Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Encryption AI Android Desktops (Apple) IOS Iphone Network Networking OS X Privacy Security Software The Internet Apple News Hardware Technology

Apple Explains Why iMessage Isn't Coming To Android (networkworld.com) 157

Posted by BeauHD from the increased-demand dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Network World: Ahead of Apple's WWDC keynote this year, one of the more bizarre and sketchy rumors we saw take shape claimed that Apple was planning to deliver iMessage to Android. As is typically the case, the rumor mill took this somewhat ridiculous rumor and ran with it. The only problem is that some people were so busy trying to figure out the ramifications of iMessage hitting Android that they didn't take a step back and try and figure out if this is something Apple would even contemplate in the first place. Remember, every move Apple makes is strategic and geared towards making more money, either via device sales or software. That being the case, iMessage on Android would not only be a free app, but it would also eliminate a user-experience advantage of iOS. Interestingly enough, Walt Mossberg of The Verge asked a senior Apple executive about the rumor whereupon the nameless executive all but indicated that iMessage will never be coming to Android. Walt Mossberg writes: "First, he said, Apple considers its own user base of 1 billion active devices to provide a large enough data set for any possible AI learning the company is working on. And, second, having a superior messaging platform that only worked on Apple devices would help sales of those device -- the company's classic (and successful) rationale for years."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Explains Why iMessage Isn't Coming To Android More

Apple Explains Why iMessage Isn't Coming To Android

Comments Filter:

  • Huh... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by BronsCon ( 927697 )
    My experience has been that iOS users who have friends with non-iOS devices tend to migrate away from iMessage after a while, in favor of something they can talk to all of their friends on. This seems to happen faster when one or more of their friends has a mix of iOS and Android devices coupled with one or more non-Mac computers, as iMessage becomes an unreliable[1] means of communicating with them relative to, well, practically anything else.

    [1] Are they near their iPad? Did they see my message? Maybe I

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Maestro485 ( 1166937 )
      iMessage just sends regular text messages to non-Apple things. I've never had an issue with texting people with Android phones from my iPhone.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by BronsCon ( 927697 )
        You can send a regular text message to a PC or an Android tablet?

        a mix of iOS and Android devices coupled with one or more non-Mac computers

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by dfghjk ( 711126 )

          You are suggesting it's Apple's fault that PCs and Android tablets do not have cellular radios?

          In what way is this a failing of iMessage?

          • It's a failing of iMessage since it shouldn't require a cellular radio, or a particular OS, to work. All these devices have Internet access and are more than powerful enough for instant messaging.

            • Re: Huh... (Score:2, Informative)

              by joh ( 27088 )

              iMessage doesnt require a cellular radio.

              • It requires a cellular radio for the fallback to SMS mode. And without this mode, it is pretty useless has it only allows you to contact other people with Apple products, which is a small minority of people.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by joh ( 27088 )

                  It's a minority, but not a small minority. Also you can use iMessage with SMS fallback on a Mac or an iPad with no cellular connection as long as you also have an iPhone around (iMessage then will use your iPhone to send a SMS from your Mac or iPad).

                  One major convenience of iMessage over WhatsApp is that you can use it freely with as many devices as you want as long as they all use the same account, cellular or not.

                  • Also you can use iMessage with SMS fallback on a Mac or an iPad with no cellular connection as long as you also have an iPhone around (iMessage then will use your iPhone to send a SMS from your Mac or iPad).

                    Yet another stupid artificial limitation. There is no reason why an Internet connected computer should ever need a smartphone to send a message.

          • Re:Huh... (Score:4, Interesting)

            by BronsCon ( 927697 ) <social@bronstrup.com> on Friday June 17, 2016 @07:19PM (#52340749) Journal

            You are suggesting it's Apple's fault that PCs and Android tablets do not have cellular radios?

            No, merely pointing out that iMessage being able to send SMS messages does not fit the cross-platform communication scenario I mentioned in my original post.

            Further, all Apple computers lack cellular radios, some PCs and Android tablets do include cellular radios, just as some iPads do. Much like an iPad, as they are data devices that do not connect to the voice network over which SMS are sent, those PCs and Android devices can not receive SMS.

            In what way is this a failing of iMessage?

            In comparison to something like Skype, or even AIM, it's a massive failing in that you are limited by the platform itself in who you can communicate with, and how; some people you may want to message can't even install an app to allow you to do so.

            As I said:

            My experience has been

            That's first hand experience, not just a guess. Back when my primary machine was a Mac and my secondary was an iPad, a lot of my friends used to chat with me via iMessage. As I had an Android phone and that's what was always with me, even if I wasn't at my Mac or iPad, they began getting frustrated when they'd send me a message via iMessage and I wouldn't get it for hours. Mind you, they weren't frustrated with me and didn't avoid chatting with me because of it; instead, they unilaterally switched to using Skype. Even when communicating with each other, even when all parties in a given conversation used only Apple devices.

            My experience may or may not be typical, but it is my experience. My entire group of friends, many of whom use only apple products, have abandoned iMessage; many of their friends who are not in my circle have done the same, and I'm sure it's cascaded from there.

            • Wrong, PCs and Android tablet with cellular radio can send/receive SMS just fine.

              • Can you provide an example of at least one that actually can? I've never seen it, despite having looked some years ago when SMS was all the rage.

                • I've used a few USB-cellular adapters. They all came with their proprietary software to connect and send/receive SMS.
                  I think all cellular tablets can send/receive SMS. If tablets can't, it's only a software issue, it's not because of a technical limitation. Maybe your carrier is blocking SMS on tablets but again, there is no technical reason to do so.

                  • And iPads? Since, you know, that's what was insinuated in the post I was replying to. Mine sure cant.

                    • It must be a software issue. There is no technical reason why a cellular iPad can't receive SMS.

                    • It's because most SIM cards supplied for use with iPads are data-only. SMS is not sent over a data connection. You need SMS explicitly enabled, which would normally be done only with a 'minutes+sms' package.

                      https://support.apple.com/en-u... [apple.com]

                    • There is no such thing as a data-only SIM. There are data-only plans. At this point, it's a billing issue, not a technical issue.
                      The same SIM card in your iPad could work in a cell phone or and Android tablet and be used to send/receive SMS. Of course, the carrier is free to block SMS for that account, but again, it has nothing to do with the hardware.

                  • I have had a Huawei 3G module , and you can issue
                    AT commands via USB serial to read sms, and send sms.
                    http://www.smssolutions.net/tu... [smssolutions.net]

                • Run their software on windows.
                  Theres a SMS send and receive app.

                  Bazinga - your just blind

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by unimacs ( 597299 )
              Are you thinking of FaceTime? That's the closest Apple equivalent to Skype, not iMessage.

              Anyway this can get a little confusing. iPads, iPhones, and Macs all have a "Messages" app that can use iMessage as a protocol to communicate with other Apple devices. Messages on OS X can also use Yahoo, AOL, or Google messaging accounts. Messages on an iPhone can use SMS to send messages in addition to iMessage.

              So you could always text somebody on an Android phone from an iPhone using the messages app. If somebo

              • Are you thinking of FaceTime? That's the closest Apple equivalent to Skype, not iMessage.

                No, I'm thinking of iMessage, a text messaging and file transfer app. Skype also does what FaceTime does, but that does not diminish the text messaging and file transfer functions. Skype also does voice-only calls, something FaceTime and iMessage both lack, or at least lacked last time I checked. But, again, that doesn't diminish Skype's text messaging and file transfer functions. I also mentioned (gag) AIM, but you ignored that for some reason.

                So you could always text somebody on an Android phone from an iPhone using the messages app.

                And if they're in front of, say, a PC or Android tablet instead

                • Re: (Score:3)

                  by unimacs ( 597299 )

                  And if they're in front of, say, a PC or Android tablet instead of their phone? If you want to ensure they get the message, you have to send it over IMessage *and* whatever other platform they use (most likely Skype or AIM). Or, you could skip iMessage and just send it on the other platform, which they'll likely have installed on their PC, tablet, and phone, so they'll get it wherever they are without you having to send it twice. That's precisely the scenario I talked about in my initial post, and it's precisely why my die-hard Apple friends have abandoned iMessage (and Messages on their Macs and iPads) as unreliable.

                  That's the real problem though isn't it? If I'm going to send a message to somebody, I have no idea what device they're in front of, or if they're near any device at all. I'll use the messages app either on my phone or on my Mac and that message will get to them on their phone (at least) whether it's an iPhone or not. I'm not going to send two messages because SMS is the least (or may be better said "most") common denominator. I'm certainly not going to use Skype unless I know for a fact that they do. Othe

            • I have friends with various mobile platforms. Some of them have switched to or from iPhones to Android or even Windows phones. Because of this, I almost never use iMessage any more. The natural tendency has been for *everybody* to rely more and more on messaging apps that are cross-platform, i.e. Whatsapp and less-so LINE. In part because group chats are common. Here in Asia, whatsapp, with its end-to-end encryption, delivery notifications, and the ability to send pictures, audio clips etc. Has beco

              • This. You just made exactly the point I was trying to make.

                Thank you for proving a much better wordsmith than myself.
          • Most apple tablets (iPads) don't have cellular radios either. Most of the time tablet users are on wifi anyway, and messaging should work regardless of network or device vendor.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Curtman ( 556920 ) *
            It's pretty much exactly the same thing as using Google Hangouts on Android, which can also be installed on OSX, iOS, in a browser, etc..

            My personal phone is Android, work phone is iOS, personal laptop is a Macbook, work laptop is a PC. Hangouts works everywhere, and so I actively encourage friends and coworkers to use something that isn't vendor locked.

            That's why it is a failing of iMessage. It's a pain in the ass having contacts who still use it.

            • Re: (Score:3)

              by unimacs ( 597299 )
              How is GOOGLE Hangouts not vendor locked? Besides I'd change "Hangouts works everywhere" to "Hangouts works every now and then". We've had a weekly meeting with remote developers for months now and have gone back to just using a speakerphone because of all the issues we had with hangouts.

              • Google Hangouts is a lot less vendor locked because

                1. it works on all platforms, so no hardware vendor lock-in.
                2. last time I checked, it worked with 3rd party clients, if it's still the case, it means no software vendor lock-in.
                3, i've heard they disabled XMPP federation, which means it's now only network vendor locked-in

                Apple iMessage is locked-in for all 3 criteria

        • No one can send a 'regular text message to a PC or an Android tablet'. Because those things don't have cellular antennas on which to receive any text messages.

        • "You can send a regular text message to a PC or an Android tablet?"

          Yes. In fact, iMessage tells you via a blue message background if it's using the Internet to pass the message to another Apple device, or a green background if it had to fall back to SMS to send the message to an infidel device.

          • Still waiting for someone to show me a PC or Android tablet that can receive SMS. Or an iPad, for that matter.

            • This controversy is about proposals to extend messaging seamlessly to such devices using the Internet, as is done for non-cellular Apple devices.

              • Don't tell me, tell maestro485, who originally suggested that as Apple's solution; or tell yourself, as you supported his explanation.

          • Edit: The target must be a device with a cellular connection, though.

        • You can send a regular text message to a PC or an Android tablet?

          You can send one to my google voice, and it will show up in the sidebar of G+, or in hangouts.

          • That's not quite the same... In the end, it may serve the same purpose but, then, can you do that from a Mac or iPad if you're not also an iPhone user? Last time I checked, the SMS gateway feature was only available on the iPhone; at least, it doesn't work for me on my Mac or iPad as an Android user. It works for my wife, but then she's an iPhone user. Also, can you reply to and participate in group chats that way?

            It's not functionally equivalent as, say, Skype would be.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
        The problem lies with those with a mix. For them you just configure an iMessage contact for their phone, whatever device it might be, and the rest can be a different contact. Not really a problem after all.
        • You can iMessage my PC and Android tablet?

      • iMessage just sends regular text messages to non-Apple things. I've never had an issue with texting people with Android phones from my iPhone.

        Exactly.

        Other than the color of the text bubbles, there's really no difference between messages between iMessage users and IMessage SMS/MMS users.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by puto ( 533470 )
          Imessage cannot be sent from other apple devices(not iphones) to non apple devices. Yet Skype and Whataspp are two prime examples that are platform agnostic. Apple would garner a much larger user base for it's project by creating an Android version.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Hadlock ( 143607 )

        That must be why I've never, ever heard of iMessage before.
         
        Why would I want another text messaging app?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      iMessage is on the devices of everyone I need to communicate with. The rest can text me. Or call. Or email. Or send a letter. If they want. I don't care.

      • Quoth the AC immediately preceding you,

        If your friends won't talk to you unless you have an iOS device, you don't have any friends.

        Seems oddly appropriate, somehow.

    • Lets not mince words here.

      A large part of Apple's customer demographic doesn't talk to people who own other devices because those other devices belong to poor people. To them Android users are poor people.

      The reason Apple's not bringing iMessage to Android is that the other portion of Apple's user demographic would then have no reason to own an iPhone and they'd lose a third of their sales.

      • I won't even attempt to disagree with this. What you just said essentially boils down to "A large part of Apple's customer demographic are ignorant and have hugely inflated egos. The rest recognize that the only real feature of iOS is that it allows them to talk to the first group." My only question, then, is: Why i nthe world would the latter group want to associate with the former?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Bongo ( 13261 )

      I have just one friend in the world, and he sends me messages on like, four different systems. It used to be simpler when he just had an iPhone.
      Now it seems he can't even agree with himself what to use.

  • Yes, because we need another, even less convenient way to send a message containing some combination of unicode text and binary data from one device to another, like we don't already have Email or a bajillion other IM clients. SMS is lame enough. Fancy, fruit-exclusive SMS is better how, exactly?

    • Because it allows Apple to harvest messages from users to train their AI.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dfghjk ( 711126 )

      If you have to ask this question then you've never used SMS.

      • That is true. I haven't. I don't. I do have Google Voice configured to deliver SMS messages as email (and I whitelist senders to a minimum as well), precisely because I don't want to deal with another, extremely limited messaging tool. I already dislike the idea that I need accounts on six or seven different platforms to communicate with my contacts. Why add another to the list?

  • Choices abound. (Score:3)

    by jshackney ( 99735 ) on Friday June 17, 2016 @06:34PM (#52340511) Homepage

    Hangouts.

    Does basically the same thing. Works on both platforms.

    • Or Blackberry Messenger works on Android IOS or Blackberry. And its free to send messages unlike SMS or MMS with most carriers. The message is sent out of band via Blackberry's network.

      • Except Blackberry Messenger requires a useless identifiant. At least Hangouts gives you access to Gmail (a lot of people use it) and other Google products.

      • What's a blackberry?

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          What's a blackberry?

          Imagine an apple that enjoys the company of women.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      But it requires a Google account.

  • why do people like non-interoperability so much? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 17, 2016 @06:39PM (#52340531)

    See, I rock it oldschool with my messaging. Open protocols, choice of clients, ability to write you own client if you want, extensible, not locked into any one vendor's ecosystem, and most importantly, ability to communicate with people not in that vendor's ecosystem.

    That's what we had - past tense. Like anything it wasn't perfect, and needed some modernization and so forth, which it could have gotten.... except that we threw the concepts of my first paragraph the fuck out. Somehow, almost overnight it seems, everyone suddenly said, "HEY! It would be a swell idea if we had a metric shitton of non-interoperating messenger apps, all closed up, no choice, no nothing, controlled by a single vendor! This is gonna rock!"

    And then everybody else went, "Fuck YEAH!!!"

    And now here we are.

    What the fuck was that about anyway? Is this one of those things that happens when you get old, when you stop having even the dimmest comprehension of why all the cool kids think the latest hot trend is a great idea? Is it like those baggy pants that were the rage for a while? Because I didn't understand those either.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vux984 ( 928602 )

      What the fuck was that about anyway?

      Money. It was about money, and advertising (the usualy source of the money). If you controlled the network and the client, you could monetize it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dillee1 ( 741792 )
      1) Layman know fuck all about importance of open standard, they just care about ability to show the latest titty emoticon on their message. 2) We nerd know why proprietary standard suck ass, but all our friend, family, colleague use that titty_emoticon_IM. We sigh and painfully migrate all our contact from old IRC/ICQ/MSN/whatever to that titty_emoticon_IM. 3) 5 years later, next gen kids think titty_emoticon_IM are for grannies, and penis_emoticon_IM rulz. Go back to step (1) Thats why we can never have g

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by dillee1 ( 741792 )

      1) Layman know fuck all about importance of open standard, they just care about ability to show the latest titty emoticon on their message.
      2) We nerd know why proprietary standard suck ass, but all our friend, family, colleague use that titty_emoticon_IM.
      We sigh and painfully migrate all our contact from old IRC/ICQ/MSN/whatever to that titty_emoticon_IM.
      3) 5 years later, next gen kids think titty_emoticon_IM are for grannies, and penis_emoticon_IM rulz. Go back to step (1)

      Thats why we can never have good t

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It appeals to people who either want exclusivity (mostly kids bullying those who aren't part of the hipster club) and people who don't know any better.

  • Superior? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Cyberax ( 705495 ) on Friday June 17, 2016 @07:08PM (#52340667)
    He's calling iMessage a superior messaging platform. Is heroine legal in his state? Simple medical pot won't explain this.
  • Since iMessage is baked into the text-messaging app and there is no "sign-up" process other then logging into the apple account during setup, most people have no idea that they are using iMessage or what the difference between a blue or a green conversation box actually means. About the only time most Apple users learn of imessage is when they switch to an android device without disabling iMessage or resetting their iPhone and end up not receiving messages from other iPhone users.
    • Thank you for the reminder. I have an iphone because that is what my company standard is(I actually have the option of choosing a non-standard phone, but since I need to support users with company phones...and only IT gets to choose a nonstandard phone...I decided I better have what everyone else has. I may change to an Android when I get to replace this one). I meant to disable imessage a while back and forgot to do so. I just took care of that.

  • The latest version of iMessage clearly has access to various iOS APIs. It runs mini-Swift applications with animation, forms, and other stuff. It reaches into the host OS to provide its flashy, whiz-bang features.

    How could Apple possibly port that to Android without also porting chunks of iOS?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by puto ( 533470 )
      How does What's App do it on all all phone platforms then? Apple could easily write an Imessage lite for Windows Phone and Android that allows you to sign in with an Apple ID. Since Apples contacts is integrated with its Messaging app so it can differentiate between regular SMS and and iMessages then it would be trivial for the contacts App to be made to recognize Imessages for non-apple devices and only show features that are avail to the receiver. Simple text, sms, and video is all you need on the othe

    • The latest version of iMessage clearly has access to various iOS APIs. It runs mini-Swift applications with animation, forms, and other stuff. It reaches into the host OS to provide its flashy, whiz-bang features.

      How could Apple possibly port that to Android without also porting chunks of iOS?

      Yeah how would APPLE ever copy a subset of the functionality that WhatsApp have developed for 300 times as many different platforms, with less than 50 programmers.

  • Was someone actually expecting Apple to bring iMessage to Android? It wasn't that Rob Enderle idiot again, was it? Didn't we all agree to just ignore him and hope that he'd go away?

  • We definitely won't do that! (Score:5, Informative)

    by stoborrobots ( 577882 ) on Friday June 17, 2016 @10:04PM (#52341391)

    iMessage will never be coming to Android

    Isn't that what they say everytime before they do the thing?

    * MP3 players are junk and just get left in drawers... http://www.bit-tech.net/news/h... [bit-tech.net]
    * Macs will never run on Intel http://www.theinquirer.net/inq... [theinquirer.net]
    * Ipods will never do video. http://www.macobserver.com/tmo... [macobserver.com]

    * We are not working on a phone. http://www.macobserver.com/tmo... [macobserver.com]
    * People want keyboards, tablets are going to fail http://www.wired.com/2010/02/s... [wired.com]
    * Information about a tablet is incorrect http://www.googl8.com/85998192... [googl8.com]

  • and iTunes and my kid would want an Android. She could live without iTunes (there are alternatives) but iMessage is practically a social network. Also at the risk of getting modded down for suggesting it it's a social network of well off people (iPhones being expensive and all) and it encourages her to associate with people of a certain social standing. That's pretty messed up, but I remember some of the trouble hanging out with shall we say, less affluent, kids got me into when I was young. I wouldn't mind

  • All I want is to be able to send messages longer than 160 characters to Android users without the messages being chopped up and receiving the pieces of the message out of order. It's annoying, this is 2016 for christ's sake. Apple's doesn't have to provide Android devices with a full featured iMessages application, just basic texting (with no character limit) and unified emojis would be sufficient.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by minus9 ( 106327 )
      Perhaps this new fangled email thing they have nowadays would fit the bill?

      I believe they even have it on computers now.

  • Can anyone explain the "user-experience advantage" (Score:4, Informative)

    by Squirmy McPhee ( 856939 ) on Saturday June 18, 2016 @03:11AM (#52342121)

    What is this supposed "user-experience advantage" of iMessage? I sure can't figure it out. The first thing I do when my employer gives me a new iPhone is turn off iMessage, because it has caused me plenty of trouble and I have never knowingly seen one single solitary benefit from it.

    I do a lot of international travel, keeping data roaming turned off, and knew nothing of iMessage when I got my first iPhone. It took me forever to figure out why text messages to and from certain people always seemed to be delayed. One day I turned on international data roaming to check for an urgent work email and instantly a slew of old text messages came through, followed by an alert from my carrier that I'd just spent 25 euros in roaming fees. I eventually figured out it was all down to iMessage, and the people whose texts were delayed were all iPhone users, so oddly enough it was Apple's "user-experience advantage" that cost me 25 euros and blocked messages to other iPhone users while allowing messages to non-iPhone users to pass unmolested....

  • Wait wait wait... (Score:3)

    by HalAtWork ( 926717 ) on Saturday June 18, 2016 @10:23AM (#52343051)

    *Not* being able to communicate with people outside the iOS user base is a user experience advantage?

    This is one thing MS is getting right that Apple is doing wrong. MS aims to have cortana control and sync all discrete services by having its cortana app actually manage the device and its notifications. Apple will just be under that umbrella. Google on the other hand is allowing their apps and services on all devices, allowing the user experience to live everywhere.

    Apple will just be overwhelmed or niche, unless they can somehow get a killer app or killer hardware that everyone else needs to catch up on. This is why everyone uses hangouts or slack/irc

  • The problem with Imessage is that it can't be tracked and recorded - for Government users, freedom of information and sunshine laws make this unacceptable. The only way to ensure compliance for Govt organizations is to manage the devices and disable imessage functionality.

  • iMessage *could* be fixed. If Apple would make messages go to every device that's signed on under that account and send it via SMS (and have the system throw out duplicates if needed), it could be decent.

    But instead ... it only goes to one device, which may or may not be the one they're using. (Or maybe it won't even go to that one device.)

    So ... ultimately, if you want to make sure that they get your message, you need to turn off iMessage, or at least not use anything that uses it.

    Personally, I'm surpris

  • If you are a current iOS user, it's easy to try a boatload of Google apps. Like what you see? You can get the full experience for your next phone, keep accessing lifetime of your photos for free and have a wide choice of form factors and special features like waterproof devices.

    If you are among the current majority of users in US and worldwide with an Android phone - why even think about Apple? It's not like you can try out iMessage on your Windows 10 tablet or Android phone, fall in love with quality and l

Slashdot Top Deals

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Close