4 ms·

I wonder if this will prompt Apple to open up group iMessage, such as BlackBerry (belatedly) attempting to go cross-platform with an app. Charge Android users $

by gaius 8y ago

I wonder if this will prompt Apple to open up group iMessage, such as BlackBerry (belatedly) attempting to go cross-platform with an app. Charge Android users $1/year or /month for access to the ecosystem or something. Bye-bye WhatsApp overnight, in lucrative developed markets.

batiudrami 8y ago
Apple doesn't need 'em though. What's $1/year to a $265bn/year company? Maybe Apple converts a few hundred million of them to iMessage. 0.1% revenue bump in return for devaluing a USP of their product and increased ongoing development and operating costs. Plus I think you overestimate Android users' propensity to hand over even $1 in return for no ads. The reason Apple Music is on Android is that the larger userbase directly gives Apple more bargaining power with labels.
- gaius 8y ago
  What's $1/year to a $265bn/year company? Maybe Apple converts a few hundred million of them to iMessage. 0.1% revenue bump in return for devaluing a USP of their product and increased ongoing development and operating costs. It would just be the same as them selling a 99c app, and the goal would be some of those users for their next phone switching to iPhone. And more high-ground kudos as “the privacy company” which is where their marketing is positioned right now. Plus I think you overestimate Android users' propensity to hand over even $1 It seems to be a general thing on all platforms, people will pay $1000 for a handset and $5 for a coffee but hesitate to spend 99c on an app.
  - batiudrami 8y ago
    I think iMessage is currently a strong unique selling proposition for iPhone (in the US anyway; no one cares about it elsewhere), and offering it for $1 would reduce the likelihood of switching to iPhone - not increase it. Apple isn't really in the business of making $1 apps (that I can think of) - just of selling them on behalf of others.
    - akvadrako 8y ago
      iMessage would be a much better selling point if it was cross platform. Being able to only chat with other Apple users is kind of pointless.
      - randomsearch 8y ago
        Self-evidently it is not.
      - briandear 8y ago
        Maybe a I am an outlier, but I only use iMessage. If for some reason I have to message an Android user, I just let it fall back to SMS. In the US, unlimited SMS is a thing.
        akvadrako 8y ago
        That's fine for 1-on-1, but not groups.
product50 8y ago
If only it was so easy. Why would users pay when they can send messages sent for free? Also, iMessage is not materially adding new feature against what Messenger and Whatsapp already offer - so adoption is going to be a massive uphill battle. iMessage succeeds on Apply only because it is the DEFAULT SMS app which Apple took over and converted into a full blown Messenger solution. Highly unlikely this playbook will work out on Android.
- gaius 8y ago
  Why would users pay when they can send messages sent for free? A combination of awareness that TANSTAAFL and network effects - RIM sold plenty of BB hardware to people who just wanted access to BBM because that’s where all their friends were, so there’s precedent. I think it’s pretty safe to assume that even if there were a paid option for FB, Insta, WhatsApp they would still do everything they could to monetise personal data, because that’s just the kind of company FB is, rapacious.
  - Freak_NL 8y ago
    You're not going to reach the tipping point with just that. Most users don't care one iota about why their lunch is free. They know you feel strongly about that topic, but feel that they just have nothing to hide, that targetted advertisements are really pretty convenient, that they are rather good at ignoring advertisements, that they are not the real target after all with their modest income — that you are just fighting the inevitable based on some vague principle. The majority at this point in time does not seem to care about privacy, but they do care about the price. Also, what's the point of moving to just another walled garden? Apple will still keep the service proprietary and closed to third party clients, so you'll also lose the vocal software freedom folk in your approach.
  - umichguy 8y ago
    "RIM sold plenty of BB hardware to people who just wanted access to BBM because that’s where all their friends were, so there’s precedent." Ahhh...those heady BBM days..BBM Pins and stuff. It's amazing how quickly everything changed for BB.
kriro 8y ago
Interesting, this must be very different in other countries. Pretty much every iPhone owner I know communicates via instant messengers, usually WA and not iMessage.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  I think this really depends on where you live and what kinds of communication apps people use, since it doesn't help to use iMessage if nobody is willing to talk to you when you do.
harrygeez 8y ago
why would they do that when iMessage is the #1 feature that keeps their users from ditching their $1000 phones

by gaius 8y ago

batiudrami 8y ago

Apple doesn't need 'em though. What's $1/year to a $265bn/year company? Maybe Apple converts a few hundred million of them to iMessage. 0.1% revenue bump in return for devaluing a USP of their product and increased ongoing development and operating costs. Plus I think you overestimate Android users' propensity to hand over even $1 in return for no ads. The reason Apple Music is on Android is that the larger userbase directly gives Apple more bargaining power with labels.

gaius 8y ago
What's $1/year to a $265bn/year company? Maybe Apple converts a few hundred million of them to iMessage. 0.1% revenue bump in return for devaluing a USP of their product and increased ongoing development and operating costs. It would just be the same as them selling a 99c app, and the goal would be some of those users for their next phone switching to iPhone. And more high-ground kudos as “the privacy company” which is where their marketing is positioned right now. Plus I think you overestimate Android users' propensity to hand over even $1 It seems to be a general thing on all platforms, people will pay $1000 for a handset and $5 for a coffee but hesitate to spend 99c on an app.
- batiudrami 8y ago
  I think iMessage is currently a strong unique selling proposition for iPhone (in the US anyway; no one cares about it elsewhere), and offering it for $1 would reduce the likelihood of switching to iPhone - not increase it. Apple isn't really in the business of making $1 apps (that I can think of) - just of selling them on behalf of others.
  - akvadrako 8y ago
    iMessage would be a much better selling point if it was cross platform. Being able to only chat with other Apple users is kind of pointless.
    - randomsearch 8y ago
      Self-evidently it is not.
    - briandear 8y ago
      Maybe a I am an outlier, but I only use iMessage. If for some reason I have to message an Android user, I just let it fall back to SMS. In the US, unlimited SMS is a thing.
      - akvadrako 8y ago
        That's fine for 1-on-1, but not groups.

product50 8y ago

If only it was so easy. Why would users pay when they can send messages sent for free? Also, iMessage is not materially adding new feature against what Messenger and Whatsapp already offer - so adoption is going to be a massive uphill battle. iMessage succeeds on Apply only because it is the DEFAULT SMS app which Apple took over and converted into a full blown Messenger solution. Highly unlikely this playbook will work out on Android.

gaius 8y ago
Why would users pay when they can send messages sent for free? A combination of awareness that TANSTAAFL and network effects - RIM sold plenty of BB hardware to people who just wanted access to BBM because that’s where all their friends were, so there’s precedent. I think it’s pretty safe to assume that even if there were a paid option for FB, Insta, WhatsApp they would still do everything they could to monetise personal data, because that’s just the kind of company FB is, rapacious.
- Freak_NL 8y ago
  You're not going to reach the tipping point with just that. Most users don't care one iota about why their lunch is free. They know you feel strongly about that topic, but feel that they just have nothing to hide, that targetted advertisements are really pretty convenient, that they are rather good at ignoring advertisements, that they are not the real target after all with their modest income — that you are just fighting the inevitable based on some vague principle. The majority at this point in time does not seem to care about privacy, but they do care about the price. Also, what's the point of moving to just another walled garden? Apple will still keep the service proprietary and closed to third party clients, so you'll also lose the vocal software freedom folk in your approach.
- umichguy 8y ago
  "RIM sold plenty of BB hardware to people who just wanted access to BBM because that’s where all their friends were, so there’s precedent." Ahhh...those heady BBM days..BBM Pins and stuff. It's amazing how quickly everything changed for BB.

kriro 8y ago

Interesting, this must be very different in other countries. Pretty much every iPhone owner I know communicates via instant messengers, usually WA and not iMessage.

saagarjha 8y ago
I think this really depends on where you live and what kinds of communication apps people use, since it doesn't help to use iMessage if nobody is willing to talk to you when you do.

harrygeez 8y ago

why would they do that when iMessage is the #1 feature that keeps their users from ditching their $1000 phones