3 ms·
>you're asking for them to reveal someone’s phone number You're putting words in my mouth (hands?), I clearly said notify said user to get it's consent. It doe
by BbzzbB 5y ago
>you're asking for them to reveal someone’s phone number
You're putting words in my mouth (hands?), I clearly said notify said user to get it's consent. It doesn't have to "synchronously hold a conversation waiting" for anything, the group can keep chatting between themselves and not add the latest recipient before they accept.
Maybe/probably my napkin solution wouldn't be the right one, but if you think it is too technically challenging for Apple to adapt iMessage for Android rather than purely a marketing tactic, I'd invite you to read the article on which we are commenting.
- dpark 5y ago> You're putting words in my mouth (hands?), I clearly said notify said user to get it's consent. It doesn't have to "synchronously hold a conversation waiting" for anything, the group can keep chatting between themselves and not add the latest recipient before they accept. This sounds like a very complex flow. I can’t imagine that this is valuable enough to add. Asynchronous acceptance but the conversation keeps going and the new recipient can’t see any of the new history that was presumably intended for them. This sounds like a mess. Apple could of course ship iMessage for android. That’s totally different from this ugly flow.