We all know this was true long before this case and I don’t blame Apple for doing this. It’s a very logical business decision for a feature that is a strong selling point.
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's Rationale for Not Bringing iMessage to Android Revealed in Legal Documents
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Interesting.. I had WhatsApp for a group chat a few summers ago when I had a beach house with 26 other people. After the FB buyout I used it less and less, until I finally deleted the app. Don’t miss it one bit. iMessage is great for group chats and that’s all I’ll use.
Why do you have to do that? I have no third party message apps and chat with friends with Android phones on a daily basis with iMessage.
Your chats with Android friends are presumably not really going through iMessage, but falling back SMS. That's far less secure and greatly limits functionality: group chat, voice messages, images, video etc all don't work as well or not at all.
They just wouldn’t. It’s a feature that is firewalled off. You have to have Apple branded hardware just to be able to make an account, let alone use it day to day. That is a very strong motivator/selling point.
What’s the problem? If cross-platform operation is important to someone, they have options. Why should Apple spend money porting iMessage to Android?
I'm from Europe.
Maybe it was partially the case in 2013, but iMessage is currently not a reason to keep buying Apple.
I basically only use iMessage with my friends that are Apple superfans.
For my family there are way more valuable reasons to stay in the Apple ecosystem like
Maybe it was partially the case in 2013, but iMessage is currently not a reason to keep buying Apple.
I basically only use iMessage with my friends that are Apple superfans.
For my family there are way more valuable reasons to stay in the Apple ecosystem like
- ease of use
- durability
- Photos (shared photo albums)
- sync with iPad / Mac
- privacy
We do. WhatsApp is not an alternative as it requires a telephone number (and therefore a phone), iMessage does not (and works great on an iPad).
Just look at the market share of iPhone vs Android. US is almost the only place iPhone dominant, thus per definition more than half of communication not in US will be not from iPhones and thus not through iMessage.
The risk for Apple is that iMessage loses out to a cross platform alternative as Airplay loses out to Chromecast. It's less likely as there's multiple alternatives though.
Definitely in the UK iMessage is absolutely NOT a reason to buy apple (it’s definitely a nice to have, but not owning a product or service related to google is a much bigger reason for me to buy apple).
This isn't anticompetitive. Of course Apple will keep iOS features on iOS.
What's next?
Apple: "Our superior App Store keeps people on iOS, so we're not going to open an Android one"
Epic games:
What's next?
Apple: "Our superior App Store keeps people on iOS, so we're not going to open an Android one"
Epic games:
I don't need to look at the market share. I just need to look outside and at my contacts. Every single one of them inside Scotland have a iPhone and again even the ones in England have a iPhone. If they don't have a iPhone they would automatically get a SMS message like anyone else on a feature phone.
Wonder how long before we come back to the time when some things were only available to a certain section of society, not to the other. Some privilege was afforded only to one section, some only to another.
Race for exclusivity (and superiority) has always been an ugly one for humans.
The above observation aside, I am of the opinion that Apple doesn’t have to (and should not be compelled to) create interoperability with Android for iMessage. It is dissimilar to the App Store issue, howsoever similar might it seem to that. iMessage is more like an exclusive title that’s available only on iOS. You want it, get iOS.
But, saying that you only need to buy titles from Microsoft (and only sell on Microsoft’s platforms) to use them on a Microsoft device, that isn’t that fair a thing to do. This is what Apple does with iOS and I find that unfair. Compatible format and place of purchase are different things. I need to buy compatible format for my Microsoft device and I know it. But requiring me to buy only from Microsoft, I would not appreciate that.
macOS allows use and purchase from everywhere. Why can’t iOS? That’s the only thing I am concerned with. iOS can give the same choice as macOS does. As Windows does. As Android does. As they all should. iOS does not. That’s the contention Epic is probably on about.
Race for exclusivity (and superiority) has always been an ugly one for humans.
The above observation aside, I am of the opinion that Apple doesn’t have to (and should not be compelled to) create interoperability with Android for iMessage. It is dissimilar to the App Store issue, howsoever similar might it seem to that. iMessage is more like an exclusive title that’s available only on iOS. You want it, get iOS.
But, saying that you only need to buy titles from Microsoft (and only sell on Microsoft’s platforms) to use them on a Microsoft device, that isn’t that fair a thing to do. This is what Apple does with iOS and I find that unfair. Compatible format and place of purchase are different things. I need to buy compatible format for my Microsoft device and I know it. But requiring me to buy only from Microsoft, I would not appreciate that.
macOS allows use and purchase from everywhere. Why can’t iOS? That’s the only thing I am concerned with. iOS can give the same choice as macOS does. As Windows does. As Android does. As they all should. iOS does not. That’s the contention Epic is probably on about.
Last edited:
I think when someone came to Epic and offered a big plate of common sense, Epic acted like a little child and flung the plate away.
reminds me of Safari, it I believed was originally used to introduce windows users to MAC applications, iTunes, Safari... but then they killed Safari. As such the effects are similar to the EU, WhatsApp, et al are used because its not limited to one platform. That is why I do not use Safari on Mac its limited and stuck and I do not like the browser sync for using Chrome on Linux and Windows, and then back to Safari on Mac. its not fluid.
Unfortunately iMessage sucks. Reason: you can’t put in another SIM card (important if you’re abroad and need internet) and just use it with your normal phone number. iMessage always wants to change your number.
I believe you have discovered Epic's next trick in this legal battle...This isn't anticompetitive. Of course Apple will keep iOS features on iOS.
What's next?
Apple: "Our superior App Store keeps people on iOS, so we're not going to open an Android one"
Epic games:
Ever hear of competitive advantage? This is a big so what. A company develops a product that people like, people buy more of the company’s products. And this is a nefarious concept to whom?
Apple cares about its own success and should not feed Android any more than it does.
If a user cares about privacy they don’t own an Android in the first place either.
. They won’t change taste.
applies for cheerleaders of every brandBesides, flies like to sit on. They won’t change taste.