I guess my “next question” would be whether you really consider a lower than 50% market share to be a monopoly? Or are you saying that not being able to change a default app is a monopoly? What exactly is your definition of a monopoly?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Beeper Mini on Continued Outages: 'It's Super Annoying That Apple is Penalizing Their Own Customers'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This x 1000. It’s always a gamble to base your business model on someone else’s platform (RSS readers that synced via Google Reader, anyone?), even when you’re using public APIs. But when you’re reverse engineering private frameworks/libraries or private communications protocols and especially when your business model is diametrically opposed to that of the company whose product you’re using, you’re just begging for a rug pull.
And once RCS support comes around, there will be little reason to use services like this. This has gotta be one of the most shortsighted business models I’ve ever seen. Basically, it’s the Google Play Store equivalent of a pump and dump, the revenue is super front-loaded because the whole idea is to get as much money as possible while conditions are favorable (knowing that conditions are going to become unfavorable quite quickly).
I’m blaming both. And I’m not arguing that all forms of regulation on business is bad, but governments shouldn’t be forcing businesses to share their products free of charge with other businesses. Also, when governments create regulation to “level the playing field” or “protect the consumer”, often times it does the opposite, even if the intentions are good. Thankfully, with the free market, consumers have choices. People can choose to go with Android if they prefer Android’s system, and people who go with iOS have plenty of choices of alternative messaging apps that they can use. I actually use FaceBook Messenger a lot for messaging, likely more than iMessage, though I do use iMessage for communicating as well, because I like some of its features better. If I wanted to, I could choose not to use iMessage and predominantly use WhatsApp or Messenger instead. Many people do exactly that, especially in Europe where WhatsApp is extremely common and popular.
Considering the free market has brought all the modern comforts in civilization today, I would call that a success.
The only time regulation is needed is when people’s rights are being violated, such as slavery or letting children do dangerous work.
Exactly, couldn’t have said it better myself, though I’d also include if a business is selling something actually hazardous to national security (like nukes) or when companies sell products that result in customers death (like selling poison laced food).
If you feel bullied over a bubble color, you're trying to be a victim.
This is an interesting characterization and also leads me to think that, in a sense, an argument that Beeper is implying is that the iMessage ecosystem is a "common good" (i.e., it is public or public-ish) and therefore they should have the right to access it and their users demand its use. It's an interesting bizarre turn on thinking what is and isn't legitimate.
The problem is you're essentially asking Apple to, for free, become the default messaging standard (mostly in the USA). SMS is the fallback for everything because it is an independent interoperable service rather than any one company.
You can't mandate that Apple do something they have no interest in doing, operating the fallback messaging service that uses telephone numbers. This is asking Apple to take on the role of a utility with no compensation for doing so.
If you think E2EE is so important lobby your representative to require that RCS be made E2EE by the end of 2024 and require RCS to be the default fallback messaging standard for all other messaging standards.
Fundamentally I don't disagree with the EU on messaging interoperability but they need to mandate an E2EE approach that looks more like email (or an E2EE version of RCS) than like iMessage. iMessage is a single company's service, so is Signal, so is Facebook Messenger. These are all private services that do not interoperate and with each other and there is no reason they should if they all support a universal fallback to RCS when their own service doesn't work.
These apps should all support a universal fallback mechanism that is better than phone numbers and RCS but there is no real universal identity service that is widespread enough to replace them.
I think the argument lacks legitimacy because there are already fallback universal messaging standards that exist. I think that if we start looking at the public good then, as my last post said, we should be mandating that all messaging apps support a universal E2EE fallback standard (like an E2EE RCS) rather than requiring that existing services magnanimously make their service available to everyone without compensation.
The main problem is identity, phone numbers are great but incomplete, email is a little better, but because the identity problem is hard to solve indefinitely then it is always going to be a bit messy no matter what governments try to do.
It does surprise me how gungho people tend to be about new regulations, despite the tendency of regulations and regulators to result in lower customer choice and greater market concentration. Regulations are quite often weaponized to keep smaller players out of the market, or at least to keep them small. And even when they aren’t weaponized, they still create an environment where it’s often harder for smaller firms to maintain compliance. I’d go into this more, but it looks like this article isn’t under the political news forum, so I’m going to err on the side of caution and try to avoid breaking forum rules.
Oh, but it is about colors. Go to Beeper website and read the very first sentence at the top of the page: “Finally, get blue bubbles on Android”. Further down you’ll read “turn your Android phone number blue”. It’s mostly about image.
Agreed. I think it lacks legitimacy too. Either in this thread or elsewhere, I had posed a question to the tune of something like this: Are we now starting to think that videoconferencing software should receive similar to what Beeper CEO and others are saying, and therefore all videoconferencing software should speak to one another (e.g., Zoom, WebEx, MS Teams, etc.)?
If we are, then ok, we are saying that these kinds of telecommunication platforms/protocols/what have you should be treated as public good.
But, I have not yet seen the same argument made for videoconferencing software and I'm questioning (really kinda questioning Beeper CEO, although I know he's not having me as an audience) as to why not? What's the difference then, per Beeper CEOs logic?
When your whole business model is based on a service run by another company, and you know from the start that the another company won't like what you're doing, then you're making some poor business decisions.
It says a lot, doesn’t it? If the Beeper mini owner doesn’t care about stealing from others, which is what unauthorized access actually is, then what makes us think he won’t steal from his own customers if it serves his needs?
Last edited:
No one really knows what was entailed in the loophole used to spoof the devices. I’d say that is where the security issues come in. Let’s take Beeper at their word and that all messages between their processes and Apple’s iMessage services are encrypted, sure, why not x they have been proven to be above board on everything else with the service. Other than essentially jailbreaking iMessage, where is potential for security issues?
It’s not just about security issues, it also sets a dangerous precedent. If Apple allows this kind of unauthorized access for too long then it becomes more difficult to justify shutting it down later. And if they allow this unauthorized access into iMessage, why aren’t they allowing unauthorized access into all of their services?
What? Apple owns the app. If it only allows iMessage and SMS/MMS, it is Apples shortcoming.
WhatsApp cannot be used for standard comms (say from a financial institution, or regulated business), nor can any of the other as you cannot make them default. As such, they are relegated to the LCD; SMS.
BTW, the EU its not in trouble as WA is not the business standard. You realize there are two WhatsApp. There is a WhatsApp for Business, but the predominate ones used are Slack and Teams. Those are internal. For comms outside the business environments, it’s SMS. My current business arena, it’s Teams globally for business. If you are not a “business member”, it is SMS.
For all else I try to get all onto Telegram or Signal, followed by RCS and iMessage with a dash of WhatsApp tossed in. It’s a mess. Luv to have a smart front end that can handle all these.
Seeing and living this mess I can see why the EU wants interoperability in messaging. May not like their method but something has to give.
You really should read up on RCS.
It is data driven just like iMessage.
It is not carrier driven. Matter fo fact most carriers have adopted Google’s implementation. RCS is now the standard.
RCS is very reliable. Maybe a number of years back it had some issues. Those are a thing of the past.
Lastly, I never said Apple should have adopted or invested in RCS years ago. Apple had the opportunity to help drive the next global standard but bowed out and moved to leverage iMessage to attract new users and lock in existing users. Too bad. It could have been the standard.
Color is a minor item that has been played up in the media regarding Apple users. Most Android users could care less.
E2EE is the bigger item especially as it directly impacts privacy and security.
The only one seeing green/blue, are Apple users. I see it on my 15PM. I don’t see it on an of my Android, Windows, or Linux devices.
Be cool if that worked. It doesn’t.
However if I can get the majority in a group to adopt Telegram, I can usually get the whole group to do it.
It’s a challenge.
Actually I am not.
What I am asking is that Apple work with others to allow an E2EE standard to be in place and used by all. This would replace or evolve SMS/MMS. The challenge is Apple’s refusal to do that. RCS is the new replacement standard for SMS/MMS and does not require carrier support (though most already have adopted it). I appreciate that Apple is adding RCS in the next year or two to iMessage however, as an Apple (and other OS) user I am very disappointed at the lack of E2EE.
Apple has asked the GSM to adopt a standard for encryption, though, so it’s already on their radar. It’s not a feature of stock RCS yet but will be, assuming Apple and Google find a protocol agreeable to both of them (because, let’s be honest, they’re the ones in the driver seat on it, not the telecoms).