• danhakimi@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Apple’s biggest crimes here are creating a proprietary platform with an exclusive protocol and making it the default messaging protocol on their devices. None of this is really new, though. All that shit is common. We need Signal or Matrix to improve in user-friendliness and even do some marketing to the point where they become viable solutions.

      • danhakimi@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        in other words: the default messaging protocol is imessage, unless that’s impossible, in which case it falls back to sms.

    • Otter@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      More marketing would be nice

      As for features, an easy remote backup solution (similar to be bettet than WhatsApp) is the big one for me. Especially on iOS

    • Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I am not an Apple fanboy at all, I have used iPhones for work previously.

      RCS debuted three years before iMessage, Apple developed iMessage because no one could get RCS standards together. We still don’t have this, Google has theirs, Samsung has another. Not all manufacturers support it and neither do all carriers. In my country it does not exist.

      I use SimpleX, but when I used a company iPhone, iMessage worked very well, and it worked everywhere regardless of carrier. RCS does not 15 years after its introduction.

      None of this is to say there should not be interoperability, clearly there should be. Historically at least, the blame lies with Google and mobile carriers.

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’m not letting Google off the hook, but Apple could also open the standard for iMessage and bypassed the whole problem. But they’d rather lock in customers than allow everyone to communicate securely and effectively.

    • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m not sure about Signal being the one, then we just give the power from one company (Apple) to another (Signal). If we want to improve then we should push open protocols where people can host their own infrastructure.

      • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Ideally, I agree. In practice, until federation / decentralization is completely transparent to the end user (unless they choose otherwise), it’ll never be adopted at a large scale. IMO that’s one of the main obstacles of Lemmy, Mastodon, and others.

        Signal is only relatively popular among the privacy-respecting options because setting it up is as easy as setting up WhatsApp. Just by adding a “choose your instance” step, you can cut your user base by an order of magnitude. And that’s not mentioning the quality of service, which is much more achievable on a centralized platform, whether that’s in terms of feature parity, uptime, bug fixes, or cross-platform support.