Never claimed it was Apple’s responsibility. They could have helped building the next gen but instead walked away.
It isn’t “secure messaging with Android”, rather messaging with non-iOS parties.
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
It isn’t “secure messaging with Android”, rather messaging with non-iOS parties.
They can work in place of Messages. I have family members who have used them in place of Messages. I don’t know for sure if all of them require their own number or not, but that’s irrelevant because you claimed that the Apple Messages app is the only app that receives SMS/MMS. That’s simply not true. Even in the case of using other numbers on these apps, you can give out that number instead of the other one if you wish. Family members of mine did that for years just fine…That work in place of Messages? Try again. Those have their own “unique” number And cannot be the default iOS/iPadOS recipient.
That has been raised before in this thread.
PS, and again, they don’t require a “set as default” setting to be used as your primary go-to (default) app. Just use the other app instead. And in the case of ones with a separate number, that’s all the more reason you don’t need a “set as default” setting! Just give out the number for that app, and you won’t receive texts to that number in Apple’s Messages app, vualla…
I wasn’t looking at the EU for anything of this. My concern for the lack of security in the SMS/MMS world started long before this current EU endeavor.
Today, on my iPhone, almost all SMS/MMS I get are from companies, advertising, and financial institutions.
You don't know what the survey asks unless you have access to the source -- do you?
Last edited:
Try again. Taking my posts out of context is a poor way to discuss or debate these topics.
If you insist on doing this, our discussion is concluded.
I believe this is what he has been saying all along which I agree with:
Native messaging. Using your real phone number. The number you use to make calls, the number tied to your SIM card.
There are no 3rd party apps that do this. Getting a new number for a certain app and sending it to people for messaging is not what he’s talking about. If any exist I’d love to know (seriously) because I’d use it.
That’s what you said, lol, whether or not that’s what you meant, I can’t know through osmosis! 😂. You said “If you receive an SMS/MMS you are forced to use The default. That is iMessage.” A. We already clarified that iMessage is a service, not an app, and you meant to say “Apple’s Messages App”. B. You stated that “if you receive SMS/MMS you are forced to use the default” (Apple’s Messages App). This statement is untrue, you are not forced to use Apple’s Messages App to receive SMS/MMS, you can use third-party apps to receive SMS/MMS. Your statement isn’t taken out of context, I quoted it in it’s entirety, and it’s wrong in both claims you made at the time: A. The claim that receiving SMS/MMS is only possible with the default (hence the “forced”), and B. That iMessage is an app rather than a service. We already clarified the second statement, so how do you clarify the first? Can you see how the way you phrased things here is confusing, and makes a claim that may not be what you’re trying to say, but is, in fact, incorrect?
Last edited:
Sorry, no, it is badly written and tripe as described. I took WAY too much statistics in college to be comfortable with anything in that particular study.
Since I made no claim as to what the numbers really are, you are asking me to do work I have no desire to do, but I never use facebook's messenger outside of one private group and only in facebook, and iMessage/SMS/MMS is all I use for messaging. (about half from businesses and half personal contacts) That's the only thing I know for sure, and I don't really care that much to do the work.
Perhaps you want to find something better to prove whatever point, that's your choice. I may or may not read it or believe it. Knock yourself out.
Perhaps that’s what he meant, and that might make sense (though even then, I don’t know that all of these types of apps require a secondary number, I know some certainly do). The ones my family members used had a secondary number, but, to be honest, it wasn’t that big of a difference since I’m not dialing their number all the time anyways. Literally all you have to do is share that contact with other people, and it can work as your defacto default app. And it even works for business contacts, etc. as well, you can just provide that number instead of the other one. The app that my family members used was Google Voice, it does texting, phone calls, everything. And if you only give out that number, it becomes your default, no “set as default” setting needed… 👍🏻
You’re claiming that the statistical evidence is wrong, so it’s on you to prove why it’s wrong. You can just say “I don’t believe it” at any statistic offered to you, but that hardly seems like a reasonable response to new information or potential evidence that could contradict your preconceived idea. Just dismissing things off-hand with no provided evidence for why or in what way it’s wrong or incorrect doesn’t make any sense. It just comes across as if you’re unwilling to entertain the possibility of your preconceived idea being wrong. It reminds me of your reaction to Apple’s official announcement that they will add RCS support to the Messages app in 2024, you just don’t trust it with no real reason to not trust it based on Apple’s track record of implementing features they announce that they will implement. You can be as cynical as you want, but I don’t have to bend over backwards to try to convince you of a statistic, when at every turn in this conversation, you’ve yet to be convinced of much of anything, and express high amounts of cynicism over the legitimacy of basic things like official, public feature announcements from Apple…
Beeper apparently is working on a new "reliable" update for lagdroid users with Macs. Which literally defeats the "purpose" of the app.
This whole thing is laughable and truly embarassing.
The average consumers doesnt know what E2EE is nor care. These are the same consumers who use the same password for everything.
A guy i was talking to from tinder for a month, I realized actually never had my phone number. We had literally been talking via snapchat or insta the entire time.
Nowadays, people can scan a QR code and simply message you. Apps nowadays are far more commonplace than traditional SMS with your number.
This whole thing is laughable and truly embarassing.
Apple created a software for their products. Apple wasn't trying to build next gen. They were building an ecosystem.
I really wish lagdroid users would stop with this E2EE and security rhetoric they have. It's a flimsy argument that truly only benefits a minority of people who care.
The average consumers doesnt know what E2EE is nor care. These are the same consumers who use the same password for everything.
A guy i was talking to from tinder for a month, I realized actually never had my phone number. We had literally been talking via snapchat or insta the entire time.
Nowadays, people can scan a QR code and simply message you. Apps nowadays are far more commonplace than traditional SMS with your number.
Sure, but just because you need to use a different number doesn't mean they don't exist.That work in place of Messages? Try again. Those have their own “unique” number and cannot be the default iOS/iPadOS recipient.
That has been raised before in this thread.
Havent used whatsapp in a minute but isnt whatsapp tied to your phone number? Meaning if they have my number they can easily find me on whatsapp?
No, I'm saying that study is terribly worded, so much so it means nothing. There is a difference.
I haven’t used WhatsApp in a while either, but I do believe it is tied to your phone number in some way or other. I’m not sure that it receives SMS/MMS from that phone number or not, I don’t think it does, but I remember having to use my phone number to setup an account.
Unless you are implying that they are lying, they are clear about the data and the source.
Seems like you are pretending there is some sort of ambiguity where none exists.
Let’s see, where’s the “terribly worded” part? They say a few of the percentages for some of the messaging apps involved in the study, and they tell us what their question for the study was, which is "Which of the following messaging services or apps do you currently use?" Seems very clear, no “terrible wording” or ambiguity as you would make it out. Everything here is typical wording for surveys/statistics…
Attachments
No, again, I am saying you can't tell what they said because it contradicts itself. And no, they do not publish the source, so it's not clear -- you can get it if you pay, but I wont. If you have the source, then say so, otherwise don't pretend you do.
Last edited by a moderator:
It doesn’t contradict itself, and they include the survey question, as I already posted: “Which of the following messaging services or apps do you currently use?". This is a very simple and clear question. There’s no ambiguity or “contradictory wording” here, you just want to attempt to discredit the statistic without providing any concrete reasons for why it’s wrong…
That’s why he said “if anything”. He was acknowledging that the court is part of the government and would be considered “government involvement”, but he was saying he thinks that should be the only kind of government involvement on this, not the government launching investigations into Apple and going after them over this…
I really liked the Razr I stopped using when I bought a first gen iPhone. I wont be interested in a folding smart phone until there is one that runs iOS. I like life in Apple’s paradise.
