4 ms·

> 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

> 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.
- 8note 3y ago
  Apple wins when you aren't allowed to message somebody using beeper, rather than you switching to beeper from iMessage
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.

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.
8note 3y ago
Apple wins when you aren't allowed to message somebody using beeper, rather than you switching to beeper from iMessage

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.