edit: I should mention that while I don't like their walled gardens in general, I don't mind them for other people except iMessage. iMessage makes me fairly angry because they're using & dividing people's social connections for profit.
edit: I should mention that while I don't like their walled gardens in general, I don't mind them for other people except iMessage. iMessage makes me fairly angry because they're using & dividing people's social connections for profit.
I think you should be pissed at bottom barrel Android manufacturers putting shitty messaging interfaces on Android phones more than Apple for having a good messaging system.
I'm still using SMS for most of my messaging, and I primarily blame Apple for that.
Their decision to wall off iMessage actively hurts their own customers by preventing them from seamlessly communicating with the most popular mobile OS using modern technology. They get away with it because they're Apple and they make good products, but that doesn't mean I have to think it's good.
Google's incentive is to keep you using their platform across any device; because, that is what is in their best interest, they make their money from billions upon billions of small advertising interactions across a vast ocean of interconnected platforms and devices.
Apple sells physical devices, it's their incentive to make sure the experience is great for whoever bought that device. They make their money from selling billions of devices...
Apple's focus is on the "user," and Google's focus is on the "platform." Both have different types of lock-in, but have different reasons why.
I still lost how it's Apple's problem that the standard interface of SMS/MMS is just totally shitty and not capable of doing what people want. Complain to your telecommunication, handset, and operating system providers/vendors to build or enable a better open standard (like RCS or whatever it is).
What your real complaint is that there isn’t an client for a nonApple operating system. It’s reasonable to not want to switch OSes, but there are many apps that are iOS exclusive, as there are many android exclusive apps, but I wouldn’t call them “walled gardens”.
Also, iMessage doesn’t make money. It an e2e encryption app with sms support. Because it’s provided by Apple, a company that famously makes money on hardware rather than services, there’s no incentive to mine your (and your connections’) data for profit, like say WhatsApp, or the others, so it is incorrect to claim they are “using & dividing people’s social connections for profit”. If anyone is dividing their connections based on iMessage, it’s your friends.
[0] https://www.cultofmac.com/314343/use-a-third-party-whatsapp-...
No whataboutism please.
Are you talking about the unwillingness of users to migrate their chats to WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, etc? That’s not a walled garden - that’s the natural hesitance to leave any comfortable/familiar system that any social media / network effect site/app has. It’s more like a psychological moat. And even the app you want Apple users to migrate to has it.
I'm intentionally trying to point out that the generalised statement was wrong without context, while at the same time providing wording that would probably match the intended message instead of the one that ended up getting posted.
Can you point me to a company that doesn't do this? I would think "but $hardware to use $network" is preferable to "use $network for free, but sell everything you put on the $network"