Apple banned some of its customers' Macs for using Beeper https://9to5google.com/2024/01/26/beeper-imessage-disabled-apple-ban/
To recap what's happened with Beeper thus far, Beeper Mini debuted in December with a reverse-engineered method of accessing iMessage with or without an Apple ID from Android phones. Apple shut down the method in part just days later, and vowed to keep it from working going forward citing "significant risks to user security and privacy." Beeper managed to get things working again, but Apple's efforts continued to prevent full functionality. By the end of December, Beeper had launched a final attempt
to keep the app on Android (and other platforms) alive using registration codes obtained from Macs as well as jailbroken iPhones.
That last effort was a hurdle for many, but worked without any big problems for a little while.
But earlier this month, a trend started to emerge among Beeper users where Apple was banning their purchased Macs from iMessage after setting up a connection with Beeper. Apple flagged Macs as "spam," preventing the Macs from sending iMessage through Beeper or even Apple's own Messages app on
the machines. Apple IDs, though, were unaffected, with iMessage still
working on iPhone and iPad.
In an update on Twitter/X, Beeper explains that 30 of the 3,500 customers using the new iMessage bridge were affected in this way. In the time since, though, Apple seems to have unbanned the affected Macs, not-so-ironically just two days after a reporter from The New York Times reached out to the company on the matter.
On 27.01.24 09:00, Patrick wrote:
Apple banned some of its customers' Macs for using Beeper
https://9to5google.com/2024/01/26/beeper-imessage-disabled-apple-ban/
To recap what's happened with Beeper thus far, Beeper Mini debuted in
December with a reverse-engineered method of accessing iMessage with
or without an Apple ID from Android phones. Apple shut down the
method in part just days later, and vowed to keep it from working
going forward citing "significant risks to user security and
privacy." Beeper managed to get things working again, but Apple's
efforts continued to prevent full functionality. By the end of
December, Beeper had launched a final attempt to keep the app on
Android (and other platforms) alive using registration codes obtained
from Macs as well as jailbroken iPhones.
That last effort was a hurdle for many, but worked without any big
problems for a little while.
But earlier this month, a trend started to emerge among Beeper users
where Apple was banning their purchased Macs from iMessage after
setting up a connection with Beeper. Apple flagged Macs as "spam,"
preventing the Macs from sending iMessage through Beeper or even
Apple's own Messages app on the machines. Apple IDs, though, were
unaffected, with iMessage still working on iPhone and iPad.
In an update on Twitter/X, Beeper explains that 30 of the 3,500
customers using the new iMessage bridge were affected in this way. In
the time since, though, Apple seems to have unbanned the affected
Macs, not-so-ironically just two days after a reporter from The New
York Times reached out to the company on the matter.
WTF cares?
WTF cares?
Butt hurt Android users who harbor a deep hatred for the color green.
On 1/27/2024 11:02 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
WTF cares?Butt hurt Android users who harbor a deep hatred for the color
green.
Indeed. They are literally green with envy.
Nick Charles <the.thin@man> writes:
On 1/27/2024 11:02 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
WTF cares?
Butt hurt Android users who harbor a deep hatred for the color
green.
Indeed. They are literally green with envy.
I don't understand the whole thing. If I own an Android phone, I
presumably like the way Android works. If I don't like that, I'm free
to buy an Apple device instead.
I kind of think that the people who are complaining are really hinting
that what they'd like is for Apple to give them an iPhone for free
since they're "entitled to it."
The government should supply us with iMessage. Mom, Apple pie, and
iMessage. A turducken in every pot. What are my tax dollars going for
if not for green bubbles?
MAGA - Make Android Green, Alright?
Indeed. They are literally green with envy.
I don't understand the whole thing.
If I own an Android phone, I presumably like the way Android works.
If I don't like that, I'm free to
buy an Apple device instead.
I kind of think that the people who are complaining are really hinting
that what they'd like is for Apple to give them an iPhone for free since they're "entitled to it."
The government should supply us with iMessage. Mom, Apple pie, and
iMessage. A turducken in every pot. What are my tax dollars going for if
not for green bubbles?
Android never forces you to log into any servers just to get the phone to work. Only Apple does that. Sure, Apple's Messages can do sms/mms without logging into Apple servers. But it won't do anything else without it.
On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 14:43:36 -0500, Bud Frede wrote:
Indeed. They are literally green with envy.
I don't understand the whole thing.
It's simple.
1. The few Android users who are forced to pay for MMS want to use
Apple's messaging servers because Apple goes through the Internet.
2. The reason has nothing to do with Apple's messaging servers.
Apple's servers are the penalty for being able to send free MMS.
3. The reason is Apple has something like 15% of the world market
(which is more than WhatsApp has, for example), so they want
to use the messaging servers that have the most penetration.
They could use any message server that requires a mainframe server.
But Apple's mainframe servers have about 15% of the world market.
That's why.
If I own an Android phone, I presumably like the way Android works.
Android never forces you to log into any servers just to get the phone to work. Only Apple does that.
the iPhone is essentially a dumb terminal that can't do much without
logging into the mainframes (yes, even just to do the messaging that
iPhone users love).
If I don't like that, I'm free to buy an Apple device instead.
What some Android owners want is a "common" messaging server that
allows them to send MMS for free (without being charged by the
carrier).
Mostly this is people in Europe, as most people in the USA pretty
much have unlimited everything (not all people of course, but most).
I kind of think that the people who are complaining are really hinting
that what they'd like is for Apple to give them an iPhone for free since
they're "entitled to it."
No. Nobody on Android would be able to put up with the severe limitations
of an iPhone. What they want (mostly in Europe) is the free MMS that Apple iPhone owners enjoy at the penalty of being forced to be tracked by Apple.
The government should supply us with iMessage. Mom, Apple pie, and
iMessage. A turducken in every pot. What are my tax dollars going for if
not for green bubbles?
The "advantage" of iMessage is that it uses a server that essentially all Apple iPhone owners are forced to log into every day of their lives.
Android, by nature, never requires you to be logged into Google servers
just to get the basic tools (like Messaging) to work with other users.
On 2024-01-27 20:28:01 +0000, Sten deJoode said:
Android never forces you to log into any servers just to get the phone to
work. Only Apple does that. Sure, Apple's Messages can do sms/mms without
logging into Apple servers. But it won't do anything else without it.
Oh dear, more complete bollocks fvrom the know-nothing brigade. Another
idiot joins my killfile. :-\
On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 14:43:36 -0500, Bud Frede wrote:
Indeed. They are literally green with envy.
I don't understand the whole thing.
It's simple.
1. The few Android users who are forced to pay for MMS want to use
Apple's messaging servers because Apple goes through the Internet.
2. The reason has nothing to do with Apple's messaging servers.
Apple's servers are the penalty for being able to send free MMS.
3. The reason is Apple has something like 15% of the world market
(which is more than WhatsApp has, for example), so they want
to use the messaging servers that have the most penetration.
1. The few Android users who are forced to pay for MMS want to use
Apple's messaging servers because Apple goes through the Internet.
Easy solution: buy Apple products. That's how Apple pay for those servers.
2. The reason has nothing to do with Apple's messaging servers.
Apple's servers are the penalty for being able to send free MMS.
"Free"? People have to pay for their cellco / internet services.
Apple's servers are definitely not a "penalty" - they are added value
for Apple clients when they buy Apple products.
3. The reason is Apple has something like 15% of the world market
(which is more than WhatsApp has, for example), so they want
to use the messaging servers that have the most penetration.
Irrelevant, alas.
Apple sell products and with those products provide backbone services
for their customers. Messages (iMessage) is part of that offering.
Another company creating ways to circumvent the intent of these services
is, at base, stealing and Apple have all rights to block it (in effect
fix their lax implementation) and if Android users don't like it well,
tough potatoes.
On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:59:39 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
1. The few Android users who are forced to pay for MMS want to use
Apple's messaging servers because Apple goes through the Internet.
Easy solution: buy Apple products. That's how Apple pay for those servers.
You have to understand something very basic that you don't seem to realize. If they're on Android, they don't want to be on iOS.
That goes without saying that nobody on Android wants to using an iPhone. What they want is to send media (like photos) over MMS, sans extra fees.
2. The reason has nothing to do with Apple's messaging servers.
Apple's servers are the penalty for being able to send free MMS.
"Free"? People have to pay for their cellco / internet services.
You don't understand the carrier pricing model for those who are charged
per MMS image but they're not charged per SMS message (mostly in Europe).
They usually use WhatsApp which is exactly the same as Apple Messages for their purpose of making MMS images free of the carrier's per-image charges.
Apple's servers are definitely not a "penalty" - they are added value
for Apple clients when they buy Apple products.
The advantage of Apple Messages over WhatsApp for Android users in Europe
who pay extra for MMS images is the number of people logging into Apple's servers for Messages reaches something like 15% of the world population - which is different people than the number who log into WhatsApp servers.
3. The reason is Apple has something like 15% of the world market
(which is more than WhatsApp has, for example), so they want
to use the messaging servers that have the most penetration.
Irrelevant, alas.
Actually that's the whole point, which you don't seem to understand.
On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 19:59:39 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
1. The few Android users who are forced to pay for MMS want to use
Apple's messaging servers because Apple goes through the Internet.
Easy solution: buy Apple products. That's how Apple pay for those servers.
You have to understand something very basic that you don't seem to realize. If they're on Android, they don't want to be on iOS.
That goes without saying that nobody on Android wants to using an iPhone. What they want is to send media (like photos) over MMS, sans extra fees.
2. The reason has nothing to do with Apple's messaging servers.
Apple's servers are the penalty for being able to send free MMS.
"Free"? People have to pay for their cellco / internet services.
You don't understand the carrier pricing model for those who are charged
per MMS image but they're not charged per SMS message (mostly in Europe).
They usually use WhatsApp which is exactly the same as Apple Messages for their purpose of making MMS images free of the carrier's per-image charges.
Apple's servers are definitely not a "penalty" - they are added value
for Apple clients when they buy Apple products.
The advantage of Apple Messages over WhatsApp for Android users in Europe
who pay extra for MMS images is the number of people logging into Apple's servers for Messages reaches something like 15% of the world population - which is different people than the number who log into WhatsApp servers.
3. The reason is Apple has something like 15% of the world market
(which is more than WhatsApp has, for example), so they want
to use the messaging servers that have the most penetration.
Irrelevant, alas.
Actually that's the whole point, which you don't seem to understand.
Most iPhone users are logged into Apple's Internet messaging service.
Essentially if they're an iPhone user, they're logged into the net.
Every instant of every day of their entire lives until they're dead.
That's the beauty of the Apple ecosystem (which treats the iPhone as a dumb terminal in terms of most of its FaceTime, Messages & iCloud capabilities).
The Apple server is what those Android users who are charged per MMS image want to take advantage of because it allows their images to reach Apple's customers for free.
It's no different than how they use WhatsApp where Apple's 15% or so of the world market allows them to reach those who are not subscribed to WhatsApp.
Apple sell products and with those products provide backbone services
for their customers. Messages (iMessage) is part of that offering.
Android users who are charged per MMS image who want to reach Apple users
who are not on WhatsApp make use of the fact the iPhone is a dumb terminal.
iPhone <---> Apple Internet Servers <---> Android
These Android users want to use Apple servers to get to that dumb terminal with their MMS messages because doing so avoids their carrier per-MMS fees.
They don't want the iPhone (otherwise they wouldn't be on Android, silly). They just want to use the Internet server like they already use WhatsApp.
Another company creating ways to circumvent the intent of these services
is, at base, stealing and Apple have all rights to block it (in effect
fix their lax implementation) and if Android users don't like it well,
tough potatoes.
Once RCS comes out, there will be probably be no need for Android users
(who are charged per MMS attachments who want to reach non-WhatsApp users)
to want to reach iPhone users (who use an iPhone as a dumb terminal).
This: iPhone <---> Apple Internet Servers <---> Android
Gets replaced by this: iPhone <---> Carrier RCS Servers <---> Android
Butt hurt Android users who harbor a deep hatred for the color green.
On 1/27/24 11:02 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
Butt hurt Android users who harbor a deep hatred for the color green.
This was a legitimate complaint before Apple announced it would support
an RCS fallback, but now it really is just a dead argument.
Once RCS comes out, there will be probably be no need for Android users
(who are charged per MMS attachments who want to reach non-WhatsApp users) >> to want to reach iPhone users (who use an iPhone as a dumb terminal).
This: iPhone <---> Apple Internet Servers <---> Android
Gets replaced by this: iPhone <---> Carrier RCS Servers <---> Android
And those carriers will be providing those servers for free, will they?
Butt hurt Android users who harbor a deep hatred for the color green.
This was a legitimate complaint before Apple announced it would support
an RCS fallback, but now it really is just a dead argument.
RCS implemented by Apple will still show itself distinct from Apple's iMessage/Messages product.
That goes without saying that nobody on Android wants to using an iPhone.
What they want is to send media (like photos) over MMS, sans extra fees.
I really don't care about their "wants".
If Android can't provide for these "wants" why should Apple?
You don't understand the carrier pricing model for those who are charged
per MMS image but they're not charged per SMS message (mostly in Europe).
This is not Apple's problem, however, so why should Android users have
access to Apple's servers which are there to serve Apple customers?
The advantage of Apple Messages over WhatsApp for Android users in Europe
who pay extra for MMS images is the number of people logging into Apple's
servers for Messages reaches something like 15% of the world population -
which is different people than the number who log into WhatsApp servers.
And why should Apple make their servers available to them at no cost.
These servers are there for Apple customers - and for that matter paid
for by Apple customers through the purchase of Apple products.
3. The reason is Apple has something like 15% of the world market
(which is more than WhatsApp has, for example), so they want
to use the messaging servers that have the most penetration.
Irrelevant, alas.
Actually that's the whole point, which you don't seem to understand.
I understand completely: Apple's servers are for Apple customers.
Everyone else stay off the clubhouse grounds.
Alan wrote on Sun, 28 Jan 2024 09:54:22 -0800 :
Once RCS comes out, there will be probably be no need for Android users
(who are charged per MMS attachments who want to reach non-WhatsApp users) >>> to want to reach iPhone users (who use an iPhone as a dumb terminal).
This: iPhone <---> Apple Internet Servers <---> Android
Gets replaced by this: iPhone <---> Carrier RCS Servers <---> Android
And those carriers will be providing those servers for free, will they?
I pay one postpaid carrier service bill with no additional charges, like
most people do in the united states on one of the three main carriers.
That service gives me as many mms attachments as I want, for free, today. Even without rcs.
The cost is just bundled in with your other charges.
Alan wrote on Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:11:23 -0800 :
The cost is just bundled in with your other charges.
You have an uncanny head-shaking ability to not only completely
misunderstand the problem set but then you go on some crazy meaningless tangent of a sudden realization of yours )that everyone else learned when they were in elementary school) but which you are suddenly figuring out
just now for the first time for yourself.
And then you make that sudden but meaningless realization of something
nobody in their right mind would dispute, your entire contrary argument?
What kind of strangely unfathomably crazily stupid idiot...
On 2024-01-27, Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
WTF cares?
Butt hurt Android users who harbor a deep hatred for the color green.
Alan wrote on Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:11:23 -0800 :
The cost is just bundled in with your other charges.
You have an uncanny head-shaking ability to not only completely
misunderstand the problem set but then you go on some crazy meaningless tangent of a sudden realization of yours )that everyone else learned when they were in elementary school) but which you are suddenly figuring out
just now for the first time for yourself.
And then you make that sudden but meaningless realization of something
nobody in their right mind would dispute, your entire contrary argument?
What kind of strangely unfathomably crazily stupid idiot does that?
Plonk!
On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 09:44:25 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
That goes without saying that nobody on Android wants to using an iPhone. >>> What they want is to send media (like photos) over MMS, sans extra fees.
I really don't care about their "wants".
That's fine but you were wrong when you claimed they wanted the iPhone.
Now you seem to understand - but at first you didn't appear to understand what they wanted. They just want the server. Not the iPhone itself.
If Android can't provide for these "wants" why should Apple?
It's not Android. Android does everything for me. But not for them.
Get it?
a. Same phone.
b. Same operating system.
c. Same apps.
It's not Android that doesn't serve their needs.
It's their crappy carrier.
You need to try to understand it's not "Android" or the "iPhone".
They just want the dumb-terminal aspect of the iPhone to reach its users.
They want the server only. The Apple server. Which goes to Apple customers.
They don't want the iPhone.
And the problem isn't Android.
You don't seem to completely understand that critical distinction.
They want two things that I've said multiple times and you still think that an Android user would lower himself to the level of an iPhone. He won't.
The problem isn't Android.
It's their crappy carrier's charging model.
Think about the guy in Europe who is charged for each MMS attachment.
1. He doesn't want the iPhone. Stop thinking that. An iPhone is crap.
2. He wants the Apple *server*. (Which is no different than the WA Server).
3. He wants the fact that Apple server *allows MMS over the Internet*.
He can get that from _any_ Internet server that everyone uses.
He gets that already from WhatsApp for example.
But Apple Messages servers have something like 15% of the world market.
That's a lot.
It's probably way more people than WhatsApp has, but I never checked.
You don't understand the carrier pricing model for those who are charged >>> per MMS image but they're not charged per SMS message (mostly in Europe). >>This is not Apple's problem, however, so why should Android users have
access to Apple's servers which are there to serve Apple customers?
I agree with you.
Nobody on Android wants to have anything to do with the iPhone.
Especially as most people in the USA get their MMS images sent for free.
Unfortunately, some people have a crappy carrier (usually in Europe).
That crappy carrier charges them a lot for sending MMS images.
It just does.
That's the problem *they* are trying to solve.
Later when Apple finally catches up with RCS, that should solve it.
The advantage of Apple Messages over WhatsApp for Android users in Europe >>> who pay extra for MMS images is the number of people logging into Apple's >>> servers for Messages reaches something like 15% of the world population - >>> which is different people than the number who log into WhatsApp servers.
And why should Apple make their servers available to them at no cost.
I agree with you.
That's fine but you were wrong when you claimed they wanted the iPhone.
I never claimed they wanted an iPhone. What they want is a
functionality that Apple provides to Apple product buyers w/o the step
of buying the Apple product.
Now you seem to understand - but at first you didn't appear to understand
what they wanted. They just want the server. Not the iPhone itself.
Which is actually what I said. I never said they wanted iPhones. I said
they wanted the functionality.
It's not Android that doesn't serve their needs.
It's their crappy carrier.
Well, also Android. It does not have the functionality that Apple
provide on Apple products.
And Apple should not be compelled to provide it to non-Apple product users.
You need to try to understand it's not "Android" or the "iPhone".
They just want the dumb-terminal aspect of the iPhone to reach its users.
It's not a "dumb terminal". It's an integrated function of the an app,
an OS, a service and servers. It is particular to Apple products.
Thus, Android users have no inherent right to use it.
They want the server only. The Apple server. Which goes to Apple customers.
Which I've said all along and you're trying to cast as if I hadn't.
They don't want the iPhone.
Never said they did.
And the problem isn't Android.
The problem is Android does not (can not) support the function.
Any
"bolt on" workarounds using Android phones and separate servers to
emulate the service are clearly violating Apple's property.
You don't seem to completely understand that critical distinction.
It doesn't matter how you construe the distinction (as badly as you do),
but simply that the service in discussion is an Apple product meant for
Apple product buyers who are given express right to use that service
whereas Android users are never offered the right to use that service.
So, some 3rd party workaround is violating Apple's property.
They want two things that I've said multiple times and you still think that >> an Android user would lower himself to the level of an iPhone. He won't.
I never said an Android user should do anything he didn't want to do.
OTOH, if he wants access to Apple's servers (their property) the legal
way to do so is to buy Apple's products.
Since that would be such a horrible thing for a virtuous Android user, I guess they'll just have to forego the advantages of of Apple's iMessage services.
The problem isn't Android.
Indeed. Since the iMessage service is for Apple product buyers it
doesn't really relate to Android users at all. They simply are denied
using it because they did not buy the requisite Apple product.
It's their crappy carrier's charging model.
It's certainly not the carrier's problem - they happily, and at no extra charge (in most cases - data/month caps or some such can apply), handle
Apple iMessage traffic from Apple devices to/from Apple servers.
Think about the guy in Europe who is charged for each MMS attachment.
1. He doesn't want the iPhone. Stop thinking that. An iPhone is crap.
iPhone's are fantastic - and they get Apple's server functions included.
Android devices do not.
2. He wants the Apple *server*. (Which is no different than the WA Server).
Apple's servers are freely available to people who buy Apple products
such as best in class iPhones, iPads and Macs.
3. He wants the fact that Apple server *allows MMS over the Internet*.
Great, then get the Apple products that allow that.
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 08:59:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
That's fine but you were wrong when you claimed they wanted the iPhone.
I never claimed they wanted an iPhone. What they want is a
functionality that Apple provides to Apple product buyers w/o the step
of buying the Apple product.
They don't want an "Apple product".
Otherwise they wouldn't be using Android.
And, more to the point, Android wouldn't be something like 85% of the TAM.
If they wanted an "Apple product", Apple would have that 85% instead.
Apple is falling fast in the world market specifically because people do
NOT want the iPhone. They want Android phones (3% want Huawei too).
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 08:59:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
That's fine but you were wrong when you claimed they wanted the iPhone.
I never claimed they wanted an iPhone. What they want is a
functionality that Apple provides to Apple product buyers w/o the step
of buying the Apple product.
They don't want an "Apple product".
Otherwise they wouldn't be using Android.
On 2024-01-30 10:22, Sten deJoode wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 08:59:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
That's fine but you were wrong when you claimed they wanted the iPhone. >>>I never claimed they wanted an iPhone. What they want is a
functionality that Apple provides to Apple product buyers w/o the step
of buying the Apple product.
They don't want an "Apple product".
Otherwise they wouldn't be using Android.
And he did say that they 'want an "Apple product"', you idiot.
He said:
'What they want is a functionality that Apple provides'
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 08:59:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
That's fine but you were wrong when you claimed they wanted the
iPhone.
I never claimed they wanted an iPhone. What they want is a
functionality that Apple provides to Apple product buyers w/o the
step of buying the Apple product.
They don't want an "Apple product".
What those few people (mostly in Europe) want is free MMS attachments.
One way to get that free MMS attachments is to use WhatsApp servers.
Or Apple servers.
They're the same thing.
On 2024-01-30, Sten deJoode <StendeJood@nospam.net> wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 08:59:45 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
That's fine but you were wrong when you claimed they wanted the
iPhone.
I never claimed they wanted an iPhone. What they want is a
functionality that Apple provides to Apple product buyers w/o the
step of buying the Apple product.
They don't want an "Apple product".
Wrong. iMessage is an Apple product, and Android users have gone so far
as to create Beeper and violate the terms of service to gain access to
it.
What those few people (mostly in Europe) want is free MMS attachments.
Nope, iMessage doesn't do MMS, yet Android users want to use iMessage.
One way to get that free MMS attachments is to use WhatsApp servers.
Or Apple servers.
Wrong, MMS has nothing to do with WhatsApp or iMessage.
They're the same thing.
No, they are not. Otherwise Android users would be happily using
WhatsApp instead of trying to use iMessage.
You're not fooling anyone, Arlen.
Nope, iMessage doesn't do MMS, yet Android users want to use iMessage.
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:35:57 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Nope, iMessage doesn't do MMS, yet Android users want to use iMessage.
Exactly. Though germane to note that this does not stop iPhones from
doing MMS. For that matter, because of Apple superior integration
across devices, (aka: "the ecosystem") it permits a Mac or other Apple
device's Message app to also do MMS providing that person also has an
iPhone to handle the telecom part.
What you said is wrong.
Dead wrong.
Which means you have a very strong opinion. Extremely strong.
Like Trump activists do.
And yet, you're dead wrong in every way.
Worse - you're easily shown to be wrong.
With a single URL.
https://home.pulsesms.app/overview/
The point is Android does exactly what you said also.
Even better.
There are many Android messaging apps which do it, in fact. https://www.xda-developers.com/best-text-messaging-apps-android/
It's not the iPhone that allows it.
It's logging into the mainframe that does.
Once you treat the phone simply as a dumb terminal, all that is possible.Does WhatsApp having servers mean that it treats the phone as a "dumb terminal", Arlen?
All the good things you like about the iPhone are because you like the mainframe servers which treat the iPhone as if it's just a dumb terminal.
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:35:57 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Nope, iMessage doesn't do MMS, yet Android users want to use
iMessage.
Exactly. Though germane to note that this does not stop iPhones from
doing MMS. For that matter, because of Apple superior integration
across devices, (aka: "the ecosystem") it permits a Mac or other
Apple device's Message app to also do MMS providing that person also
has an iPhone to handle the telecom part.
What you said is wrong. Dead wrong.
Nope, iMessage doesn't do MMS, yet Android users want to use iMessage.
Exactly. Though germane to note that this does not stop iPhones from
doing MMS. For that matter, because of Apple superior integration
across devices, (aka: "the ecosystem") it permits a Mac or other Apple device's Message app to also do MMS providing that person also has an
iPhone to handle the telecom part.
On 2024-01-31 14:32, Sten deJoode wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:35:57 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
Nope, iMessage doesn't do MMS, yet Android users want to use
iMessage.
Exactly. Though germane to note that this does not stop iPhones
from doing MMS. For that matter, because of Apple superior
integration across devices, (aka: "the ecosystem") it permits a Mac
or other Apple device's Message app to also do MMS providing that
person also has an iPhone to handle the telecom part.
Once you treat the phone simply as a dumb terminal, all that is
possible.
All the good things you like about the iPhone are because you like
the mainframe servers which treat the iPhone as if it's just a dumb
terminal.
Does WhatsApp having servers mean that it treats the phone as a "dumb terminal", Arlen?
claiming that all mobile phones that connect to the
internet are dumb terminals.
On 31 Jan 2024 23:01:22 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
claiming that all mobile phones that connect to the internet are dumb
terminals.
You stoop to insults.
Android users are desperate to use Apple servers
without owning Apple products.
It's not my fault you didn't get the logic that the people using
Beeper were on Android phones (even though that was obvious to
everyone else).
Unfortunately you're wrong, and you have zero credibility.
The service runs on mainframe servers
Nope, just servers.
Apple designed iPhones using dumb terminal
Bullshit.
iPhones are much more powerful than dumb terminals.
One clear
example is the inclusion of the A-series neural engine which allows developers to use the Core ML and other frameworks to do on-device
machine learning, where many of Apple's competitors use cloud-based
machine learning processing which makes them more deserving of the term
dumb terminal and also compromise the privacy of their users. You're desperately making these outright lies as if you think the rest of us
are just as dumb and gullible as you are, but those juvenile antics
won't work here.
I just wish you'd have figured that out fifty posts ago
Projection. You are the one who started baselessly claiming this was
about iPhones fifty posts ago, and several people have called you out on >>> it from the beginning. You're not fooling anyone here.
What's revealing is you finally figured out, after fifty posts, that
Android users are on Android because they don't want to be on the iPhone
The fact that you think this isn't blatantly obvious to everyone here is telling and says way more about you than anyone else.
Earth to Jolly Roger. They're using Beeper with Android because they
expressly do not want to have anything to do with the iPhone. Idiot.
They want to use a messaging service that is *exclusive* to Apple
products.
But when _they_ send an MMS attachment, they don't want it to work
that way
No matter how hard you try, nothing you say changes the fact that this
isn't about SMS/MMS.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 18:07:45 |
| Calls: | 10,389 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,956 |