-4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
22 points

I absolutely am not an iPhone or iMessage fan, but criticizing a company for blocking someone who reverse engineered they platform to gain access isn’t right in my opinion.

If a 3rd party app is allowed to utilise Apple’s iMessage protocol/network, then every other messaging provider (WhatsApp, Telegram, etc) will be required to open up their platforms.

I cant wait to see the day where WhatsApp allows 3rd party apps to use their messaging network.

permalink
report
reply
-3 points

It’s very right. All messaging platforms should be open or interoperable.

Imagine if from Hotmail you could only email others on Hotmail. Or the same with Gmail. Or not being able to SMS anyone on at&t from any other telco. There’s no good reason to limit it like that.

Also consider that they were charging for the service. The only part of the deal I wasn’t keen on. 1 because again, messaging should be open and interoperable. 2 they were basically charging a recurring fee for access to Apple’s service, not specifically theirs in this instance. Which seems bad on Beeper, until you realize that Apple is basically refusing to make money from their service. And they’re not doing it out of principle, ideology, or good will. They’re doing it because they don’t want to compete. Not with regards to iMessage, or anything else.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Maybe we wouldn’t have the spam ridden hellscape that is modern email if it worked more like current messaging platforms

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Apple has reverse engineered a lot of stuff to make it work on apple products. A fair number of Microsoft products specifically. I don’t know why they should be exempt from having similar happen to them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

DMCA specifically protects the right to reverse engineer something for interoperability. There is no reason other than being cordial to request “permission”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Yawn snooze. Nothing to see here. Hackers complaining their exploit got blocked.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

I feel like if they initially didn’t try to force people to pay a subscription for a free service, Apple wouldn’t have closed the issue.

That being said, they fixed what was inarguably an exploit that could have led to scammers using Bluestacks to run iMessage spam campaigns. (These exist now, but would be amplified)

permalink
report
reply
5 points

I just fine it odd that people are unhappy with Apple. Beeper was spoofing Apple’s servers to make it look like an iMac was requesting the ping. Apple isn’t a charity they do not have to allow unauthorised third party access. I would hope none of us would allow unauthorised access to our servers.

permalink
report
reply

Apple

!apple_enthusiast@lemmy.world

Create post
Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:
  1. No NSFW Content
  2. No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
  3. No Ads / Spamming
    Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

Community stats

  • 2.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.2K

    Posts

  • 16K

    Comments