I am pretty sure that he was toning down the actual problems and that every 7 milliseconds this happens but Apple is able to hide most of them.
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.
Microsoft CEO Would 'Welcome' Apple to Bring iMessage to Windows
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sure. They could have been the standard for messaging and video calling back in the day, but decided they just want these services to drive hardware sales. Nothing wrong with that. But as a result, most of the world doesn’t use the service or cares about new feautures. Like emojis or SharePlay.
That would undermine the whole reason for the Apple ecosystem to even exist. There is a reason tight integration exists. It is the number one factor in driving sales across their whole product lineup. Apple is not going to easily give that up.
It has taken them almost a decade to allow us to invite Android users to FaceTime. Even then, the accepting party is severely limited as to what they can do in FaceTime.
Based on the recent documents from Epic trial, actually some Apple execs do think that's the case, and some people do.
I doubt it would ever happen. There was actually an excellent window of opportunity for Apple to bring iMessage to other platforms like Android. It was during the backlash against WhatsApp's ToS change. Now, most people already clicked on accept on the new ToS, and the news died down already. Apple missed the chance, but maybe they don't care.
How does Apple being the standard chat app help them? They are a hardware company. They also make money through paid services, but since no one will subscribe to a messaging app when all the others are free, this isn’t viable either. The only way to monetize a cross-platform iMessage is through ads and/or data collection, which Apple doesn’t want to do. So how would they make money off of it? They wouldn’t. They might actually lose money because:
1. They would have to build out servers to support billions more devices, for free.
2. They would lose hardware sales to people who are locked in to Apple because of iMessage.
The mistake Apple’s competitors make over and over again is prioritizing market share over the part of the market that’s actually profitable. Apple is focused. It would (wisely IMO) rather sell expensive iPhones than be a loss leader with the dominant platform.
Also, can you imagine the antitrust investigations Apple would be facing if they owned the dominant chat app, yet bundled it with their OS? Right now Apple can answer the monopoly accusations by rightfully pointing out that they have minority market share.
Again I ask, how them being the standard with no platform benefits would have helped them?
In their largest market, these platform exclusive features benefit them. In your world how would spending money and development resources on a cross platform product that you yourself acknowledge would not draw customers, help them?
Last edited:
Steve Jobs in 2010 say they want to open iMessage API.
At that time I was fun about WhatsApp and other ****** messaging apps future. They should become useless in minutes after API publication. But that never happened...
At that time I was fun about WhatsApp and other ****** messaging apps future. They should become useless in minutes after API publication. But that never happened...
They haven’t that method of downloading the insider build to run in parallels isn’t an officially support method nor is the arm version of windows available to buy which is required for Apple to bring boot camp to arm macs
Apple has made it clear they do not plan to support another native OS, only virtualization.
Why not have iMessage on non Apple devices have a $/£1 per year fee the way WhatsApp used to be? Pretty much instantly they would have hundreds of millions of $/£ that would go towards the running costs.
Have it per device as well and you'd be looking at billions of $/£ yearly revenue, and almost nobody would say no to paying that fee.
I prefer iMessage to not be opened to Microsoft. I know of no one in my circle with Microsoft PCs. Very few people have Nokia Lumia smart phones or Windows Phone 10 OS on a phone so I see it mostly as redundant. I am concerned that Governments will use iMessage on Windows to attempt to break the encryption, like others here. I would not be sending iMessages to myself at work. I like keeping that barrier between work PC and home Mac.
This is a stretch, but another selling point is supposed to be privacy. If you send to people with sms, it’s less secure than iMessage. It would be in Apple’s benefit IMO to make it secure end to end even outside of their “walled garden”. The walled garden is just a facade, but wouldn’t it be cool if it even worked outside the device? It can build credibility and also markets itself to people that don’t have entry into the Apple ways
Yeah it’s true that allows opportunities for others to try to reverse engineer, but this also forces Apple to not take their facades for granted
Apple Once Tried (and Failed) to Pitch a Standardized Version of iMessage to Wireless Carriers • iPhone in Canada Blog
Scott Forstall, Apple's former head of iOS development, reveals the Cupertino company once tried to push wireless carriers toward its version of messaging.
www.iphoneincanada.ca
Apple wanted to bring the best of iMessage to every phone
Apple will never bring iMessage to third-party platforms like Android, but there was a time when it tried to convince carriers to adopt a standardized
www.cultofmac.com
You‘re mistaken iMessage with FaceTime.
First, none of the other competitors charge, so why would anyone pay for iMessage? Second, as has already been pointed out, in the U.S. (and possibly in other countries where iOS has significant market share), iMessage helps sell phones (or at least keeps people in the ecosystem). Giving up that value, would be a significant loss.
Why do you think anyone would pay for that service when there are so many free services? The more expensive it is, the less likely it people would adopt it. Finally, that would actually be an anti-trust issue.
well, WhatsApp was paid early on - I believe $1/ year or similar for both iOS/ Android, unless you got it on a promo. Then, it was permanently free....
Microsoft make their money from enterprise services and it dwarfs the amount they made from selling copies of Windows. I'm actually half expecting them to give Windows away for free to gain market share.
It was a paid for (single purchase) app, then was converted to a subscription app that was barely enforcing the in-app payment (to drive growth) with single purchase users being converted to lifetime subs, followed by Facebook making the app free to use to further grow the userbase.
YES! I live in Europe and I only have two continuous iMessage conversations and they’re both with people in the US. While I enjoy WhatsApp, I would love to be able to use iMessage for all/most of my chats.
Just like so many other features and products, though, Apple is more focused on the US (and China, I guess) than any other markets and use cases.
I’m sorry, but Western Europe is not a collection of third world countries.
I believe the topic is about personal use. Not corporate. And they’re not “completely wrong”… I’ve been in Europe for nearly 10 years and I’ve received iMessages from exactly 3 people… and two of them were Americans.