4 ms·

>Imagine if you bought a 4K television that had AppleTV built in, and then you find out that the 4K feature is only available if you use the built in AppleTV in

>Imagine if you bought a 4K television that had AppleTV built in, and then you find out that the 4K feature is only available if you use the built in AppleTV interface, and HDMI is limited to 1080P. That would be a very bad product design decision. I would realize that I had made a bad purchase and I would return the TV to the store and buy one that didn't do that. There are lots and lots of TVs to choose from. On the other hand, if you really like AppleTV, you might not care. Either way, it is the consumer's choice, so no harm. Lots of TVs have features people don't like. >There is a case to be made that such anti-competitive behavior is illegal. No there isn't. iOS is a minority platform (globally) by a very large number. Also, there are a number of app based messaging options, many of which are quite popular and some use strong encryption.

jacob019 5y ago
You're first point is well made, however I don't have any other choice when I communicate with an Apple user. Everything is so siloed these days. The lack of federated protocols harms us all. You're second point is irrelavant. Apple is a US company and iOS is the dominant majority mobile platform in the US. I live in the US and I am discussing this as a domestic issue as it relates to me and the laws of my country. We wouldn't be having this discussion if iMessage was just another messaging app alongside the default SMS app.
- dev_tty01 5y ago
  Okay, but there is no iMessage app, it is a protocol available to Messages users. Messages is the default SMS app and it defaults to using SMS. If a user ops in to iMessage, they get E2E and the other iMessage goodies. If they don't opt in, it does SMS and MMS. Even opted in, it does SMS and MMS to non iMessage users. So, the user has the choice to participate in iMessage the protocol or stick with SMS. Both options are available within the default SMS app. The question here is whether Apple should be forced to implement RCS. They aren't stopping anyone from communicating since SMS and MMS are available. I suspect if RCS gains enough traction, Apple might add that capability for non iMessage users. I don't know that of course, but I wouldn't be surprised. iMessage still has many advantages over RCS for in-ecosystem users so it wouldn't harm them to add it. Time will tell I guess.

jacob019 5y ago

You're first point is well made, however I don't have any other choice when I communicate with an Apple user. Everything is so siloed these days. The lack of federated protocols harms us all. You're second point is irrelavant. Apple is a US company and iOS is the dominant majority mobile platform in the US. I live in the US and I am discussing this as a domestic issue as it relates to me and the laws of my country. We wouldn't be having this discussion if iMessage was just another messaging app alongside the default SMS app.

dev_tty01 5y ago
Okay, but there is no iMessage app, it is a protocol available to Messages users. Messages is the default SMS app and it defaults to using SMS. If a user ops in to iMessage, they get E2E and the other iMessage goodies. If they don't opt in, it does SMS and MMS. Even opted in, it does SMS and MMS to non iMessage users. So, the user has the choice to participate in iMessage the protocol or stick with SMS. Both options are available within the default SMS app. The question here is whether Apple should be forced to implement RCS. They aren't stopping anyone from communicating since SMS and MMS are available. I suspect if RCS gains enough traction, Apple might add that capability for non iMessage users. I don't know that of course, but I wouldn't be surprised. iMessage still has many advantages over RCS for in-ecosystem users so it wouldn't harm them to add it. Time will tell I guess.