Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #124307 > unrolled thread

Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2023-12-09 04:43 +0000
    Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2023-12-09 07:41 +0100
      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid> - 2023-12-09 08:07 +0000
      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2023-12-09 08:19 -0500
        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2023-12-09 15:30 +0100
        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-09 15:27 -0400
          Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2023-12-10 11:02 +0100
            Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Larry Wolff <larrywolff@larrywolff.net> - 2023-12-11 09:52 -0500
              Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2023-12-11 16:33 +0000
              Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2023-12-11 19:00 +0100
    Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-09 04:28 -0400
      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2023-12-09 09:05 +0000
        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-09 06:24 -0400
          Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> - 2023-12-09 13:28 +0000
            Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2023-12-09 08:49 -0500
              Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-09 14:59 -0400
      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2023-12-09 11:46 +0000
        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-12-09 17:40 +0100
        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-09 15:04 -0400
          Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2023-12-10 14:04 +0000
            Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2023-12-10 14:26 +0000
              Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2023-12-10 15:27 +0000
                Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-12-11 12:33 +0100
                  Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-11 11:02 -0400
                    Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> - 2023-12-11 16:48 +0000
                      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-12-11 19:32 +0100
                      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2023-12-11 20:09 +0000
                        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol david <this@is.invalid> - 2023-12-11 13:18 -0700
                      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-11 16:11 -0400
                      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2023-12-11 14:54 -0800
                    Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2023-12-11 19:42 +0100
                  Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2023-12-11 19:03 +0100
      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman) - 2023-12-09 12:29 +0000
        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-09 15:34 -0400
    Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2023-12-09 08:11 -0500
      Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-09 15:13 -0400
        Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2023-12-09 13:51 -0800
          Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2023-12-09 17:09 -0500
            Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> - 2023-12-10 00:59 -0400
              Re: Beeper Mini: Latest Android app to emulate iMessage protocol Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> - 2023-12-09 21:13 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#126699

badgolferman wrote:

> I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
> users can be integrated into their conversations.  I hear Android users
> creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.

I can send SMS (and if justified) MMS messages to people with iPhones, I 
neither know or care what application they view them in, or what colour 
bubble I get.  If in a few months I can also send them RCS messages, all 
the better.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#126766

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> badgolferman wrote:
> 
> > I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
> > users can be integrated into their conversations.  I hear Android users
> > creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.

  FTR, Android *users* do no such thing. In this case it's an app
*developper* which tries "to integrate into iMessage".

> I can send SMS (and if justified) MMS messages to people with iPhones, I 
> neither know or care what application they view them in, or what colour 
> bubble I get.  If in a few months I can also send them RCS messages, all 
> the better.

  Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
*'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#127613

On 2023-12-10 16:27, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> badgolferman wrote:
>>
>>> I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
>>> users can be integrated into their conversations.  I hear Android users
>>> creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.
> 
>    FTR, Android *users* do no such thing. In this case it's an app
> *developper* which tries "to integrate into iMessage".

Right.

> 
>> I can send SMS (and if justified) MMS messages to people with iPhones, I
>> neither know or care what application they view them in, or what colour
>> bubble I get.  If in a few months I can also send them RCS messages, all
>> the better.
> 
>    Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
> is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
> *'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
> you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!

It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128122

"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote 

>>    Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
>> is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
>> *'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
>> you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
> 
> It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.

For badgolferman,

Is my summary understanding of the problem set below accurate yet?

I respectfully change my assessment that we previously disagreed upon as it
seems to be both Apple & Android users complaining - but only a subset of
each group.

As I try to understand all these problems, it appears the problem is a mix
of the proprietary messaging iOS uses versus the open messaging of Android.

              *First problem: free Android MMS to Android*
Some Android users get charged for MMS so they prefer a method that sends
MMS for free. There are two fundamental solutions to that problem set.
1. Use any messaging app that allows MMS for free (there are many)
2. Use RCS in the messaging (there are a half dozen free Android RCS apps)
3. But the problem with both is the recipient has to use a similar app

              *Second problem: free Android MMS to iOS*
For the same subset who are charged by their carrier for MMS... 
1. Use RCS (but iOS doesn't support RCS)
2. Use Beeper (but iOS doesn't support Beeper)
3. Use anything else such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Theema, whatever

Given that iOS Messages is the same as WhatsApp (and all the rest), the
problem is nobody on Android is using the iOS Messages app while everyone
on iOS (practically) is using the proprietary closed iOS Messages app.

So it's a conundrum only for the following subsets of Android/iOS users:
a. Android users who are charged for sending MMS, and, 
b. iOS users who want to receive those MMS messages.

Is this yet an accurate summary of the problem set?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128230

Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote 
> 
>>> Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
>>> is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
>>> *'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
>>> you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
>> 
>> It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.
> 
> For badgolferman,
> 
> Is my summary understanding of the problem set below accurate yet?
> 
> I respectfully change my assessment that we previously disagreed upon as it
> seems to be both Apple & Android users complaining - but only a subset of
> each group.
> 
> As I try to understand all these problems, it appears the problem is a mix
> of the proprietary messaging iOS uses versus the open messaging of Android.
> 
>               *First problem: free Android MMS to Android*
> Some Android users get charged for MMS so they prefer a method that sends
> MMS for free. There are two fundamental solutions to that problem set.
> 1. Use any messaging app that allows MMS for free (there are many)
> 2. Use RCS in the messaging (there are a half dozen free Android RCS apps)
> 3. But the problem with both is the recipient has to use a similar app
> 
>               *Second problem: free Android MMS to iOS*
> For the same subset who are charged by their carrier for MMS... 
> 1. Use RCS (but iOS doesn't support RCS)
> 2. Use Beeper (but iOS doesn't support Beeper)
> 3. Use anything else such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Theema, whatever
> 
> Given that iOS Messages is the same as WhatsApp (and all the rest), the
> problem is nobody on Android is using the iOS Messages app while everyone
> on iOS (practically) is using the proprietary closed iOS Messages app.
> 
> So it's a conundrum only for the following subsets of Android/iOS users:
> a. Android users who are charged for sending MMS, and, 
> b. iOS users who want to receive those MMS messages.
> 
> Is this yet an accurate summary of the problem set?
> 

Since most people in the US don’t pay for MMS I don’t think that’s the
problem. My opinion is Android users break group chats for iOS users since
Android doesn’t support some iOS features. 

Now you can say it’s iOS users complaining about this, but it seems it’s
Android users who keep trying to get around it somehow. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128257

On 2023-12-11 17:48, badgolferman wrote:
> Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>> "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote

...

>> Is this yet an accurate summary of the problem set?
>>
> 
> Since most people in the US don’t pay for MMS I don’t think that’s the
> problem. My opinion is Android users break group chats for iOS users since
> Android doesn’t support some iOS features.
> 
> Now you can say it’s iOS users complaining about this, but it seems it’s
> Android users who keep trying to get around it somehow.

Rather some devs are trying to get around it somehow, because iOS users 
complain about this.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128275

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

> Since most people in the US don?t pay for MMS I don?t think that?s the
> problem. My opinion is Android users break group chats for iOS users since
> Android doesn?t support some iOS features. 

  You've (*still*) got it completely backwards: "Android doesn't support
some iOS features" because *Apple* refuses to open up iMessage, so
'Android' *cannot* "support some iOS features" because *Apple* doesn't
allow them to.

> Now you can say it?s iOS users complaining about this, but it seems it?s
> Android users who keep trying to get around it somehow. 

  Again completely backwards: Android users don't do any such thing!
*Apple*'s kludge converts chats with Android users to SMS/MMS, which is
much more limited, much more expensive (outrageously so for MMS) for the
sender or/and the recipient and (for MMS) not even available in a number
of countries.

  The Apple kludge is apparently 'accepted' in the US (and perhaps in
NA) 'because' of the high penetration of iPhones (much higher than in
the rest of the world) and the US(/NA?) Android users apparently rolling
over.

  As this is a worldwide forum, such sillyness is highly frowned upon
and no amount of Apple worshipping is going to  change that.

  *This* part of Apple's offering is a kludge. Accept it and move on.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128279

Using <news:ul7tpu.peo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank Slootweg
wrote:

>   Again completely backwards: Android users don't do any such thing!
> *Apple*'s kludge converts chats with Android users to SMS/MMS, which is
> much more limited, much more expensive (outrageously so for MMS) for the
> sender or/and the recipient and (for MMS) not even available in a number
> of countries.

Does this mean that when an iphone sends a picture to an android phone,
that the image is sent from the apple messages app as an mms message?

But that same image is not sent from ios as an mms to another iphone?

>   The Apple kludge is apparently 'accepted' in the US (and perhaps in
> NA) 'because' of the high penetration of iPhones (much higher than in
> the rest of the world) and the US(/NA?) Android users apparently rolling
> over.

There is not only a high usa penetration of iphones but also free usa mms.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128276

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote 

> Since most people in the US don't pay for MMS I don't think that's the
> problem. My opinion is Android users break group chats for iOS users since
> Android doesn't support some iOS features. 
> 
> Now you can say it's iOS users complaining about this, but it seems it's
> Android users who keep trying to get around it somehow.

Hi badgolferman,

Thanks for trying to clarify as I am struggling to understand the issues
as I have no problems communication with iOS users in any fashion at all.

And I'm in family "group chats" which include both platforms (where the
non-technical women are usually on iOS & the technical men on Android).

Nobody's complaining they can't get my many MMS messages (if you think I
post a lot of images to this ng, you should see my pictures of my kids).

And I get theirs. Easy peasy. No problems here. 

So I'm still struggling to summarize the problem set, which Dave Royal
seems to grasp the best, although Frank Slootweg (NL) & Carlos E.R. (Spain)
seem to also understand the MMS issues better than I do.

In addition, Andy Burns (UK) explained that a problem is his recipient's
RCS support, which, if I understand it correctly, seems to be that he can
send MMS using RCS but nobody on iOS (currently) can get those messages.

Even the Android recipients can't get them if the Android user doesn't make
one of the half dozen RCS-enabled messaging apps their one-&-only default.

It seems to me when all the messaging apps support RCS, that part of the
problem should be fixed. Does that seem like a reasonable assessment yet? 
-- 
The only reason Apple stuff works well is everyone is logged into the same
server 100% of the time, so of course they can communicate with each other.
 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128290

On 12/11/2023 8:48 AM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> Since most people in the US don’t pay for MMS I don’t think that’s the
> problem.
MMS uses data which most people in the U.S. do pay for.

-- 
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it 
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not 
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as 
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128259

On 2023-12-11 16:02, Wally J wrote:
> "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote
> 
>>>     Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
>>> is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
>>> *'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
>>> you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
>>
>> It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.
> 
> For badgolferman,
> 
> Is my summary understanding of the problem set below accurate yet?
> 
> I respectfully change my assessment that we previously disagreed upon as it
> seems to be both Apple & Android users complaining - but only a subset of
> each group.
> 
> As I try to understand all these problems, it appears the problem is a mix
> of the proprietary messaging iOS uses versus the open messaging of Android.
> 
>                *First problem: free Android MMS to Android*
> Some Android users get charged for MMS so they prefer a method that sends
> MMS for free.

And in some countries or in some providers, MMS has been removed.

> There are two fundamental solutions to that problem set.
> 1. Use any messaging app that allows MMS for free (there are many)
> 2. Use RCS in the messaging (there are a half dozen free Android RCS apps)
> 3. But the problem with both is the recipient has to use a similar app

4. Do not use SMS/MMS, but some other messaging app, like WhatsApp, 
Signal, Telegram, Threema....

> 
>                *Second problem: free Android MMS to iOS*
> For the same subset who are charged by their carrier for MMS...
> 1. Use RCS (but iOS doesn't support RCS)
> 2. Use Beeper (but iOS doesn't support Beeper)
> 3. Use anything else such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Theema, whatever

4. Use SMS.

> 
> Given that iOS Messages is the same as WhatsApp (and all the rest), the
> problem is nobody on Android is using the iOS Messages app while everyone
> on iOS (practically) is using the proprietary closed iOS Messages app.

In other countries than NA, people on iPhones are probably using feature 
rich WhatsApp or similar instead of iMessages, because the population 
using iPhones is minimal, and the problem is solved.


> 
> So it's a conundrum only for the following subsets of Android/iOS users:
> a. Android users who are charged for sending MMS, and,
   a2. Users in countries where MMS is not supported.
> b. iOS users who want to receive those MMS messages.
> 
> Is this yet an accurate summary of the problem set?

I made some corrections.

Then there are the users communicating across countries. In that case, 
MMS (if not disabled) is even more expensive. It might even have a cost 
for USAians.

There is a reason for using open standards...

Also, the EU is going to push for all those isolated messaging platforms 
to intercommunicate "somehow™"


-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#128250

Am 11.12.23 um 12:33 schrieb Carlos E. R.:
> On 2023-12-10 16:27, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>>> badgolferman wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't hear iOS users wanting Apple to open up iMessage so Android
>>>> users can be integrated into their conversations.  I hear Android users
>>>> creating all sort of apps and workarounds to integrate into iMessage.
>>
>>     FTR, Android *users* do no such thing. In this case it's an app
>> *developper* which tries "to integrate into iMessage".
> 
> Right.

Wrong. Economics are not your strength: There is only a market among 
Android-users.

>>> I can send SMS (and if justified) MMS messages to people with iPhones, I

No you can't. MMS exists only in grossly underdevelopped markets like 
North America.

>>> neither know or care what application they view them in, or what colour
>>> bubble I get.  If in a few months I can also send them RCS messages, all
>>> the better.
>>
>>     Exactly. And as you indicate, the whole 'bubble colour' (non-)argument
>> is mindblowingly stupid. Who *cares* what colour *'our'* messages are on
>> *'their'* screens!? Have I ever been worried about what kind of colours
>> you use in Thunderbird? I don't think so!
> 
> It is apparently a thing with "kids" in USA.

And Spain and the Netherlands ... *ROTFLSTC*

-- 
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#125166

In article <ul18fv$297ne$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
walterjones@invalid.nospam (Wally J) wrote:

> But I'm looking for what the "value equation" is, as I don't get it 
> yet.

I have to break it to you, but there are lots and lots of people who care
mostly about what other people think of them, and measure that by
superficialities like fashion, or blue bubbles. 

Apple having a "monopoly" on a particular style of chat message thus
seems significant to some people. That's why Apple decided to support RCS,
because giving way on their own schedule is safer for them than being
forced by politicians to do so. 

Worrying about this when the climate is collapsing and authoritarianism
is threatening all over the world is utterly silly, but much of modern
culture exists to distract people from the ways powerful people are
abusing their power for short-term gain. 

John 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#126161

John Dallman <jgd@cix.co.uk> wrote 

>> But I'm looking for what the "value equation" is, as I don't get it 
>> yet.
> 
> I have to break it to you, but there are lots and lots of people who care
> mostly about what other people think of them, and measure that by
> superficialities like fashion, or blue bubbles.

I don't disagree, but why is it always the Apple users who are complaining
about the color of bubbles and not the Android users?

For example, I communicate with iPhone owners all the time, and I have no
problems communicating with them. I don't care what color my chats are.

In fact, I can set the color of my SMS/MMS chats to any number of colors.
 <https://home.pulsesms.app/overview/>

It's surprising the Apple owners can't do something that simple to do.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#125274

On 2023-12-08 23:43, Andy Burns wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
> 
>> I'm less sure that using such to "register" a non Apple device's phone 
>> number on the Apple servers would not violate Apple's terms of 
>> service. To be seen.
> 
> Why would I want to pay £2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden, 
> when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?

What walled garden?  Apple devices roam wherever they like.  No walls.

OTOH, they have a superb eco-system between Apple devices that excludes 
non Apple systems.  iMessage service is one of them.



-- 
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#126148

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote 

>> Why would I want to pay Ł2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden, 
>> when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
> 
> What walled garden?  Apple devices roam wherever they like.  No walls.
> 
> OTOH, they have a superb eco-system between Apple devices that excludes 
> non Apple systems.  iMessage service is one of them.

Alan Browne is wrong. Dead wrong. He doesn't know how iOS works.
He's never tried _not logging into the walled garden_ for example.
 
                      I have.

It is rather telling that this Apple iKook has absolutely no idea he's
logging into _many_ different Apple servers every day of his entire life.
 <https://i.postimg.cc/7P7NCctS/locked-01.jpg> AppleID is locked by Apple

Where if you don't log in constantly, Apple _bricks_ the walled garden!
 <https://i.postimg.cc/4dHQQFfk/locked-02.jpg> Password was always good 

For example, here's the prompt when you don't log in daily to iMessages.
 <https://i.postimg.cc/rwyGPpV9/locked-05.jpg> iMessage walled garden

And, as another example, here's the prompt if you don't log into iCloud.
 <https://i.postimg.cc/rpmJKw7p/locked-04.jpg> iCloud walled garden

Worse... if you _refuse_ to log into the walled garden, Apple bricks the
device in terms of making everything inside the walled garden lock up.
 <https://i.postimg.cc/vTdfLY2f/locked-03.jpg> Apple wants a gov license!!!

And the only way to unbrick your own device, is to lose all your privacy
because Apple requires you to present a government ID in person to get your
own iPad back from them if you don't log into Apple servers every day of
your life for the rest of your life.

Ask me how I know this... 
-- 
(Hint: Those are my screenshots from last month).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#126238

On 2023-12-09 11:13, Wally J wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
> 
>>> Why would I want to pay Ł2/month "entrance fee" to the walled garden,
>>> when we expect the gates to be opened (to some extent) next year?
>>
>> What walled garden?  Apple devices roam wherever they like.  No walls.
>>
>> OTOH, they have a superb eco-system between Apple devices that excludes
>> non Apple systems.  iMessage service is one of them.
> 
> Alan Browne is wrong. Dead wrong. He doesn't know how iOS works.
> He's never tried _not logging into the walled garden_ for example.
>   
>                        I have.
> 
> It is rather telling that this Apple iKook has absolutely no idea he's
> logging into _many_ different Apple servers every day of his entire life.
>   <https://i.postimg.cc/7P7NCctS/locked-01.jpg> AppleID is locked by Apple

Showing an image of your AppleID being locked doesn't provide any 
evidence that it was locked because you didn't log in.

> 
> Where if you don't log in constantly, Apple _bricks_ the walled garden!
>   <https://i.postimg.cc/4dHQQFfk/locked-02.jpg> Password was always good

Supra

> 
> For example, here's the prompt when you don't log in daily to iMessages.
>   <https://i.postimg.cc/rwyGPpV9/locked-05.jpg> iMessage walled garden

To use any messaging app, you need an ID. Otherwise, how can the 
app/service direct messages to you?

> 
> And, as another example, here's the prompt if you don't log into iCloud.
>   <https://i.postimg.cc/rpmJKw7p/locked-04.jpg> iCloud walled garden

So don't log in. It's not a requirement.

> 
> Worse... if you _refuse_ to log into the walled garden, Apple bricks the
> device in terms of making everything inside the walled garden lock up.
>   <https://i.postimg.cc/vTdfLY2f/locked-03.jpg> Apple wants a gov license!!!

Your images don't support your assertion.

> 
> And the only way to unbrick your own device, is to lose all your privacy
> because Apple requires you to present a government ID in person to get your
> own iPad back from them if you don't log into Apple servers every day of
> your life for the rest of your life.
> 
> Ask me how I know this...

Based on previous history, I assume you're not telling the entire story.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#126243

On 2023-12-09 16:51, Alan wrote:

> 
> Based on previous history, I assume you're not telling the entire story.

It also (being a troll) added the Mac group to the thread.  Pls prune 
those when you reply if you must feed it.

-- 
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#126351

Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote 

>> Based on previous history, I assume you're not telling the entire story.

I have Alan Baker & Snit blocked, so I didn't see this until Alan Browne's
post, which shows how deathly afraid these iKooks are of the basic facts.

They deny all facts about Apple simply because they don't like the facts.
No other reason.

They just don't like the facts.

I had never logged out.
And yet, Apple _constantly requires_ you to log into the walled garden.

That's just a fact.
It's a fact the iKooks hate.

But it's still a fact even as the iKooks hate all facts about Apple.

The simple assessment of that fact is that nothing in the walled garden
works for long if you don't constantly, repetitively & incessantly log into
the Apple walled-garden mothership tracking servers. That's just a fact.

These are facts which occurred when I upgraded to iOS 16.7.2 on my iPad.
 <https://i.postimg.cc/9fPjQpr3/nag01.jpg> 3 iOS nag items
 <https://i.postimg.cc/wxwgN0Fg/nag02.jpg> 2 iOS nag items
 <https://i.postimg.cc/3NVqB4dC/nag03.jpg> 1 iOS nag item (permanent)

Bear in mind, I never logged out.

No other operating system is built with that mothership tracking required.
Yet, the iKooks are oblivious of the very fact that they're logging in!

So what do the iKooks do?
a. Do they test the statements by NOT logging into Apple servers?
b. Do they even _understand_ how to test the factual statemenets above?
c. Or, do all iKooks brazenly deny every fact about Apple they don't like

FACTS (bearing in mind I never logged out!):
 <https://i.postimg.cc/7P7NCctS/locked-01.jpg> AppleID is locked by Apple
 <https://i.postimg.cc/4dHQQFfk/locked-02.jpg> Password was always good
 <https://i.postimg.cc/vTdfLY2f/locked-03.jpg> Apple wants a gov license!!!
 <https://i.postimg.cc/rpmJKw7p/locked-04.jpg> Then, iCloud works again
 <https://i.postimg.cc/rwyGPpV9/locked-05.jpg> Then, Messages works again
-- 
There's a reason it's called the walled garden.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#126359

On 2023-12-09 20:59, Wally J wrote:
> Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> wrote
> 
>>> Based on previous history, I assume you're not telling the entire story.
> 
> I have Alan Baker & Snit blocked, so I didn't see this until Alan Browne's
> post, which shows how deathly afraid these iKooks are of the basic facts.
> 
> They deny all facts about Apple simply because they don't like the facts.
> No other reason.
> 
> They just don't like the facts.
> 
> I had never logged out.
> And yet, Apple _constantly requires_ you to log into the walled garden.
> 
> That's just a fact.

That's just an ASSERTION.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web