Apple Being Sued Over Phone-Switching iMessage Issue

[Agilis]

Such an easy fix... I'm not sure why Apple engineers have not thought of it yet. Here's the solution:

Within the messages app, include a protocol that allows users to submit a particular number that is no longer iMessage compatible. When the submission takes place, the iMessage service Apple provides sees a unique code indicating the protocol and sends a SMS message to the number associated with the submission along with a challenge code. The user can then take the challenge code and either submit it at a website that Apple must create or use SMS services to process a text reply.

The website should also take a phone number and an email address. On submission, a service sends an email to the email address entered an authorization link which would be processed by the iMessages service to remove the phone number from the iMessage system.

These 2 methods would solve the issue.

 

[bsolar]

Such an easy fix... I'm not sure why Apple engineers have not thought of it yet. Here's the solution:

Within the messages app, include a protocol that allows users to submit a particular number that is no longer iMessage compatible. When the submission takes place, the iMessage service Apple provides sees a unique code indicating the protocol and sends a SMS message to the number associated with the submission along with a challenge code. The user can then take the challenge code and either submit it at a website that Apple must create or use SMS services to process a text reply.

The website should also take a phone number and an email address. On submission, a service sends an email to the email address entered an authorization link which would be processed by the iMessages service to remove the phone number from the iMessage system.

These 2 methods would solve the issue.

As far as I understand that would only allow deactivating iMessages without the need of the corresponding iPhone. The bug happens even if iMessages is deactivated, so your solution would not solve the problem.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

after a few times, it'll override it and walla problem fixed.

What does this mean?

----------

You mean, Apple needs to fix this for their former customers?

It affects current users too. How on earth can you claim that only one person is affected when a two-way communication is disrupted!??!

 

[SlCKB0Y]

As much as i hate android

Why would you "hate" an operating system?!

----------

You're right. My bad. It's not like there's other complaints on MacRumors daily. How could I have possibly missed it?

I'm not even an iPhone user and I recall this problem being mentioned fairly frequently...

----------

This will be really hard for Apple engineers to fix.

Why?

----------

I'm not claiming to have some secret, I found this information online.

And it only took about half an hour after you quoted your previously posted "solution" for someone to say it didn't work for them....

This didn't work for me.

spinedoc is no newb either - he has probably had more mobile devices than you and I combined...

There is no consistent and reliable solution to this problem.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

so remain civil or look for someone else to throw your petty insults towards.

Your extreme interpretation of anything Apple related makes you a pretty good target for such things.

----------

Apple is not blocking anything. If the sender sends as an SMS, the SMS goes through.

iMessages abstracts SMS to a point that the user isn't consciously sending an SMS, they are sending a Message. iMessage then determines the appropriate service to use to send the message (SMS vs iMessage).

 

[Agilis]

As far as I understand that would only allow deactivating iMessages without the need of the corresponding iPhone. The bug happens even if iMessages is deactivated, so your solution would not solve the problem.

I believe that is not the issue. The post says that users have had success with asking Apple to remove their number from iMessage system and by deactivating iMessage before they deactivate their iPhone.

The problem is that there is no guaranteed way to disassociate a number with Apple's iMessage service. My solution would work because it would force Apple to create a dedicated way to "unlink" a number from iMessage.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

So the real solution for Apple is to change it so iMessage checks back with the DB every time an iMessage is attempted. Maximum of 13-15 bytes of information for every message (the phone number out and a 1 or 0 back as a yes or no). Then even those with iPhone's who have the sms toggle turned off will be notified that their message did not get delivered. This would only have added a few megabytes to the entire data flow of the multibillion iMessages sent and received to date.

This solves the issue completely right? Then even if someone has not disabled iMessage before getting a different phone, if the check is tagged on at the end, it will return undeliverable to the sender when it see that the number is no longer connected to an iDevice on the other end...and even if SMS is turned off on the sender's end it will show up as not delivered. In my view the SMS option should simply toggle automatic SMS attempts if iMessage fails, not turn off the undelivered warnings.

Turning on and off iMessage should also trigger a warning pop up that tells the user they are about to remove their phone number from the iMessage DB, and it should be pushed out to all your iMessage enabled devices to confirm the change, just like when you add an email or number to iMessage. Basically mirror that process.

Is that so hard for Apple engineers to figure out? There must be a complication or three in the equation I am missing or don't know about.

----------

I believe that is not the issue. The post says that users have had success with asking Apple to remove their number from iMessage system and by deactivating iMessage before they deactivate their iPhone.

The problem is that there is no guaranteed way to disassociate a number with Apple's iMessage service. My solution would work because it would force Apple to create a dedicated way to "unlink" a number from iMessage.

The issue this doesn't solve is when other iPhone users' phones don't check back with the iMessage DB when sending messages but have cached the numbers used a lot with iMessage without actually checking in and doing a query. The weird thing is that it reports these iMessages as delivered even when they haven't been. It seems like it is programmed to assume that since it has been working in the past it just will keep doing so. Very odd, as it can't save that much data - these queries could be well under half a KB each meaning each user would have to send and receive well over 2,000,000 iMessages a month in order to use one extra MB of data.

 

[ValerieDurden]

I've had this issue for a while after my iPhone 5 was stolen and had to go onto my back up Galaxy S3, it finally corrected itself after a few months.

 

[MrX8503]

This happened to a friend that switched to an Android device. What I did with my iPhone was tap and hold the msg and "send as text message". Eventually it cleared itself up, but I'm not sure if my friend had to do anything on his end.

 

[Tech198]

wow, that is seriously harsh...

You must speak with an Apple Genius to get your number "removed" from them, otherwise it would still route to a deactivated iPhone...??

This is Bollocks.... This system should be controlled by the user, NOT Apple...

It's also one reason i never use iMessage ..

SMS never has this problem, Its just not reliable...

Then again, it seems neither is iMessage either thanks to Apple and I would also say that it's worse. At least if you change phones and/or number SMS keeps *track*

Apple's iMessage was/and has been always a broken system regarding privacy too.

(Lets see, what else can i rant about.) .. I would have used iTunees to "throw" away the phone number from iMessage, (done by the USER)

Talk about convenience

 

[babaroga73]

Ahem...

This has been a major tech news in Serbia , which is due to have its first iPhone release soon.
It has been translated by all major media with a title " How is Apple punishing users that switch to Android" , with tottaly misinterpreted and malicious translation.
Sumsung is working they back channels ass off , i guess.
Since the same media is full of glorified articles and ads for Samsung Galaxy S5.
Nothing helps the sales , I guess...

 

[sualpine]

YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE SERVICE IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE” BASIS. APPLE AND ITS AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, PARTNERS AND LICENSORS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN PARTICULAR, APPLE AND ITS AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, PARTNERS AND LICENSORS MAKE NO WARRANTY THAT (I) THE SERVICE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS; (II) YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE WILL BE TIMELY, UNINTERRUPTED, SECURE OR ERROR-FREE; (III) ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY YOU AS A RESULT OF THE SERVICE WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE; AND (IV) ANY DEFECTS OR ERRORS IN THE SOFTWARE PROVIDED TO YOU AS PART OF THE SERVICE WILL BE CORRECTED.

You were never promised a fix and you shouldn't demand it. They provide fixes on their terms, not yours.

 

[afs_nj]

Frivolous to say the least

Holding a company responsible for this non-problem is outrageous!

Perhaps someone here remembers the many years of BB-to-BB pin-based messaging -- you switch from BB, you no longer receive messages from other BB users. What's so hard to understand?

 

[numlock]

Holding a company responsible for this non-problem is outrageous!

Perhaps someone here remembers the many years of BB-to-BB pin-based messaging -- you switch from BB, you no longer receive messages from other BB users. What's so hard to understand?

sorry whats the connection here?

were bb users unable to send sms texts to people that moved from bb to nokia or sony or whatever?

how can people not receiving texts from iphones not be considered a problem and if apple is not responsible then who is?

 

[kojinshugi]

Only in the US you could actually win a retarded case like this.

Actually it'd be a guaranteed win in the EU, since our courts routinely side with consumers over corporate interests. Oddly enough, I haven't heard of this bug here, but you can rest assured it wouldn't even need to go to court, as it's eight kinds of illegal already.

And no, this case is not retarded. Since Apple wants to use phone numbers (a regulated identifier) for their proprietary IM instead of Apple IDs, they have to make sure their implementation doesn't break the functionality of text messaging.

----------

YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE SNIP[/B]

You were never promised a fix and you shouldn't demand it. They provide fixes on their terms, not yours.

EULAs are about as legally binding as soiled toilet paper, and this bug isn't on the phones of the people suing Apple, and therefore the EULA doesn't even apply to them. Rather, they are suing Apple because the iMessage system itself is defective and is breaking the functionality of SMS.

If US carriers had any backbone, they'd sue Apple themselves.

 

[C DM]

YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE SERVICE IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE” BASIS. APPLE AND ITS AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, PARTNERS AND LICENSORS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN PARTICULAR, APPLE AND ITS AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, PARTNERS AND LICENSORS MAKE NO WARRANTY THAT (I) THE SERVICE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS; (II) YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE WILL BE TIMELY, UNINTERRUPTED, SECURE OR ERROR-FREE; (III) ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY YOU AS A RESULT OF THE SERVICE WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE; AND (IV) ANY DEFECTS OR ERRORS IN THE SOFTWARE PROVIDED TO YOU AS PART OF THE SERVICE WILL BE CORRECTED.

You were never promised a fix and you shouldn't demand it. They provide fixes on their terms, not yours.

Just because someone puts something in their terms and even if you agree to it doesn't mean they can be negligent. Basic legal principles in play here.

----------

Holding a company responsible for this non-problem is outrageous!

Perhaps someone here remembers the many years of BB-to-BB pin-based messaging -- you switch from BB, you no longer receive messages from other BB users. What's so hard to understand?

So an actual problem that even Apple themselves seems to acknowledge is a non-problem? Sounds like logic forgot to show up at all.

 

[sualpine]

If US carriers had any backbone, they'd sue Apple themselves.

The carriers aren't scumbag trip and fall lawyers.

----------

even Apple themselves seems to acknowledge is a non-problem? Sounds like logic forgot to show up at all.

Show me where Apple acknowledges this is a problem.

 

[C DM]

The carriers aren't scumbag trip and fall lawyers.

----------



Show me where Apple acknowledges this is a problem.

https://www.macrumors.com/2014/05/14/imessage-text-messages/

 

[sualpine]

https://www.macrumors.com/2014/05/14/imessage-text-messages/

Dude, some random CSR from AppleCare does not speak for the company. This is true of all companies. Absolutely none of that information is primary source.

 

[C DM]

Dude, some random CSR from AppleCare does not speak for the company. This is true of all companies. Absolutely none of that information is primary source.

Dude, in an age where most random CSRs don't know a lot of even official company information you can pretty much bet that if they actually do know about some problem then it is an actual problem and one that the company knows about (even if hasn't officially publicly acknowledged it).

 

[HenryDJP]

EULAs are about as legally binding as soiled toilet paper,

And you heard this from where, your fellow Macrumors members?

Or do you have concrete proof that Apple's EULA would never hold up in a court of law?

Because if so then what's the point of having a software license agreement?

 

[smoking monkey]

^this... Apple just needs to make the Send as SMS option enabled on all iPhones. This is the fix really.

No, thank you!
As somebody who uses iMessage with people in various countries that option would cost me a fortune.

 

[divergirl]

after a few times, it'll override it and walla problem fixed.

What does this mean?

If I had to make a guess I'd say it means voilà. A lot of people pronounce it with a w instead of a v.

 

[bsolar]

YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE SERVICE IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” AND “AS AVAILABLE” BASIS. APPLE AND ITS AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, PARTNERS AND LICENSORS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN PARTICULAR, APPLE AND ITS AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES, OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, PARTNERS AND LICENSORS MAKE NO WARRANTY THAT (I) THE SERVICE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS; (II) YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE WILL BE TIMELY, UNINTERRUPTED, SECURE OR ERROR-FREE; (III) ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY YOU AS A RESULT OF THE SERVICE WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE; AND (IV) ANY DEFECTS OR ERRORS IN THE SOFTWARE PROVIDED TO YOU AS PART OF THE SERVICE WILL BE CORRECTED.

You were never promised a fix and you shouldn't demand it. They provide fixes on their terms, not yours.

You conveniently forgot the part just right above:

SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN WARRANTIES, AS SUCH, TO THE EXTENT SUCH EXCLUSIONS ARE SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED BY APPLICABLE LAW, SOME OF THE EXCLUSIONS SET FORTH BELOW MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.

APPLE SHALL USE REASONABLE SKILL AND DUE CARE IN PROVIDING THE SERVICE. THE FOLLOWING DISCLAIMERS ARE SUBJECT TO THIS EXPRESS WARRANTY.

 

[Hurda]

Perhaps someone here remembers the many years of BB-to-BB pin-based messaging -- you switch from BB, you no longer receive messages from other BB users. What's so hard to understand?

You should ask yourself this very question, because you don't understand the problem at all.