4 ms·

That's why I like this Beeper mini saga, it breaks the illusion of competition that really doesn't exist between both companies and highlights the enormous powe

That's why I like this Beeper mini saga, it breaks the illusion of competition that really doesn't exist between both companies and highlights the enormous power those two companies have.

Grustaf 3y ago
How exactly?
- realusername 3y ago
  Thanks to Beeper mini, nobody can say "yeah technically you could implement iMessage if you wanted to, it's just a proprietary protocol" anymore, Apple has actively blocked the messaging platform as much as they could. Nobody can say that the mobile apps are open markets anymore, the app would have been rejected on the appstore from the start and is now removed from the play store. Effectively the distribution of this app on mobile devices is in practice impossible now. It also highlights the similar review process and lack of differentiating competitive factor between those two stores. They aren't interchangeable like supermarkets are. We knew all of that already but I like that Beeper mini made it obvious enough that the PR lies of both companies cannot work here.
  - Grustaf 3y ago
    Has anyone ever claimed that iMessage is some kind of open network that anyone can build apps for? I think most people presume it's just as closed as the rest of iCloud. I don't know what the legal status of the protocol per se is, but I don't think anyone thought that you would be allowed to utilize Apple's iMessage servers for your own app.
    - realusername 3y ago
      The other closed networks had third-party clients historically, such as MSN or ICQ. It's not enough to say that it's closed, now we know it's both closed and blocked by Apple. Apple could have said that no other clients really even tried before this case and it would have been true. And that will make a difference in the next antitrust lawsuit, that's one less argument Apple can use to defend themselves. I'm sure most developers expected them to behave like this but now there's a factual proof valid even outside of our tech developers little circle, it's not just speculation.
chongli 3y ago
The illusion of competition? This whole event has a lot of people talking about antitrust action against Apple for keeping iMessage exclusive to their own hardware, leaving Android devices out of the loop. Why would Google want to help Apple maintain iMessage's competitive edge over their platform? Edit: just to be clear, I don’t buy the argument that Apple is doing anything wrong with keeping iMessage exclusive to their brand. I only wanted to relay that argument here to discuss in this context
- realusername 3y ago
  Because they don't compete with each other? They are in different markets and they don't really care that a portion of users stick to Apple. I'd say the opposite, having Android with a 90% market share would be a bad thing for Google since it opens easier antitrust lawsuits. The statu quo is more profitable. See the "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company" quote from Google execs which is representative of what's happening in the space.
- mrcode007 3y ago
  Why would Apple let other companies use their servers and infrastructure ? Have you ever heard of an independent car repair shop being allowed access to the manufacturer’s factory floor ? How about factory floors of all car manufacturers? It makes no sense. How about I go use your home’s toilet when I’m nearby?
  - maven29 3y ago
    While we're at it, let's outlaw web search as well. Clearly, those indexing bots are not paying customers. If a niche enthusiast crowd worth of traffic will absolutely obliterate the underlying infrastructure, allow unchecked flows of spam and undermine the security posture, maybe Apple should just leave it to the telcos who might be marginally more competent.
    - rahkiin 3y ago
      The irony of indexing being Google does not want to be index by others and prohibits scraping in their ToS

That's why I like this Beeper mini saga, it breaks the illusion of competition that really doesn't exist between both companies and highlights the enormous power those two companies have.

Grustaf 3y ago

How exactly?

realusername 3y ago
Thanks to Beeper mini, nobody can say "yeah technically you could implement iMessage if you wanted to, it's just a proprietary protocol" anymore, Apple has actively blocked the messaging platform as much as they could. Nobody can say that the mobile apps are open markets anymore, the app would have been rejected on the appstore from the start and is now removed from the play store. Effectively the distribution of this app on mobile devices is in practice impossible now. It also highlights the similar review process and lack of differentiating competitive factor between those two stores. They aren't interchangeable like supermarkets are. We knew all of that already but I like that Beeper mini made it obvious enough that the PR lies of both companies cannot work here.
- Grustaf 3y ago
  Has anyone ever claimed that iMessage is some kind of open network that anyone can build apps for? I think most people presume it's just as closed as the rest of iCloud. I don't know what the legal status of the protocol per se is, but I don't think anyone thought that you would be allowed to utilize Apple's iMessage servers for your own app.
  - realusername 3y ago
    The other closed networks had third-party clients historically, such as MSN or ICQ. It's not enough to say that it's closed, now we know it's both closed and blocked by Apple. Apple could have said that no other clients really even tried before this case and it would have been true. And that will make a difference in the next antitrust lawsuit, that's one less argument Apple can use to defend themselves. I'm sure most developers expected them to behave like this but now there's a factual proof valid even outside of our tech developers little circle, it's not just speculation.

chongli 3y ago

The illusion of competition? This whole event has a lot of people talking about antitrust action against Apple for keeping iMessage exclusive to their own hardware, leaving Android devices out of the loop. Why would Google want to help Apple maintain iMessage's competitive edge over their platform? Edit: just to be clear, I don’t buy the argument that Apple is doing anything wrong with keeping iMessage exclusive to their brand. I only wanted to relay that argument here to discuss in this context

realusername 3y ago
Because they don't compete with each other? They are in different markets and they don't really care that a portion of users stick to Apple. I'd say the opposite, having Android with a 90% market share would be a bad thing for Google since it opens easier antitrust lawsuits. The statu quo is more profitable. See the "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company" quote from Google execs which is representative of what's happening in the space.
mrcode007 3y ago
Why would Apple let other companies use their servers and infrastructure ? Have you ever heard of an independent car repair shop being allowed access to the manufacturer’s factory floor ? How about factory floors of all car manufacturers? It makes no sense. How about I go use your home’s toilet when I’m nearby?
- maven29 3y ago
  While we're at it, let's outlaw web search as well. Clearly, those indexing bots are not paying customers. If a niche enthusiast crowd worth of traffic will absolutely obliterate the underlying infrastructure, allow unchecked flows of spam and undermine the security posture, maybe Apple should just leave it to the telcos who might be marginally more competent.
  - rahkiin 3y ago
    The irony of indexing being Google does not want to be index by others and prohibits scraping in their ToS