8 ms·

I think this is kinda technically a win for Beeper. I would've expected another 100% lockout to be Apple's priority. They were instead only able to block 5%, wh

I think this is kinda technically a win for Beeper. I would've expected another 100% lockout to be Apple's priority. They were instead only able to block 5%, which sounds like a heuristic being applied, and possibly not even an intentional block of Beeper (in the sense that some anti-spam service may be identifying some Beeper users). They can certainly escalate with protocol changes, but they still have to contend with older Macs, iPhones and iPads which are out of the support window losing access-- so if they want to update the protocol they either have to issue out of band patches for these devices or cut them off too. This is assuming you can actually iMessage on iDevices that are out of software support -- maybe our iOS friends can let us know. EDIT: This take seems more plausible (that this is intentional by Apple): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38648030 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38648030

unstatusthequo 3y ago
Apple owns the delivery mechanism. I don’t believe that a third party using their ecosystem will last long. Nor do I want it. There are plenty of cross-platform things out there. Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp. Why does everyone care so much? Google can paint their Android robot blue. Then maybe all this silliness will end?
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  > Nor do I want it > Why does everyone care so much? You seem to both care about it, and also wonder why other people care about it ? Otherwise, looking from the sideline it's fascinating seeing Apple fighting this battle that they brought upon themselves and have no chance of winning.
  - hx8 3y ago
    > have no chance of winning I think Apple will almost certainly win on a purely technical game of cat and mouse. I think you need to adjust your definition of winning. Blocking 5% of messages is a 'win' for Apple. I won't use a messaging service with a 95% success rate. I won't migrate from iMessage to Beeper. I will submit, Apple would have liked a more decisive victory.
    - makeitdouble 3y ago
      My definition of a win for Apple would be to have the problem go away and the attention dissipate. That's how it went for Nothing's attempt for instance, where it was instantly ridiculed and everyone forgot about it. Right now, they blocked a part of Beeper mini, and nobody expecting a rock solid service would join Beeper Mini so Apple's won't be losing any of their core customers. But the news cycle keeps going on, Beeper Mini is still there for those the group of users that wants it alive, and I wouldn't be surprised if next week for instance actual iMessage users came out to complain about getting kicked out of the service as colateral damage from the whole additional filtering. And of course this whole publicity for Beeper is a door opened to any other company to give it a shot, as Apple is playing the cat and mouse game, and not taking any more drastic option. Apple isn't losing either, but they're now dragged into guerrila like battle with no upside for them.
      - nucleardog 3y ago
        > so Apple's won't be losing any of their core customers. They won't be losing _any_ of their customers. For the most part[^], nobody using Beeper Mini has paid Apple for anything... otherwise they wouldn't need to use Beeper Mini. [^] Yes I'm sure there's at least a few people with an iPhone and a Windows PC or something that see this as "iMessage on Windows".
        makeitdouble 3y ago
        Beeper mini is not ready for regular use, so it's not even a question, but I think there's many potential use if it was any good. For instance if you have a mac and an iPad but use an android phone, iMessages will go to both Apple devices but not where you want it the most, on your phone. That's the kind of pain point that pushes a group to fully move to another service if the android members have enough weight, but would be fine if there was a reliable android client.
    - mastazi 3y ago
      > on a purely technical game of cat and mouse based on the history of tech-related cat and mouse games, then Apple will probably lose. Just like Sony could not prevent people from pirating Playstation DVDs, Apple itself could not prevent iOS jailbreaks, music labels could not prevent CD ripping, etc etc etc if there are enough people who are strongly motivated to bypass whatever protection, eventually they will probably bypass it.
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    I care about it because lack of iMessage is still a very good heuristic for spam. Not perfect anymore, but I reckon this will make it much worse.
    - makeitdouble 3y ago
      Your advice was "There are plenty of cross-platform things out there. Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp", but you don't seem happy to take it and move away from iMessage either. This tension is at the center of the it all, and why Beeper Mini exists in the first place.
      - ethanbond 3y ago
        What? I pay for iMessage. You’re just arguing for the right to use products for free, and in Beeper’s case to create monetized products that use others’ products for free.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        Jtsummers 3y ago
        > What? I pay for iMessage. I doubt that. iMessage is a free service if you have almost any Apple OS product (iOS, iPadOS, macOS). You aren't making ongoing payments for the iMessage service. You could say you paid for iMessage in that you bought a device that worked with it. But you do not pay for iMessage.
        ethanbond 3y ago
        Do you think this is a relevant point somehow?
        makeitdouble 3y ago
        I'm arguing that the crux of the issue is a lot more than just "why don't they use something else ?" The same way you see value in iMessage, other users also see value in iMessage. You may want them to go away, but to my eyes that's the same weight as other users wanting to be there. I'll be standing in the corner with the popcorn to see how it turns out. On what is paid and what is free, Beeper mini is free, iMessage is free (as we've learned from the whole saga, you don't even need an icloud account). Using someone else's public facing API without consent is rude, but hey, our whole industry started with kits to plug into the AT&T network with unauthorized material, and as of now no money is changing hands.
- rezonant 3y ago
  Because Apple embraced texting by supporting SMS, then extended it by forcing all the text conversations that they could into their own proprietary infrastructure, and is extinguishing it by using punitive product design to create pressure on communities of people to all use their products so that everything goes over their proprietary network. I don't want an over the top chat app, I just want to text people.
  - Terretta 3y ago
    How do you want Apple to tell iPhone users whether their messages to someone are being recorded by that person's telco and made available to other plan holders on that phone plan? How do you want Apple to indicate if this chat participant is costing you money by the message or free? Everyone's concerned about teens. Presumably teens know that T-Mobile and the other carriers give the family plan adults the ability to read their dependents text messages. As a teen I would want to stick with the encrypted bubbles your parents can't read and tell my parents about, thank you very much. It's not punitive product design. It's seamlessly integrated and meaningful, both on chat leaks and on costs of messaging: Blue sky, text safely. Green could literally cost you.
    - brandon272 3y ago
      I have recent experience talking to non-techie younger people recently about this very issue and none of them were aware of the security differences of SMS vs. iMessage. Teenagers know that blue = iPhone and green = non-iPhone/SMS and that blue offers significantly more features and functionality vs SMS (delivered/read receipts, group chats, stickers, rich media, memojis, etc), which is the overwhelming reason why blue is preferred.
      - HenryBemis 3y ago
        Plus the cost. Over here in the EU, back in 2010 (?) SMS was an expensive thing, you would pay dearly for each or have to buy a "50/100/500 SMS package" or similar. So lowering the cost of 3G made it more economical if your friends had iPhones as now you could spend €20/month for '1GB' (which was mostly iMessage & web browsing at the time) and avoid spending that simply on SMS. (excuse the price inaccuracies if any, it's been a while since I had that iPhone 3GS)
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  > Why does everyone care so much? Happy to explain. First thought, why do you care so much? > Nor do I want it. Why? What about exclusivity makes the world better? Why shouldn't I be able to communicate well with someone using an Apple device? Why should someone using an Apple device not want someone to communicate well with them? Sure there are other systems. But switching costs are so high. Especially with iMessage, folks are going to use what's provided them out of the box. It doesn't seem like a reasonable ask to get everyone en masse to agree to & switch to a lone cross-platform system. What's really needed is standards & interop. You should be able to use what you like, be that iMessage or RCS or Signal or XMPP. But none of these options should be locked out of working with others. I'm so baffled by the strident defenses against possibility. From someone whose name is @unstatusthequo at that, going to bat for status quo lock in seems like a low and dark comedy. Un status quoer, un status quo thineself. Don't triple down on the fixed & limited!
  - 8note 3y ago
    They're using "buying an Apple device" as a spam filter, rather than using democratic means to put good regulations that are anti-spam.
    - nucleardog 3y ago
      Regulations... like CAN-SPAM? TCPA? Or CASL in Canada? Or the "Spam Act" in Australia? Or the PECR in the UK? Yeah, what we need is more regulation. That's been solving the problem.
    - smcin 3y ago
      Yes. They switched to that ~2020/1. You can no longer make a Genius Bar appt by browser on an Android phone; you used to be able to. Seems grossly unreasonable to assume "user has an Android phone" indicates "possible spammer".
      - filoleg 3y ago
        > Seems grossly unreasonable to assume "user has an Android phone" indicates "possible spammer". I think you got it in the reverse order. “User has an android phone” doesn’t indicate “possible spammer”. However, “spammer” typically indicates “user has an android phone.”
- StressedDev 3y ago
  I agree with you. This obsession with iMessage does not make a lot of sense. Apple created a better messaging experience because they wanted to add features to SMS. This is good and it makes things better when both people have iOS. That being said, the reactions in this thread are way over the top. A lot of Android users in this thread seem to think there are a huge number of Apple users who refuse to talk to Android users or that iMessage is some sort of messaging nirvana. Both are not true. The other elephant in the room is Apple created iMessage, Apple pays for the service's costs, and therefore Apple has the right to decide who can use it. Third parties do not have the right to use it. It's sad that sone non-Apple users feel entitled to use iMessage.
lolinder 3y ago
> They can certainly escalate with protocol changes, but they still have to contend with older Macs, iPhones and iPads which are out of the support window losing access This is what people were saying before Apple cut Beeper off the first time. It would be great if there was just one mistake that they made and fixed, but I'm not holding my breath.
- rezonant 3y ago
  Well they didn't cut off Beeper in the way that would block access to older Apple devices. It seems likely that they found a pattern of access performed (or looked at the identifying information provided) by Beeper in order to target it specifically from the server side. Those were not protocol changes. The iMessage protocol remains unchanged as far as I know. What I'm referring to above is changing the protocol and updating all clients to use the new protocol so that Beeper is left catching up. This could involve adding new DRM mechanisms or even adding cryptographic remote attestation requirements.
zappb 3y ago
Priority? Half the company is on vacation right now!
- rezonant 3y ago
  Hah, that's true. Good strategic timing on Beeper's part I suppose.
zem 3y ago
i believe that thus far it's a win for apple - all they need to do is introduce the perception that beeper is not 100% reliable, which is the kiss of death for something as potentially important as a messaging service.
- vintermann 3y ago
  Oh no, if the alternative is getting rid of your Android phone and go buy an iPhone, it needs to be a lot worse than that.
  - zem 3y ago
    the alternative is just continuing to sms people from your android because at least you know the messages are definitely going through, green bubble or not
    - vintermann 3y ago
      You still face such problems as being left out of group chats.
      - StressedDev 3y ago
        Is this really a problem? I seriously doubt many people are going to leave someone out because they use an Android phone. I certainly won't because I like communicating with people and people are far more important than technology.
        vintermann 3y ago
        That's nice of you, but by all accounts from the US (where iphone is dominant): Yes, it's a problem. The visual marking and decreased integration/service towards users of non-iphones is pretty obviously part of why Apple has such a big phone market share in the US - if not, they wouldn't fight tooth and nail to keep those anti-features. There's plenty of examples of Apple being quite open and friendly to integration when it benefits them, and here they aren't, so it isn't.
chongli 3y ago
My father has an iPhone 8 which did not receive the latest iOS update. I can iMessage him just fine. There are millions of people out there running old iPhones like that. If Apple just decided to cut them all off iMessage they would do far more damage to their brand than Beeper could possibly manage.
- flomo 3y ago
  That doesn't seem hard, people like your father can be allow-listed, he's not signing-up out of the blue. (I'm wondering if this "works" because the early adopters were hackintosh types who were already on imessage and not abusers. When the H3rb8l V18gr8 crowd shows up, that is the end.)
  - usui 3y ago
    The what crowd?
    - messe 3y ago
      Spam.
  - HenryBemis 3y ago
    Now then.. if I am a professional spammer (which I am not), what stops me from buying a second hand mac or a second hand iphone (for $150 each) and start 'doing business' with iMessage? Unless it's an issue of 'iPhones can't be JB-ed like Androids can be rooted to run all shorts of malware/spamming softwares'. I get Apple's "this is our toy, you won't be making $2/month/user on us". But "keeping the spammers out" it's a bit.. weird..? Can someone please describe the WHAT is the technical advantage of Android users to spam over iPhone/Mac users to spam.
    - pjerem 3y ago
      The whitelist would be on the phone number/icloud id and not tied to the device. That’d be pretty difficult to get second hand, especially when you can just spam over SMS. They could even release a new iMessage protocol with another bubble color and let the blue ones become uncool.
pjerem 3y ago
Honestly they could just choose to disable iMessages on older devices. For the vast majority of people using those old devices, it would just change the bubble color and Apple wouldn’t fear any backlash. I’m not saying they should, but knowing Apple, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they decided to do it.
rjst01 3y ago
Apple has on occasion done out-of-band patches for older devices to fix serious security issues, so it doesn't seem too unrealistic.
- StressedDev 3y ago
  Note Apple does not fix all security issues on unsupported devices. They only fix really bad issues. I do not think it is safe to use an iOS device which does not have the latest version of iOS.
hexagonwin 3y ago
iMessage generally works well on old versions. I used it just fine on an iPhone 5 running iOS 6.1.4 (from 2012!) last year.

unstatusthequo 3y ago

Apple owns the delivery mechanism. I don’t believe that a third party using their ecosystem will last long. Nor do I want it. There are plenty of cross-platform things out there. Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp. Why does everyone care so much? Google can paint their Android robot blue. Then maybe all this silliness will end?

makeitdouble 3y ago
> Nor do I want it > Why does everyone care so much? You seem to both care about it, and also wonder why other people care about it ? Otherwise, looking from the sideline it's fascinating seeing Apple fighting this battle that they brought upon themselves and have no chance of winning.
- hx8 3y ago
  > have no chance of winning I think Apple will almost certainly win on a purely technical game of cat and mouse. I think you need to adjust your definition of winning. Blocking 5% of messages is a 'win' for Apple. I won't use a messaging service with a 95% success rate. I won't migrate from iMessage to Beeper. I will submit, Apple would have liked a more decisive victory.
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    My definition of a win for Apple would be to have the problem go away and the attention dissipate. That's how it went for Nothing's attempt for instance, where it was instantly ridiculed and everyone forgot about it. Right now, they blocked a part of Beeper mini, and nobody expecting a rock solid service would join Beeper Mini so Apple's won't be losing any of their core customers. But the news cycle keeps going on, Beeper Mini is still there for those the group of users that wants it alive, and I wouldn't be surprised if next week for instance actual iMessage users came out to complain about getting kicked out of the service as colateral damage from the whole additional filtering. And of course this whole publicity for Beeper is a door opened to any other company to give it a shot, as Apple is playing the cat and mouse game, and not taking any more drastic option. Apple isn't losing either, but they're now dragged into guerrila like battle with no upside for them.
    - nucleardog 3y ago
      > so Apple's won't be losing any of their core customers. They won't be losing _any_ of their customers. For the most part[^], nobody using Beeper Mini has paid Apple for anything... otherwise they wouldn't need to use Beeper Mini. [^] Yes I'm sure there's at least a few people with an iPhone and a Windows PC or something that see this as "iMessage on Windows".
      - makeitdouble 3y ago
        Beeper mini is not ready for regular use, so it's not even a question, but I think there's many potential use if it was any good. For instance if you have a mac and an iPad but use an android phone, iMessages will go to both Apple devices but not where you want it the most, on your phone. That's the kind of pain point that pushes a group to fully move to another service if the android members have enough weight, but would be fine if there was a reliable android client.
  - mastazi 3y ago
    > on a purely technical game of cat and mouse based on the history of tech-related cat and mouse games, then Apple will probably lose. Just like Sony could not prevent people from pirating Playstation DVDs, Apple itself could not prevent iOS jailbreaks, music labels could not prevent CD ripping, etc etc etc if there are enough people who are strongly motivated to bypass whatever protection, eventually they will probably bypass it.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  I care about it because lack of iMessage is still a very good heuristic for spam. Not perfect anymore, but I reckon this will make it much worse.
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    Your advice was "There are plenty of cross-platform things out there. Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp", but you don't seem happy to take it and move away from iMessage either. This tension is at the center of the it all, and why Beeper Mini exists in the first place.
    - ethanbond 3y ago
      What? I pay for iMessage. You’re just arguing for the right to use products for free, and in Beeper’s case to create monetized products that use others’ products for free.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - Jtsummers 3y ago
        > What? I pay for iMessage. I doubt that. iMessage is a free service if you have almost any Apple OS product (iOS, iPadOS, macOS). You aren't making ongoing payments for the iMessage service. You could say you paid for iMessage in that you bought a device that worked with it. But you do not pay for iMessage.
        ethanbond 3y ago
        Do you think this is a relevant point somehow?
      - makeitdouble 3y ago
        I'm arguing that the crux of the issue is a lot more than just "why don't they use something else ?" The same way you see value in iMessage, other users also see value in iMessage. You may want them to go away, but to my eyes that's the same weight as other users wanting to be there. I'll be standing in the corner with the popcorn to see how it turns out. On what is paid and what is free, Beeper mini is free, iMessage is free (as we've learned from the whole saga, you don't even need an icloud account). Using someone else's public facing API without consent is rude, but hey, our whole industry started with kits to plug into the AT&T network with unauthorized material, and as of now no money is changing hands.
rezonant 3y ago
Because Apple embraced texting by supporting SMS, then extended it by forcing all the text conversations that they could into their own proprietary infrastructure, and is extinguishing it by using punitive product design to create pressure on communities of people to all use their products so that everything goes over their proprietary network. I don't want an over the top chat app, I just want to text people.
- Terretta 3y ago
  How do you want Apple to tell iPhone users whether their messages to someone are being recorded by that person's telco and made available to other plan holders on that phone plan? How do you want Apple to indicate if this chat participant is costing you money by the message or free? Everyone's concerned about teens. Presumably teens know that T-Mobile and the other carriers give the family plan adults the ability to read their dependents text messages. As a teen I would want to stick with the encrypted bubbles your parents can't read and tell my parents about, thank you very much. It's not punitive product design. It's seamlessly integrated and meaningful, both on chat leaks and on costs of messaging: Blue sky, text safely. Green could literally cost you.
  - brandon272 3y ago
    I have recent experience talking to non-techie younger people recently about this very issue and none of them were aware of the security differences of SMS vs. iMessage. Teenagers know that blue = iPhone and green = non-iPhone/SMS and that blue offers significantly more features and functionality vs SMS (delivered/read receipts, group chats, stickers, rich media, memojis, etc), which is the overwhelming reason why blue is preferred.
    - HenryBemis 3y ago
      Plus the cost. Over here in the EU, back in 2010 (?) SMS was an expensive thing, you would pay dearly for each or have to buy a "50/100/500 SMS package" or similar. So lowering the cost of 3G made it more economical if your friends had iPhones as now you could spend €20/month for '1GB' (which was mostly iMessage & web browsing at the time) and avoid spending that simply on SMS. (excuse the price inaccuracies if any, it's been a while since I had that iPhone 3GS)
jauntywundrkind 3y ago
> Why does everyone care so much? Happy to explain. First thought, why do you care so much? > Nor do I want it. Why? What about exclusivity makes the world better? Why shouldn't I be able to communicate well with someone using an Apple device? Why should someone using an Apple device not want someone to communicate well with them? Sure there are other systems. But switching costs are so high. Especially with iMessage, folks are going to use what's provided them out of the box. It doesn't seem like a reasonable ask to get everyone en masse to agree to & switch to a lone cross-platform system. What's really needed is standards & interop. You should be able to use what you like, be that iMessage or RCS or Signal or XMPP. But none of these options should be locked out of working with others. I'm so baffled by the strident defenses against possibility. From someone whose name is @unstatusthequo at that, going to bat for status quo lock in seems like a low and dark comedy. Un status quoer, un status quo thineself. Don't triple down on the fixed & limited!
- 8note 3y ago
  They're using "buying an Apple device" as a spam filter, rather than using democratic means to put good regulations that are anti-spam.
  - nucleardog 3y ago
    Regulations... like CAN-SPAM? TCPA? Or CASL in Canada? Or the "Spam Act" in Australia? Or the PECR in the UK? Yeah, what we need is more regulation. That's been solving the problem.
  - smcin 3y ago
    Yes. They switched to that ~2020/1. You can no longer make a Genius Bar appt by browser on an Android phone; you used to be able to. Seems grossly unreasonable to assume "user has an Android phone" indicates "possible spammer".
    - filoleg 3y ago
      > Seems grossly unreasonable to assume "user has an Android phone" indicates "possible spammer". I think you got it in the reverse order. “User has an android phone” doesn’t indicate “possible spammer”. However, “spammer” typically indicates “user has an android phone.”
StressedDev 3y ago
I agree with you. This obsession with iMessage does not make a lot of sense. Apple created a better messaging experience because they wanted to add features to SMS. This is good and it makes things better when both people have iOS. That being said, the reactions in this thread are way over the top. A lot of Android users in this thread seem to think there are a huge number of Apple users who refuse to talk to Android users or that iMessage is some sort of messaging nirvana. Both are not true. The other elephant in the room is Apple created iMessage, Apple pays for the service's costs, and therefore Apple has the right to decide who can use it. Third parties do not have the right to use it. It's sad that sone non-Apple users feel entitled to use iMessage.

lolinder 3y ago

> They can certainly escalate with protocol changes, but they still have to contend with older Macs, iPhones and iPads which are out of the support window losing access This is what people were saying before Apple cut Beeper off the first time. It would be great if there was just one mistake that they made and fixed, but I'm not holding my breath.

rezonant 3y ago
Well they didn't cut off Beeper in the way that would block access to older Apple devices. It seems likely that they found a pattern of access performed (or looked at the identifying information provided) by Beeper in order to target it specifically from the server side. Those were not protocol changes. The iMessage protocol remains unchanged as far as I know. What I'm referring to above is changing the protocol and updating all clients to use the new protocol so that Beeper is left catching up. This could involve adding new DRM mechanisms or even adding cryptographic remote attestation requirements.

zappb 3y ago

Priority? Half the company is on vacation right now!

rezonant 3y ago
Hah, that's true. Good strategic timing on Beeper's part I suppose.

zem 3y ago

i believe that thus far it's a win for apple - all they need to do is introduce the perception that beeper is not 100% reliable, which is the kiss of death for something as potentially important as a messaging service.

vintermann 3y ago
Oh no, if the alternative is getting rid of your Android phone and go buy an iPhone, it needs to be a lot worse than that.
- zem 3y ago
  the alternative is just continuing to sms people from your android because at least you know the messages are definitely going through, green bubble or not
  - vintermann 3y ago
    You still face such problems as being left out of group chats.
    - StressedDev 3y ago
      Is this really a problem? I seriously doubt many people are going to leave someone out because they use an Android phone. I certainly won't because I like communicating with people and people are far more important than technology.
      - vintermann 3y ago
        That's nice of you, but by all accounts from the US (where iphone is dominant): Yes, it's a problem. The visual marking and decreased integration/service towards users of non-iphones is pretty obviously part of why Apple has such a big phone market share in the US - if not, they wouldn't fight tooth and nail to keep those anti-features. There's plenty of examples of Apple being quite open and friendly to integration when it benefits them, and here they aren't, so it isn't.

chongli 3y ago

My father has an iPhone 8 which did not receive the latest iOS update. I can iMessage him just fine. There are millions of people out there running old iPhones like that. If Apple just decided to cut them all off iMessage they would do far more damage to their brand than Beeper could possibly manage.

flomo 3y ago
That doesn't seem hard, people like your father can be allow-listed, he's not signing-up out of the blue. (I'm wondering if this "works" because the early adopters were hackintosh types who were already on imessage and not abusers. When the H3rb8l V18gr8 crowd shows up, that is the end.)
- usui 3y ago
  The what crowd?
  - messe 3y ago
    Spam.
- HenryBemis 3y ago
  Now then.. if I am a professional spammer (which I am not), what stops me from buying a second hand mac or a second hand iphone (for $150 each) and start 'doing business' with iMessage? Unless it's an issue of 'iPhones can't be JB-ed like Androids can be rooted to run all shorts of malware/spamming softwares'. I get Apple's "this is our toy, you won't be making $2/month/user on us". But "keeping the spammers out" it's a bit.. weird..? Can someone please describe the WHAT is the technical advantage of Android users to spam over iPhone/Mac users to spam.
  - pjerem 3y ago
    The whitelist would be on the phone number/icloud id and not tied to the device. That’d be pretty difficult to get second hand, especially when you can just spam over SMS. They could even release a new iMessage protocol with another bubble color and let the blue ones become uncool.

pjerem 3y ago

Honestly they could just choose to disable iMessages on older devices. For the vast majority of people using those old devices, it would just change the bubble color and Apple wouldn’t fear any backlash. I’m not saying they should, but knowing Apple, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they decided to do it.

rjst01 3y ago

Apple has on occasion done out-of-band patches for older devices to fix serious security issues, so it doesn't seem too unrealistic.

StressedDev 3y ago
Note Apple does not fix all security issues on unsupported devices. They only fix really bad issues. I do not think it is safe to use an iOS device which does not have the latest version of iOS.

hexagonwin 3y ago

iMessage generally works well on old versions. I used it just fine on an iPhone 5 running iOS 6.1.4 (from 2012!) last year.