3 ms·

Apple is not preventing anyone from downloading beeper, or giving beeper money, or running beeper software. They are exercising control over their own servers.

paulryanrogers 3y ago
Blocking interpretability could be illegal, especially as they near market dominance
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  iMessage is nowhere near market dominance. As evidenced by the ease of use and popularity of alternatives such as SMS/Whatsapp/Signal/Wechat/etc
  - AlexandrB 3y ago
    I agree. The obsession with "blue bubbles" is something I only hear about from tech writers. No one I communicate with in the real world has ever mentioned it. Supposedly teenagers care about this, but that seems like a poor basis for anti-trust action. At the same time, I miss the era of rich third party client ecosystems for things like AIM or MSN messenger. Blocking interoperability is a bummer for innovation.
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      >Supposedly teenagers care about this, Android vs iPhone is definitely a thing people in their 20s and 30s even use to judge others. I have polled quite a few family/friends, and it is near unanimous that it is a dealbreaker in dating, mostly because they assume there is a higher likelihood they will not mesh with the type of person the non iPhone user is. >but that seems like a poor basis for anti-trust action. Correct.
- simondotau 3y ago
  Apple would claim that you pay for the iMessage service as part of the purchase price of hardware and software. From this perspective it's not blocking interoperability, it's blocking theft. Whether that argument holds is for governments and courts to decide, ultimately.
gnicholas 3y ago
My understanding of tortious interference is that it is broader than actually preventing others from using a service. Even just saying things to dissuade them from doing business with a company can qualify.
- tedunangst 3y ago
  Really weird that a disinterested third party like Apple would even make loud public statements about Beeper.

paulryanrogers 3y ago

Blocking interpretability could be illegal, especially as they near market dominance

lotsofpulp 3y ago
iMessage is nowhere near market dominance. As evidenced by the ease of use and popularity of alternatives such as SMS/Whatsapp/Signal/Wechat/etc
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  I agree. The obsession with "blue bubbles" is something I only hear about from tech writers. No one I communicate with in the real world has ever mentioned it. Supposedly teenagers care about this, but that seems like a poor basis for anti-trust action. At the same time, I miss the era of rich third party client ecosystems for things like AIM or MSN messenger. Blocking interoperability is a bummer for innovation.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    >Supposedly teenagers care about this, Android vs iPhone is definitely a thing people in their 20s and 30s even use to judge others. I have polled quite a few family/friends, and it is near unanimous that it is a dealbreaker in dating, mostly because they assume there is a higher likelihood they will not mesh with the type of person the non iPhone user is. >but that seems like a poor basis for anti-trust action. Correct.
simondotau 3y ago
Apple would claim that you pay for the iMessage service as part of the purchase price of hardware and software. From this perspective it's not blocking interoperability, it's blocking theft. Whether that argument holds is for governments and courts to decide, ultimately.

gnicholas 3y ago

My understanding of tortious interference is that it is broader than actually preventing others from using a service. Even just saying things to dissuade them from doing business with a company can qualify.

tedunangst 3y ago
Really weird that a disinterested third party like Apple would even make loud public statements about Beeper.