- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 4/8/24 at 1:56 pm to TigerGman
You are taking a quote from this NY Post ( 
) article
and adding "black", "poors", etc. to fit your argument even though the list terminates at teenagers.
Once upon a time there was SMS/MMS. Every phone used it and every phone was compatible when texting phone number to phone number. Apple created iMessage and took over how their phones interacted with native messaging between phone numbers. Still ok because Apple built a bridge and fell back to SMS/MMS when both users were not on iMessage. The same SMS/MMS non-iphone users were already subjected to. Carriers are migrating to RCS to replace SMS/MMS since that protocol no longer supports modern messaging needs. Now, Apple was refusing to update their fallback to use RCS. The motivation for why they were dragging their feet can be plainly seen in this quote from a similar conversation around messaging from Apple’s Craig Federighi re: bringing iMessage to Android where he said
combined with their massive marketshare it reinforces messaging incompatibility remains one of the strongest switching cost for apple users and a large part of the wall holding them in the "garden". this switching cost is important because it is not rooted in merit, it is exclusionary behavior which falls directly under antitrust law.
all that shite about blacks and poors and DEI is fabricated by you to try to make this a political issue. the barrier to entry is low for new users. thats why Apple sells the SE and those can be had all day for <$200 off ebay. people with androids could very easily pick iphone. the issue is that Apple is using their market share to create high switching cost for existing users to keep them there and sell them products at inflated prices not based solely on merit, but on switching costs.
No one is saying Apple has to even change bubble colors. in fact, after RCS integration they will likely still exist to indicate users not on iMessage and to try to hang onto a piece of the switching cost.
even if this was "leftist", as you so badly want so you can cope, you still have yet to answer how this is bad for the consumer, but i think we all know why.
) article quote:
“Many non-iPhone users also experience social stigma, exclusion, and blame for ‘breaking’ chats where other participants own iPhones,” the lawsuit claimed, adding that the effect is “particularly powerful for certain demographics, like teenagers.”
and adding "black", "poors", etc. to fit your argument even though the list terminates at teenagers.
quote:
Apple doesn't have a monopoly on texting
Once upon a time there was SMS/MMS. Every phone used it and every phone was compatible when texting phone number to phone number. Apple created iMessage and took over how their phones interacted with native messaging between phone numbers. Still ok because Apple built a bridge and fell back to SMS/MMS when both users were not on iMessage. The same SMS/MMS non-iphone users were already subjected to. Carriers are migrating to RCS to replace SMS/MMS since that protocol no longer supports modern messaging needs. Now, Apple was refusing to update their fallback to use RCS. The motivation for why they were dragging their feet can be plainly seen in this quote from a similar conversation around messaging from Apple’s Craig Federighi re: bringing iMessage to Android where he said
quote:
‘iMessage on Android would simply serve to remove [an] obstacle to iPhone families giving their kids Android phones,”
combined with their massive marketshare it reinforces messaging incompatibility remains one of the strongest switching cost for apple users and a large part of the wall holding them in the "garden". this switching cost is important because it is not rooted in merit, it is exclusionary behavior which falls directly under antitrust law.
all that shite about blacks and poors and DEI is fabricated by you to try to make this a political issue. the barrier to entry is low for new users. thats why Apple sells the SE and those can be had all day for <$200 off ebay. people with androids could very easily pick iphone. the issue is that Apple is using their market share to create high switching cost for existing users to keep them there and sell them products at inflated prices not based solely on merit, but on switching costs.
quote:
Boo Hoo, poor little minority/teenager feels looked down upon for having green bubbles, and buys Apple instead, so we gonna hit Apple where it hurts.
No one is saying Apple has to even change bubble colors. in fact, after RCS integration they will likely still exist to indicate users not on iMessage and to try to hang onto a piece of the switching cost.
even if this was "leftist", as you so badly want so you can cope, you still have yet to answer how this is bad for the consumer, but i think we all know why.
This post was edited on 4/8/24 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 4/8/24 at 2:23 pm to Fat Batman
i think you expressed your real feelings here pretty well and why you have a problem with this: sunbird messaging thread
GiantKiller
TigerGman
your wittle apple might "lose" something and that doesn't play well with your narcissism of minor differences.
GiantKiller
quote:
Apple will go scorched earth to stop it. They know iMessage is literally the only carrot they have left and my guess is they'll spend almost an infinite amount of $$$ to protect it.
TigerGman
quote:
Yep. Or they can always tell their shareholders we'll lose potentially billions of dollars so we can make Android users happy...
your wittle apple might "lose" something and that doesn't play well with your narcissism of minor differences.
This post was edited on 4/8/24 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 4/8/24 at 3:44 pm to TigerGman
You need to find a hobby.
Posted on 4/8/24 at 4:05 pm to taylork37
quote:I think this is it
You need to find a hobby.
Posted on 4/8/24 at 6:56 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I think this is it
Heh, well explaining the law to a bunch of tech nerds is fun
Especially watching Fatbatman display his unending inability to grasp the basics of anti-trust law.
Posted on 4/8/24 at 7:33 pm to TigerGman
You are clearly the smartest person in the room, especially considering you are trying to explain the law to a lawyer and others who don't simply conform to a one-sided political viewpoint every chance they get, like you.
This post was edited on 4/8/24 at 7:35 pm
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:21 pm to Fat Batman
quote:
Carriers are migrating to RCS to replace SMS/MMS since that protocol no longer supports modern messaging needs. Now, Apple was refusing to update their fallback to use RCS. The motivation for why they were dragging their feet can be plainly seen in this quote from a similar conversation around messaging from Apple’s Craig Federighi re: bringing iMessage to Android where he said
Carriers are dragging their feet far more than Apple. CCMI was a complete and utter failure. SMS/MMS isn't going away any time soon.
RCS for all purposes in the US is Google's iMessage. The carriers just don't care enough to really follow through with anything, maybe when Apple follows through with their own version of it, they will get back to figuring out WTF they are going to do. T-Mobile even just gave up and said let Google deal with it. It makes them no money like SMS/MMS. There isn't a texting plan to go with it, it's all data. They just don't care about it due to that.
This post was edited on 4/8/24 at 9:32 pm
Posted on 4/8/24 at 9:57 pm to Dam Guide
Apple is going to use the RCS Universal Profile not Google's Jibe. I believe they've also indicated they are going to work with GSMA to add encryption to the Universal Profile.
This post was edited on 4/8/24 at 10:03 pm
Posted on 4/9/24 at 8:02 am to Fat Batman
My non-lawyer take is that most all of everyone's statements are true at the same time:
-Apple is kinda getting hosed here. They built a superior product and marketed da fuq outta it. It's the most popular phone/messagine (with imessage) platform in the US.
-Google/android users do get hosed somewhat that apple users are locked into imessage which always screws up messaging to android users aka sms/mms.
-If the roles were reversed, both companies would be doing the same thing, just reversed.
-At the end of the day, I personally, don't see imessage as a monopoly. It's part of the ecosystem within apple's phones. There are clear alternatives out there to an iphone. The consumer has spoken within the US market so it shouldn't be on apple to play nice with opponents. Competitors should merely do better or build a better product in order to make Apple the inferior product.
It's called competition by innovation to me. Google/Android seems, again, to me, to be trying to bitch smack Apple but by the Govt's hand. That leads to a slippery slope.
ETA: In full disclosure, I'm an apple user and my whole family is too. That being said, I also use an nVidia Shield TV and have had android phones. I like the product, I just like Apple for my family/kids a bit better. They both do things really well and have both spurred innovation from each other.
-Apple is kinda getting hosed here. They built a superior product and marketed da fuq outta it. It's the most popular phone/messagine (with imessage) platform in the US.
-Google/android users do get hosed somewhat that apple users are locked into imessage which always screws up messaging to android users aka sms/mms.
-If the roles were reversed, both companies would be doing the same thing, just reversed.
-At the end of the day, I personally, don't see imessage as a monopoly. It's part of the ecosystem within apple's phones. There are clear alternatives out there to an iphone. The consumer has spoken within the US market so it shouldn't be on apple to play nice with opponents. Competitors should merely do better or build a better product in order to make Apple the inferior product.
It's called competition by innovation to me. Google/Android seems, again, to me, to be trying to bitch smack Apple but by the Govt's hand. That leads to a slippery slope.
ETA: In full disclosure, I'm an apple user and my whole family is too. That being said, I also use an nVidia Shield TV and have had android phones. I like the product, I just like Apple for my family/kids a bit better. They both do things really well and have both spurred innovation from each other.
This post was edited on 4/9/24 at 8:14 am
Posted on 4/9/24 at 8:20 am to DoubleDown
iMessage is nice...so is RCS. Having only SMS/MMS cross system is trash for everyone.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 8:43 am to DoubleDown
My non lawyer take is I'm not smart enough to know the in and outs of the Guberment lawsuit, but I'm sure enjoying the back and forth banter in this thread.
Oh and iMessage Sucks.
Oh and iMessage Sucks.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 8:48 am to DoubleDown
quote:
At the end of the day, I personally, don't see imessage as a monopoly. It's part of the ecosystem within apple's phones. There are clear alternatives out there to an iphone. The consumer has spoken within the US market so it shouldn't be on apple to play nice with opponents.
If Apple had made iMessage a standalone messaging app, and Apple users chose to use it to message other Apple users, then I would agree that the consumer has spoken.
But that's not how it happened.
Apple piggybacked iMessage on SMS, a universal messaging system which is what consumers really want, and brought those users onto their platform "seamlessly" (which is a nice way to say "underhandedly"). Then when people tried to switch to Android, they weren't receiving their messages because Apple had hijacked their phone numbers (iPhones were still trying to send iMessages to their numbers instead of SMS).
That's fricked up. I don't know if Apple has since fixed that issue, but it's not the only example of Apple doing shady shite to lock in users and make it hard to switch.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 8:55 am to Fat Batman
quote:
Apple is going to use the RCS Universal Profile not Google's Jibe. I believe they've also indicated they are going to work with GSMA to add encryption to the Universal Profile.
That's just it, the government wants them to build their own version of messaging that is compatible with what Google is doing. The carriers, who should be doing this job, not Google or Apple, aren't doing shite and don't care to do shite here. You said carrier before, they are doing f**k all and in some cases just throwing up their hands and saying f**k it, Google can do it.
quote:
Apple piggybacked iMessage on SMS, a universal messaging system which is what consumers really want, and brought those users onto their platform "seamlessly" (which is a nice way to say "underhandedly"). Then when people tried to switch to Android, they weren't receiving their messages because Apple had hijacked their phone numbers (iPhones were still trying to send iMessages to their numbers instead of SMS).
That's fricked up. I don't know if Apple has since fixed that issue, but it's not the only example of Apple doing shady shite to lock in users and make it hard to switch.
This is fricked up and should never been allowed, I think this for the most part has been made easier if you read the instructions, people don't really like to do that though.
This post was edited on 4/9/24 at 8:58 am
Posted on 4/9/24 at 8:57 am to Fat Batman
quote:
You are taking a quote from this NY Post ( ) article
quote:
“Many non-iPhone users also experience social stigma, exclusion, and blame for ‘breaking’ chats where other participants own iPhones,” the lawsuit claimed, adding that the effect is “particularly powerful for certain demographics, like teenagers.”
and adding "black", "poors", etc. to fit your argument even though the list terminates at teenagers.
WTF, dude? You continue to embarrass yourself. I've said over and over again that that's a direct quote from the lawsuit, the Biden Administration's exact words. Paragraph 90 to be specific.
And no, if you'd bothered to read it, you'd see that it doesn't terminate at teenagers; it specifically says "particularly powerful impact on other demographics." You tell me what the Biden administration means by "other demographics."?
Posted on 4/9/24 at 8:59 am to Korkstand
quote:
Apple piggybacked iMessage on SMS, a universal messaging system which is what consumers really want, and brought those users onto their platform "seamlessly" (which is a nice way to say "underhandedly"). Then when people tried to switch to Android, they weren't receiving their messages because Apple had hijacked their phone numbers (iPhones were still trying to send iMessages to their numbers instead of SMS).
I don't disagree with that. I think Apple/Carriers/and refurb stores know now to remove imessage from #s when people get new phones or convert to android now. However, the premise of what you said, I don't disagree with.
I don't know the lawsuit that well so coming from a place of ignorance but I feel like that's only 1 of their arguments.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 9:02 am to DoubleDown
I might be stretching this discussion some, however, one thing that concerns me is if the Gov't intervenes here. Is it possible that forcing apple to utilize RCS (or whatever) allows Big Gubm't to obtain/spy/etc on people's conversations/messages?
I get a good bit leery when I hear that the Gov't is "doing something for the good of the people". That tends to never be the case.
Just throwing that out there though...
I get a good bit leery when I hear that the Gov't is "doing something for the good of the people". That tends to never be the case.
Just throwing that out there though...
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:20 am to DoubleDown
quote:
I might be stretching this discussion some, however, one thing that concerns me is if the Gov't intervenes here. Is it possible that forcing apple to utilize RCS (or whatever) allows Big Gubm't to obtain/spy/etc on people's conversations/messages?
As it stands right now, RCS universal profile aka the standard is much easier to spy on people. It's not encrypted. Apple will not use stock Universal Profile, but make their own fork that is compatible with it and should add encryption. Google has their own fork called Jibe that pretty much everyone in the US is using right now because the carriers don't give a shite about it.
There will be some things when Apple's version comes out that will not be compatible with each other for sure, but all the universal profile included things should work between each other.
The government really isn't forcing anything at this point because Apple was already working on integrating RCS this year. These public statments going after Apple about this is perplexing. Especially when the people who should be doing this, the carriers, could easily make it part of their requirements and force Apple's hand to be part of their networks.
This post was edited on 4/9/24 at 10:24 am
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:38 am to Dam Guide
quote:The carriers milked SMS for all it was worth then moved on to the next cash cow - data. There's no value left in messaging for the carriers so they damn sure don't want to shoulder the cost.
Especially when the people who should be doing this, the carriers, could easily make it part of their requirements and force Apple's hand to be part of their networks.
Honestly I don't want the carriers nor Google nor Apple nor anyone in charge of "universal" messaging. This is going to sound like some buzzword bandwagon pipe dream shite but I think we need to start moving away from messaging via phone numbers and email addresses and look to blockchain messaging.
Posted on 4/9/24 at 10:52 am to Dam Guide
quote:
That's just it, the government wants them to build their own version of messaging that is compatible with what Google is doing. The carriers, who should be doing this job, not Google or Apple, aren't doing shite and don't care to do shite here. You said carrier before, they are doing f**k all and in some cases just throwing up their hands and saying f**k it, Google can do it.
RCS, i believe was put together by 3GPP and is backed by GSMA and OMA as the industry supported successor to SMS/MMS. I said carriers because it conveys the same thing, the industry supports the move to RCS. Sure, Google is really the only one doing anything with RCS currently, but that is more because they are the only ones that had to since apple already hijacked native messaging with iMessage. Google doesn't own RCS, they own Jibe which is currently the only RCS on android. Anyone can create an RCS implementation, for instance Apple will. And Google has already committed to opening up an API for 3rd party apps once Jibe reaches a more stable state. I don't view it as much as the government saying you have to integrate with what Google is doing as much as the government saying you have to support the new industry successor to SMS/MMS. They already built iMessage to support "what google (and everyone else) was doing" when it was just SMS/MMS. This is just bringing universal compatibility back in sync. I could careless who owns the metal, carriers or Google or Apple or anyone else who's integration you choose to use, and would argue Google taking over pushed RCS further than the carriers would have. Now Apple is coming along and wants to add encryption to the Universal Profile (look at that, already spurring some innovation) which pushes the RCS protocol even further. I don't think there is anything wrong with owning discrete RCS integrations as they would all work together, which is the whole point of all of this. None of this would be happening if Apple wasn't exhibiting exclusionary behavior.
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News