4 ms·

oh right - as if a Billion users are forced to use iMessage </sarc> edit an OS web browser tied to the base OS is not the same as an instant msg app on a phone

oh right - as if a Billion users are forced to use iMessage </sarc> edit an OS web browser tied to the base OS is not the same as an instant msg app on a phone. The OS Browser bundling is not at all comparable, by a long measure. Some context is needed on such a large situation. source: read direct testimony on the MSFT anti-trust case

megaman821 3y ago
Serious question. How do you text on an iPhone without using iMessage?
- stevenjgarner 3y ago
  I predominantly use Google Voice, but there are a slew of other alternative iOS SMS apps.
- nickthegreek 3y ago
  With SMS using the Messages app. iMessage is 100% optional and can be disabled.
- wharvle 3y ago
  Settings -> Messages -> Tap the "iMessage" toggle so it's off. Don't even have to scroll to find it (at least on mine).
hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
Again, I don't understand why people try to defend Apple's shitty behavior here. As I said in my comment, I'm less arguing from the technical legal details and more from a "this is just shitty, monopolistic-preserving behavior that serves no benefit besides protecting a company's marketshare" perspective. Apple could trivially easily: 1. Allow better interoperability from 3rd party clients. All of Apple's "user security" arguments are complete and total BS given that iMessage already degrades to the most insecure method of communication if any messages (including group chats) contain a non-iMessage user. 2. Provide a compatible Android client for iMessage (like literally every other single message app out there). At the very least they could stop breaking other iMessage Android clients. 3. Make it easier to choose a text client on startup. 4. Support a more functional interoperability standard - which, thankfully, Apple has finally said they will do by supporting RCS, but only after it looked like they became wary that their blatant tactics would look too monopolistic from a regulatory perspective. There is just 0 user-centered rationale for defending Apple's behavior here.

megaman821 3y ago

Serious question. How do you text on an iPhone without using iMessage?

stevenjgarner 3y ago
I predominantly use Google Voice, but there are a slew of other alternative iOS SMS apps.
nickthegreek 3y ago
With SMS using the Messages app. iMessage is 100% optional and can be disabled.
wharvle 3y ago
Settings -> Messages -> Tap the "iMessage" toggle so it's off. Don't even have to scroll to find it (at least on mine).

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

Again, I don't understand why people try to defend Apple's shitty behavior here. As I said in my comment, I'm less arguing from the technical legal details and more from a "this is just shitty, monopolistic-preserving behavior that serves no benefit besides protecting a company's marketshare" perspective. Apple could trivially easily: 1. Allow better interoperability from 3rd party clients. All of Apple's "user security" arguments are complete and total BS given that iMessage already degrades to the most insecure method of communication if any messages (including group chats) contain a non-iMessage user. 2. Provide a compatible Android client for iMessage (like literally every other single message app out there). At the very least they could stop breaking other iMessage Android clients. 3. Make it easier to choose a text client on startup. 4. Support a more functional interoperability standard - which, thankfully, Apple has finally said they will do by supporting RCS, but only after it looked like they became wary that their blatant tactics would look too monopolistic from a regulatory perspective. There is just 0 user-centered rationale for defending Apple's behavior here.