auxio

gatorguy said:

dominikhoffmann said:

Android users were unable to securely communicate with iMessage users and were relegated to using decades-old, unencrypted SMS technology.

So not true. Those senators and members of Congress and their staffers would surely know that Android and iOS users can safely communicate with one another using Signal or even WhatsApp. 

But not someone using iMessage, the predominant messaging service in the US and the one Android owners cannot securely and privately message with. The statement you quoted is accurate.  Remember that with US antitrust, the US market share and the effects on it matters, not the EU or Asia users' experiences and 3rd party app usage.

They can message each other, just not securely unless they use other technologies. For the first couple of decades of cellular communication, nearly all text messaging was insecure. If government officials wanted security, they used proprietary technology. And they didn't seem to have a problem with that. Now suddenly it's a problem?

Again, I question the motivation behind this. If government officials deem that it's in the public interest to have secure messaging between all mobile platforms, then why don't they invest in the technology and mandate it? The same way the government (via military funding) created the internet and the open standards it's based on.

Really makes me wonder who's funding them. To generate this kind of media hype and political interest in something so insignificant reeks of well-connected investors.

How about we investigate why tech companies which truly innovate and create new products/services that are of benefit to people can't generate as much interest as a company which reverse engineers and clones an existing product?

StrangeDays said:

mikethemartian said:

It is no different than Apple constantly claiming “privacy and security” to lock down their platforms so that they can maximize profit.

Nonsense. Apple’s privacy measures have nothing to do with any lock-in strategies. Unless privacy is somehow a *devious trick* that forces one to not want to leave!? What absurdity. 

Sorry you like being the product and not the customer. 

Mostly just parroting the talking points which people are paid to be bombarded with on social media and so-called news (advertising masquerading as news) these days. That combined with the conditioned belief that everything should be free. Which is essentially your point about so many people happy to be violated in every way just to get something for free.

mikethemartian said:

It is no different than Apple constantly claiming “privacy and security” to lock down their platforms so that they can maximize profit.

Nope.

In Apple's case, sure, all the people who work in the tech industry or are tech enthusiasts would be able to tell the difference between a legitimate App Store and a scam one run by hackers who are out to harvest credit card numbers and other personal data. But the average person, a large number of whom get duped by internet scams every day because they don't understand technology, wouldn't.

In GM's case, there's nothing to protect people from. The two existing options, CarPlay and Android Auto, are run by legitimate tech companies who have a wealth of experience in the field. There's nothing nefarious about them as there would be in the alternative App Store case. Are they perfect? No, but it's not like they're intentionally sabotaging anything or trying to scam people. And who honestly thinks that GM can do a better job of designing technology than Apple and Google? We'd still be using cassette tapes and manually tuning radio stations if they were in charge of innovating with car entertainment systems.

Reminds me of the time when there was an iPod competitor who tried to hijack iTunes as the means to sync their devices to Mac/PC (instead of developing their own syncing software).