[flagged]
Maybe they wanted to, but it was too onerous back then to force client software updates that they had to continue supporting reverse-engineered versions of the protocol?
MSN Messenger and Yahoo IM both cried foul about this and called out for interoperability, but then turned around and denied third-party clients access to their own networks once they got big enough.
I bet if HDMI and USB wouldn't exist, they'd protest against being able to connect their MacBooks to non-Apple TVs and non-Apple keyboards - to keep them safe from evil Samsung monitors and bad Logitech mice.
If our regulators weren't asleep at the wheel this would have been forcibly spun out years ago.
The blue/green icon debacle should have been ruled discriminatory.
Anecdotally I had to switch to iOS due to iMessage being used amongst my colleagues.
In the US perhaps.
UK here. "no-one" uses iMessage. The only people I use it with are the ones who refuse to use Signal (because I refuse to use WhatsApp). Most people here don't know or care that the green/blue bubbles mean different things. I've had to explain it repeatedly.
The way iMessage locks your phone number into the Apple ID system, meaning that people using iMessage to chat with people who have changed their phone away from Apple sometimes can't get messages through.
Here, it's a joke app, used under sufferance.
I assume you put no-one in quotes because it's not true? Of course people in the UK use iMessage! From this source, it looks like about 1 in 3 internet users age 16-64 use it.
https://engage.sinch.com/blog/most-popular-messaging-apps-in...
People do use iMessage, because it's the SMS app on their phone.
[0]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/262179/market-share-held...
You can disable iMessage on an iPhone and it just becomes SMS. You're not even forced to use it as an iPhone user.
You may note that the DOJ mentioned in the article's title is a US agency.
No it isn't and what Beeper is doing is wrong.
Discriminating is completely fine unless it's done based on protected classes (which, generally speaking, are things that aren't a result of simple choices). Choosing whether to use an iPhone falls on the "discriminating is totally fine" side of things, in my book.
I've never had an iPhone but the default messaging apps on my recent Android phones have told me whether or not the person I'm messaging has RCS or not. That lets me know whether I should expect them to see typing indicators and so forth. Is that also a bad thing? What if it used colors instead of a written label?
This discrimination is not arbitrary, it is critical functionality. The set of features available to blue icons is vastly broader (it goes far beyond messaging) than the features available to green icons. Some of these features cannot be practically replicated to non-Apple platforms.
Blue icons also have a much higher quality of service because they don't rely on telco infrastructure for delivery. Green icon messages frequently get lost or are delivered extremely late.
I use WhatsApp, Signal, and iMessage daily. Apple's iMessage (blue icon version) is the best of the bunch and it isn't particularly close. I don't think this is because there is anything special about iMessage per se, it is more that implementing complex core features across a broad range of unrelated platforms necessarily dumbs things down to the lowest common denominator, which makes for an unnecessarily rubbish experience on many platforms. iMessage goes for depth where other messaging platforms go for breadth.
Can we stop labeling everything that people like a "public utility"? What is ridiculous phrase. At any point in time I can open 10 chat apps and talk to my friends.
There are _existing_ public utilities that have way more, _actual_ monopoly power than iMessage and federal, state and local governments do nothing - nay - support it.
Try and chat to a group including 50+ year olds and see how far you get without it.
This feels like “Please submit documents in Microsoft Word format” all over again.
or with people who _do_ understand other messaging platforms but choose to use iMessage? I fall (mostly) into the latter category. I well understand that other messaging systems exist, have accounts on a handful; but the people I communicate most with use iMessage. I'm not going to persuade them otherwise; and I'm not going to be harangued with notifications on a half-dozen different messaging apps.
> 50+ year olds
It's how I message with my 15 year old. And mostly how she messages with her friends.
I think the usage patterns are more nuanced than old/young and simpleton/cognoscenti.
I do. Regularly. Using WhatsApp.
The first because you just said there is outstanding competition in the rich messaging space. Competition means a lot more than quantity of companies trying to do something. If, at a large scale, consumers are truly jealous of something they can't get without swapping hardware and OS providers to the message provider then competition is poor at best.
The second because I'm an iPhone owning user who uses Beeper, it has much better multi-os iMessage sync without having to sync/mirror my phone locally. So it's not just Android users it's even owners/users of Apple's products wanting to break a bit out of needing to use a Mac to get proper access to their iMessage. This widens the overall scope of the discussion quite a bit.
I will agree Beeper is entitled and lawmakers are clueless. We may differ on whether that entitlement is warranted or what lawmakers are clueless about though :).
Terrible comparison.
Edit
>A survey reveals that an overwhelming 87% of American teens own an iPhone, and an even more staggering 88% plan to purchase an iPhone as their next smartphone.
There is no "Poor Apple", there were mistakes, but mostly intentional malic the entire way. People repeatedly asked them to stop, people asked to be let in, and Apple had plenty of chances to allow RCS and additional layers of security like "Verified sent from Apple hardware".
I hope this one seriously hurts for them.
Under what possible manipulated definition of "forced" are you using? That Apple makes a desirable product? That they don't replace their messaging app every two years? That they don't bloat the phone with garbage?
> [Apple] fostered a culture
[serious citation needed]
Oh for crying out loud, NOBODY is forced to use iPhones. Can we stop this narrative already?
Everyone has their own personal device. I chose iPhone. But if I had a job where I had to use an Android for some reason, I wouldn't feel I was FORCED to use an Android, because I would only use that device for work related things, and my preferred device, the personal iPhone for everything else.
Of course you're welcome to use another device for your personal things but this doesn't mean the other choice limitations of the device in the required case are no longer present.
Personally I don't like whether an example of being boxed in is present as a decider though. My argument against it, instead of saying it just never happens, is that there needs to be a critical mass of occurrences. I.e. I think there are costs to both choosing to regulate or not regulate and it's a matter of when one outweighs the other not as much when some specific event occurs to some people. So, while many people do have to use Apple products for certain things in certain scenarios, it's not necessarily wrong by that fact. It's that it's so entrenched. I wouldn't call it a monopoly but I also don't want to wait until things are that bad to ever do anything, otherwise you end up with Microsofts doing massive damage before being reeled in.