Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

BlackBerry CEO Says U.S. Government Should Force Apple to Expand iMessage to Other Platforms

"Netflix, which has forcefully advocated for carrier neutrality, has discriminated against BlackBerry customers by refusing to make its streaming movie service available to them."

Maybe because your devices aren't popular enough for Netflix to bother with them?

Edit: Throwing the word "discriminate" out there, especially around MLK day, is an obvious and despicable attempt at trying to gain undue sympathy for a mobile phone platform. We just learned about this in cognitive science, haha.

----------

Yeah, I wish iMessage were open to other platforms so I wouldn't have to deal with that one Android user who makes a group text message fall back to SMS. I don't know about the U.S. government forcing Apple to do that, sounds like an inappropriate government intrusion.
 
Last edited:
gnasher729 said:
And Apple created iMessage and sells it for $0 because they hope that people buy more iOS devices and Macs because of iMessage. It gives Apple a competitive advantage. So there are two things that Apple could do logically: Create iMessage for other devices and sell it at a price higher than $0 to end users, or create iMessage for other devices and sell a license to the application to any device manufacturer who wants to buy it.

How much do you think BlackBerry is willing to pay?
Click to expand...

They don't have any money! BUT.... isn't this a canadian company? Eeesh.
 
Canadian

As a Canadian living near the BB buildings, I would like to remind everyone that BB does not represent the composite intellectual might of Canadians. We do not endorse the comments of BB, and do not subscribe to the "speak first learn later" PR methodology.

Thank you.
 
Drexus said:
As a Canadian living near the BB buildings, I would like to remind everyone that BB does not represent the composite intellectual might of Canadians. We do not endorse the comments of BB, and do not subscribe to the "speak first learn later" PR methodology.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Seconded.

when i read what he said this morning, I just facepalmed and repeated "no, no no no no no"
 
gnasher729 said:
I think that as long as Apple's servers are in the middle, they can guarantee that either a message is sent from A to B with nobody other than B being able to read the message, or that the message cannot be read by B and by anyone else (that would happen if for example an Android app didn't implement the iMessage protocol directly).

Where you are right is that once the message has been sent from A to B, anyone who hacks into A directly or hacks into B directly may be able to read the message. But then if B puts an unlocked iPhone on the table and walks away for a minute, anyone can read that message as well.
Click to expand...

Nope. There are plenty of possible man-in-the-middle attacks when you allow for putting some other service in the middle. And the security is only as good as the client app and client OS, and they're asking to have a client on their client OS. So many ways I could never list them all here (that I myself can think of).

But, for example, I send messages from my iPhone to your BB. When we do our initial key exchange, your BB client or OS or server can weaken the keys, such that all my messages to you can be read over the wire, by whoever has hacked the public wifi I'm on, etc. Simply by having a predictable random number generator.

Or, if you have all of my public key, the session keys, the encrypted and decrypted text, it becomes computationally more feasible to crack my private key, than for an outsider with just the public key and encrypted text.

If using SSL like security, the OS is responsible for walking up the certificate authority chain. Simply not doing that, allows for substituting in a forged SSL certificate, as it's not properly verified. Like using a self-signed certificate.
 
The apps don't support your platform because they can't make a business case to do so.
Just like Pandora was not available to Windows phone 3 years ago.
 
Last edited:
wolfaaron said:
Well, this is awkward. I don't use iMessages because not all my friends own an iPhone. I wouldn't use the blackberry app because I don't have any friends with a blackberry. I just use my regular texting plan (unlimited) to text friends and family in the US and whatsapp for everybody else.

If one app isn't available everywhere then I simply won't use it. And if apple doesn't care about my needs I won't sue them either. I'll just let the market decide what app comes out ahead.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your approach. iMessage works transparantley with SMS. If you message someone and they use iMessage it goes as an iMessage, if they don't it goes via SMS. You know the difference based on the colour of the conversation bubbles.

You don't need to actively not use iMessage just because some folks you interact with don't have iPhones! You should turn it on and see how many of your SMS conversations turn blue...
 
wah...my competitor isn't supporting me!

What a joke!

Seriously?! "My competitor isn't helping us out so force them to work with us."

HUH?

Listen Blackberry....you've failed. You let the ball go and it left you in a hurry. It's not any other company's fault that you have a low # of products being purchased so developers, including rival competitors, don't want to develop or WASTE THEIR TIME on any apps for your platform.

Cry me a river.

That's business. If you can't keep up, that's your own fault. Get out there an innovate. Create a platform that people want and products people will buy.

For the record, I've got nothing against Blackberry. I'd be saying this for any company.

Apple should air mail them a shipping container full of Kleenex.
 
This is a similar to the principle behind Obama Care. Ignore the market demands and require everyone to participate. If this happened it would kill innovation!
 
He is not in the real world, or forgotten about Standereds that come to be when competition becomes too much, compitition is good and needed in order to find out what works well and what doesn't.
 
BB CEOs

The previous jerk BB CEO ran the company into the grow chasing an NHL team when he should have been running the company. Now this guy is setting himself up for a job as a comedian.

----------
keebler said:
what a joke!

Seriously?! "my competitor isn't helping us out so force them to work with us."

huh?

Listen blackberry....you've failed. You let the ball go and it left you in a hurry. It's not any other company's fault that you have a low # of products being purchased so developers, including rival competitors, don't want to develop or waste their time on any apps for your platform.

Cry me a river.

That's business. If you can't keep up, that's your own fault. Get out there an innovate. Create a platform that people want and products people will buy.

For the record, i've got nothing against blackberry. I'd be saying this for any company.

Apple should air mail them a shipping container full of kleenex.
Click to expand...

cod
 
TomMcIn said:
The previous jerk BB CEO ran the company into the grow chasing an NHL team when he should have been running the company. Now this guy is setting himself up for a job as a comedian.
Click to expand...

Untrue:

the "joke" you are talkig about, Jimmy B, actually kept the hockey idea seperate from the business of BBRY.

he also (if you bothered to read a link i've posted earlier) was trying to change BBRY earlier, but was forced out by his Co-CEO who didn't agree with him on the future of BBRY. Ballsilli wanted to move the company in the direction of software, services, and making BBM a full time replacement for SMS 5 years ago, but Lazardis wanted no part of it. Jimmy B eventually walked away from the company he helped found because the board ended up siding with Mike Lazardis and Thosrtein Heinz in following the handset business.

Then they actually named Thorstein Heinz new CEO after that, who continued with the failing strategy of being a hardware company first. Letting their software and services side of things, (The Side jimmy B wanted to push) fall into disservice and disrepair.

Thor only last year got ousted after it was proven that he and Lazardis were wrong and Chen, the new guy who made the news today, has gone back to Jim B's original software/services ideal in the last 6 months or so.

So, you're pretty inaccurate in your history lesson. The guy who was chasing the NHL was actually correct in the first place and the problems BBRY has encountered was because they chose to ingore him
 
BB stop resisting and sell yourself to Samsung already!

1. Samsung buys BB
2. SS keeps BB IP to fend off patent lawsuits
3. SS replaces it's own Tizen with BB OS (QNX)
4. SS shutters/sells all of BB internal manufacturing
5. SS converts existing BB customers to new devices running BB OS
6. SS kills off BB name and reputation
 
MrXiro said:
While I don't agree that iMessage should be available to "EVERYONE" I would like if I could access it on my stupid work Windows PC much like Google Hangouts lets me text and message people. Would certainly make life easier when the wife is texting me since I somehow always manage to miss the texts on my phone.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, The only platform that I miss iMessage on is windows. However I understand why apple doesn't have an iMessage application for windows. It's all about (to quote another user on this thread) "USP"

----------

What's next, is Nintendo going to start complaining because Microsoft doesn't make Forza or Halo for the Wii?

smh
 
milo said:
For simple things like messaging protocols, I can at least see the argument for that. Personally I don't use iMessage since it isn't universally available.
Click to expand...

This can tell that you don't know anything about iMessage. It's an automated process that with iMessage enabled, your idevice will detect and automatically switch to iMessage (blue bubbles) for iDevices instead of carrier SMS (green bubbles). So, tell me why on earth one needs to disable iMessage since it's secured, seamless, and free.
 
mrtune said:
When blackberry was king of the hill back in the day. BBM was nowhere to be found on other platforms. They only changed there minds when they were at the bottom of the totem pole.
Click to expand...

I agree. I remember that BBM was touted as a differentiator when the iPhone came out. I did not see Blackberry offer BBM to other handsets.
 
Lol

Did he not stop and think how stupid he would sound for asking this?

Really? All apps should be available on all platforms?

So then I could just write my own crappy OS that no one uses but requires licensing fees to develop on - and then get rich off of forcing developers to write their apps for a platform no one uses?

what if a platform doesn't even support the functionality of an app? a video app on a device without a screen? an audio app on a device without speakers? really? an internet browser on a device with no connection to the internet?

ROFL!

no wonder BlackBerry devices suck, their CEO is a moron!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back