I’m in the UK. Unlimited calls and texts and large data plans are commonplace. But telcos here still have this nasty habit of charging an arm and a leg if you dare to use something as radical as MMS messaging.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Confirms It Shut Down iMessage for Android App Beeper Mini
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
how is it anticompetitive if u illegally use a companies software and protocols?
I have unlimited texts calls and data on my iPhone, but if a Android user sends a Emoji at the end of their text and
I respond that's 50P, because its counted as a MMS message in the UK and also in some EU countries too. So unless you pay even more for a MMS add on nobody wants as they are costly and even then its sometimes limited to a set amount of MMS images per month on some networks. Basically you can't freely send fun messages from iPhones to Android and back natively.
Users need to either use Meta apps, or ones that your friends have never heard of, and since they are not as popular as WhatsApp nobody uses them. Seeing the pettiness about Android vs iOS just seems childish, well it does from my point of view. Privacy on your iPhone is gone when its a third party app like WhatsApp or its bretheren as I see it, so let people communicate freely and safely, this blue vs green bubble rivary is not helping people talk. Its just feels like device snobbery.
I respond that's 50P, because its counted as a MMS message in the UK and also in some EU countries too. So unless you pay even more for a MMS add on nobody wants as they are costly and even then its sometimes limited to a set amount of MMS images per month on some networks. Basically you can't freely send fun messages from iPhones to Android and back natively.
Users need to either use Meta apps, or ones that your friends have never heard of, and since they are not as popular as WhatsApp nobody uses them. Seeing the pettiness about Android vs iOS just seems childish, well it does from my point of view. Privacy on your iPhone is gone when its a third party app like WhatsApp or its bretheren as I see it, so let people communicate freely and safely, this blue vs green bubble rivary is not helping people talk. Its just feels like device snobbery.
Wow, politicians condoning theft! Whoda thunk?Letting you know
Tim Apple better get on the horn and take care of this. /s
LOL, when there's a question of legality, should I trust someone who has a degree in law and has taught law at more than one university, or you with your one word condemnation.
Lets see, it's not you, that's for sure. She knows law in the U.S..
He'd be smart not to poke the hornet's nest.
Just another perspective:
Have you considered that MMS shouldn't be an extra charge? From that perspective, the burden lies on the telephone companies and not whomever makes the device of your phone.
In the US, it's rare that a post-paid plan charges for SMS or MMS.
Perhaps because it's trivial to implement an HTTP client that makes the same requests as an iPhone?
Given the billions of active "obsolete" devices, there's no way Apple rolls out a change that breaks compatibility.
LOL, like literally any of that matters.
Apple doesn't care about the security.
Apple doesn't care about "being paid" for the service.
Apple cares about having a foothold that makes shallow people more likely to buy iPhones and to shame other people for buying iPhones. There is no security review, and no B2B subscription fee offer that would change Apple's mind on this.
You can trust or not trust anyone you want. I don’t care. Its not as if politicians never practice do as I say, not as I do.
Or she’s talking from both sides of her mouth.
What? I have hundreds of contacts on my phone I can communicate with and they use Android. We talk share pictures and videos just fine. I don’t know what some of these people are talking about. You don’t NEED to use iMessage. It doesn’t block communication between iPhone and Android.
Oy! I think you slightly misquoted or rather put the quote out of context. I was trying to characterize what I hear on this board. That was not my opinion.
The following is my rough characterization of what I hear on the board, and that's what you quoted: "We’re just trying to get iMessages onto Android so others can use it. What so bad about that? iMessages is forcing Android not to be able to communicate Apple users." Again, NOT my opinion.
I don't disagree that iMessage isn't a necessity to communicate between Android and iPhone texts or otherwise.
I do think the lack for a server mattered. They had to go deeper into the structure and code of imessage to do that and that would raise several red flags to apple.
How is iMessage necessary for me to communicate with all my Android contacts? I’m communicating just fine now. SMS is what is necessary.
SMH. I give up. I don't disagree with what you write there. You're not getting the point that you put the quote out of context. Ciao.
Maybe you aren’t, but lots of other americans don’t use anything other than sms to message their non-apple contacts. And many of those people haven’t even heard about whatsapp or signal. That’s partly Apple’s fault.
Ok. Then it would be helpful not to attribute that to me in the fashion that it was done as it looks a bit out of context. ;-)
I'm attaching a capture of what I wrote and what you then quoted, but not providing context that I'm just trying to summarize what I have heard and that it isn't necessarily my opinion.
As you'll see, I used indentation to signify that this is in the voice of someone else and there's even an introductory remark to say what I'm doing. In any case, I just don't want to be associated with things that are easily misread as if they were my opinion. They're not.
Anyhow, carry on....
I look forward to the RCS implementation as it would, as I understand, create more secured text messaging. I imagine though that SMS will still be the lowest common denominator because I would think that some older iPhone and Android devices are not able to support RCS and therefore will downgrade (is that the verb?) to SMS/MMS.
To me, if the lowest common denominator still remains SMS/MMS, iOS 17 or 18 (whichever version implements RCS) should still have a way to indicate that message was received as SMS/MMS and therefore not secured.
To me, if the lowest common denominator still remains SMS/MMS, iOS 17 or 18 (whichever version implements RCS) should still have a way to indicate that message was received as SMS/MMS and therefore not secured.
You probably don't send or receive media files via text with android contacts. A lot of people do around here, and that's what doesn't work. (and group chats via SMS)
I know you weren't responding to me in the quote above.
But, this made me think about how I text. Within the US, or to those whom I text in the US, we go back and forth in regular SMS/MMS if the person is not on iPhone. For those whom I text outside of the US, they use either Signal or Whatsapp and that's the platform I use then to write to them.
I have basically 3 platforms/apps going on that I use to text depending on the people. Oh...there is a 4th and that's Facebook Messenger. I hate using it but my elderly neighbour who cannot distinguish between Messenger and Messages (she has an iPhone) will easily go back and forth between Messenger and Messages when we write back and forth. LOL. It's ok. She's old. I just accommodate ;-)
While on the one hand it would be lovely to have all communication apps be consolidated into one that allows cross-app and cross-platform ability (e.g., SMS/MMS, iMessage, Signal, Telegram, Whatsapp, Zoom, WebEx, MS Teams, Facetime, etc.) I honestly cannot yet see an obligation for such companies to make their platforms cross-app abled, unless one is rising as a default communication tool. Maybe?
Zoom certainly seems to dominate in the videoconferencing world and it even has texting capabilities, I believe.
This feels like a false flag operation to me.
Like Apple paid Beeper to do this entire stunt with a bizarre concern about whether iMessage works on other devices, so that Apple could redirect attention away from their monopolistic practices on the App Store.
The App Store is very much a monopoly that exists solely for the benefit of Apple - iPhone users and developers are both massively negatively impacted by how Apple operates the App Store.
Consider all of today's enormous issues in tech. None of them existed before the App Store. Before the App Store, a lot more people created and used FOSS. Literally everyone massively benefited from this. The browser you're using now exists only because of FOSS - Firefox is FOSS, WebKit is FOSS, and every other browser is a decedent of one or the other of those two.
Microsoft tried the same stunt that Apple was able to pull off with the App Store about a decade prior with Internet Explorer. Had Microsoft succeeded, Microsoft would have full control of the internet and these forums wouldn't exist.
Anyways, since Apple (and Google) took joint control over the entire mobile app ecosystem and strangled the internet, everything now depends on ad revenue. All the amazing FOSS we use is now decades old - nothing new has been created, because the idea of making a tool and just releasing it for free isn't viable anymore. I can't release a free iOS App - Apple will charge me hundreds of dollars per year to host my free app.
Apple didn't just murder FOSS. They also murdered the idea of charging just once for a perpetual license for an app. If I (a developer) charge just once, that only covers my bills for this year - if my app still works without any changes, I need to pay Apple a renewal fee. My existing customers won't be able to download my app to their new devices unless I pay that renewal fee. So the perpetual license becomes a lie - Apple forced themselves in as a middleman and demands money from both the developer and the customer.
But wait, it's worse - on any other commercial platform, my app would just keep working for decades to come. Most organizations that create SDKs commit to supporting them for 5+ years. Apple? No way. They throw stuff out all the time. So I as a developer am forced to keep on making changes to my old software just because Apple refuses to think their APIs through in the beginning and make sure that they actually want to support it for the long haul. Except no, it's worse than that - it's planned obsolesce. By forcing me to update the app, I break the app on older devices, forcing my (and Apple's) customers to update to a newer device.
App Stores must die.
Like Apple paid Beeper to do this entire stunt with a bizarre concern about whether iMessage works on other devices, so that Apple could redirect attention away from their monopolistic practices on the App Store.
The App Store is very much a monopoly that exists solely for the benefit of Apple - iPhone users and developers are both massively negatively impacted by how Apple operates the App Store.
Consider all of today's enormous issues in tech. None of them existed before the App Store. Before the App Store, a lot more people created and used FOSS. Literally everyone massively benefited from this. The browser you're using now exists only because of FOSS - Firefox is FOSS, WebKit is FOSS, and every other browser is a decedent of one or the other of those two.
Microsoft tried the same stunt that Apple was able to pull off with the App Store about a decade prior with Internet Explorer. Had Microsoft succeeded, Microsoft would have full control of the internet and these forums wouldn't exist.
Anyways, since Apple (and Google) took joint control over the entire mobile app ecosystem and strangled the internet, everything now depends on ad revenue. All the amazing FOSS we use is now decades old - nothing new has been created, because the idea of making a tool and just releasing it for free isn't viable anymore. I can't release a free iOS App - Apple will charge me hundreds of dollars per year to host my free app.
Apple didn't just murder FOSS. They also murdered the idea of charging just once for a perpetual license for an app. If I (a developer) charge just once, that only covers my bills for this year - if my app still works without any changes, I need to pay Apple a renewal fee. My existing customers won't be able to download my app to their new devices unless I pay that renewal fee. So the perpetual license becomes a lie - Apple forced themselves in as a middleman and demands money from both the developer and the customer.
But wait, it's worse - on any other commercial platform, my app would just keep working for decades to come. Most organizations that create SDKs commit to supporting them for 5+ years. Apple? No way. They throw stuff out all the time. So I as a developer am forced to keep on making changes to my old software just because Apple refuses to think their APIs through in the beginning and make sure that they actually want to support it for the long haul. Except no, it's worse than that - it's planned obsolesce. By forcing me to update the app, I break the app on older devices, forcing my (and Apple's) customers to update to a newer device.
App Stores must die.
Last edited:
I applaud you for a fun example of how to create a conspiracy theory!
