davidw

About

Username
davidw
Joined
Visits
163
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
4,335
Badges
1
Posts
2,053

Reactions

2.1KLike423Informative

  • Apple Music & Apple TV get antitrust attention, but are far from a monopoly

    davidwdavidw
    >Apple leads in streaming music, outpacing Spotify and Pandora, according to Consumer Intelligence Research Partners (CIRP). Over forty percent of Apple users subscribe to Apple Music, compared to thirty percent for Spotify Premium and under ten percent for PandoraOne, Pandora's paid version.<

    WTH

    Don't some one mean ...... 40% of Apple users, that subscribes to a music steaming service, subscribe to Apple Music? There are 1.4B iPhone users Worldwide (not counting iPads, Macs and ATV's users). 40% of just iPhone users would mean that some one thinks 560M of them are subscribers to Apple Music, not counting those that are not "Apple users". I pretty sure that is not the case.  There's only about 660M total consumers, that pays for a streaming music subscription. And Spotify account for about 230M (about 34%) of them. While Apple Music account for about 14% or about 90M.  

    I sure hope the DoJ anti-trust lawsuit against Apple, for "Apple Music", is not hinged on ....... over 40% of Apple users subscribe to Apple Music. If it is, they are truly clueless and even the progressive anti-tech-corporations consumers against Apple, would be embarrass to be on the DoJ side, based on this.  


    Even from the linked CIRP website, it's stated as ...

    >In streaming music, Apple is in the leading position relative to Spotify and Pandora. Over 40% of Apple customers report using Apple Music, compared to 30% for paid Spotify Premium and under 10% for PandoraOne (Pandora’s paid service) (Chart 1). <








    williamlondon

  • Google obviously says that Apple RCS support will come in the fall

    davidwdavidw
    gatorguy said:
    davidw said:
    gatorguy said:
    jfreedle2 said:
    Just more proof that Google does spy on everyone and cannot be trusted.
    In case you're interested in facts more than FUD...
    Google cannot see the contents of any RCS Google Messages. They are encrypted end-to-end, from your device which encrypts them, to the receiver's phone, where they are decrypted. It is equally as secure and private as iMessage...

    If you are comfortable with others potentially being able to read your RCS messages sent from your iPhone, just as they can read SMS messages now, then it won't matter if the GSMA ever makes encryption part of the standard.  ... while iPhone owners cannot be assured of RCS privacy and security, Google Messages users will be. That is unless an iPhone user enters that conversation and breaks the security with Apple's RCS. ...they will likely have green bubbles as default, the same as the insecure fallback SMS now has, while blue is reserved for Google's encrypted and secure communications.


    That is FUD. (So you say, but where specifically? I can't find it...)
      Google can see the contents of any RCS messages where the receiver is not using Google Messages or do not have RCS enabled...(Well duh, then it wouldn't be Google Messages RCS would it?).
      RCS will default to SMS in these cases (Oh, so not using Google Messages RCS? Double-Duh).
      Google can also read RCS messages in a group chat if anyone in the group is not using Google Messages with RCS enabled (Yup, for instance when an Apple RCS user or any other insecure protocol will join the conversation as I pointed out?).
      It's no different than than the chat on iMessage.  (TRIPLE-Duh!)
      Not every Android users wants to use Google Messages and Google messages is the only way to send and receive RCS with E2EE. (OMG, like not every Apple user outside of the US wants to use iMessage and that's the only way to get Apple's E2EE message security??)
    You could save a lot of wind by reading what someone actually says first. Start with the second sentence in my post, and the first sentence of your reply.

    I made it easier for you to parse by fixing your post.

    When you posted your comment, just exactly how did it pertain to the comment you were responding to ........ "Just more proof that Google does spy on everyone and cannot be trusted." What made to think that it was referring to Google RCS Messages with E2EE. Were you so offended about the implication that Google might be spy on everyone, that you didn't see the obvious? That the comment was referring to how Google got so much info about Apple pending adoption of RCS, when Apple only made public that they will adopt RCS sometime in 2024.

    But yet you took a comment that had nothing to do with Google RCS Messages, in order to say something negative about Apple. Par for the course with you.


    But since you already moved the goal post. You stated, in bold none the less, that ..... "Google cannot see the contents of any RCS Google Messages". That is a bold lie and FUD. What Google can not see is the content of RCS messages that are E2EEed. Not all Google RCS messages are E2EEed. In order for Google RCS messages to have E2EE, both sender and receiver must have RCS enabled in Google Messages. The fact that Google RCS messages will default to SMS, is part of Google RCS Messages. It is built into Google RCS messaging protocol. If it did not default to SMS for the receivers that do not have RCS enabled, then it's not Google RCS messaging. Regardless if the receivers have RCS disabled, one is still using Google RCS Messages to send them a message. One using Google Messages with RCS enabled, do not have to use some other messaging protocol to send a message to an Android user that have RCS disabled in Google Messages. And I'm willing to bet that most of the messages sent with Google RCS are not E2EEed, if only about 25% of Android phones are using RCS.

    And in a group chat, it's not only Apple device users that will break the E2EE. An Android user with RCS disabled in Google Messages will also break the E2EE for the group. And with 3 out of 4 Android users not using RCS, that will more likely be the case. 

    If and Apple device user uses iMessage to send a message to an Android user, iMessage will convert the message to SMS so the Android user will receive it, That doesn't mean the the Apple user did not use iMessage to send the message. iMessage was designed to do just that.

    BTW- E2EE only prevent Google (and anyone for that matter) from reading the contents of a Google RCS Message, after it's sent and before it's received. Once the message is decrypted in the receiver phone, Google can read its contents. All one has to do to prove this is to ask Google Assistance to read out loud your text messages. Many users do this while driving. And one can ask Google Assistance to send a message that you dictated. Apple Siri can do the same. The same would be true when using Spell Check or Auto-Correct when sending a text message. It's only a matter of trust that makes us think Google is not reading (or scanning) the contents of text messages while un-ecrypted in the phone, without permission. 




    williamlondonwatto_cobra

  • Google obviously says that Apple RCS support will come in the fall

    davidwdavidw
    lam92103 said:
    And why should I care? No one uses RCS. 
    Don't they?

    I mean, isn't it the default on Android, with a fallback to SMS like on the iPhone?

    I honestly don't know.  I'm trying to get my Android friends to use Signal instead of text messages, but it's hard to convince them.

    No. RCS is not the "default" on Android. Even though every Android phone is capable of RCS (with E2EE), it is disabled in Google Messages by default. But I believe Google Messages is the default for SMS on Android. The funny thing is that there is no other choice for RCS on Android. Either one enable RCS in Google Messages or one can't message with RCS. Except with some Samsung phones where RCS can be enabled in Samsung Messages. But not Google proprietary RCS with E2EE, which requires Google Messages. This was allowed through a special deal with Google, as nearly all other Android phones can only use Google Messages for RCS.

    Samsung phones with Samsung Messages actually supported carriers RCS for over 10 years. But recently had to rely on Google Messages because the most carriers are only supporting Google proprietary RCS, that must use Google Messages on the device.


    williamlondonwatto_cobra

  • Google obviously says that Apple RCS support will come in the fall

    davidwdavidw
    gatorguy said:
    jfreedle2 said:
    Just more proof that Google does spy on everyone and cannot be trusted.
    In case you're interested in facts more than FUD...
    Google cannot see the contents of any RCS Google Messages. They are encrypted end-to-end, from your device which encrypts them, to the receiver's phone, where they are decrypted. It is equally as secure and private as iMessage, and at least in one way even more so than Apple's Messaging.  At the very worst they might be able to log metadata, same as Apple can, which is hardly the same as seeing the contents of a message.

    If you are comfortable with others potentially being able to read your RCS messages sent from your iPhone, just as they can read SMS messages now, then it won't matter if the GSMA ever makes encryption part of the standard.  They might not, and I don't think Apple will care. The GSMA has had years to do so and have ignored it despite Google's pushing them to add it. Encryption is not in the interests of the carriers, and they have been the ones leading the RCS standards body.  

    So until there's movement on that front, while iPhone owners cannot be assured of RCS privacy and security, Google Messages users will be. That is unless an iPhone user enters that conversation and breaks the security with Apple's RCS. There's been no mention of Google requiring those unencrypted iPhone messages to display a different bubble color in Google Messages but IMO, they will likely have green bubbles as default, the same as the insecure fallback SMS now has, while blue is reserved for Google's encrypted and secure communications.

    Of course an Android owner can choose to change the colors from the defaults, even to specific contacts in a conversation. 

    That is FUD. Google can see the contents of any RCS messages where the receiver is not using Google Messages or do not have RCS enabled on their Android phone. RCS will default to SMS in these cases. Google can also read RCS messages in a group chat if anyone in the group is not using Google Messages (with RCS enabled). It's no different than than the chat on iMessage. Not every Android users wants to use Google Messages and Google messages is the only way to send and receive RCS with E2EE. (Also Samsung has an exclusive (and confidential deal) with Google so Samsung Phones users using Samsung Messages can also send and receive RCS with E2EE.)

    Right now about 1B Android users Worldwide have RCS enabled on their Android phones. That's out of about 4B Android phones. This means that when using Google Messages to send a RCS message, 3 out of 4 Android phones will get it as an SMS message and Google can read it. When Apple adopts RCS, that will increase the number of RCS users by 100%. And of course, all the RSC messages sent or received from an iPhone can be read by Google because Apple have adopted the Universal Profile of RCS and not Google proprietary version (of RCS) with E2EE.



    Maybe in the US, Google Messages is popular. But in the rest of the World, the majority of Android users are not using it, even though by now, every Android phone is capable of RCS messaging with E2EE. And why isn't Google RCS more popular on Android? Maybe because it's still inferior to messaging services like WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Signal, Telegram, etc.. RCS is turned off by default and many Android users just don't want to or bother to, enable RCS. To many, RCS is like SMS in that it's a messaging service that is provided by their carrier and there are plenty of better messaging service out there and right now, most are cross platform. 

    And maybe many don't want to enable RCS because of this  ....





    In this digital age of the internet, why in the name of Hell would anyone want to use a messaging service that requires a mobile phone number, uses it as the ID and requires the support of the carrier, before it can be used on the phone? 


    >It’s worth noting that you cannot use RCS without a SIM card in your device. RCS might only rely on Wi-Fi and mobile data but it still needs a mobile network to function.<







    williamlondonStrangeDayswatto_cobrarorschachai

  • Another Find My misfire led to a raid on a suburban family's home

    davidwdavidw
    longfang said:
    This seems less like a failure on the part of Find My, since the AirPods were found in the yard of the house where Find My said they were, and more a failure on the part of police procedure. 
    Ferguson, Missouri. The police in that town don't exactly have the best reputation for controlled reactions. 
    They had a warrant so throw in clueless about tech judge.

    The lawsuit also said they ransacked drawers and punched a hole in the drywall. Did they think the car jackers hid a Dodge Charger there?

    No, just because a Judge signed a search warrant, doesn't mean that he/she automatically approved of the officers serving the warrant by bust down the door. If there was no obvious sign of danger, the officers could have or should have just rang the door bell and serve the warrant. The AirPods gave a very accurate location of where it was and it was there. It wasn't across the street or several homes down the block.

    But the officers serving the search warrant should have known that the car-jacked car was not there. And unless they knew for sure that the car-jackers were inside the home, they didn't need to bust down the door for the element of surprise. AirPods are not armed and dangerous. Remember, these officers were not primarily looking for the AirPods and the search warrant wasn't issued by the Judge to recover the AirPods. (At least I hope not.)  They were hoping to catch the car-jackers who were a danger to the public.

    Never the less, the Judge and officers were in the right to sign and serve the search warrant at that residence. They were trying to solve a violent crime. What was not in the right was to bust down the door (in order to serve the warrant) without any evidence that the car-jackers were still in possession of the Air Pods and inside. Or worst yet, knowing that the car-jackers were not inside. All they knew was that the AirPods were inside or very near by.  A knock on the door would have suffice.



    hecalderwilliamlondondewmewatto_cobra