4 ms·

They have created an environment that takes an SMS protocol that users think is standard across all cellular devices, and is apart of their monthly phone plan,

They have created an environment that takes an SMS protocol that users think is standard across all cellular devices, and is apart of their monthly phone plan, and instead uses their own protocol (but only for their own devices.) That is hijacking. What other word is there? The average user has no idea that their SMS is actually being rerouted by Apple into their own system, they just know the bubble color is different. Some often assume that because their desktop iMessage doesn't always recieve messages from Android phones that the Android system is broken, when in fact it's not. So you are rerouting an open standard to your own platform, and you are giving users a false impression on reliability of your competition...how is that not hijacking?

dymk 5y ago
They have their own messaging service, and their client supports two protocols - iMessage and SMS as a fallback in the event the recipient doesn't use iMessage. iMessage isn't hijacking anything, as it's _not involved with SMS_. It's an entirely separate system from SMS. If you can't use iMessage, then the client uses plain old, non hijacked, non augmented SMS. The word "hijacking" is being used because it's an aggressive sounding term that makes Apple sound like a bad guy. It's propaganda.
- robmccoll 5y ago
  It's not hijacking a protocol - it's hijacking a client for the protocol. Most users were likely not aware that when they open iMessage (the default SMS application) on their brand new iPhone and send a message to another user by phone number that the application is actually choosing between routing that message via iMessage through Apple's backend or via SMS over their carrier's network. To me this would be similar to me operating as a browser vendor and having my own CDN that implements a separate protocol from HTTP, provides additional features beyond what HTTP can do, and displays a different color of banner to indicate that the website you are using is coming over my CDN. Then I don't allow arbitrarily anyone to implement my CDN protocol or connect to my CDN, so other browser vendors can't provide a competitive experience. Later when I have built a large marketshare, I decide that I'm good with HTTP 1.1 or whatever version of HTTP at the time and stop upgrading my implementation of that protocol. This is damaging to the other browser vendors and of users of websites that only support HTTP. Obviously this is an imperfect analogy given the client-server nature of HTTP, but I figured this might resonate with this audience.
  - tatersolid 5y ago
    Ha! The “own CDN with custom protocol” is exactly what Google did with AMP. They even prevented sites that wouldn’t let Google hijack their sites from appearing atop the search results!
  - partiallypro 5y ago
    This is exactly what I'm trying to say. To me it would be like if back in the day mIRC rerouted IRC traffic between fellow mIRC users into a proprietary protocol when everyone believes they are just using IRC and treated non-mIRC users differently and even degraded their service. There used to be bots/add-ons etc but nothing ever skipped over the original IRC protocol. To me that is akin to hijacking.
    - Melatonic 5y ago
      Google is doing the same thing with RCS though and Google Messages. Android to Android it goes through googles special sauce RCS e2e. Anyone else it falls back to SMS
  - SllX 5y ago
    > It's not hijacking a protocol - it's hijacking a client for the protocol. I don’t know what to make of your analogy, it’s one of those “if facts were different then thing would be different” sorts of things, so just go ahead and read your first sentence. A literal reading reads as Apple hijacking software they wrote and own the source code to… to support an additional protocol. It’s now been just over 10 years since iMessages was released into the wild as a feature of the Messages app and society has pretty well gotten used to it. Would you be happier if they were two apps, one called Messages and with an inferior communications channel and the other with blue bubbles called iMessages supporting all the iMessage features of today? Android had that feature 10 years ago or more. It sucked before you could change the default SMS messenger to Hangouts or something else, and once you did, Hangouts experientially worked the same as Messages does post-iMessages.
    - robmccoll 5y ago
threeseed 5y ago
I think you really need to stop speaking on behalf of average users. Because all of the reports over the many years show that users know that a blue bubble indicates that this message is only going to be readable by other iPhones. And that a green bubble indicates it has fallen back to SMS and will incur a cost. This whole blue message bullying narrative is because users very much are knowledgable into what is happening at a technical level.
- partiallypro 5y ago
  I'd love for that to be user surveyed, because I will guarantee you that most people have no idea that this is happening. They just know the bubble color is different and nothing else. Especially since iMessage the default "text messaging" app. Which everyone associates with SMS. People with technical knowledge even have no idea why Android messages sometimes never go to their iMessage app on iPad/Mac...which happens to me constantly with people missing important messages because something breaks in between the two.
  - prepend 5y ago
    I interact with a few dozen kids between 10-18. Every single one of them knows the difference and that blue means iMessage and green means phone. Especially since many kids don’t have phone lines and use data only iPhones that don’t even have phone numbers. Ask a few kids and then come back.
  - amrangaye 5y ago
    Yeah no - just like the sister comment I too have never met anyone who doesn’t know the difference. I think you’re underestimating the intelligence of the average “non tech” user.

dymk 5y ago

They have their own messaging service, and their client supports two protocols - iMessage and SMS as a fallback in the event the recipient doesn't use iMessage. iMessage isn't hijacking anything, as it's _not involved with SMS_. It's an entirely separate system from SMS. If you can't use iMessage, then the client uses plain old, non hijacked, non augmented SMS. The word "hijacking" is being used because it's an aggressive sounding term that makes Apple sound like a bad guy. It's propaganda.

robmccoll 5y ago
It's not hijacking a protocol - it's hijacking a client for the protocol. Most users were likely not aware that when they open iMessage (the default SMS application) on their brand new iPhone and send a message to another user by phone number that the application is actually choosing between routing that message via iMessage through Apple's backend or via SMS over their carrier's network. To me this would be similar to me operating as a browser vendor and having my own CDN that implements a separate protocol from HTTP, provides additional features beyond what HTTP can do, and displays a different color of banner to indicate that the website you are using is coming over my CDN. Then I don't allow arbitrarily anyone to implement my CDN protocol or connect to my CDN, so other browser vendors can't provide a competitive experience. Later when I have built a large marketshare, I decide that I'm good with HTTP 1.1 or whatever version of HTTP at the time and stop upgrading my implementation of that protocol. This is damaging to the other browser vendors and of users of websites that only support HTTP. Obviously this is an imperfect analogy given the client-server nature of HTTP, but I figured this might resonate with this audience.
- tatersolid 5y ago
  Ha! The “own CDN with custom protocol” is exactly what Google did with AMP. They even prevented sites that wouldn’t let Google hijack their sites from appearing atop the search results!
- partiallypro 5y ago
  This is exactly what I'm trying to say. To me it would be like if back in the day mIRC rerouted IRC traffic between fellow mIRC users into a proprietary protocol when everyone believes they are just using IRC and treated non-mIRC users differently and even degraded their service. There used to be bots/add-ons etc but nothing ever skipped over the original IRC protocol. To me that is akin to hijacking.
  - Melatonic 5y ago
    Google is doing the same thing with RCS though and Google Messages. Android to Android it goes through googles special sauce RCS e2e. Anyone else it falls back to SMS
- SllX 5y ago
  > It's not hijacking a protocol - it's hijacking a client for the protocol. I don’t know what to make of your analogy, it’s one of those “if facts were different then thing would be different” sorts of things, so just go ahead and read your first sentence. A literal reading reads as Apple hijacking software they wrote and own the source code to… to support an additional protocol. It’s now been just over 10 years since iMessages was released into the wild as a feature of the Messages app and society has pretty well gotten used to it. Would you be happier if they were two apps, one called Messages and with an inferior communications channel and the other with blue bubbles called iMessages supporting all the iMessage features of today? Android had that feature 10 years ago or more. It sucked before you could change the default SMS messenger to Hangouts or something else, and once you did, Hangouts experientially worked the same as Messages does post-iMessages.
  - robmccoll 5y ago

threeseed 5y ago

I think you really need to stop speaking on behalf of average users. Because all of the reports over the many years show that users know that a blue bubble indicates that this message is only going to be readable by other iPhones. And that a green bubble indicates it has fallen back to SMS and will incur a cost. This whole blue message bullying narrative is because users very much are knowledgable into what is happening at a technical level.

partiallypro 5y ago
I'd love for that to be user surveyed, because I will guarantee you that most people have no idea that this is happening. They just know the bubble color is different and nothing else. Especially since iMessage the default "text messaging" app. Which everyone associates with SMS. People with technical knowledge even have no idea why Android messages sometimes never go to their iMessage app on iPad/Mac...which happens to me constantly with people missing important messages because something breaks in between the two.
- prepend 5y ago
  I interact with a few dozen kids between 10-18. Every single one of them knows the difference and that blue means iMessage and green means phone. Especially since many kids don’t have phone lines and use data only iPhones that don’t even have phone numbers. Ask a few kids and then come back.
- amrangaye 5y ago
  Yeah no - just like the sister comment I too have never met anyone who doesn’t know the difference. I think you’re underestimating the intelligence of the average “non tech” user.