5 ms·

This is insane. I have never heard of these and after checking I also have them on my iDevice. Tmobile should explain what wingman is and why it's on IOS device

by s3p 4y ago

This is insane. I have never heard of these and after checking I also have them on my iDevice. Tmobile should explain what wingman is and why it's on IOS devices.

ajmurmann 4y ago
I don't understand why Apple allows carriers to do this. Apple id a well-respected brand by most of their customers while carriers are seen as an evil you cannot do without.
- jrockway 4y ago
  I suppose "brand perception" loses to "we bought all the RF spectrum". If T-mobile, AT&T, and Verizon say "no iPhone", guess who is out of business? Not the spectrum owners.
  - nulbyte 4y ago
    > If T-mobile, AT&T, and Verizon say "no iPhone", guess who is out of business? If Apple said, "no, you can't force users onto Wi-Fi networks without their consent," T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon would just say, "ok, it was worth a try," and carry on as if nothing happened. People will still want Apple products in sufficient numbers, and carriers will still want money from those people. But Apple isn't interested in what people want, Apple is interested in what they can convince people they want.
  - tekknik 4y ago
    I mean I’m certainly not switching back to a dumb phone or android. And since iOS maintains 56% market share in the US Apple can easily force some hands.
  - isleyaardvark 4y ago
    Apple already fought and won that battle when they introduced the iPhone, when they had much less negotiating power than today.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    If my cellular provider stopped supporting iPhones as a first class device I would switch providers by the end of the billing period, no question. AT&T got my business by supporting the iPhone first. I assume if one major carrier drops the iPhone the other would recognize the opportunity and court users asap.
- leephillips 4y ago
  > a well-respected brand by most of their customers Not surprising. I don’t respect or trust them, so I’m not one of their customers.
  - bhawks 4y ago
    Not respecting or trusting Apple is a valid position to have. Not sure why people would down vote this. It's clear that Apple uses the feelings of trust and respect in their marketing campaigns, but this is just a calculated strategy that works for them. As a company, they are like most companies - they desire to create and maximize revenue streams. To the extent that they value trust and respect they actually value customer perceived trust and respect as it relates to their marketing strategies. Tl;Dr if they think they can get away with things that are customer hostile without tarnishing their marketing image they'll do it. They will take calculated risks here as well. Examples: Apple will hold a monopoly on iOS for books and this is fine: https://www.techemails.com/p/ibooks-is-going-to-be-the-only-bookstore-on-ios https://www.techemails.com/p/ibooks-is-going-to-be-the-only-... Apple forces a 30% fees on subscriptions, negotiates with Uber (and presumably others) to pass this cost directly onto the user in cases where the margin is so low the 3rd party cannot economically eat the fee: https://www.techemails.com/p/lets-take-a-cut-of-membership-programs https://www.techemails.com/p/lets-take-a-cut-of-membership-p... iMessage is exclusive to iPhone because they fear that parents may buy Android for their children over iPhones if the app was available on both - which obviously indicates that the dark UX treatment of non iMessage sms (green bubbles) is an intentional segmentation of the messaging ecosystem designed to bring users to the iphone thru social effects. Any platitudes to security are purely marketing. https://www.techemails.com/p/imessage-for-android https://www.techemails.com/p/imessage-for-android Apple is a company, their users are revenue streams, trust and respect matter in terms perspective not in terms of meaningful action. They will do things that put their trust/respect at calculated risks to maximize revenue. Folks thinking otherwise are pleasantly naive - it is totally reasonable to question Apple's actions and motivations.
    - nl 4y ago
      Apple's priorities are, in order: Apple End Users Distribution partners Other companies Once you realize that then their decisions make sense. And for me these priorities aren't the worst thing ever. Yes, Apple putting Apple first means I pay a premium. (And BTW, to clarify: Apple has a book store monopoly on iOS, not "a monopoly on iOS for books". I can read my Kindle books perfectly fine)
- thefz 4y ago
  Because without the ability to join carriers' networks, Apple would be selling overpriced paperweights. How can Apple be well-respected after wanting to scan your photos for CSAM is well beyond me, but I guess everyone is different.
  - aerique 4y ago
    Reality Distortion Field
  - theshrike79 4y ago
    BTW, every single cloud provider does CSAM scanning.
    - kmbfjr 4y ago
      Yes they do, but they don’t using MY device (phone, tablet, PC) before it touches their infrastructure.
      - theshrike79 4y ago
        I count that as a plus. If the scanning is done on my device, they have zero reasons to scan the content in the cloud and thus can encrypt it at rest so nobody can access it even with a warrant. But I've had this same argument a thousand times and it's like shouting at the tide and trying to stop it...
        lucasyvas 4y ago
        The reason you are likely wrong here is because it's an ownership boundary - the cloud service is understood to be renting, but you purchased the phone and own it. What you are suggesting doesn't necessarily make zero sense to desire, but practically speaking I don't think it makes sense based on the transactions that have occurred in this scenario. They may have a right to do that stuff on the cloud, but they don't have a right to do it on your device. It has nothing to do with which is better.
- mihaaly 4y ago
  "Apple id a well-respected brand". Less and less so. With stunts like this.
  - IYasha 4y ago
    I had a chuckle too. Maybe it was, in 20th century.
- RetpolineDrama 4y ago
  Maybe Apple doesn't know carriers are doing this and the capability is an oversight? Verizon and AT&T seem to be respecting the user auto-join preference flag. I'm thinking Apple didn't expect the carrier to do this.
judge2020 4y ago
Probably to force more traffic onto wifi to keep people off of their network whenever possible.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
cryptonector 4y ago
https://community.t-mobile.com/coverage-signal-32/t-mobile-wingman-managed-wifi-settings-on-iphone-46999 https://community.t-mobile.com/coverage-signal-32/t-mobile-w...
codethief 4y ago
> what wingman is Not really related but hypothesizing it's the following makes me chuckle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8OnoxKotPQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8OnoxKotPQ
tekknik 4y ago
T-mobile here as well, no wingman. This means you’ve used in flight wifi.

by s3p 4y ago

This is insane. I have never heard of these and after checking I also have them on my iDevice. Tmobile should explain what wingman is and why it's on IOS devices.

ajmurmann 4y ago

I don't understand why Apple allows carriers to do this. Apple id a well-respected brand by most of their customers while carriers are seen as an evil you cannot do without.

jrockway 4y ago
I suppose "brand perception" loses to "we bought all the RF spectrum". If T-mobile, AT&T, and Verizon say "no iPhone", guess who is out of business? Not the spectrum owners.
- nulbyte 4y ago
  > If T-mobile, AT&T, and Verizon say "no iPhone", guess who is out of business? If Apple said, "no, you can't force users onto Wi-Fi networks without their consent," T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon would just say, "ok, it was worth a try," and carry on as if nothing happened. People will still want Apple products in sufficient numbers, and carriers will still want money from those people. But Apple isn't interested in what people want, Apple is interested in what they can convince people they want.
- tekknik 4y ago
  I mean I’m certainly not switching back to a dumb phone or android. And since iOS maintains 56% market share in the US Apple can easily force some hands.
- isleyaardvark 4y ago
  Apple already fought and won that battle when they introduced the iPhone, when they had much less negotiating power than today.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  If my cellular provider stopped supporting iPhones as a first class device I would switch providers by the end of the billing period, no question. AT&T got my business by supporting the iPhone first. I assume if one major carrier drops the iPhone the other would recognize the opportunity and court users asap.
leephillips 4y ago
> a well-respected brand by most of their customers Not surprising. I don’t respect or trust them, so I’m not one of their customers.
- bhawks 4y ago
  Not respecting or trusting Apple is a valid position to have. Not sure why people would down vote this. It's clear that Apple uses the feelings of trust and respect in their marketing campaigns, but this is just a calculated strategy that works for them. As a company, they are like most companies - they desire to create and maximize revenue streams. To the extent that they value trust and respect they actually value customer perceived trust and respect as it relates to their marketing strategies. Tl;Dr if they think they can get away with things that are customer hostile without tarnishing their marketing image they'll do it. They will take calculated risks here as well. Examples: Apple will hold a monopoly on iOS for books and this is fine: https://www.techemails.com/p/ibooks-is-going-to-be-the-only-bookstore-on-ios https://www.techemails.com/p/ibooks-is-going-to-be-the-only-... Apple forces a 30% fees on subscriptions, negotiates with Uber (and presumably others) to pass this cost directly onto the user in cases where the margin is so low the 3rd party cannot economically eat the fee: https://www.techemails.com/p/lets-take-a-cut-of-membership-programs https://www.techemails.com/p/lets-take-a-cut-of-membership-p... iMessage is exclusive to iPhone because they fear that parents may buy Android for their children over iPhones if the app was available on both - which obviously indicates that the dark UX treatment of non iMessage sms (green bubbles) is an intentional segmentation of the messaging ecosystem designed to bring users to the iphone thru social effects. Any platitudes to security are purely marketing. https://www.techemails.com/p/imessage-for-android https://www.techemails.com/p/imessage-for-android Apple is a company, their users are revenue streams, trust and respect matter in terms perspective not in terms of meaningful action. They will do things that put their trust/respect at calculated risks to maximize revenue. Folks thinking otherwise are pleasantly naive - it is totally reasonable to question Apple's actions and motivations.
  - nl 4y ago
    Apple's priorities are, in order: Apple End Users Distribution partners Other companies Once you realize that then their decisions make sense. And for me these priorities aren't the worst thing ever. Yes, Apple putting Apple first means I pay a premium. (And BTW, to clarify: Apple has a book store monopoly on iOS, not "a monopoly on iOS for books". I can read my Kindle books perfectly fine)
thefz 4y ago
Because without the ability to join carriers' networks, Apple would be selling overpriced paperweights. How can Apple be well-respected after wanting to scan your photos for CSAM is well beyond me, but I guess everyone is different.
- aerique 4y ago
  Reality Distortion Field
- theshrike79 4y ago
  BTW, every single cloud provider does CSAM scanning.
  - kmbfjr 4y ago
    Yes they do, but they don’t using MY device (phone, tablet, PC) before it touches their infrastructure.
    - theshrike79 4y ago
      I count that as a plus. If the scanning is done on my device, they have zero reasons to scan the content in the cloud and thus can encrypt it at rest so nobody can access it even with a warrant. But I've had this same argument a thousand times and it's like shouting at the tide and trying to stop it...
      - lucasyvas 4y ago
        The reason you are likely wrong here is because it's an ownership boundary - the cloud service is understood to be renting, but you purchased the phone and own it. What you are suggesting doesn't necessarily make zero sense to desire, but practically speaking I don't think it makes sense based on the transactions that have occurred in this scenario. They may have a right to do that stuff on the cloud, but they don't have a right to do it on your device. It has nothing to do with which is better.
mihaaly 4y ago
"Apple id a well-respected brand". Less and less so. With stunts like this.
- IYasha 4y ago
  I had a chuckle too. Maybe it was, in 20th century.
RetpolineDrama 4y ago
Maybe Apple doesn't know carriers are doing this and the capability is an oversight? Verizon and AT&T seem to be respecting the user auto-join preference flag. I'm thinking Apple didn't expect the carrier to do this.

judge2020 4y ago

Probably to force more traffic onto wifi to keep people off of their network whenever possible.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

cryptonector 4y ago

https://community.t-mobile.com/coverage-signal-32/t-mobile-wingman-managed-wifi-settings-on-iphone-46999 https://community.t-mobile.com/coverage-signal-32/t-mobile-w...

codethief 4y ago

> what wingman is Not really related but hypothesizing it's the following makes me chuckle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8OnoxKotPQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8OnoxKotPQ

tekknik 4y ago

T-mobile here as well, no wingman. This means you’ve used in flight wifi.