• cum@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    6 months ago

    It was a waste of time beginning to end. If they were smart, they were doing this for a quick cash grab. If they were dumb, then they legitimately thought this would work long-term.

    • EarthlingHazard@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      6 months ago

      Whatever their motives are I’m glad it brought the interoperability conversation into the spotlight.

    • habanhero@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s a marketing and publicity stunt, kinda like Nothing’s fiasco with the Sunbird app. The goal is to get people talking about them and come out looking like the good guy underdog vs Apple. To be fair their plan is probably working judging by how many people are jumping out in front of Beeper and condemning “Big Apple”, even though Apple is just doing what any service provider should be doing.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I just don’t understand how anyone could base a company on an exploit. That is what it is in the end - the found an exploit and took advantage of it. Seems like the logical thing would be for apple to immediately close the exploit.

      The answer is right there. If Apple wanted iMessage on Android it would be there. It isn’t so they don’t want it.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 months ago

      It was a waste of time beginning to end.

      Sounded like the original effort was hobby reverse engineering for fun by a smart school kid and then Beeper went ahead and tried to turn it into a product.

    • On@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      It’s almost like when companies try to build a wall, some people will try to break in, even for the sake of it, maybe the thrill of it, even if it worked for a minute.

      Whatever their intentions, I’m glad they did. Apple got to strengthen their infrastructure (somewhat, users are still using it with access to a Mac), and it brought messaging interoperability conversation to congress.

      People seem to forget Apple founders were doing this shit too. They build a blue box and sold it too.

      https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-releases/2015/11/the-phone-phreaks-and-steve-jobs-wozniaks-discovery-of-the-little-blue-box-recounted-in-fivethirtyeight-espn-films-short/

      • cum@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s why nobody thinks the 16 year old who found the method is in the wrong here. It’s really cool they found that, especially at that age. Now to build an entire product off of an exploit while loudly announcing it is just stupid.

  • mannycalavera@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    They need to go to the EU and get them to intervene! Only the EU can stand up to apple.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      6 months ago

      The EU doesn’t care about iMessage. Almost nobody uses that thing over here. Usually Applie die hards try it out after new features have been released, try to convince everyone that it’s the year of iMessage now, and move back to WhatsApp what the vast majority is actually using.

  • Chozo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    6 months ago

    Good. I can’t wait to stop hearing about this app and their stupid feud with Apple.

    You don’t need iMessage. Your iFriends need RCS. Beeper is not the solution.

    • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      And while they wait for RCS, they can just install Signal. Signal works and is funded by a non-profit who puts in more work to know as little as possible about you than any other company/org out there.

      • sour@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        i dont want to download another app to talk to one person

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Unfortunately Signal, unlike Telegram, breaks when I uninstall google play services.

        • KISSmyOS@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          You have to reinstall Signal after uninstalling play services. Then it detects that play services aren’t there and sets itself up to receive push notifications without it.
          But to be on the safe side, I’d install Signal-FOSS instead which has no Google dependencies at all.

        • jcarax@beehaw.org
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          It doesn’t for me? I run it on Graphene without google play services. You just have to turn off battery optimization, but it’s very reasonable in its battery usage. I’ve been off battery for 18 hours, and am at 81% on my Pixel 8. Signal is at less than 1% of battery use, and it still will be in a few days when I’m ready to charge, unless I use it significantly on my phone. But I mostly use it from my laptop, and just get notifications on my phone, so probably not.

          In contrast, K9 Mail is at around 3%, it’s running at battery optimized, and I haven’t opened it at all.

        • 0x2d@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          get the signal apk from their website instead of downloading with aurora store

        • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          No, the solution is to rid ourselves of the Plain Old Telephone System, as well as IP-based internet, and move to something that doesn’t rely on a corporation to communicate, is secure for everyone, and is free and open source.

            • 9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              IP-based internet relies on so many corporations, organizations, governments, etc., to play nicely. They hoard IPv4 ranges and let you “rent” out blocks of IPs if you pay them enough. This is not free and open access to the internet.

              In order to connect to the internet, you are required to pay an ISP. They then dictate how you can use your service. For some residential ISPs, you aren’t allowed to use certain ports, so you cant host your own services like email, websites, etc. You also have to monitor how much bandwidth you are using to make sure you don’t go over your “data cap”. This is why these centralized services are so big for things like email and web hosting. We’ll get more into data collection here in a bit.

              IP-based internet is flawed in that it allows DDoS attacks to take out a server that might be limited on protection. There is no redundancy or self-healing properties built-in that will protect the little guy. You can always subscribe to services like CloudFlare, who will then Man-In-The-Middle your internet traffic. You then have to abide by their terms of service, which is not desirable (especially if new hostile leadership were to come in and take over the company). Also, unless you are paying multiple ISPs for redundant connections to the internet backbone, you are vulnerable to Sybil attacks on your network. If subscribed to a single ISP, and it has downtime, you will have downtime along with them.

              Any data sent between one IP to another is not encrypted by default. You have to bolt-on entirely different protocols to have that capability. As a result of that, we ended up with a very splintered implementation of encrypting data-in-transit. There are thousands of messenger applications, transmissions protocols, certificate authorities, etc., that often aren’t compatible with others. They also individually have their own set of issues.

              Data collection… Ads… Trackers. Oh my! The end user of most modern websites are connecting to multiple servers, even though they visited a single site. Those users are tracked as they hop website to website. Often, these companies keep a profile on anyone matching that fingerprint. You have no control over that data. If you turn off connections to those servers, the website can become unusable. You can’t seriously say this is the best we can do. Why not have a network that prevents you from being tracked?

          • AlijahTheMediocre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            IP-based internet? What do you mean by that, how else are we supposed to provide unique addresses for every device on a network?

      • Luvon@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        RCS would be a good solution if the standards committee wasn’t so held back by not adding an official end to end encryption method. Probably telecoms not wanting to give up the data mining.

      • Chozo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Doesn’t RCS support E2EE if properly implemented? I seem to recall reading that the spec for RCS supports this, but it’s just that carriers won’t enable it.

      • petrescatraian@libranet.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s also handing control over messaging back to carriers

        I don’t really see any issue in this, as RCS was meant as an upgrade of the SMS protocol. Moreover, as the smartphone market is now pretty much a duopoly between Google and Apple, and pretty much what is not Apple is Google, it was natural for Google to also come up with an alternative to iMessage of theirs. Because that’s what it is currently. I’m surprised Apple accepted to implement RCS after all because of this tbh.

        Imo, both Google, Apple could have worked with the major carriers to implement a solution like this over GSM (and not requiring you to use mobile data). For me, that’s the advantage of the SMS over any IM app out there (including Matrix, XMPP etc.): you’re not required to turn on your data in order to use it. It’s just right there. For the current implementations of RCS/iMessage respectively, I don’t see any advantage over just using WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger for example.

    • 27myths@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It is a really nice app though. I have never even used the iMessage feature.

      • shahar2k@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’ll do one better, I’ve been a beeper (not beeper mini) beta tester for a while, and I’ve had uninterrupted imessage access through their older method which never had a single outage!

        I imagine though they have been using a method like spinning up virtual mac machines or matrix bridge to get it to work.

        either way it is by far my favorite messaging app, I’m so damn tired of all these companies walling their messaging service into some enclosed garden while everyone I know decides that THEIR favorite app is the one everyone should be using.

  • leetnewb@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    I mostly blame Apple for walling off the default text messaging app on the iOS platform. It is ridiculous to me that we are over 10 years into the smartphone era and are stuck in a duopoly with two players that would rather degrade communications between platforms than prioritize interoperability for some base level functionality. I hope that Beeper’s campaign forces regulation that puts an end to the insanity.

    • kowcop@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Why not go whinge to Google to develop a messaging system that Apple users want to integrate with…

      • MiddledAgedGuy@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        They did. RCS. And it sounds like Apple will be adopting it due to regulatory pressure. But the idea of “Apple users will want to integrate with” has a flaw. A lot of their userbase happily drinks the Kool-aid and want their walled garden, even if it’s not in their best interest.

        • kowcop@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Maybe there is no kool-aid and it is just better, hence why these apps exist. As you said, RCS is coming yet people still aren’t happy. It sounds like Google can’t make a decent messaging app and is mobilising it’s user base to force the issue instead of innovating

          • MiddledAgedGuy@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Apple definitely came out with the better messaging product first. But RCS has nearly all the same features as iMessage.

            Maybe it’s not drinking the kool-aid, Apple does make a good product. But since integrating RCS has no negative impact to them, and allows them to use those features with more people, why wouldn’t they want it?

            Maybe, generally speaking on the userbase. I’m personally not interested in promoting Android or Google. I begrudgingly use it, but I’m not a fan. I am interested in interoperability, which this gives us.

            Edit: Redundant