Wouldn't most encrypted backups require storing a key in order to be able to decrypt it if needed? I doubt iCloud is unique in that respect.
A better question is" "Does a master key exist that allows decryption of a backup?"
There is one: SMS
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.
Sarcastic Android 'Lyric Explainer Video' Urges Apple to Adopt RCS in Messages
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wouldn't most encrypted backups require storing a key in order to be able to decrypt it if needed? I doubt iCloud is unique in that respect.
A better question is" "Does a master key exist that allows decryption of a backup?"
There is one: SMS
There is a secondary impact to interoperability. Once a small company decides to enable it, many of tehir advantages go away. If they introduce features beyond what the bigger players have, users will still be limited to their user base; and likely upset when they can't use a cool new feature with friends that don't use that app.
If it is a really useful feature, bigger players can adopt it, negating the advantage. Smaller companies would risk becoming R&D labs as well as market intelligence sources. Lets say a company intorduces some new feature that Apple/Google/Meta do not support. If a company does not ensure a message is sent and rejected by any of them, the big players will see the frequency a feature is used and learn what may be worth implementing. If a company blocks sending those messages their users will get frustrated by "I'm afraid I can't do that..." messages.
They could weaponize interoperability as well. Given a choice of their servers or a small companies when the get a message from a user that has both, why not use the small companies to let them absorb the costs? They've opened up their servers to a much larger base.
There are privacy issues as well. Company A may not save messages or release user info, but will Apple/Google/Meta do the same for users that are not their users but that they handled message traffic for in the name of interoperability? I suspect companies would not be averse to providing user information and keys in such cases.
Why are you in a group chat with a physician or your boss? Your best friend is your fault. Should have taught that person better.
And yes, put those people in their own chats.
I don’t think Apple care. However it’s quite sad that people are making songs about green bubbles now.
Yeah but he’s implying that texts should be blue and it’s a negative thing if your texts are green.
If a text's bubble color is a source of happiness I suggest their are other issues that need addressing.
I was only joking! I know theRE are some great android phones.
I really just like that all of my Apple devices "talk" to each other.
I have laptops, iPhone, iPads,apple watch and love the interaction between them.
Simple stuff like being able to turn down the volume on my iPhone from my watch,
very handy when I'm djing or watching a video.
I also like airdrop for all my devices.
I'm sure I could work an android into this somehow but if it ain't broke
why fix it?
Last edited:
You left out a few things. Unless you are among those that naively think that all messaging services are just dumb pipes you can drop messages on with a recipient's phone number and they will just be on their merry way - like all the stuff that actually makes that work. The "protocol" to send a message is the proprietary IP that actually makes each messaging service unique and would represent a huge chunk of third-party code being embedded in iMessage (I suppose you will also want people to be able to respond to these message in whatever client they receive them in and see those response in iMessage.) You still haven't addressed the issues of message persistence across devices, encryption keys, or which service handles and pays for the notifications, etc. There is a reason why the average messaging app is over 100mb. There is nothing "simply" about it and it's not Apple's business to consolidate a bunch of services that work just fine by themselves into a UI that most people are going to hate anyway. Your whole premise that SMS is a "fallback" is wrong as well as that is not actually what is happening.
Interesting send an SMS to WhatsApp on iOS? Possible on Android I'd say (from a technical point of view) - iOS hides the API e.g. WhatsApp or Signal could use to send/receive SMS.
Interoperability requirements would allow that; if What's App wanted to send a hat's App encrypted message Apple would have to decide if they wanted to incorporate What's App's encryption, which would mean What's App gives up control of keys.
It would also mean any small app that gets big would have to give up control as well.
That's exactly the key issue: who is able to decrypt the data? Apple's design decision is that they are able to decrypt the iCloud Backup independently from the user. Other backup solutions only allow the user to decrypt.
It's a design choice with its advantages, e.g. if the user forgets the password Apple can still recover the data, but also with its drawbacks and one of them is what was explained above in terms of end-to-end encryption.
Whether a user considers Apple's solution "good enough" from the security standpoint and whether they trust them to be able to decrypt the data is a personal choice: I do so myself as I have iCloud Backup activated, but it's a choice which I made with full understanding of the consequences and I'm fine with that.
Without context, they could've been mistaken for Linux geeks, or "the cult from Apple"
Well, sure but iMessage works fine and is more secure than WhatsApp.
But who knows?
Messages works fine when you're messaging other iPhones - but if you need a cross platform chat that works as well as Messages you need a 3rd party app - which is why everyone in Europe is on Whatsapp, i'm not sure why this is so different in the US.
I don't personally like Whatsapp but I still have it for a few friends that are on Android and don't use any other apps - I also use Facebook messenger for other people but my app of choice would be Signal where i have specifically 3 friends who won't use Whatsapp and don't have iPhones.
Because text messages have been effectively free for a long time in the US across iOS and Android phones. WhatsApp was more of “I don’t want to pay (some small amount of currency per text) just to let my friends know where I’ll be. If we all simply use WhatsApp, we can save a lot of money per month!” not “I want something as cool and secure as iMessage on a non-iOS phone”. It has, of course, become that, but WhatsApp exists thanks to the business needs of the EU carriers.
Not really, my text messages have been free for as long as I can remember, long before smartphones or the choice of messaging apps existed - but picture messages aren't and rich context doesn't exist in SMS - plus it seemed to make a lot more sense to send instant messages over the internet rather than via a voice network.
From one EU country to another:
As of 15 May 2019, phone calls via landline and mobile phone or SMS made from one EU country to another are capped at 19 cents per minute (+VAT) and 6 cents per SMS (+VAT). This price does not include VAT, which varies depending on the EU Member States of the calling operator (European Member States’ rates of VAT range between 17% and 27%). See VAT rates in all EU countries.
Based on the above, I’m curious, were your text messages only to others in your country? I don’t live in the EU so I only have this to go by.
Most calling and texting plans cover the entire US, so the included App works just fine, and chances are good many of the recipients also use iPhones. I suspect alot depends on demographics - older users probably are happy just texting with no frills while younger ones may gravitate to an app.
I use What's App exclusively for calling EU/UK/Africa friends and clients since it is significantly cheaper, as in free except for my phone plan, and works on WiFi as well. I also use FaceTime but that is strictly close family, mainly because it's easier than getting them on What's App.
Oh yeah definitely - this is what made Whatsapp/iMessage/other web based messaging apps better too - international message. I wouldn't use SMS for anything, ever again, if I can help it. It's a dated dead standard with way too many flaws.
But you can't send video or pictures via SMS. I mean I constantly send my 76 year old mum pictures and videos - she jumps between Whatsapp and iMessage - she doesn't know what the difference is, she thinks they're both email anyway.
The issue with XMPP is it is a minimal standard with a lot of extensions. A consistent minimal standard makes sense because it retains backwards compatibility. However, it does not address the issue of ensuring any client can talk to any other.
Unless both ends are using the same implementation you will not have the same functionality. For example, unless the receiver acknowledges receipt, which is not part of teh base protocol, you will not know if the message has been received. Given XMPP' extendability, I suspect you'd soon have various non-100% compatible clients as companies add features; much as you have today.
Yea, I should have been more specific that I meant most users consider iMessage texting; and even say "I sent you a text."
Yea, and given some of the responses here some want messaging to be just like email. Personally, I would not want that; I already get too much attachment spam emails already.
Who pays for international messaging?
If it's SMS, everyone I suspect. People call iMessage, Whatsapp, Signal, text messages too - it doesn't just have to be text, it just means an instant message. It'd be great to have one app to rule them all but that's not going to happen and unless it was an open standard not run by a company it wouldn't be a good idea either. China and Asian will always have WeChat, Europe, Latin America, Africa and India will always have Whatsapp. It's the US that's the odd one out here that somehow doesn't mind mixing rich text messaging with basic SMS - for the rest of the world I think we'd happily turn SMS off, it's barely used and I don't see any operators bothering to upgrade to the rich text version of SMS outside of the US, it'd be a waste of their time and money.
I think it would because MMS is not a substitute for being able to just fling over a 4k video you recorded of something to your friend. (nor pictures that look straight from your camera roll etc)