I can understand the argument when it comes to railroads or telecom companies or utilities, but apps? That just sounds crazy, in my opinion.
If a company like Microsoft has a monopoly, then they can be restrained in what they do, and can be required to what they don't want to do. It's proper.
But yes, what Blackberry wants here is nuts. It will never happen, and so it's not something to get too frustrated over. There's a good thread in Arstechnica about this as well. It seems that pretty much no one agrees with what he wants. It does smack of desperation.
Yep, desperation is what it says to me, too, loud and clear.
From the day Blackberry decided to make BBM cross-platform, I thought it was the beginning of the end, at least, for their hardware.
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
Rumor has it that there are vacancies on all sides of Apple ]['s apartment in New York.
Nah. That's where he stores all his old Apple gear.
No, they wouldn't. Apple would turn into a software company just like Google and Microsoft and all phones would be cheap garbage running Android. Apple sells a complete product, which also happens to be the best phone and software combination going. Try letting those co-workers work instead of trying to chat with them all the time. Also educate them on why Apple phones are better and get them to buy one, then you don't have to use inferior apps on your iPhone (if you even have one) just to talk with your friends and co-workers.
An alternative would be to get new friends who already have iPhones.
???? nice! Why not just text? Is it that hard? If it is international then sure use watup or skip but other than that just text! Is not that hard. Everyone has unlimited text now so is cheap too.
???? nice! Why not just text? Is it that hard? If it is international then sure use watup or skip but other than that just text! Is not that hard. Everyone has unlimited text now so is cheap too.
"Watup" or "Skip" ??? LOL!
Lots of reasons! Privacy, sending video clips, sending locations, getting delivery and read receipts...etc, etc, etc...
So Mr Chen wants smartphone vendors to collude to fix functionality market-wide, removing their competitive points of difference and reducing customer choice? Why would this not ping every anti-competitive regulator around?
I get that lowest-common-denominator SMS messaging needs the bar raised but I wouldn't want to dilute the excellent system for smart people I actually want to communicate with that is iMessage/FaceTime.
There are, I'm sure, more details on this in other places, but this should give you the idea.
Move down to the "standards" section. Right under where it tells the standards it uses, it mentioned what Apple did. The whole thing is useful as it explains some of Apple's contributions, which is the part they released to the standards body.
That not really what you said. Apple didn't release any of the listed protocols to be standards, they already were standards, Apple used them to build FaceTime, with some proprietary wrapping around the service and with Apple as the gatekeeper. Did they release any part of it as open source, or as a proposed standard? That's what Steve Jobs implied they were going to do, but it never seemed to materialise.
You just never like believing anything positive about Apple.
If I tell you that Apple contributed one of the most important features to Unix and therefore, Linux, you won't believe me either, so I'll leave you to look that up for yourself, since you refuse to do any research of your own, have fun!
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.
You stated "Apple released the protocols", I asked for details of them releasing it, because if they have released them then surely other companies could support them, as it would be standardised? You came back when I questioned the Wikipedia link you gave with
No, you haven't read it. Read it again. Believe me, if I say it's in there, it's in there.
I would love to believe you, but can you point out exactly where it says Apple has released it, and it is available for others to implement?
The FaceTime protocol is based on numerous open industry standards[5] although it is not interoperable with other videotelephony systems:
?H.264 and AAC-ELD – video and audio codecs respectively.
?SIP – IETF signaling protocol for VoIP.
?STUN, TURN and ICE – IETF technologies for traversing firewalls and NAT.
?RTP and SRTP – IETF standards for delivering real-time and encrypted media streams for VoIP.
Upon the launch of the iPhone 4, Jobs stated that Apple would immediately start working with standards bodies to make the FaceTime protocol an "open standard". While the protocols are open standards, Apple's FaceTime service requires a client-side certificate.[6] This measure protects against robocalling and telemarketing as access to the service is controlled by Apple. This measure is partly why FaceTime has currently not been implemented on non-Apple devices[citation needed].
FaceTime calls are protected by end-to-end encryption so that only the sender and receiver can access them. Apple cannot decrypt this data.[7]
Compared to most SIP implementations, Facetime adds techniques that enhance performance at the cost of breaking interoperability
[8] port multiplexing, SDP minimization and SDP compression.
Nope, read the whole thing, I can't see where they have actually released them
If I tell you that Apple contributed one of the most important features to Unix and therefore, Linux, you won't believe me either, so I'll leave you to look that up for yourself, since you refuse to do any research of your own, have fun!
Well if you made it up, of course I wouldn't believe you, but since Apple has done it, and there is actually documented proof of it, why wouldn't I believe you. But that has nothing to do with what you claimed. Apple said originally they were going to Facetime made an Open Standard, there is nothing to prove they have done this, and in fact there is no reason for Apple to even do it now, they have a solution that works very well, and they are in a position to keep it to themselves.
That not really what you said. Apple didn't release any of the listed protocols to be standards, they already were standards, Apple used them to build FaceTime, with some proprietary wrapping around the service and with Apple as the gatekeeper. Did they release any part of it as open source, or as a proposed standard? That's what Steve Jobs implied they were going to do, but it never seemed to materialise.
It didn't materialize, according to some, not because Apple didn't release it, but because Apple intended to keep the security protocols in its own hands, that is, to not allow third party modifications.
It didn't materialize, according to some, not because Apple didn't release it, but because Apple intended to keep the security protocols in its own hands, that is, to not allow third party modifications.
How is that "not because Apple didn't release it"? All you've done is given a reason for why Apple didn't release it. They still didn't release it.
Comments
I can understand the argument when it comes to railroads or telecom companies or utilities, but apps? That just sounds crazy, in my opinion.
If a company like Microsoft has a monopoly, then they can be restrained in what they do, and can be required to what they don't want to do. It's proper.
But yes, what Blackberry wants here is nuts. It will never happen, and so it's not something to get too frustrated over. There's a good thread in Arstechnica about this as well. It seems that pretty much no one agrees with what he wants. It does smack of desperation.
Yep, desperation is what it says to me, too, loud and clear.
From the day Blackberry decided to make BBM cross-platform, I thought it was the beginning of the end, at least, for their hardware.
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
Rumor has it that there are vacancies on all sides of Apple ]['s apartment in New York.
Nah. That's where he stores all his old Apple gear.
That could be said about any President. The difference is that the ones looking for a handout with a Republican include corporations.
???? nice! Why not just text? Is it that hard? If it is international then sure use watup or skip but other than that just text! Is not that hard. Everyone has unlimited text now so is cheap too.
"Watup" or "Skip" ??? LOL!
Lots of reasons! Privacy, sending video clips, sending locations, getting delivery and read receipts...etc, etc, etc...
I get that lowest-common-denominator SMS messaging needs the bar raised but I wouldn't want to dilute the excellent system for smart people I actually want to communicate with that is iMessage/FaceTime.
C'mon those are the bootleg versions of WhatsApp, and Skype, can't believe you never heard of them.
I did the quickest thing.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FaceTime#Standards
There are, I'm sure, more details on this in other places, but this should give you the idea.
Move down to the "standards" section. Right under where it tells the standards it uses, it mentioned what Apple did. The whole thing is useful as it explains some of Apple's contributions, which is the part they released to the standards body.
That not really what you said. Apple didn't release any of the listed protocols to be standards, they already were standards, Apple used them to build FaceTime, with some proprietary wrapping around the service and with Apple as the gatekeeper. Did they release any part of it as open source, or as a proposed standard? That's what Steve Jobs implied they were going to do, but it never seemed to materialise.
You just never like believing anything positive about Apple.
If I tell you that Apple contributed one of the most important features to Unix and therefore, Linux, you won't believe me either, so I'll leave you to look that up for yourself, since you refuse to do any research of your own, have fun!
I'm game, lay it on me. Learning is fun
Especially with regards to computing.
I'm pretty sure that was tongue in cheek.
True, my tongue was in his mama's cheek. (Drops the mic, walks away)
You stated "Apple released the protocols", I asked for details of them releasing it, because if they have released them then surely other companies could support them, as it would be standardised? You came back when I questioned the Wikipedia link you gave with
I would love to believe you, but can you point out exactly where it says Apple has released it, and it is available for others to implement?
Nope, read the whole thing, I can't see where they have actually released them
What has you posting something false got to do with anyone believing anything about Apple, you posted the false information, not Apple
Well if you made it up, of course I wouldn't believe you, but since Apple has done it, and there is actually documented proof of it, why wouldn't I believe you. But that has nothing to do with what you claimed. Apple said originally they were going to Facetime made an Open Standard, there is nothing to prove they have done this, and in fact there is no reason for Apple to even do it now, they have a solution that works very well, and they are in a position to keep it to themselves.
BB is dying and wants Apple's help.
But why does he want help from the company he laughed at with the outdated UI???
http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/13/7539683/blackberry-tweeting-from-iphone
It didn't materialize, according to some, not because Apple didn't release it, but because Apple intended to keep the security protocols in its own hands, that is, to not allow third party modifications.
They can't because of a patent troll that forced Apple to scrub their plans to open source FaceTime. Am I the only one here that remembers anything?
It didn't materialize, according to some, not because Apple didn't release it, but because Apple intended to keep the security protocols in its own hands, that is, to not allow third party modifications.
How is that "not because Apple didn't release it"? All you've done is given a reason for why Apple didn't release it. They still didn't release it.
A link would help.