it all up.
What we *are* saying is that when it's about *communication* the reasonable expectation is that the communication method (iMessage) can
also communicate with other platforms. And no, the current SMS/MMS
kludge does *not* satisfy that need. It's a silly bandaid 'used' (FSVSVO 'used') in the US(/NA?). No-one takes the kludge seriously, so it's
telling that Apple users - who always talk about seamless, smooth, etc.
- even bother to defend such a kludge. Just accept/admit that it's a
kludge and move on.
Of course Apple *can* keep iMessage closed. Likewise we *can* call it silly, stupid, <whatever>.
And Samsung makes some stuff which Apple doesn't, so let's call it a >>> *different* country club, where both Apple users and non-Samsung users
"can only gaze through the fence and wish they had the benefits of the
club (or rant about the club members if that is therapeutic to them)".
:-)
I can't think of a thing Samsung makes where I wouldn't consider some
other company's wares over them. Not to say Samsung doesn't make things
I may want.
Well, again you can't have it both ways: You either stick with one
company or you pick and choose. I could make the same (non-)argument: "I can't think of a thing Apple makes where I wouldn't consider some other company's wares over them.".
But their disjointed eco-system is certainly not a draw.
Their eco-system is not "disjointed". They might not offer the
intricate level of integration which Apple offers for their products,
but that doesn't mean their eco-system is "disjointed".
On 2023-12-09 15:19:52 +0000, Andy Burns said:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Tyrone wrote:
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think Apple >>>> would permit this?
Do have any reference/proof for this? (I didn't see any such thing in
the article, nor in the original Business Insider article.)
<https://www.androidpolice.com/beeper-mini-outage-b/>
<https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/08/apple-cuts-off-beeper-minis-access-after-launch-of-service-that-brought-imessage-to-android/>
So *what* exactly *did* Apple 'kill'?
At a rough guess, Apple have initially blocked Beeper's IPs from their
firewall?
The Beeper Mini developer is already working on a fix:
Beeper Mini developers say fix is 'coming soon'
for iMessage Android app
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/12/09/beeper-mini-developers-say-fix-is-coming-soon-for-imessage-android-app>
But as that articles says ...
"If Beeper Mini is fixed to work once more, it may face a
similar issue in the not-so-distant future. With Apple
keen to keep iMessage to only its own ecosystem of
devices, this may result in a security arms race between
the trillion-dollar iPhone maker and developers wanting
iMessage to work with Android."
so it may not work for long before being blocked again. Continually
being blocked would mean it's not really a viable solution to anything
at all, whether that's Android user's "blue bubble phobia" or "lack of features".
Again completely backwards: Android users don't do any such thing! *Apple*'s kludge converts chats with Android users to SMS/MMS, which is
much more limited, much more expensive (outrageously so for MMS) for the sender or/and the recipient and (for MMS) not even available in a number
of countries.
The Apple kludge is apparently 'accepted' in the US (and perhaps in
NA) 'because' of the high penetration of iPhones (much higher than in
the rest of the world) and the US(/NA?) Android users apparently rolling over.
Since most people in the US don’t pay for MMS I don’t think that’s the problem.MMS uses data which most people in the U.S. do pay for.
On 12/11/2023 2:17 PM, Larry Wolff wrote:
Countries that have discontinued MMS include: India (BSNL; from 1
November 2015), Philippines (SunCel, SmartCommunications, TNT; from 28
September 2018), Singapore (Singtel, M1, Starhub; from 16 November 2021),
Kazakhstan (Kcell; from 6 May 2022),
Switzerland (Swisscom, Salt Mobile; from 10 January 2023), Germany
(Vodafone; from 17 January 2023).
The only country that might matter in that short list is Germany.
Anyone know if Germany supports RCS now that it's the world standard?
On 11 Dec 2023 19:25:56 +0100 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:08, Dave Royal wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 10:38:27 -0400 Wally J wrote:
...
The 'problem', which is shared by (some) users of both Android and iOS, is >>> ...
"A user of a modern smartphone cannot be confident of sending a
feature-rich message (having features equivalent to the GSMA's RCS
Universal Profile) irrespective of both sender's and recipient's make of >>> phone, both sender and receiver using their phone's _default_ messaging
facility."
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
It does if you use the Google Messages App.
GSMA's RCS Universal Profile does not.
On 2023-12-11 11:08, Dave Royal wrote:
"A user of a modern smartphone cannot be confident of sending a
feature-rich message (having features equivalent to the GSMA's RCS
Universal Profile) irrespective of both sender's and recipient's make of
phone, both sender and receiver using their phone's _default_ messaging
facility."
Which is a sad argument. There are other means to move large files if
one avenue doesn't work. E-mail, text a link to a repository (Dropbox), e-mail a link to ... etc.
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
At the moment only SMS messages can be confidently sent and reliably
received.
MMS has been discontinued in many territories:
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_Messaging_Service#Decline_and_discontinuation
6 countries. Oooooooohhhh the horror.
It is rumoured that Apple will enable RCS in their default message app in
No rumour. Apple have said they will.
2024 (not replacing iMessage) which is to be welcomed IMO. No doubt
people
will continue to use proprietary apps and protocols when they want extra
features - eg e2ee.
It does E2E already in some instances. But Apple is seeking a
non-3rd-party solution to E2E in RCS.
https://www.techradar.com/phones/iphone/breaking-apple-will-support-rcs-in-2024
On 2023-12-11 19:29, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 11:08, Dave Royal wrote:
It is rumoured that Apple will enable RCS in their default message
app in
No rumour. Apple have said they will.
2024 (not replacing iMessage) which is to be welcomed IMO. No doubt
people
will continue to use proprietary apps and protocols when they want extra >>> features - eg e2ee.
It does E2E already in some instances. But Apple is seeking a
non-3rd-party solution to E2E in RCS.
https://www.techradar.com/phones/iphone/breaking-apple-will-support-rcs-in-2024
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS. They are
too late for that. :-D
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote
Yes, but that's just a bay of islands, not tight integration as the
rest of the Apple eco-system. You can't have it both ways: It's either
part of the Apple eco-system - and hence (most likely) tightly
integrated - or it's not - and hence the *user* is the 'systems
integrator', not Apple.
Frank ...
The sole reason Apple stuff works together is they're always logged into
the same server (for the rest of their lives - they're logging into Apple).
Think about that.... (given you know Android doesn't need us to do that).
There's nothing Apple can do that Android can't do if everyone logged into the same server to do it, Frank.
The difference is that Apple will _brick_ your device if you don't log in.
On 11 Dec 2023 23:51:39 +0100 Carlos E. R. wrote:
Samsung switched to the Google version.
The GSMA RCS UP* is a set of standards for a set of features. Google's RCS implementation is not an /alternative/ to the UP, it is (IIUC) in
compliance with the UP and provides features on top, such as e2ee.
*I keep giving it that long name because 'RCS' could refer to that set of standards, Google's implementation based on those, or somebody else's
service called RCS.
On 2023-12-11 20:09, Dave Royal wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 19:25:56 +0100 Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:08, Dave Royal wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 10:38:27 -0400 Wally J wrote:
The 'problem', which is shared by (some) users of both Android and iOS, is >>>> ...
"A user of a modern smartphone cannot be confident of sending a
feature-rich message (having features equivalent to the GSMA's RCS
Universal Profile) irrespective of both sender's and recipient's make of >>>> phone, both sender and receiver using their phone's _default_ messaging >>>> facility."
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services>
Note that RCS does not currently include End to End Encryption (e2ee).
It does if you use the Google Messages App.
GSMA's RCS Universal Profile does not.
Is anybody providing that in the real world?
Samsung switched to the Google version.
It is relevant for me, who don't live in the USA.
But even those on Android in the US have no problem communicating with
iPhone users; it's always mainly the iPhone users who complain about it.
Even more bullshit. Apple devices have their own software and systems.
Android not. That is the reason why Google tries to spread such an
inferior chat tool like RCS. The American market is the driving force
idiot. And stop try to spread FUD and lies.
Bullshit. :-P
On 12.12.23 09:27, Dave Royal wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 23:51:39 +0100 Carlos E. R. wrote:
Samsung switched to the Google version.
The GSMA RCS UP* is a set of standards for a set of features. Google's RCS >> implementation is not an /alternative/ to the UP, it is (IIUC) in
compliance with the UP and provides features on top, such as e2ee.
Right. And this encryption is proprietary and is not accepted by Apple. Meaning that RCS will be introduced but kept outside iMsg.
*I keep giving it that long name because 'RCS' could refer to that set of
standards, Google's implementation based on those, or somebody else's
service called RCS.
Google-RCS will fail inevitably: It has no unique selling proposition compared to other messengers which exist already for roughly a decade.
On 2023-12-11 11:56, Wally J wrote:
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote
Yes, but that's just a bay of islands, not tight integration as
the rest of the Apple eco-system. You can't have it both ways:
It's either part of the Apple eco-system - and hence (most
likely) tightly integrated - or it's not - and hence the *user*
is the 'systems integrator', not Apple.
Frank ...
The sole reason Apple stuff works together is they're always logged
into the same server (for the rest of their lives - they're logging
into Apple).
Think about that.... (given you know Android doesn't need us to do
that).
There's nothing Apple can do that Android can't do if everyone logged
into the same server to do it, Frank.
The difference is that Apple will _brick_ your device if you don't
log in.
Why must you lie?
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
but the fact
is many people use Apple devices without the *completely* *optional*
iCloud service for years without issue.
Hi Jolly Roger,
While Snit & Alan Baker & Joerg are plonked, I read everything you write.
And it's clear you have absolutely no idea of how Apple does things, JR.
What you do not understand, Jolly Roger, is there are _multiple_ times you must log into an Apple device, as witnessed by the very images I provided.
For example, there's an iCloud login and there's an iMessage login, JR.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rpmJKw7p/locked-04.jpg> iCloud login
<https://i.postimg.cc/rwyGPpV9/locked-05.jpg> iMessage login
And there's plenty more, Jolly Roger, none of which are you aware of.
<https://i.postimg.cc/3NVqB4dC/nag03.jpg> Plenty of other Apple logins
but the fact
is many people use Apple devices without the *completely* *optional*
iCloud service for years without issue.
I have an iPhone SE (1st gen)
semi-permanently mounted to the windshield of my car that hasn't been
logged into iCloud for years, and it functions as a dedicated dash cam without issue.
He's a pathetic loser.
And it's clear you have absolutely no idea of how Apple does things,
JR.
Projection. It is *you* who has absolutely no idea how Apple devices
work.
What you do not understand, Jolly Roger, is there are _multiple_ times
you must log into an Apple device, as witnessed by the very images I
provided.
Nope. My iPhone SE hasn't asked or required a login for *years* and
continues to work just fine. You don't know what you are talking about.
You think iCloud is mandatory when it's not. You think Apple requires
you to log in, when they do not. You are a useless, know-nothing troll.
For example, there's an iCloud login and there's an iMessage login,
JR.
You caused that by logging into iCloud and iMessage, Arlen. And the fact
that you think the rest of us don't know that is pathetic. Your trolls
are as weak as your interpersonal skills.
And there's plenty more, Jolly Roger, none of which are you aware of.
More projection from the Apple-hating loser troll. You logged into that account and now like a complete moron you are complaining that your
logged-in account is asking for your credentials. How fucking dumb are
you? Pretty fucking dumb it appears.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
And it's clear you have absolutely no idea of how Apple does things,
JR.
Projection. It is *you* who has absolutely no idea how Apple devices
work.
Hi Jolly Roger,
The unsurprising thing is you iKooks have no clue whatsoever that there's a login into the iMessage server and _another_ login into the iCloud server.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rpmJKw7p/locked-04.jpg> iCloud login
<https://i.postimg.cc/rwyGPpV9/locked-05.jpg> iMessage login
And plenty more.
<https://i.postimg.cc/3NVqB4dC/nag03.jpg> Plenty of other Apple logins
It's no longer shocking you iKooka have no idea how Apple products work.
What you do not understand, Jolly Roger, is there are _multiple_ times
you must log into an Apple device, as witnessed by the very images I
provided.
Nope. My iPhone SE hasn't asked or required a login for *years* and
continues to work just fine. You don't know what you are talking about.
Ah, but I do. I know full well what happens if you don't log into Apple servers when they ask you to "Update Apple ID settings" as shown here.
<https://i.postimg.cc/3NVqB4dC/nag03.jpg> 1 Update Apple ID settings
You think iCloud is mandatory when it's not. You think Apple requires
you to log in, when they do not. You are a useless, know-nothing troll.
I understand you better than you know yourself, Jolly Roger, so I forgive
you for lashing out at me simply for telling you the truth about Apple.
For example, there's an iCloud login and there's an iMessage login,
JR.
You caused that by logging into iCloud and iMessage, Arlen. And the fact
that you think the rest of us don't know that is pathetic. Your trolls
are as weak as your interpersonal skills.
No. You're wrong Jolly Roger. That was caused by Apple who forces you to identify yourself with a government ID if you ever stop logging into it.
<https://i.postimg.cc/7P7NCctS/locked-01.jpg> AppleID is locked by Apple
And there's plenty more, Jolly Roger, none of which are you aware of.
More projection from the Apple-hating loser troll. You logged into that
account and now like a complete moron you are complaining that your
logged-in account is asking for your credentials. How fucking dumb are
you? Pretty fucking dumb it appears.
Again, I forgive you for hating all facts about Apple products, Jolly
Roger. But you hating what Apple does doesn't change what Apple does.
It's clear you have absolutely no idea that you're continually logging into Apple servers - because if you didn't - Apple will brick your device.
<https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg> Apple _disables_ the device!
What you hate is that almost nothing works on Apple products if you simply choose to NOT log into Apple's mothership tracking servers every single moment of the rest of your life, Jolly Roger.
Which is why I feel sorry for you iKooks after all.
You're so _happy_ being oblivious to everything about Apple products
that you hate me (and Apple) when I prove to you what Apple does.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
but the fact is many people use Apple devices without the
*completely* *optional* iCloud service for years without issue.
And it's clear you have absolutely no idea of how Apple does things,
JR.
What you do not understand, Jolly Roger, is there are _multiple_ times
you must log into an Apple device, as witnessed by the very images I provided.
For example, there's an iCloud login and there's an iMessage login,
JR.
And there's plenty more, Jolly Roger, none of which are you aware of.
I have an iPhone SE (1st gen) semi-permanently mounted to the
windshield of my car that hasn't been logged into iCloud for years,
and it functions as a dedicated dash cam without issue.
uneducated
ignorant
iKooks
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
And it's clear you have absolutely no idea of how Apple does things,
JR.
Projection. It is *you* who has absolutely no idea how Apple devices
work.
you iKooks have no clue whatsoever
there's a login into the iMessage server and _another_ login into the
iCloud server.
It's no longer shocking you iKooka have no idea how Apple products
work.
Nope. My iPhone SE hasn't asked or required a login for *years* and
continues to work just fine. You don't know what you are talking
about.
Ah, but I do. I know full well what happens if you don't log into
Apple servers when they ask you to "Update Apple ID settings" as shown
here.
You think iCloud is mandatory when it's not. You think Apple requires
you to log in, when they do not. You are a useless, know-nothing
troll.
I understand you better than you know yourself
I forgive you for lashing out at me
You caused that by logging into iCloud and iMessage, Arlen. And the
fact that you think the rest of us don't know that is pathetic. Your
trolls are as weak as your interpersonal skills.
No. You're wrong Jolly Roger.
Apple who forces you to identify yourself with a government ID if you
ever stop logging into it.
It's clear you have absolutely no idea that you're continually logging
into Apple servers
almost nothing works on Apple products if you simply choose to NOT log
into Apple's mothership tracking servers every single moment of the
rest of your life
you iKooks have no clue whatsoever
More projection. BTW, repeating yourself isn't winning you any points,
dumb ass.
there's a login into the iMessage server and _another_ login into the
iCloud server.
Yes, bozo. That's what happens when you log into a server - it asks for
your credentials. You really are *this* fucking stupid, huh?
It's no longer shocking you iKooka have no idea how Apple products
work.
More projection. You exude weak-mindedness.
Nope. My iPhone SE hasn't asked or required a login for *years* and
continues to work just fine. You don't know what you are talking
about.
Ah, but I do. I know full well what happens if you don't log into
Apple servers when they ask you to "Update Apple ID settings" as shown
here.
No, you clearly don't know that if you hadn't logged into it in the
first place, it would never ask for your credentials.
You are truly an
idiot. You log into servers and then complain when they ask for your credentials, like a complete moron. Are you a boomer? Because you sire
think like one.
You think iCloud is mandatory when it's not. You think Apple requires
you to log in, when they do not. You are a useless, know-nothing
troll.
I understand you better than you know yourself
In your fevered dreams.
I forgive you for lashing out at me
And I hope you die soon. On that day, we'll
celebrate with a drink here, because the world will instantly become a
bit brighter due to your absence. Count on that.
You caused that by logging into iCloud and iMessage. And the
fact that you think the rest of us don't know that is pathetic. Your
trolls are as weak as your interpersonal skills.
No. You're wrong Jolly Roger.
Nope, I'm right. And I have a years-old 1st generation iPhone SE right
here that is living proof. I haven't been asked to log into *any* Apple servers for literal *years*. You *desperately* want to pretend this
isn't the case, but it is. And nothing you can ever say will change this reality.
Apple who forces you to identify yourself with a government ID if you
ever stop logging into it.
Nope. You already admitted you never logged out and then forgot your credentials, like the complete idiot you are.
It's clear you have absolutely no idea that you're continually logging
into Apple servers
It's clear you *desperately* want to pretend my iPhone SE hasn't been
logged into an Apple server in many years and works just fine.
You also
comically don't remember you already admitted staying logged into Apple servers then forgetting your own username and password, before turning
around and claiming Apple fucked you like the complete jackass you are.
And you apparently think the rest of us don't remember that too.
Dementia is setting in, eh?
almost nothing works on Apple products if you simply choose to NOT log
into Apple's mothership tracking servers every single moment of the
rest of your life
Objectively and laughably false.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
you iKooks have no clue whatsoever
More projection. BTW, repeating yourself isn't winning you any points,
dumb ass.
You call me a "dumb ass" merely because I showed you were ignorant that
Apple requires _multiple_ logins into multiple servers, and if you do not frequently log into those mothership servers, Apple will brick the device.
On 2023-12-12 04:13, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
Google-RCS will fail inevitably: It has no unique selling proposition
compared to other messengers which exist already for roughly a decade.
It will have more appeal in North America as many European posters here
are quick to point out.
On 2023-12-10 04:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
In advanced markets MMS does not exist anymore.
You mean in overpriced telecoms markets like Europe. MMS is still very relevant when out of WiFi range and using the cellco for basic chat with images and video and not using a 3rd party app.
On 10.12.23 14:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-10 04:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
In advanced markets MMS does not exist anymore.
You mean in overpriced telecoms markets like Europe. MMS is still very
relevant when out of WiFi range and using the cellco for basic chat with
images and video and not using a 3rd party app.
*ROTFLSTC*
The price level in underdeveloped markets like the US are almost double
what they are in Europe or Asia.
The price level in underdeveloped markets like the US are almost double
what they are in Europe or Asia.
Then why do they charge so much for MMS in Europe? Have to make up for
the cheap plans?
On 2023-12-13 07:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 10.12.23 14:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-10 04:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
In advanced markets MMS does not exist anymore.
You mean in overpriced telecoms markets like Europe. MMS is still very
relevant when out of WiFi range and using the cellco for basic chat with >>> images and video and not using a 3rd party app.
*ROTFLSTC*
The price level in underdeveloped markets like the US are almost double
what they are in Europe or Asia.
Then why do they charge so much for MMS in Europe? Have to make up for
the cheap plans?
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
you iKooks have no clue whatsoever
More projection. BTW, repeating yourself isn't winning you any
points, dumb ass.
You call me a "dumb ass" merely because I showed you were ignorant
that Apple requires _multiple_ logins into multiple servers
You call me a "dumb ass" merely because I showed you were ignorant
that Apple requires _multiple_ logins into multiple servers
No, you're a dumb ass for signing into servers and then complaining when
the servers ask you to verify your credentials.
If you don't sign in,
you don't get asked for your credentials, idiot.
You have to be a boomer.
There's no other explanation. Also, stop bitching and moaning about
insults when every single post you make here for the past decade calls
Apple users "iKooks" and worse, you fucking crybaby.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
You call me a "dumb ass" merely because I showed you were ignorant
that Apple requires _multiple_ logins into multiple servers
No, you're a dumb ass for signing into servers and then complaining
when the servers ask you to verify your credentials.
Hi Jolly Roger,
I've tested it. You haven't.
In fact, I've tested it, on purpose, for years.
You haven't tested it for one second.
So I respectfully say you don't know what you're talking about, JR.
While Apple brags (rightly so) about how "great" their "integration"
is, what Apple doesn't brag about is that nothing works unless you're constantly logging into Apple's many mothership tracking servers.
If you don't sign in, you don't get asked for your credentials,
idiot.
Jolly Roger, Stop trying to insult my intelligence because it's you
who couldn't pass your GED exam (you said you tried three times and
failed); so just stop it.
I know your IQ better than you do, Jolly Roger.
I know you're _desperate_ for me to just go away.
These morons have no idea that the very fact that all they have are kindergarten insults - says so much about them instead of about me.
Because I study you rather strange iKooks.
You don't even know the difference between a megabit and a decibel,
JR. You proved that many times - and if you deny it - I'll provide
cites.
On 13 Dec 2023 08:58:11 -0500 Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-13 07:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 10.12.23 14:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-10 04:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
In advanced markets MMS does not exist anymore.
You mean in overpriced telecoms markets like Europe. MMS is still very >>>> relevant when out of WiFi range and using the cellco for basic chat with >>>> images and video and not using a 3rd party app.
*ROTFLSTC*
The price level in underdeveloped markets like the US are almost double
what they are in Europe or Asia.
Then why do they charge so much for MMS in Europe? Have to make up for
the cheap plans?
Here in the UK there is keen competition on price, wide network coverage,
and it's easy to swap mobile supplier and port your phone number. The standard competitive offering these days is a SIM-only rolling monthly contract with unlimited voice calls and SMSs and varying amounts of data: typicaly £10/month upwards but can be half that for small amounts of
data. To my knowledge MMSs are always extra - a quick google suggests
£0.5 per MMS is typical. Few people use them so there's no incentive to include them and every incentive to charge a lot for them.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
You call me a "dumb ass" merely because I showed you were ignorant
that Apple requires _multiple_ logins into multiple servers
No, you're a dumb ass for signing into servers and then complaining when
the servers ask you to verify your credentials.
Hi Jolly Roger,
I've tested it. You haven't.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zSvshQf/appleid04.jpg> Apple _locks_ you out!
In fact, I've tested it, on purpose, for years.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8k3GQyj4/appleid09.jpg> Apple tracks your activity
You haven't tested it for one second.
<https://i.postimg.cc/hhFNJ5mq/appleid010.jpg> Apps become non functional
So I respectfully say you don't know what you're talking about, JR.
I do.
<https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg> Apple _forces_ extra logins!
Meanwhile, I tested it also on Android, and guess what! No ID needed.
<https://i.postimg.cc/NG5pHyBx/aurora10.jpg> No need for a Google Account
On 2023-12-09 22:50:20 +0000, Your Name said:
On 2023-12-09 15:19:52 +0000, Andy Burns said:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
Tyrone wrote:
As expected, Apple has already killed this. Did anyone REALLY think
Apple would permit this?
Do have any reference/proof for this? (I didn't see any such thing in
the article, nor in the original Business Insider article.)
<https://www.androidpolice.com/beeper-mini-outage-b/>
<https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/08/apple-cuts-off-beeper-minis-access-after-launch-of-service-that-brought-imessage-to-android/>
So *what* exactly *did* Apple 'kill'?
At a rough guess, Apple have initially blocked Beeper's IPs from their
firewall?
The Beeper Mini developer is already working on a fix:
Beeper Mini developers say fix is 'coming soon'
for iMessage Android app
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/12/09/beeper-mini-developers-say-fix-is-coming-soon-for-imessage-android-app>
But as that articles says ...
"If Beeper Mini is fixed to work once more, it may face a
similar issue in the not-so-distant future. With Apple
keen to keep iMessage to only its own ecosystem of
devices, this may result in a security arms race between
the trillion-dollar iPhone maker and developers wanting
iMessage to work with Android."
so it may not work for long before being blocked again. Continually
being blocked would mean it's not really a viable solution to anything
at all, whether that's Android user's "blue bubble phobia" or "lack of
features".
Beeper Mini is working again ...
Beeper Mini for Android lives again,
but for how long is anybody's guess
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/12/11/beeper-mini-for-android-lives-again-but-for-how-long-is-anybodys-guess>
... bets on how long it will take Apple to block it again?
Amazing. Here (Canada) an unlimited contract with a paltry 3 - 5 GB of
data is on the order of $40+tax/month. This would be a bring-your-own
phone annual deal.
On 2023-12-13 07:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 10.12.23 14:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-10 04:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
In advanced markets MMS does not exist anymore.
You mean in overpriced telecoms markets like Europe. MMS is still very
relevant when out of WiFi range and using the cellco for basic chat with >>> images and video and not using a 3rd party app.
*ROTFLSTC*
The price level in underdeveloped markets like the US are almost double
what they are in Europe or Asia.
Then why do they charge so much for MMS in Europe? Have to make up for
the cheap plans?
since the APIs are public (at least to Google Play Store & YouTube
content they are) there's only so much that Google can do (on
Android) to stop people from having an app that doesexactly what
they want it to do.
In a way, it's surprising the iMessage app doesn't use a client
certificate, that's stored in the Secure Enclave, or for older devices
that's retrieved from the iCloud account.
... bets on how long it will take Apple to block it again?
And it's gone again ... at least for a few users (although supposedly
simply reinstalling the app "fixes" the problem).
Beeper Mini is down for 5% of users, but there's a fix
<https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/12/14/beeper-mini-is-down-for-5-of-users-but-theres-a-fix>
In a way, it's surprising the iMessage app doesn't use a client
certificate, that's stored in the Secure Enclave, or for older devices
that's retrieved from the iCloud account.
What I've said for a bit. Actually any known item that the server can challenge the device to encrypt with an Apple originated key and send
back to validate. This might be a challenge to implement for some older Macs, OS versions however.
Older devices w/o a secure enclave could be easy to mimic, however.
Apple have to be able to defeat this attack w/o maiming valid users.
On 2023-12-11 17:57, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 19:29, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 11:08, Dave Royal wrote:
It is rumoured that Apple will enable RCS in their default message
app in
No rumour. Apple have said they will.
2024 (not replacing iMessage) which is to be welcomed IMO. No doubt
people
will continue to use proprietary apps and protocols when they want
extra
features - eg e2ee.
It does E2E already in some instances. But Apple is seeking a
non-3rd-party solution to E2E in RCS.
https://www.techradar.com/phones/iphone/breaking-apple-will-support-rcs-in-2024
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS. They
are too late for that. :-D
Why "too late"?
"Apple says it won't be supporting any proprietary extensions that seek
to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard." techradar link above.
On 2023-12-12 02:04, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:57, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS. They
are too late for that. :-D
Why "too late"?
"Apple says it won't be supporting any proprietary extensions that
seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with
the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard." techradar
link above.
Half of the world is already using the Google implementation of RCS
that includes E2E.
If Apple wants their own implementation
If Apple wants their own implementation
You haven't been paying attention. Apple doesn't want their own implementation - they want an industry standard implementation not
controlled by a single vendor (especially one that literally makes money
by tracking users, building fingerprints of them, and targeting them
with advertising and malware).
Am 13.12.23 um 14:58 schrieb Alan Browne:
On 2023-12-13 07:16, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
On 10.12.23 14:26, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-10 04:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
In advanced markets MMS does not exist anymore.
You mean in overpriced telecoms markets like Europe. MMS is still very >>>> relevant when out of WiFi range and using the cellco for basic chat
with
images and video and not using a 3rd party app.
*ROTFLSTC*
The price level in underdeveloped markets like the US are almost double
what they are in Europe or Asia.
Then why do they charge so much for MMS in Europe? Have to make up for
the cheap plans?
There are no MMS anymore in Europe. At least in the majority of the
markets. The quality and reliability of MMS is so inferior, that nobody
used them anymore for years. Hence most providers stopped the serivce.
On 2023-12-15, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-12 02:04, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:57, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS. They
are too late for that. :-D
Why "too late"?
"Apple says it won't be supporting any proprietary extensions that
seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with
the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard." techradar
link above.
Half of the world is already using the Google implementation of RCS
that includes E2E.
Yeah, it's not like Google hasn't dropped numerous messaging services before... oh, wait:
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a-half-of-instability-the-history-of-google-messaging-apps/>
And besides, the fact that "half of the world" (debatable) is using
Google's RCS encryption doesn't prove it's supposedly too late for Apple
to work with industry leaders to create an encryption standard for RCS.
It's never too late for that.
If Apple wants their own implementation
You haven't been paying attention. Apple doesn't want their own implementation - they want an industry standard implementation not
controlled by a single vendor (especially one that literally makes money
by tracking users, building fingerprints of them, and targeting them
with advertising and malware).
I've tested it. You haven't.
My iPhone SE that has been functioning perfectly without being signed
into Apple's servers is living proof I *have* tested it.
Your crippled device is proof that you:
1. signed into Apple servers
2. forgot your credentials
3. got locked out of Apple services as a result of your stupidity
4. turned around and blamed Apple like the dip shit boomer you are
5. lied about it in order to troll the Apple newsgroups
On 2023-12-12 02:04, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:57, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-12-11 19:29, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 11:08, Dave Royal wrote:
It is rumoured that Apple will enable RCS in their default message
app in
No rumour. Apple have said they will.
2024 (not replacing iMessage) which is to be welcomed IMO. No doubt
people
will continue to use proprietary apps and protocols when they want
extra
features - eg e2ee.
It does E2E already in some instances. But Apple is seeking a
non-3rd-party solution to E2E in RCS.
https://www.techradar.com/phones/iphone/breaking-apple-will-support-rcs-in-2024
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS. They
are too late for that. :-D
Why "too late"?
"Apple says it won't be supporting any proprietary extensions that
seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with
the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard." techradar
link above.
Half of the world is already using the Google implementation of RCS that includes E2E. If Apple wants their own implementation instead, they
should have done that 5 or 10 years ago.
On 2023-12-13 10:26, Dave Royal wrote:
Here in the UK there is keen competition on price, wide network coverage,
and it's easy to swap mobile supplier and port your phone number. The
standard competitive offering these days is a SIM-only rolling monthly
contract with unlimited voice calls and SMSs and varying amounts of data:
typicaly £10/month upwards but can be half that for small amounts of
Amazing. Here (Canada) an unlimited contract with a paltry 3 - 5 GB of
data is on the order of $40+tax/month. This would be a bring-your-own
phone annual deal. Actually I'm contract free at the moment. So they bill me monthly. I can walk at any moment and take my number with me. They're always "upselling" (more data for a small increase in fee).
data. To my knowledge MMSs are always extra - a quick google suggests
£0.5 per MMS is typical. Few people use them so there's no incentive to
include them and every incentive to charge a lot for them.
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
I've tested it. You haven't.
My iPhone SE that has been functioning perfectly without being signed
into Apple's servers is living proof I *have* tested it.
Hi Jolly Roger,
Unless you're jailbroken
If you actually _believe_ you've never "signed into Apple's servers"
it's going to be difficult to carry on any *adult conversation* with you.
Your crippled device is proof that you:
1. signed into Apple servers
2. forgot your credentials
3. got locked out of Apple services as a result of your stupidity
4. turned around and blamed Apple like the dip shit boomer you are
5. lied about it in order to troll the Apple newsgroups
First off, I know the credentials, so that strawman is remiss.
Second, it's not crippled so much as unilaterally bricked by Apple
simply for not constantly and repeatedly signing into Apple servers
Which I did on purpose.
On three iPads.
Just to test what Apple would do.
Indeed, you fucked yourself on purpose in order to roll your lame troll. You're a clown.
Just to troll.
On 2023-12-15 17:32, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-12-15, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-12 02:04, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:57, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS. They >>>>> are too late for that. :-D
Why "too late"?
"Apple says it won't be supporting any proprietary extensions that
seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with
the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard." techradar
link above.
Half of the world is already using the Google implementation of RCS
that includes E2E.
Yeah, it's not like Google hasn't dropped numerous messaging services
before... oh, wait:
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a-half-of-instability-the-history-of-google-messaging-apps/>
And besides, the fact that "half of the world" (debatable) is using
Google's RCS encryption doesn't prove it's supposedly too late for Apple
to work with industry leaders to create an encryption standard for RCS.
It's never too late for that.
What industry leaders would be those? :-D
If Apple wants their own implementation
You haven't been paying attention. Apple doesn't want their own
implementation - they want an industry standard implementation not
controlled by a single vendor (especially one that literally makes money
by tracking users, building fingerprints of them, and targeting them
with advertising and malware).
Ok, fine, but are there any industry leaders left out doing RCS implementations? Samsung dropped out, they use the Google one instead.
On 2023-12-15 17:55, Jolly Roger wrote:
Indeed, you fucked yourself on purpose in order to roll your lame troll.
You're a clown.
That discredits some perfectly nice, upstanding clowns out there.
Just to troll.
I suspect it's making the whole thing up.
It can't even do make-believe and not f it up.
On 2023-12-15, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-15 17:32, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-12-15, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-12 02:04, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:57, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS. They >>>>>> are too late for that. :-D
Why "too late"?
"Apple says it won't be supporting any proprietary extensions that
seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with >>>>> the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard." techradar
link above.
Half of the world is already using the Google implementation of RCS
that includes E2E.
Yeah, it's not like Google hasn't dropped numerous messaging services
before... oh, wait:
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a-half-of-instability-the-history-of-google-messaging-apps/>
And besides, the fact that "half of the world" (debatable) is using
Google's RCS encryption doesn't prove it's supposedly too late for Apple >>> to work with industry leaders to create an encryption standard for RCS.
It's never too late for that.
What industry leaders would be those? :-D
The GSMA, for starters. :-D
Which industry leaders did Google work with for its slew of failed
messaging solutions, Big Brain?
If Apple wants their own implementation
You haven't been paying attention. Apple doesn't want their own
implementation - they want an industry standard implementation not
controlled by a single vendor (especially one that literally makes money >>> by tracking users, building fingerprints of them, and targeting them
with advertising and malware).
Ok, fine, but are there any industry leaders left out doing RCS
implementations? Samsung dropped out, they use the Google one instead.
That's their choice (key word: choice).
On 2023-12-16 01:15, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-12-15, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-15 17:32, Jolly Roger wrote:
On 2023-12-15, Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
On 2023-12-12 02:04, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2023-12-11 17:57, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I'd guess Apple is seeking a Non-Google solution to E2E in RCS.
They are too late for that. :-D
Why "too late"?
"Apple says it won't be supporting any proprietary extensions
that seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to
work with the GSM Association to add encryption to the
standard." techradar link above.
Half of the world is already using the Google implementation of
RCS that includes E2E.
Yeah, it's not like Google hasn't dropped numerous messaging
services before... oh, wait:
<https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a-half-of-instability-the-history-of-google-messaging-apps/>
And besides, the fact that "half of the world" (debatable) is using
Google's RCS encryption doesn't prove it's supposedly too late for
Apple to work with industry leaders to create an encryption
standard for RCS. It's never too late for that.
What industry leaders would be those? :-D
The GSMA, for starters. :-D
Really? What phones do they build? I have never seen that make.
Really? What phones do they build? I have never seen that make.
Apple is on record
stating they intend to work with the GSMA to standardize RCS encryption. That's it. Not a hard concept to understand. Hard to imagien why you are having such a problem with it other than because you are just low-level trolling.
Google is Apple's bitch to the tune of $18B per year. They'll get in line.
The LAST thing Apple wants is to interoperate with other operating
systems.
Sometimes plans change, either out of necessity or by coercion.
From the more-hoops-to-jump-through dept:
Next Beeper Mini Fix Requires Users To Have a Mac <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422795>
From the more-hoops-to-jump-through dept:
Next Beeper Mini Fix Requires Users To Have a Mac <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422795>
From the more-hoops-to-jump-through dept:
Next Beeper Mini Fix Requires Users To Have a Mac
<https://m.slashdot.org/story/422795>
Anyone who believed it was going to last very long was a fool. The
idiot developers should think themselves lucky Apple hasn't sued them
into backruptcy.
I just tested, and MMS is available in Movistar (Spain).
To test, I disabled RCS in phone #2. Then in phone #1 I tried to send a message. It changed the display note to "SMS". I typed "Aa" then a big smiley. Instantly, it said MMS. I did not hit send, it costs money.
From the more-hoops-to-jump-through dept:
Next Beeper Mini Fix Requires Users To Have a Mac <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422795>
From the enough-is-enough dept:
Beeper Says It's Done Trying To Bring iMessage To Android <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422871>
This was never going to work. Apparantly lots of people in the US paid
real money for this app!
Beeper Says It's Done Trying To Bring iMessage To Android <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422871>
From the enough-is-enough dept:
Beeper Says It's Done Trying To Bring iMessage To Android <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422871>
This was never going to work. Apparantly lots of people in the US paid
real money for this app!
According to the New York Times, this dispute has attracted the attention
of the US Justice Department, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust:
Apple’s Newest Headache: An App That Upended Its Control Over Messaging
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/22/technology/apple-iphone-beeper-mini.html?unlocked_article_code=1.H00.i-Lc.z_aripkZQYXo&hpgrp=ar-abar&smid=url-share>
OTOH I read a few days ago that some 'US lawmakers' were complaining that
the EU was interfering in US tech companies by introducing burdensome regulations:
<https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-lawmakers-urge-biden-probe-eu-targeting-tech-firms-letter-2023-12-18/>
Beeper's iMessage Connection Software Open Sourced. What Happens Next? <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422965>
That might tempt hackers and script-kiddies to come up with new ways to do what Beeper did ;)
I would have thought Apple might bring forward their RCS plans to get this story out of the news. Probably, though, they'll stick to "as little as possible, as late as possible". And maybe "only in the Europe".
I wonder how many iPhone users in Europe like me don't use iMessage at all and just use WhatsApp? (Or similar, though WA's the most popular here.)
<https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/22/technology/apple-iphone-beeper-mini.html?unlocked_article_code=1.H00.i-Lc.z_aripkZQYXo&hpgrp=ar-abar&smid=url-share>
iPhones are interoperable with Android to the limits of the country club fence - and that is sufficient. With Apple adding RCS next year this is
all on the way to the moot bucket.
OTOH I read a few days ago that some 'US lawmakers' were complaining that
the EU was interfering in US tech companies by introducing burdensome
regulations:
<https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-lawmakers-urge-biden-probe-eu-targeting-tech-firms-letter-2023-12-18/>
Congress has trouble figuring out who to please and who to be angry at.
Dave Royal <dave@dave123royal.com> wrote:
Beeper's iMessage Connection Software Open Sourced. What Happens Next?
<https://m.slashdot.org/story/422965>
That might tempt hackers and script-kiddies to come up with new ways to do >> what Beeper did ;)
I would have thought Apple might bring forward their RCS plans to get this >> story out of the news. Probably, though, they'll stick to "as little as
possible, as late as possible". And maybe "only in the Europe".
I wonder how many iPhone users in Europe like me don't use iMessage at all >> and just use WhatsApp? (Or similar, though WA's the most popular here.)
Here in The Netherlands everyone uses WhatsApp. Anything else is
noise and iMessage isn't even that. From others, I uderstand that the situation is the same in most - if not all - of the rest of Europe.
There used to be a time when Apple users used FaceTime amongst
themselves, but since a long time ago, most text IM platforms have added video calling and I haven't heard anyone mention FaceTime since.
This obviously isn't about them though. It's about a bunch of
Android users trying to use iMessage without Apple devices.
Beeper's iMessage Connection Software Open Sourced. What Happens Next? <https://m.slashdot.org/story/422965>
That might tempt hackers and script-kiddies to come up with new ways
to do what Beeper did ;)
I would have thought Apple might bring forward their RCS plans to get
this story out of the news.
I wonder how many iPhone users in Europe like me don't use iMessage at
all and just use WhatsApp? (Or similar, though WA's the most popular
here.)
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote
This obviously isn't about them though. It's about a bunch of
Android users trying to use iMessage without Apple devices.
Having studied Apple's court cases over the years, I respectfully disagree.
While the iKooks missed the point of the EU & Congress potentially getting involved, and also in why Beeper might want to donate the code to the open source community - what's important to note is the facts of the matter.
Apple is on record (from the Epic deposition) of telling the truth - where they were legally required NOT to lie - as to what their real intentions
were with respect to integrating their messaging with that of Android.
Apple had said at that time they had NO INTENTION OF EVER interoperating
with Android messaging - and Apple even clearly stated why they won't.
Apple clearly stated in those now-public documents that they would lose
their messaging walled-garden lock particularly on the young customer base.
The fact is... *Apple NEVER had intentions of interoperating with Android*.
Hence, excuses by Apple for killing Beeper are false (as Apple historically has only told the truth when forced to do so under oath in a court of law).
Dave Royal wrote:
From: "Dave Royal" <dave@dave123royal.com>
Subject: Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage
protocol Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2023 08:18:48 -0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <um8ph8$2gehq$1@dont-email.me>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
User-Agent: PyKiN 0.5 (Android)
What is this PyKin newsreader you have? I have not been able to find
it on Google Play or the internet.
On 2024-01-09 02:50:49 +0000, badgolferman said:
What is this PyKin newsreader you have? I have not been able to find
it on Google Play or the internet.
It's a custom-made newsreader. Quoting another of Dave Royal's posts
back in June 2023 ...
"I wrote it, in Python using Kivy, to handle Mozilla's
news server, now closed down. It's incomplete, and
_v e r y_ slow. I recently started using it again
because my previous Android newsreader could no
longer quote properly. It's far too slow for release."
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 09:19:32 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Files: | 12,213 |
| Messages: | 5,336,264 |
