Facebook Opens New Fight With Apple Over Messaging (9to5mac.com) 59
Facebook executives have sharply ramped up their criticism of Apple in recent months, contesting the iPhone maker's restrictions on gaming apps and ad targeting, as well as its cut of in-app purchases. Now, emboldened by Apple software changes that suggest it is starting to bend, Facebook wants something else: the option to make its Messenger app the default messaging tool on iPhones [Editor's note: the link is paywalled; alternative source]. From a report: "We feel people should be able to choose different messaging apps and the default on their phone," Stan Chudnovsky, the Facebook vice president in charge of its Messenger app, told The Information. "Generally, everything is moving this direction anyway." Chudnovksy said Facebook has asked Apple over the years to consider opening up default messaging. Apple has never agreed. Apple's Messages app is a core feature of its mobile software that encourages people to keep buying its devices, and the app's encryption of messages is also a cornerstone of the company's privacy pitch to consumers. Google's rival Android mobile operating system already lets users choose their default messaging app.
What's a "default messaging app"? (Score:4, Insightful)
What's a "default messaging app"? Do they mean SMS texts should go to Facebook messenger?
Why would anyone want that?
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
What's a "default messaging app"? Do they mean SMS texts should go to Facebook messenger?
Something like that. Default apps have massive power. Because consumers are too damn lazy to change default settings. Corporations know this.
Why would anyone want that?
OK, in the great world of consumer electronics and social media, let's just stop asking this stupid question. Also, see data mining, privacy-robbing, soul-crushing greed.
Re: (Score:2)
Apples iMessage integrates with SMS App. So if you Text iPhone to iPhone you use the iMessage protocol vs SMS. And also have some extra features.
Digital Rates a much lower than texting rates. Because Cell Phone Carriers are really stupid. So people will prefer sending via messaging apps to talk to other people.
Now Having Facebook set as default would mean it would go to your facebook contact first, then SMS if there isn't a direct contact.
Re: (Score:2)
Apples iMessage integrates with SMS App. So if you Text iPhone to iPhone you use the iMessage protocol vs SMS. And also have some extra features.
Digital Rates a much lower than texting rates. Because Cell Phone Carriers are really stupid. So people will prefer sending via messaging apps to talk to other people.
Now Having Facebook set as default would mean it would go to your facebook contact first, then SMS if there isn't a direct contact.
Weird. My plan gives me unlimited SMS messages, but only 250MB /month of data.
Re: (Score:1)
Weird. My plan gives me unlimited SMS messages, but only 250MB /month of data.
When I’m connected to WiFi, I don’t need to spend a penny to send an iMessage. Come in handy when I’m out of country.
Re: (Score:3)
What's a "default browser"? Do they mean weblinks shouuld go to browser XYZ? Why would anyone want anything other than Internet Explorer?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I dunno... maybe because Internet Explorer is dead [msn.com]? /sarcasm
It will cause huge support problems (Score:4, Informative)
FB messenger is teh suck (Score:2)
I already have FB Messenger, Telegram, WhatsApp, and iMessage on my phone because nobody can agree on a single messaging standard across all platforms. Being able to set something else as the "default" does nothing to improve that situation.
The whole problem with mobile messaging is summed up quite well in that XKCD comic you've likely already seen. We don't need more standards, or some rule changes in the fight over who gets to be the dominate platform (which is what Facebook is suggesting), but one inte
Re:FB messenger is teh suck (Score:4, Funny)
I already have FB Messenger, Telegram, WhatsApp, and iMessage on my phone because nobody can agree on a single messaging standard across all platforms.
* SMS has entered the chat *
"Asshole."
* SMS has left the chat *
Re: (Score:2)
I already have FB Messenger, Telegram, WhatsApp, and iMessage on my phone because nobody can agree on a single messaging standard across all platforms.
* SMS has entered the chat *
"Asshole."
* SMS has left the chat *
ROFL. I think the problem is that SMS sucks. Let's see:
It's a MacGyver'ed hack consisting of shoestrings, baling wire, and chewing gum that should not be taken seriously as a candidate for a joint standard.
I'm not sure what the right solution is, but whatever folks come up with
Re: (Score:2)
And all I had, was a silly joke. Thank you man, for providing so much more. You are correct in the analysis, but there are a couple of bigger issues that don't make a unified standard "much simpler":
End-to-end encrypted, including all payloads.
And your answer for law enforcement? This battle will continue to rage, especially as violence gets worse, fueling "UNLOCK OR HE WALKS!" chants outside courtrooms from victims. Believe me I'd rather have it your way, but law enforcement sees it differently.
A global [anything]...
We battle enough with global standards. Debates can
Re: (Score:2)
End-to-end encrypted, including all payloads.
And your answer for law enforcement? This battle will continue to rage, especially as violence gets worse, fueling "UNLOCK OR HE WALKS!" chants outside courtrooms from victims. Believe me I'd rather have it your way, but law enforcement sees it differently.
Law enforcement's opinion does not matter in the slightest to me. They work for the people, not the other way around. If they can't make a case without cracking into someone's phone, then they don't have a case. Simple as that.
Sure, I understand the desire, if they know who committed some crime (particularly things like mass shootings, bombings, etc.), to find out if anybody else was involved. But in the era before cell phones, they would have had no way to discover that information after the fact unles
Re: (Score:2)
End-to-end encrypted, including all payloads.
And your answer for law enforcement? This battle will continue to rage, especially as violence gets worse, fueling "UNLOCK OR HE WALKS!" chants outside courtrooms from victims. Believe me I'd rather have it your way, but law enforcement sees it differently.
Law enforcement's opinion does not matter in the slightest to me. They work for the people, not the other way around. If they can't make a case without cracking into someone's phone...
Let's just pause right here for a moment. I know I'm not going to convince you otherwise (I'm on your side with this) but let's "run" this for a minute.
Assuming you are one who still respects privacy and security, if I told you I had a completely secure service that ensured privacy for everything you do online, would you be far more inclined to use it? Chances are you would. So, what do you think criminals will do as crime continues to mirror the rest of the analog world quickly going digital?
"If they c
Re: (Score:2)
End-to-end encrypted, including all payloads.
And your answer for law enforcement? This battle will continue to rage, especially as violence gets worse, fueling "UNLOCK OR HE WALKS!" chants outside courtrooms from victims. Believe me I'd rather have it your way, but law enforcement sees it differently.
Law enforcement's opinion does not matter in the slightest to me. They work for the people, not the other way around. If they can't make a case without cracking into someone's phone...
Let's just pause right here for a moment. I know I'm not going to convince you otherwise (I'm on your side with this) but let's "run" this for a minute.
Assuming you are one who still respects privacy and security, if I told you I had a completely secure service that ensured privacy for everything you do online, would you be far more inclined to use it? Chances are you would. So, what do you think criminals will do as crime continues to mirror the rest of the analog world quickly going digital?
"If they can't make a case"...yes, what happens to crime rates when they can never make a case?
Then they likely wouldn't have been able to make a case in the analog world, either. You mostly didn't catch mob bosses in the old days by monitoring their communications; you did it by either bribing an accountant to become an informant or planting listening devices. Mass use of wiretaps is basically an invention of the last two decades (though wiretaps have existed since the 1890s). We could easily go back to an era when people's papers were secure against search and seizure without any real long-term
Re: (Score:2)
I already have FB Messenger, Telegram, WhatsApp, and iMessage on my phone because nobody can agree on a single messaging standard across all platforms. Being able to set something else as the "default" does nothing to improve that situation.
There already is one [wikipedia.org], and at one point Google, FB and What'sApp used it (or variations of it). The problem is that open standards are detrimental to lock-in and monetization.
Re: (Score:1)
I already have FB Messenger, Telegram, WhatsApp, and iMessage on my phone because nobody can agree on a single messaging standard across all platforms. Being able to set something else as the "default" does nothing to improve that situation.
The whole problem with mobile messaging is summed up quite well in that XKCD comic you've likely already seen. We don't need more standards, or some rule changes in the fight over who gets to be the dominate platform (which is what Facebook is suggesting), but one interoperable open standard that works by default on both major smartphone platforms. That means both Google and Apple getting over their petty desires for vendor lock-in and doing something good for the end users for once. Fat chance of that.
I think you're supposed to wait for the Free Market (TM) to solve this.
Facebook takeover = no sale (Score:4, Interesting)
If Facebook can take over a device and change administrative settings then I will never purchase that device.
Re: (Score:2)
Who said anything about changing administrative settings?
Re: (Score:2)
If an app makes itself a 'default app' (whatever that means) when I install it then it made an administrative change. Do you think that Facebook really wants your permission to make these kinds of changes?
I don't want any device that can be commandeered by an app where that commandeering can happen by design. Facebook acts like a visible yet malicious actor.
Re: (Score:2)
If an app makes itself a 'default app' (whatever that means) when I install it then it made an administrative change. Do you think that Facebook really wants your permission to make these kinds of changes?
The app itself cannot change the default messaging app... only the user can.
Please! (Score:3)
Would someone please hammer the wooden stake into the heart of Facebook and just put it down already?
It's sucked enough of our blood already...
Re: (Score:1)
After almost 20 years AND giving them money, I'm about ready to give up on Slashdot entirely because they just killed anonymous posting for logged in users on D2.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why you'd be logged as Diablo 2, but yeah I don't see the "post as anonymous" checkbox anymore either.
kill the facebook messenger (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Find new friends. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I would even say, find real friends. Nobody has 4000 real friends.
Re: kill the facebook messenger (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, my sarcasm meter is in the shop.
Facebook Smartphone default app? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
As a consumer, if I'm buying Apple, I want Apple messaging to be default
You want iMessage to be the default, so nobody else should be allowed to set a different default?
I'll change it to what ever I'd like after - if I feel inclined to do so.
Wait, what? So you do want to be able to change the default?
Re: (Score:1)
Are you paid to post this? The number of near identical posts in this thread makes me wonder...
Since changing the "default Messaging app" to something that cannot talk to the current default Messaging app I find it really stupid to allow such a thing. It would only fragment the messaging more than it is today. If you want to do messaging over Facebook Messenger, open the app!
Note that changing the default e-mail client or default web browser doesn't affect other users the least, it is only you who see the c
Re: (Score:2)
Note that changing the default e-mail client or default web browser doesn't affect other users the least, it is only you who see the change, changing the Messaging app would.
No, it wouldn't. I use Pulse SMS as my default on my Android phone... nobody knows or cares that I use that instead of Android Messages or something else, they just see standard SMS/MMS messages, same as they would see if I used Android Messages. If I made Facebook Messager my default, then SMS/MMS would go through that, but again, others would just see SMS/MMS messages.
Re: (Score:1)
TL;DR: Allowing for this makes no sense on iOS since there are no drop-in replacements for the Messages app.
You are wrong since there is no drop-in replacement for Messages on iOS. So offering an option to switch Messages for another messaging app makes no sense. Most of these apps don't JUST send SMS:es and if you tell people that you can choose "default Messaging app" you are then essentially telling them that all the alternative apps are interchangeable. But they aren't, besides sending SMS:es they have
Hold the line Apple (Score:4, Interesting)
If I wanted the wild, wild west, the ability to do ANYTHING on my system no matter the consequences, the ability for ANYONE to put ANYTHING on my system at will, and the ability for ANYONE to reach in and extract ANY DATA from my systems, I'd be using Android and PCs with either Windows or Linux.
In other words, I'm in your ecosystem because I consciously want a controlled environment. Facebook, Epic and the others are basically barbarians hammering at the gate. In the most strongest words possible, PLEASE HOLD THAT LINE. Epic wants the ability to do whatever they please in your app store. Facebook wants the ability to harvest my data at will and pump my phone full of adds. You prevent these things and it makes them unhappy. However, your current policies are practically the only reason I pay your high prices. If you lose that line, you most likely lose me as a customer.
You should fight this like your business model depends on it. Because it probably does.
Sincerely,
A large fraction of your customer base.
Re: (Score:2)
Dear Apple,
If I wanted the wild, wild west, the ability to do ANYTHING on my system no matter the consequences, the ability for ANYONE to put ANYTHING on my system at will, and the ability for ANYONE to reach in and extract ANY DATA from my systems, I'd be using Android and PCs with either Windows or Linux.
Sincerely,
A large fraction of your customer base.
Yeah, I'd say it 99.999%
Re: (Score:2)
And that 0.0001% are the idiots who buy an expensive MacBook Pro to install Windows on it for some reason.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"If I wanted the wild, wild west, the ability to do ANYTHING on my system no matter the consequences, the ability for ANYONE to put ANYTHING on my system at will, and the ability for ANYONE to reach in and extract ANY DATA from my systems, I'd be using Android and PCs with either Windows or Linux."
Facebook: we want THE USER to be able to select our app for messenging.
You: ANYONE will be able to do ANYTHING to my phone!
Everyone else: *eyeroll*
Re: Hold the line Apple (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If Facebook can disrespect your privacy/settings then your OS' permission system is a bad joke... Noob
Re: (Score:2)
I already deleted Messenger from my Android phone because I no longer could convince myself that it was safe to have it installed - it wanted ALL the permissions, and AFAICT it wasn't an ala carte selection (you obviously need to enable audio to send voice messages, video to send video messages, contacts to gets contacts integration, but I was not interested in any of that, so the app gave me nothing at all). I _might_ be willing to allow Messenger on an iPhone, but in part that's because iOS's permissions
Re: Hold the line Apple (Score:2)
Why does FB Messenger need access to your contacts when it already knows all the people you're connected with on FB? Oh, that's right: it could improve their data about you and your network so they can monetise you and your contacts better.
Better to use FB from a private browser session and hope the browser sandbox protects you better than a natively installed app.
Re: (Score:2)
Why does FB Messenger need access to your contacts when it already knows all the people you're connected with on FB? Oh, that's right: it could improve their data about you and your network so they can monetise you and your contacts better.
Better to use FB from a private browser session and hope the browser sandbox protects you better than a natively installed app.
Well, my assumption is that they were going to suck in all those contacts and ping them all to say "shess is on Facebook, you should connect!" Probably there would be an opt-out checkbox somewhere on the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory, and when you click it will say "Are you sure about the leopard?" So it would be my fault!
Re:Hold the line Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
the ability for ANYONE to put ANYTHING on my system at will, and the ability for ANYONE to reach in and extract ANY DATA from my systems,
How does allowing you, the user, to change your default messaging app allow "anyone to put anything on your system at will" or "anyone to reach in and extract any data from your system"?
In other words, I'm in your ecosystem because I consciously want a controlled environment.
Facebook wants the ability to harvest my data at will and pump my phone full of adds. You prevent these things and it makes them unhappy.
So don't change the default messaging app. Don't use Facebook at all. Allowing you to change the default messaging app doesn't give Facebook, or anybody else, any additional power over you or your device.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah. Sorry. I'm not naive enough to buy it. I've been around the block once or twice. Apple needs to hold the line here and now, or they'll wind up as just another version of windows and android. At that point, I'll just go Samsung and my current iMac w
Re: (Score:3)
In other words, we should let the barbarians into the walled garden because they promise that they'll only take their steaming dumps in the northwest corner, while I'm welcome to stay in cleaner we-totally-pinky-promise-we-won't invade southeast corner.
Apple already rejects malicious apps from the App Store. Allowing you to set a different default messaging app doesn't change that. Nor does allowing a different default messaging app allow the app to do anything more than what is already allowed plus being the default messaging app.
Yeah. Sorry. I'm not naive enough to buy it. I've been around the block once or twice. Apple needs to hold the line here and now, or they'll wind up as just another version of windows and android. At that point, I'll just go Samsung and my current iMac will be my last. It wouldn't be the end of the world but I'm happy with my systems as they are.
So don't change *your* default messaging app. Other people might want to *theirs*.
Re: (Score:1)
If
Re: (Score:2)
Once the Apple ecosystem defenses are breached, there probably won't be any end to it. You'll just have another version of windows. Every niche has 1800 programs that do the same thing, with 3 of them being good. So many people doing so many different things that they can't drop ANY OS feature because of legacy load. Optimization impossible. Security has to be weak because so many different programs do so many different things that any tightening up breaks things and people get all mad and litigious.
You're being overly dramatic here. Allowing alternative messaging apps isn't "breaching any defenses", nor would it make it any more difficult to drop any OS feature in the future.
If Epic gets their way, Apple will eventually lose a great deal ability to police the app store. Denied your way with the app store? Just sue..... the courts will get you in.
Not really what we're discussing here. The debate over the 30% "Apple tax" is a whole other thing. Beyond the payments part, Fortnite isn't malware so shouldn't be blocked from the App Store once the payments issue is resolved. Stadia and xCloud shouldn't be blocked either.
And... regarding Android... no matter what they say, your data is up for sale. Laws are enforceable. But when a company quietly violates their stated policies, the consequence is "whoopsie, caught us tee tee". Policies are malleable, mutable and ignorable. Apple is the only one holding the line on user privacy.
The ability to change one's default SMS app in Android
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, as a long time Apple customer, I disagree.
Like I said, I'm a long time Apple customer--my first Mac was a Macintosh. But I remember an entertaining discussion I had with Windows people back in the '90s. They of course loved to point out that I had to buy my computer from Apple whereas they could buy their computer from anywhere. I would point out, though, that the vast majority of their software came from Microsoft. Web browser? Microsoft. Email? Microsoft. IDE? Microsoft. Office Suite?
Re: (Score:2)
Now-a-days, my Web browser comes from Apple. Email? Apple. IDE? Apple. Office suite? Apple. Music player? Apple. Maps? Apple. Photo Management? Apple. Podcast? Apple. Messaging? Apple.
Mac is my primary work and personal computer since 2014.
Web browser? Safari for personal because I like it and it integrates with my iPhone. Chrome for work to separate concerns.
Email? Gmail on Chrome for work and Gmail on Safari for personal.
IDE? IntelliJ, Eclipse, WebStorm, VS Code, MacVim, PyCharm, Sublime, ... oh, and Xcode for an iOS hobby. I guess I should blame Apple for forcing me to use Xcode for that.
Office Suite? Excel for spreadsheets. Confluence for documentation. Google docs for random things.
Re: (Score:2)
Dear Apple,
If I wanted the wild, wild west, the ability to do ANYTHING on my system no matter the consequences, the ability for ANYONE to put ANYTHING on my system at will, and the ability for ANYONE to reach in and extract ANY DATA from my systems, I'd be using Android and PCs with either Windows or Linux.
Note that "anyone" includes the owner and user of the phone and excludes Apple. That is, Apple can be trusted, but the phone owner and user cannot be trusted.
year of Linux on the desktop Re: Hold the line App (Score:2)
Competition good for the industry (Score:1)
How about opening up the Facebook Messenger API? (Score:2)
What’s good for Apple should be good for Facebook, right? I used to be able to chat on Messenger without using the Messenger app. Then Facebook blocked it. How about letting others into your wall garden?
Re: (Score:1)
But Facebook isn't a monopoly that should be forced to open up. I mean, it is not like they have billions of users or something... oh, wait. /s (of course!)
I remember the days of Trillian, Gaim/Pidgin and Adium. Now I have to have a ton of messaging apps just because different circles of friends decided on different platforms, and the platforms won't allow third party clients.
How about "No." (Score:1)
Facebook? (Score:1)
Apple will never relinquish control of its devices (Score:1)
Sorry, Facebook, but Apple will never agree to this one because doing so would undermine the basis of their selling point against Android: a controlled environment.
The entire point of owning an iPhone is to have an environment carefully regulated (and owned) by Apple; users who don't want that are always free to choose Android. Allowing users to set an non-Apple (competing) app as a default application when an alternative by Apple exists would undermine their entire philosophy of providing a controlled us