Apple can't release FaceTime on other platforms because of lawsuits.
Re 'Get better friends' ... I had to chuckle at that. My wife was berating me recently for trying to limit our friends to Apple using, well educated, scientifically minded people. A friend from the west coast who was there at the time suggested we leave Florida! LOL
Americans have joined Al-Qaeda before. Being an "American" doesn't make somebody immune from having ridiculous, anti-freedom and offensive ideas. Plenty of nutjobs happen to be American.
And Chen's proposal is definitely outrageous, ridiculous and goes against the concept of free-will and self determination. A company should be free to develop for whoever they wish.
Except that you're wrong in this. This particular thing he's asking for is silly. But when a company's a monopoly, there are things they can't do, and things they must do. This is VERY American. It comes from the 19th century, when they already understood that unbridled capitalism would be dangerous to our way of life.
So for you to make generalized statements like that is wrong. It shows a misunderstanding of society and the need to keep major entities from just taking over. Something that is slowly happening due to the benighted ideas of some in this country that big corporations should be allowed to do whatever they like, no matter how destructive to the country it would be.
Except that you're wrong in this. This particular thing he's asking for is silly. But when a company's a monopoly, there are things they can't do, and things they must do. This is VERY American. It comes from the 19th century, when they already understood that unbridled capitalism would be dangerous to our way of life.
So for you to make generalized statements like that is wrong. It shows a misunderstanding of society and the need to keep major entities from just taking over. Something that is slowly happening due to the benighted ideas of some in this country that big corporations should be allowed to do whatever they like, no matter how destructive to the country it would be.
I can understand the argument when it comes to railroads or telecom companies or utilities, but apps? That just sounds crazy, in my opinion.
After a decade of "I won't play with you kids, and your playground stinks too!", we suddenly start getting "I'm going to force them to put your swing-set in MY playground, and make you come play with me!"
Blackberry can be satisfied with YIM, ICQ, AIM, FB, GT, G-G, and the variety of apps that support them. And there's always good old SMS.
You must be a comedian or something, because nobody has violated and broken the consitution more than the "current office-holder".
The Constitution has been broken & bent by every President since Lincoln decided to wipe his ass with it. Obama, Bush, Clinton & FDR are among the worst offenders
The problem here is - there's no limit to the number of "platforms" or "handsets". He might want Apple to develop for Blackberry, but what about Android? What about Windows? What about Symbian? What about Hardware Fragmentation? What about the Amazon Fire cut of Android? What about other proprietary cuts of Android? It's all a bunch of rubbish.
If he wants Netflix on his ecosystem, then he should fund the app developers to do so. If Netflix can't see a return or additional benefit, then they won't spend the money. If he wants to change that, then he needs to provide Netflix with a benefit or incentive. He needs to contract with them and offer them $$ to hire and retain BB developers to provide the service. It's in BB's interest, not Netflix's.
If it's not feasible for either Netflix or BB to finance the development - then they either get a different strategy that doesn't involve Netflix, or they realize that their platform is dead.
The Constitution has been broken & bent by every President since Lincoln decided to wipe his ass with it. Obama, Bush, Clinton & FDR are among the worst offenders
Indeed it has, but it was worth pointing out that the assertion that the "current office-holder" is not guilty of this, is a ludicrous and ridiculous, factually incorrect statement.
You can use iMessage with Android text messages. I do that all the time.
No you don't. You use the Messages app to send SMS/MMS to your Android friends.
The Messages app sends iMessages, SMS & MMS
Unless they have downloaded the iMessagesforAndroid app. And created an AppleID to use with it.
Apple released the protocols to the standards association several years ago. It's up to other companies to support them, rather than that of their own software. If they don't want to do that, then people should be blaming them, and not Apple.
Pretty sure that never happened, hence my earlier "/s"
I'd so love for Apple to open up iMessage and FaceTime by releasing those apps on Android. To be able to send iMessages to everyone (Android users would download iMessage) would make my usage of my Apple devices far more seamless and enjoyable. Juggling messaging apps is quite annoying.
I hear you. That's why I cut off my Android-loving friends. Gives them time to rethink their mistake.
The problem here is - there's no limit to the number of "platforms" or "handsets". He might want Apple to develop for Blackberry, but what about Android? What about Windows? What about Symbian? What about Hardware Fragmentation? What about the Amazon Fire cut of Android? What about other proprietary cuts of Android? It's all a bunch of rubbish.
HTML5 App.
Unless your platform is 10 years old and has received 0 updates, it should work.
-----------------
That being said, I've never heard a more silly argument for "open" anything than what I have read here. Proprietary services have been with the internet since public release of it and they were never a problem. What WAS a problem were the various proprietary standards fighting each other.
I suggest if Mr Chen really wants to keep an open internet, then he should be advocating against instances such as the W3C accepting DRM standards into HTML5, not whether he can iMessage or not.
iMessage does work on all phones (in a roundabout way)... if the person you're sending a text to doesn't have iOS/OSX then it will send it as SMS rather than iMessage... I suppose that doesn't help if your destination doesn't have SMS texting enabled on their phone... but... that's the luddite's limitation, not yours.
(and the reverse is true... someone using Android (or the person using WinMo) can send you a text via SMS, iMessage receives through the SMS channel seamlessly.)
(edit: "Messages" is the Apple app, "iMessage" is their data-stream messaging protocol. ... The "Messages" app seamlessly integrates the "iMessage" protocol with SMS/MMS. So the Android users don't really get to use iMessage with their iOS friends, but iOS and android et al can still send messages back and forth and iOS users using "Messages" never really have to know whether it's using iMessage or SMS.)
(...unless you're out of cellular coverage, in which case a message can't be sent as SMS over WiFi and will be sent only when you're back in coverage... but if it's that time-sensitive, wouldn't you just call anyway to make sure they "get" the message in a timely manner?)
Comments
Re 'Get better friends' ... I had to chuckle at that. My wife was berating me recently for trying to limit our friends to Apple using, well educated, scientifically minded people. A friend from the west coast who was there at the time suggested we leave Florida! LOL
Except that you're wrong in this. This particular thing he's asking for is silly. But when a company's a monopoly, there are things they can't do, and things they must do. This is VERY American. It comes from the 19th century, when they already understood that unbridled capitalism would be dangerous to our way of life.
So for you to make generalized statements like that is wrong. It shows a misunderstanding of society and the need to keep major entities from just taking over. Something that is slowly happening due to the benighted ideas of some in this country that big corporations should be allowed to do whatever they like, no matter how destructive to the country it would be.
Except that you're wrong in this. This particular thing he's asking for is silly. But when a company's a monopoly, there are things they can't do, and things they must do. This is VERY American. It comes from the 19th century, when they already understood that unbridled capitalism would be dangerous to our way of life.
So for you to make generalized statements like that is wrong. It shows a misunderstanding of society and the need to keep major entities from just taking over. Something that is slowly happening due to the benighted ideas of some in this country that big corporations should be allowed to do whatever they like, no matter how destructive to the country it would be.
I can understand the argument when it comes to railroads or telecom companies or utilities, but apps? That just sounds crazy, in my opinion.
Do you get Fox News in Ireland?
After a decade of "I won't play with you kids, and your playground stinks too!", we suddenly start getting "I'm going to force them to put your swing-set in MY playground, and make you come play with me!"
Blackberry can be satisfied with YIM, ICQ, AIM, FB, GT, G-G, and the variety of apps that support them. And there's always good old SMS.
That's actually a good point. Good catch.
Well, Robin, with the exception of the current office-holder, I would tend to agree with Ireland.
You must be a comedian or something, because nobody has violated and broken the consitution more than the "current office-holder".
You must be a comedian or something, because nobody has violated and broken the consitution more than the "current office-holder".
The Constitution has been broken & bent by every President since Lincoln decided to wipe his ass with it. Obama, Bush, Clinton & FDR are among the worst offenders
The problem here is - there's no limit to the number of "platforms" or "handsets". He might want Apple to develop for Blackberry, but what about Android? What about Windows? What about Symbian? What about Hardware Fragmentation? What about the Amazon Fire cut of Android? What about other proprietary cuts of Android? It's all a bunch of rubbish.
If he wants Netflix on his ecosystem, then he should fund the app developers to do so. If Netflix can't see a return or additional benefit, then they won't spend the money. If he wants to change that, then he needs to provide Netflix with a benefit or incentive. He needs to contract with them and offer them $$ to hire and retain BB developers to provide the service. It's in BB's interest, not Netflix's.
If it's not feasible for either Netflix or BB to finance the development - then they either get a different strategy that doesn't involve Netflix, or they realize that their platform is dead.
The Constitution has been broken & bent by every President since Lincoln decided to wipe his ass with it. Obama, Bush, Clinton & FDR are among the worst offenders
Indeed it has, but it was worth pointing out that the assertion that the "current office-holder" is not guilty of this, is a ludicrous and ridiculous, factually incorrect statement.
As I suspected... the Samsung purchase of Blackberry is not dead yet.
http://business.financialpost.com/2015/01/21/samsung-electronics-co-ltd-still-pursuing-blackberry-ltd-purchase/?__lsa=63a0-ca66
The Messages app sends iMessages, SMS & MMS
Unless they have downloaded the iMessagesforAndroid app. And created an AppleID to use with it.
Could you provide a link to back up that claim?
Exactly.
I hear you. That's why I cut off my Android-loving friends. Gives them time to rethink their mistake.
Cutting off someone because of the phone they bought, sheesh.
The problem here is - there's no limit to the number of "platforms" or "handsets". He might want Apple to develop for Blackberry, but what about Android? What about Windows? What about Symbian? What about Hardware Fragmentation? What about the Amazon Fire cut of Android? What about other proprietary cuts of Android? It's all a bunch of rubbish.
HTML5 App.
Unless your platform is 10 years old and has received 0 updates, it should work.
-----------------
That being said, I've never heard a more silly argument for "open" anything than what I have read here. Proprietary services have been with the internet since public release of it and they were never a problem. What WAS a problem were the various proprietary standards fighting each other.
I suggest if Mr Chen really wants to keep an open internet, then he should be advocating against instances such as the W3C accepting DRM standards into HTML5, not whether he can iMessage or not.
iMessage does work on all phones (in a roundabout way)... if the person you're sending a text to doesn't have iOS/OSX then it will send it as SMS rather than iMessage... I suppose that doesn't help if your destination doesn't have SMS texting enabled on their phone... but... that's the luddite's limitation, not yours.
(and the reverse is true... someone using Android (or the person using WinMo) can send you a text via SMS, iMessage receives through the SMS channel seamlessly.)
(edit: "Messages" is the Apple app, "iMessage" is their data-stream messaging protocol. ... The "Messages" app seamlessly integrates the "iMessage" protocol with SMS/MMS. So the Android users don't really get to use iMessage with their iOS friends, but iOS and android et al can still send messages back and forth and iOS users using "Messages" never really have to know whether it's using iMessage or SMS.)
(...unless you're out of cellular coverage, in which case a message can't be sent as SMS over WiFi and will be sent only when you're back in coverage... but if it's that time-sensitive, wouldn't you just call anyway to make sure they "get" the message in a timely manner?)