8 ms·

> Of course you can. It's sitting there on your Mac where you can use it as much as you like. For what? I own a Mac an iPhone and an iPad but iMessage and Fac

> Of course you can. It's sitting there on your Mac where you can use it as much as you like. For what? I own a Mac an iPhone and an iPad but iMessage and FaceTime are entirely useless to me because no one I communicate with on a regular basis uses Apple devices. Same thing with various iCloud sharing features. Not using the family sharing offers is entirely uneconomical as well. So what happens is that I gravitate to other ecosystems. I use WhatsApp. I upload all my photos to Google Photos. I mirror my iCloud Drive to Google Drive to share and collaborate with people on various things. I have enabled Apple’s advanced data protection for end to end encryption but it’s entirely farcical as my stuff is all over the place anyway. Almost everything Apple does in terms of software and services is useless to me. They are not locking me in. They are locking me out. I’m paying for their excellent hardware, the m-series CPUs in particular, but I’m using my “spare” Pixel phone more often because the software suits me better. I appreciate a lot of things that Apple does but it’s only a question of time until some other ARM based hardware catches up enough for me to stop overpaying Apple for software I can’t use anyway.

gms 3y ago
What’s the problem here? Seems like you found fine alternatives.
- fauigerzigerk 3y ago
  My problem is that I'm paying for something that could be far more useful than it is, and I haven't actually found satisfactory alternatives. For instance, I haven't found an end-to-end encrypted and still user friendly cloud option for my photos. Apple's problem is that they are selling less to me than they could and risk losing me as a hardware customer as well. Now, I totally get their strategy. It's a bet that net net they are locking more people in than they are locking out. It's hard to tell whether or not this is paying off for them. Not even Apple can know the counterfactuals.
  - xattt 3y ago
    I’m trying to figure out why it’s a crappy experience elsewhere, but not on Apple devices. I don’t think Apple deliberately contributes to Android hardware development to just make it less usable. The ball is in the court of Google et al. to make messaging and video chats less frustrating.
    - Melatonic 3y ago
      That's the thing - android to android with RCS and e2e enabled is pretty comparable to iMessage now. And apple could have just opted into adopting the open standard years ago
  - avianlyric 3y ago
    > For instance, I haven't found an end-to-end encrypted and still user friendly cloud option for my photos. iCloud Photos is E2EE if you turn on iCloud’s “Advanced Data Protection”. That migrates the vast majority of your iCloud data into E2EE storage.
    - fauigerzigerk 3y ago
      I know. That's my whole point. Apple has it but it's of little use to me because of their limited cross-platform sharing.
Grustaf 3y ago
If you don't want to communicate with other Apple owners over iMessage, then there is no issue. What Beeper set out to do was to solve the opposite problem, people who don't have Apple devices, but want to use iMessage. And the poster above did have an Apple device, and wanted to use iMessage, but didn't seem to realise that iMessage works on Macs too.
- rezonant 3y ago
  Only via email address. You need an iPhone to receive iMessage via phone number, and in a country where texting is dominant, you're going to be texted via that phone number, even by your iPhone friends.
  - OJFord 3y ago
    If you set it up on an iPhone once, is the number then linked somehow? Since fully Apple users do get phone number iMessages pop up on macOS too right? Or is that only locally synchronised by Bluetooth or something?
    - rezonant 3y ago
      Yes, you can receive iMessages to the phone number on linked devices when the phone is off. You cannot receive SMS when the phone is off.
- fauigerzigerk 3y ago
  >If you don't want to communicate with other Apple owners over iMessage, then there is no issue. The issue is that I as an Apple user want to be able to use iMessage to communicate with Android users.
  - photonerd 3y ago
    Given Android users don’t have iMessage that’s kind of not an issue then.
rezonant 3y ago
> but I’m using my “spare” Pixel phone more often because the software suits me better. Welcome! Pixel is all you need.
grishka 3y ago
> So what happens is that I gravitate to other ecosystems. I use a Mac but an Android phone. Android because I require the ability to install apps from arbitrary sources, including piracy. Mac because modern Windows is so contemptuous towards its users, and desktop Linux falls apart unless you know the intricacies of its internals. Anyway, transferring files between the two was a pain in the butt that eventually grew so immense I reverse engineered Google's Nearby Share and made this: https://github.com/grishka/NearDrop https://github.com/grishka/NearDrop Though yes, I'm not North American so iMessage is just a non-issue to me. I don't know anyone who uses it. No one uses SMS for actual messaging between people, everyone's SMS inbox is 99% OTP codes and various other automatic notifications. Literally everyone who I communicate with is reachable through Telegram.
- pjmlp 3y ago
  Actually it is more like knowing the intricacies of its distribution specific internals.
- bonney_io 3y ago
  > I require the ability to install apps from arbitrary sources, including piracy. No one "requires" access to theft.
  - 4ndrewl 3y ago
    If you want to play semantics, you can't "buy" a digital service
  - grishka 3y ago
    Piracy isn't theft because it doesn't deprive anyone of anything, and English isn't my native language.
pbhjpbhj 3y ago
Can you do what people did with Windows in the noughties, install a different OS and get a refund for the OS portion of your purchase (or for the apps portion??), it sounds like you're not using it?
- norman784 3y ago
  AFAIK macOS is free for people with an Apple device, so this won't work.
  - pbhjpbhj 3y ago
    MS Windows was also included in the price at the time of the legal action over pre-install refunds. I'm struggling to see a difference in the situations -- perhaps I'm overlooking something obvious?
- danaris 3y ago
  ...Where did you get that from their post? Unless my eyes are just completely missing it, I didn't see anywhere that they said or implied that they weren't using macOS or iOS on their Apple devices.
  - pbhjpbhj 3y ago
    They're obviously using an OS, but not the specific features of macOS - ie the bundled apps. So to me it sounds like they could use a different OS, so long as they could still run the apps they use. People often say they are happy to pay a premium for Apple because of the software. So, for someone who doesn't use the unique features of a particular OS+apps bundle maybe they could use another ... which reminded me of the lawsuits that resulted in Microsoft [partners?] having to refund the OS portion of the sale price for those who chose not to use Windows. It was a leap, but not a huge one IMO.
    - danaris 3y ago
      I think it's a pretty huge leap from "they're not using Apple's bundled apps" to "so they must not actually like macOS." I know a lot of people who have MacBooks of various types who use Chrome as their browser (and only access their mail through the Gmail web interface), MS Office, etc, rarely using a single one of the Apple bundled apps (save perhaps the very basic ones, like Preview)...and yet, they would never give them up for a Windows computer, because so much of the OS is very fundamentally different to interact with.

gms 3y ago

What’s the problem here? Seems like you found fine alternatives.

fauigerzigerk 3y ago
My problem is that I'm paying for something that could be far more useful than it is, and I haven't actually found satisfactory alternatives. For instance, I haven't found an end-to-end encrypted and still user friendly cloud option for my photos. Apple's problem is that they are selling less to me than they could and risk losing me as a hardware customer as well. Now, I totally get their strategy. It's a bet that net net they are locking more people in than they are locking out. It's hard to tell whether or not this is paying off for them. Not even Apple can know the counterfactuals.
- xattt 3y ago
  I’m trying to figure out why it’s a crappy experience elsewhere, but not on Apple devices. I don’t think Apple deliberately contributes to Android hardware development to just make it less usable. The ball is in the court of Google et al. to make messaging and video chats less frustrating.
  - Melatonic 3y ago
    That's the thing - android to android with RCS and e2e enabled is pretty comparable to iMessage now. And apple could have just opted into adopting the open standard years ago
- avianlyric 3y ago
  > For instance, I haven't found an end-to-end encrypted and still user friendly cloud option for my photos. iCloud Photos is E2EE if you turn on iCloud’s “Advanced Data Protection”. That migrates the vast majority of your iCloud data into E2EE storage.
  - fauigerzigerk 3y ago
    I know. That's my whole point. Apple has it but it's of little use to me because of their limited cross-platform sharing.

Grustaf 3y ago

If you don't want to communicate with other Apple owners over iMessage, then there is no issue. What Beeper set out to do was to solve the opposite problem, people who don't have Apple devices, but want to use iMessage. And the poster above did have an Apple device, and wanted to use iMessage, but didn't seem to realise that iMessage works on Macs too.

rezonant 3y ago
Only via email address. You need an iPhone to receive iMessage via phone number, and in a country where texting is dominant, you're going to be texted via that phone number, even by your iPhone friends.
- OJFord 3y ago
  If you set it up on an iPhone once, is the number then linked somehow? Since fully Apple users do get phone number iMessages pop up on macOS too right? Or is that only locally synchronised by Bluetooth or something?
  - rezonant 3y ago
    Yes, you can receive iMessages to the phone number on linked devices when the phone is off. You cannot receive SMS when the phone is off.
fauigerzigerk 3y ago
>If you don't want to communicate with other Apple owners over iMessage, then there is no issue. The issue is that I as an Apple user want to be able to use iMessage to communicate with Android users.
- photonerd 3y ago
  Given Android users don’t have iMessage that’s kind of not an issue then.

rezonant 3y ago

> but I’m using my “spare” Pixel phone more often because the software suits me better. Welcome! Pixel is all you need.

grishka 3y ago

> So what happens is that I gravitate to other ecosystems. I use a Mac but an Android phone. Android because I require the ability to install apps from arbitrary sources, including piracy. Mac because modern Windows is so contemptuous towards its users, and desktop Linux falls apart unless you know the intricacies of its internals. Anyway, transferring files between the two was a pain in the butt that eventually grew so immense I reverse engineered Google's Nearby Share and made this: https://github.com/grishka/NearDrop https://github.com/grishka/NearDrop Though yes, I'm not North American so iMessage is just a non-issue to me. I don't know anyone who uses it. No one uses SMS for actual messaging between people, everyone's SMS inbox is 99% OTP codes and various other automatic notifications. Literally everyone who I communicate with is reachable through Telegram.

pjmlp 3y ago
Actually it is more like knowing the intricacies of its distribution specific internals.
bonney_io 3y ago
> I require the ability to install apps from arbitrary sources, including piracy. No one "requires" access to theft.
- 4ndrewl 3y ago
  If you want to play semantics, you can't "buy" a digital service
- grishka 3y ago
  Piracy isn't theft because it doesn't deprive anyone of anything, and English isn't my native language.

pbhjpbhj 3y ago

Can you do what people did with Windows in the noughties, install a different OS and get a refund for the OS portion of your purchase (or for the apps portion??), it sounds like you're not using it?

norman784 3y ago
AFAIK macOS is free for people with an Apple device, so this won't work.
- pbhjpbhj 3y ago
  MS Windows was also included in the price at the time of the legal action over pre-install refunds. I'm struggling to see a difference in the situations -- perhaps I'm overlooking something obvious?
danaris 3y ago
...Where did you get that from their post? Unless my eyes are just completely missing it, I didn't see anywhere that they said or implied that they weren't using macOS or iOS on their Apple devices.
- pbhjpbhj 3y ago
  They're obviously using an OS, but not the specific features of macOS - ie the bundled apps. So to me it sounds like they could use a different OS, so long as they could still run the apps they use. People often say they are happy to pay a premium for Apple because of the software. So, for someone who doesn't use the unique features of a particular OS+apps bundle maybe they could use another ... which reminded me of the lawsuits that resulted in Microsoft [partners?] having to refund the OS portion of the sale price for those who chose not to use Windows. It was a leap, but not a huge one IMO.
  - danaris 3y ago
    I think it's a pretty huge leap from "they're not using Apple's bundled apps" to "so they must not actually like macOS." I know a lot of people who have MacBooks of various types who use Chrome as their browser (and only access their mail through the Gmail web interface), MS Office, etc, rarely using a single one of the Apple bundled apps (save perhaps the very basic ones, like Preview)...and yet, they would never give them up for a Windows computer, because so much of the OS is very fundamentally different to interact with.