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.
Nothing Announces iMessage Compatibility via New App
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think my AppleID was created for iTunes, back when my first Apple device was the iPod. I've never had an iPhone, but now use it on Mac which also supports iMessage.
Other people without iPhones could have an AppleID for Apple Music etc.
Nothing is wrong.
Nothing is using your data inappropriately.
Nothing is burning.
Nothing has had a major data breach.
Nothing is corrupt.
Nothing is requesting access to your banking details…
Oh good! This is fine…
Edit: Not saying any of that is true - I don’t know a thing about that company - just making a joke about the name.
Last edited:
Regarding #2, Apple could easily block their IP range from communicating with their services.
Why not?
Even companies that want to make profit at all costs should think about the greater good for humanity alongside
That literally makes no sense based on how it works. They run Mac Mini's in a datacenter running their software, they run the same Messages application that is pre-installed on Macs like you would on your own Mac.
When the Messages app on their Macs receives messages for you their software reads the content of the Message from the application window and then repackages it and sends it to your Android phone. The point at which they read the message from the Messages app is where they can see everything.
They cannot take encrypted messages from Apple and just forward them to your phone without seeing them. It doesn't work like that. This is why it doesn't yet support all of Apple's messages such as reactions, stickers and so on. It's not doing this blind.
This is more akin to how CloudFlare works where they accept an encrypted message, decrypt it, examine the contents, re-encrypt it and forward it to the end-user or web-server.
This isn't a new idea, it has been done before. I would only ever trust something like this if it was self-hostable. Meaning I could run the application that watches the Messages application on my Mac myself to handle the incoming and outgoing messages. No third-party servers.
Challenge accepted! Oh come on, you’re getting all bent out of shape over Nothing!
…but what if they want to use it for Nothing?
Oh, the door is that way? I’ll see myself out.
Or a Mac, or an iPad. I have both android and iPhones, but that's not that common. But I did have my first Mac before I had an iPhone. Families that allow choice might have Apple and android phones too. I have both because of work.
My best friends and I use Signal because before the last guy moved to iPhone he had an Android.
All iPhone users, still using a competing app. I like some features of iMessage better but Signal is mostly superior IMHO.
Android users will register an apple ID just to communicate with iPhone users via iMessage. So the risk of sharing apple ID is not that much. What do you think Android users use their apple ID for something else?
I have an iPhone 15 Pro Max and Galaxy Z Fold5 as my daily drivers and I use iMessage on both every day.
BlueBubbles is the way. They've done a really great job with it.
Why should they try to be eco-friendly? Why recycle materials? You are either cherry picking topics or not aware of the situation. We will need lawmakers to come into play if Apple make encrypted information across phone OS' impossible.
I want to see yourself argue your way out of that.
This is technically already possible by running a proxy on a Mac.
This reminds me of the Aereo court case. They had a physical antenna for each user picking up the tv broadcasts for that area. They then allowed their users to see this video stream over the internet. Should have been technically legal. But they lost the case.
I can see Apple shutting this down via some technical legal threat.
This reminds me of the Aereo court case. They had a physical antenna for each user picking up the tv broadcasts for that area. They then allowed their users to see this video stream over the internet. Should have been technically legal. But they lost the case.
I can see Apple shutting this down via some technical legal threat.
I fondly remember Pidgin…back when I wasn’t too worried about stuff like device security and other stuff I didn’t understand completely, it didn't really matter who read my messages, didn’t do much online banking and didn’t know about duckpics.
Now? I’d never share password with any third-party anything (password manager an exception) or use a service that routed another service via a third party like this…..unless…
If the roles were reversed. If Google had the upper hand and Apple made a service to do all this? I’d give them anything they asked for quite frankly.
And I get it, this is an Apple-defence thing they’ve done COUNTLESS times before. Protecting the herd. But times have changed. Messaging is more important than almost anything else we do on our phones. It’s often one of THE reasons to have a phone. Messaging is more important than Apple or Google.
And it should be universal…
Now? I’d never share password with any third-party anything (password manager an exception) or use a service that routed another service via a third party like this…..unless…
If the roles were reversed. If Google had the upper hand and Apple made a service to do all this? I’d give them anything they asked for quite frankly.
And I get it, this is an Apple-defence thing they’ve done COUNTLESS times before. Protecting the herd. But times have changed. Messaging is more important than almost anything else we do on our phones. It’s often one of THE reasons to have a phone. Messaging is more important than Apple or Google.
And it should be universal…
You did not just miss the point, you ended up discussing with yourself on the topic...
I mean, technically that would mean they were handling the intellectual property of broadcast corporations, which sounds a bit different from simply acting as a proxy for messages. I could be wrong, though.
If only Google could have partnered with Apple and done this, but also allow for compatibility with an Apple ID account that has advanced data protection enabled.
Nothing did better here than wasting ad money on a vision that Tim Cook doesn't intend on changing anytime.
Nothing did better here than wasting ad money on a vision that Tim Cook doesn't intend on changing anytime.
I think the nuance of it was that they had one physical antenna per user so they actually had a physical presence, and only one user could access that specific stream from that specific antenna. It’s legal to receive broadcasts where you have a physical presence, and legal to view one instance of that for personal use. But the court decided that doesn’t count.
If one used ones own personal Mac and legit Apple ID and simply forwarded those to another device after Apple is done delivering them, seems analogous.
In this case if Nothing is just providing a computer to run that on, it becomes interesting.
You can use Signal instead lol, you don't have to be solely reliant on iMessage if you value someone for more than what phone they use.
Can't uh, Google also de-list the Nothing Chats app from the Play Store too? Or is it bundled in with Nothing's custom OS?