Exactly, that was the biggest mistake. Once something goes from a hobby to trying to make money, the situation changes. If he had reverse engineered it and just used it for himself Apple would have ignored it. Charging money is the line. They might have shut it down anyway but charging for it makes it commercial gain from Apple’s service. There’s no way to justify that, whatever you think of it.
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
Exactly, that was the biggest mistake. Once something goes from a hobby to trying to make money, the situation changes. If he had reverse engineered it and just used it for himself Apple would have ignored it. Charging money is the line. They might have shut it down anyway but charging for it makes it commercial gain from Apple’s service. There’s no way to justify that, whatever you think of it.
I hear ya, it's just that so many of the things I experience are really really specific. The other day I had a patient with a really out of left field fairly rare diagnosis which we had a 30 minute conversation regarding. The next day I see a bunch of news stories on it in my news feed. It's just interesting that if my data profile, or whatever profile is digitally sold and distributed, inferred that I would be interested in news stories about this condition why have I never, ever, seen a single news article on it until the very day after I was speaking about it? And no, I did not use the internet, do a search, or anything else on the subject. It's not isolated either, I have very very specific stuff like this happening all the time. I've just grown to accept it.
You can do this yourself if you legitimately own an Apple device. It can be relayed from a Mac.
The two big issues here is they were impersonating an Apple device ID, and they were trying to charge for it.
The hackintosh was probably doing the same thing but nobody made money and it wasn’t worth it to Apple to try to limit MacOS as it is such a small market anyway. They are clearly more protective of iMessage.
Apple is right though that this does leak metadata, to Beeper if no one else. Now Beeper’s security becomes important. And recall the company that Nothing used wasn’t even using https. Maybe this could be done securely but at the very least it adds another third party to trust.
Apple has clearly decided iMessage is a commercial advantage, and considering how much interest there seems to be in it, they are probably right. It’s within their right to do this. The EU appears to be trying to tackle the issue of interoperability in messaging but for now this is what we’ve got.
He simply thought it would be much harder for apple to shut down his app than it actually was.
He used fake OSX mountain lion device serial numbers, that was what he used. Apple just blocked those.
He shouldn’t have thought that then. He might have just broken Mountain Lion activation for everyone. This was my concern that I expressed with the fact that this was all reverse engineered, by a high school student. He can’t know what he doesn’t know. Rumsfeld’s “unknown unknowns.” And being so young he may lack the experience to realize that. Yikes he wasn’t even alive when Rumsfeld said that.
So people with old Mac with Mountain Lion can no longer register with iMessage (or use iMessage?) Way to go Apple -- now that I'm mad about.
Because you know that vendors customize the operating system for their ecosystem. It’s a bit more nuanced than yes or no. But you got caught as you were backing up the “platform” argument but it’s much more nuanced than that.
But your patient likely did do searches about it. And your phones were in the same place at the same time. Same thing happened to me helping an elderly relative with pairing her hearing aid to her iPhone. I did the search on her phone, and now Apple News is convinced that I want to hear all about hearing aids. She was on my wireless at the time as well.
Also I notice Google bugs me every time now to enable microphone access so I can play Name That Tune. Yeah, I’m sure that’s the only thing they want it for…
I would say this is over the top but the fact is Apple does have the power to do all of those things.
No, we’re talking about proper safe and first party app communication. Not giving your data to the Zucc. I thought that was obvious.
Ah, so I need to commit my data to a third party provider in order to securely communicate with Android devices?
If you can’t see the problem, I think you are in too deep in the Apple pool. Time to get out, my dude.
“Dealbreaker”. That’s the key word here. It’s not a dealbreaker for most people. It is just a persistent annoyance for both iOS and Android users which only Apple can solve. People on here act like there’s already a solution for consumers to fix this annoyance. THERE ISN’T.
Kind of reminds me of Microsoft in the 90s and their antitrust case because they were bundling Internet Explorer. Although Apple has less penetration (that's why they are getting off on this issue in the EU) so maybe it doesn't approximate antitrust yet. Or maybe society and governments just have a more corporate view on antitrust issues than they did 25 years ago. But I would think there should be some responsibility for a company to ensure that a basic and required communication service was universal. I get it, SMS exists, but that should not be considered the minimum anymore. And no, the argument that consumers can just install apps doesn't really make sense because go try and convince the hundreds of contacts in my phone list to download and switch to a 3rd party app. It's like Microsoft in the 90s saying they should not have lost their anti trust case because Netscape was available, that's the whole point, that it's skewed because it's the default app when people unwrap their phones.
Anyway the argument is moot because Apple has agreed to include RCS, which is more of an acceptable basic minimum. I can't blame them if they want to keep all the other bells and whistles locked behind their walled garden. It's a smart move on their part, appease the regulators, shut Google up, but keep their walled garden.
Yeah sorry but I’d rather my device just worked- without being open to hacks and phishing like Androids
Yes you might be right, but I'm not seeing the connection big data could make between myself and my patient other than maybe our phones were in the same geographical location, but so were 50 other people on that day. How do you think your relative's phone knew YOU were doing the search? I don't doubt there is a connection somewhere and I'd be supremely curious to have a data scientist chime in.
Elitism? Some of us just want to engage with a platform that is serious about privacy and security, is that a lot to ask for? What's so wrong about that?
Maybe it's really not that big of a problem to the rest of us because there are other platforms available like Signal, Telegram, Whatsapp etc., if that's necesssary. I'd much rather have my primary messaging app remain secure.
I'll ask the same question I ask anyone else confused why in the US we just don't use 3rd party apps, how easy do you think it would be to convince HUNDREDS of my contacts to trust and download a 3rd party app and switch to it when texting with me? I wish I could put up a big banner saying this every time someone from the EU comes in and asks why we all just don't use Whatsapp.
I kind of find it amusing that so many are talking about security/privacy and how Beeper deserves what they got (and I personally don't disagree), but are more than willing to let Meta/Facebook handle their texting as I see Whatsapp as the service most recommend.
Apple does not have to write a core app on a rival platform. Ask much as you don’t like that it is not anti competitive.
WhatsApp has 90% market share across much of the EU. And yet it's the US that's limited to one brand? Hah!
Especially a brand that's a privacy and social disaster fully under the control of one person.
Anybody remember Psystar?
Yeah, right? Remember Psystar? They tried to convince a judge that Apple was anticompetitive too. Didn’t work out well for them did it.