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

[Saucesome2000]

I'm not sure that this would even help BB. It's not like iMessage users are sticking with the iPhone simply because of iMessage. I mean,it's definitely one of the features that I love about the phone, but I'm not sitting here looking at BB's thinking, "If only it had iMessage"

As far as a Canadian company, or ANY company for that matter, telling the U.S. government what they should force another company to do - they can straight suck it. I was a big BB advocate back in the day and sold hundreds to my customers, but this is soiling their reputation immensely.

 

[powers74]

Fixed.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who saw these all over the sides of the roads in their town!

 

[ActionableMango]

I'd like it on my windows computer, but you will never see it on another mobile platform.

I'd like to see it on Windows too. But don't forget that Windows IS another mobile platform, which is why we'll never see it on Windows.

 

[stoked_dude]

Someone Please Tell Him About This

It's so easy to install Netflix on a BB, it's not even funny...
http://crackberry.com/how-install-netflix-blackberry

 

[occollegeboi420]

I agree with this. How many people who switched from iOS to android or any other platform were not getting text messages from their friends with iPhone? it's ridiculous.

Same thing with apple pay. if Apple really wanted to make apple pay available for more people they would make an Apple pay app for android. But instead they make everything proprietary.

Same thing with the apple watch. If apple really wanted this watch to kick off they would open it up to android. But no, only people who have iphones can buy the apple watch. Fail.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Like having iMessage would get anyone to buy a Blackberry. LOL.

 

[SaraMac95014]

iMessage is far from perfect and I doubt it generates any extra device sales.

There is absolutely no reason why Google, Microsoft, Apple, Blackberry and everyone else couldn't get together and hook up their different messaging systems. It would mean all messages were sent safely and quickly via data, rather than charges being incurred for SMS.

Apple aren't doing anyone a favour by keeping iMessage proprietary.

I haven't seen mention of how Apple I message prevent s Samsung users from receiving texts.

 

[bushido]

i heard the EU is already working on a law to require them to use an open protocol

 

[mkldev]

Err, okay…how does this make any sense? iMessage is proprietary technology. Would you ask Ford Motors to share their engine and drive shaft patents/tech with Nissan?

Bad comparison. iMessage isn't anything like a drive shaft. A drive shaft serves a purpose in a particular vehicle, but there's no real advantage (other than replacement parts cost) to two cars having the same drive shaft. Cars don't couple to one another so that the drive shaft on one car drives both of them.

By contrast, iMessage does nothing in isolation. What makes it useful is its ability to take content that the user creates (text messages) and exchange those messages with other pieces of software running on other people's devices. Thus, mandating that the iMessage protocol be an open standard is much closer to mandating a common charging standard for electric vehicles (which the government has done).

Additionally, users of a drive shaft aren't locking their creative works into the sole custody of a drive shaft. With iMessage and FaceTime, users are creating a copyrighted work (yes, text messages and video chat sessions are protected by copyright) and using those technologies to send that work to another person. With closed standards, a single company has the ability to dictate what users can and can't do with content that they created. That's morally and ethically wrong.

IMO, all protocols and file formats should be open standards, by law, including iMessage, FaceTime, etc. I've spent way more time than I'd like reverse-engineering closed file formats so that I can extract my own creative works from the grips of companies that have dropped support for products and/or gone out of business. I really want to live in a world where nobody else ever has to go through that in the future.

 

[Glideslope]

Lol

Apple should buy BB and then dissolve it.

 

[vladi]

First of all BBM did exist outside of BBOS. I used BIS and BBM on Sony Ericsson UIQ OS back in 2008. So now that we got that out of the way this is actually a serious issue here.

Forget about iMessage but lets talk about Goolge. Goolge has a world leading online map service called Google Maps, so Google has monopoly over online maps. Google Maps is available on all desktops across the world no matter the OS, all services and all features are there. Now Google decides to make Google Maps app for mobile OS and they get to support only one. Now that is antitrust case right there. Google will not support Windows Phone due to some agenda which really tells you they don't care about their users as long as they are not using Android, which is fine except the fact they used their monopoly positions of Gmail and Maps to capitalize on their mobile operating system. There is your antitrust case. And now Google is using its dominance in mobile OS to leverage and become wireless carrier. Do you know how big of implications this will have on the whole industry?

App game is Apple's game no doubt about that. Once they start to loose they game to Google, and its only a matter of time, they will force app developers to not offer the same title for any other platforms if they decide to develop for iOS in one way or the other. Sounds crazy but that day will come.

Since the apps have critical impact on user and users choice for operating system I live to see a day when court will order all monopoly holding service that ventured into app business to offer their apps across the whole spectrum of mobile OSes. Or make all major players like Apple, Google, Microsoft, BlackBerry, Samsung, etc to support some open source devkit or something so apps truly can be universal. Cause if that day doesn't come only us users will be on a loosing side.

 

[Glideslope]

Bad comparison. iMessage isn't anything like a drive shaft. A drive shaft serves a purpose in a particular vehicle, but there's no real advantage (other than replacement parts cost) to two cars having the same drive shaft. Cars don't couple to one another so that the drive shaft on one car drives both of them.

By contrast, iMessage does nothing in isolation. What makes it useful is its ability to take content that the user creates (text messages) and exchange those messages with other pieces of software running on other people's devices. Thus, mandating that the iMessage protocol be an open standard is much closer to mandating a common charging standard for electric vehicles (which the government has done).

Additionally, users of a drive shaft aren't locking their creative works into the sole custody of a drive shaft. With iMessage and FaceTime, users are creating a copyrighted work (yes, text messages and video chat sessions are protected by copyright) and using those technologies to send that work to another person. With closed standards, a single company has the ability to dictate what users can and can't do with content that they created. That's morally and ethically wrong.

IMO, all protocols and file formats should be open standards, by law, including iMessage, FaceTime, etc. I've spent way more time than I'd like reverse-engineering closed file formats so that I can extract my own creative works from the grips of companies that have dropped support for products and/or gone out of business. I really want to live in a world where nobody else ever has to go through that in the future.

Good Luck. The World is not "Rainbows and Unicorns." It's about being on top, and eliminating your competition through what ever means one can get away with. It's all out War, and no prisoners taken.

Your vision is nobel, and justified. It's just not going to happen in the next decade.

 

[ActionableMango]

Ford should make parts that work with GM cars. Toyota should make parts for BMW. Let's make cars neutral too.

There are probably several Ford parts that work in GMs and vice-versa. They use the same parts suppliers you know, even for large assemblies. For example ZF transmissions.

Toyota has quite literally partnered with BMW and will be sharing parts, assemblies, and design work.

Would you ask Ford Motors to share their engine and drive shaft patents/tech with Nissan?

Don't have to ask, they already do. Mercury Villager and Nissan Quest are very nearly identical minivans. Ford does tend to partner for more often with Mazda though.

 

[FrizzleFryBen]

I disagree. If Apple had explicitly informed Adobe that what they were working on would be supported on iOS, you could argue it was a dick move on Apple's part. It's not something that required government enforcement. Nothing ever came of it. And for good reason.

And besides, doesn't Blackberry know that Android is "winning?" Who cares about iMessage?

I'll call it a 'jerk' move, and yes, it was. So, I think we're on the same page.

As for iMessage vs. Android... Well, one is an encrypted messaging service available only on a single (quite successful) platform that just works out of the box with negligible setup. The other is a very successful, yet fragmented OS.

 

[taptic]

besides apple in this case who would be unhappy with this?

i would argue ios users would want more of their contacts to be accessible via imessage.

i doubt it had any influence on this blog post but apple certainly has made things very hard from people moving on from ios/imessage and people messaging iphone users.

but i dont think the government should intervene here. they should safeguard consumer rights but this should be left to consumer pressure.

You know what I mean. In general, people resent the government stepping into their business.

 

[Windlasher]

To Die with Grace is another option.

Why doesn't he just call up Tim Cook and ask to be bought?

BB could cut Apple a sweetheart deal and work with them while they transition everyone over to iPhones.

 

[occollegeboi420]

I haven't seen mention of how Apple I message prevent s Samsung users from receiving texts.

You don't read the internet much do you? http://m.imore.com/text-issues-switching-iphone-android-heres-fix

Tons of people who switched from iOS to android have had problems with not getting texts from people with iPhones. A lot of my friends have had this problem.

 

[Windlasher]

I agree with this. How many people who switched from iOS to android or any other platform were not getting text messages from their friends with iPhone? it's ridiculous.

Same thing with apple pay. if Apple really wanted to make apple pay available for more people they would make an Apple pay app for android. But instead they make everything proprietary.

Same thing with the apple watch. If apple really wanted this watch to kick off they would open it up to android. But no, only people who have iphones can buy the apple watch. Fail.

They don't need to. Its all NFC. The only difference is the backend processing. Why the heck would Apple open their back end to Android which is chockablock with malware and trojans?

Edit: and ANYONE can buy an Apple Watch, iPhone or not. YOU just done get ALL of the features.

 

[i4m]

Very nice, the government should force apple. Wow nothing surprises me anymore with people.

What do you think the role of the government is?

 

[Swift]

The problem is DRM

The real question that we should be thinking about it compatibility between all text message apps. I mean, why shouldn't I have iMessage talk to What's App or Facebook Messenger or any of the other systems?

Ah, the problem is likely DRM. It's one thing to take it out of music files, but the customer wanted that. The customer wants privacy, that is, "DRM" or encryption. Who sets the standards for interchange of messages? The government? That's not going to go over well, is it? Meanwhile, you send a message to a Windows user, or an Android user, and it's going to have to be over e-mail or some other insecure path.

And as Jobs said about music, if you try for a common encryption over differing platforms, things get very messy very quickly. The possibility of cracking the encryption on any one platform endangers them all.

----------

What do you think the role of the government is?

Deciding on railroad gauges and measurement systems has always been a very real role for government. Set a common standard.

----------

I agree with this. How many people who switched from iOS to android or any other platform were not getting text messages from their friends with iPhone? it's ridiculous.

Same thing with apple pay. if Apple really wanted to make apple pay available for more people they would make an Apple pay app for android. But instead they make everything proprietary.

Same thing with the apple watch. If apple really wanted this watch to kick off they would open it up to android. But no, only people who have iphones can buy the apple watch. Fail.

I agree, to a degree, about the first part. Apple Pay, however, is usable on any system that works by NFC. So it's not exclusive to Apple. Your google thingie will work at the same terminal. I think that Apple does a few things with increasing security that I think are more convenient and therefore more secure, but there's nothing that can't be copied. Apple Pay is trademarked, but it works on as many terminals as Google Pay or whatever they call that.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

It's typical of companies who cannot compete to ask for government intervention. Maybe they should just do us all a favor and file bankruptcy. Nobody cares what they have to say. Most companies have one CEO and do just fine, but RIM had two and they couldn't even get their heads out of the sand.

Please, RIM, just die.

 

[2457282]

There are probably several Ford parts that work in GMs and vice-versa. They use the same parts suppliers you know, even for large assemblies. For example ZF transmissions.

Toyota has quite literally partnered with BMW and will be sharing parts, assemblies, and design work.



Don't have to ask, they already do. Mercury Villager and Nissan Quest are very nearly identical minivans. Ford does tend to partner for more often with Mazda though.

As you state, these are partnerships, not government mandates. Let's not change the subject. I am all for partnerships, not for silly government mandates.

 

[Tech198]

No wuv for Blackbewwy

It would be good for iMessage to be a part of a bigger crowd than just us Apple users, but Blackberry is also ironically the same company that Samsung wants to buy..


This is probably something to try and save Blackberry from going under or some scheme. expand iMessage and save Blackberry.

 

[kage207]

I agree with this CEO mainly because developers are cheap...and doesn't take much time to pump out a quality app. I mean comion, a 14 year old can make an app.

Plus buying all the hardware for the developers and testers is cheap. So ya, get on that Apple.

/End sarcasm

On a serious note, if he wanted to be taken seriously, he should have called Apple out on FaceTime not being Open Source. I mean, Steve Jobs did say it was going to be.

I understand that Apple lost a lawsuit about a part of FaceTime. I mean a $300mil+ is hurtful but Google, Microsoft and Samsung should have stepped up and help create this standard to destroy that patent because the world really does need an Open Standard when it comes to video chats.

Edit: He should have called out the government for issue donkey turds of patents for software when the PO doesn't know anything about software. He should call for a reform of software patents as they hurt the little guys...like Blackberry. lol

 

[chr1s60]

So he is thinking people will want to stick with or purchase a new BB if iMessages is on it? Nobody is debating between a BB and an iPhone and picking iPhone because of iMessages. They are picking the iPhone because BB's lack in many areas, not just messaging. If he thinks messaging is the biggest issue facing BB, he shouldn't be the CEO.

besides apple in this case who would be unhappy with this?

How about the providers, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and everyone else. iMessages could potentially eliminate text messaging as a whole which would kill these added charges for text messaging.