[Snuupy]

I disagree with the author using the analogy of a Centurion lounge. It is not a "premium" messaging app, it is the "default" where Apple is abusing their position on being the default bundled messaging app, where unsuspecting users don't know there are better, interoperable messaging apps, or don't know which ones to migrate to. This is similar to Microsoft abusing its position to bundle Internet Explorer.

For the sake of his analogy, American Express is not a dominant player in the credit card industry compared to mc/visa.

The real situation is this: Apple is intentionally hindering communication between people to coerce others into buying an iPhone. This is different from American Express, where you can bring guests with you into a Centurion lounge.

> > Earlier this month, Beeper introduced Beeper Mini, an interoperable messaging service that allows users of the Android mobile operating system to communicate with users of Apple’s iMessage service.

> Wrong. There is only one service at hand, iMessage, ...

It's interesting that the author completely ignores Beeper (the original, non-mini version), which IS an interoperable messaging client. You can message other Beeper users in the Beeper Community Channel (which operates on Matrix), other social networks (like LinkedIn, Instagram, WhatsApp, Signal, etc.), and up until recently, iMessage as well.

I find it difficult to take this post seriously when the author strawmans the opposing view's argument.

Of course, Apple is free to do whatever it likes - it's their servers after all. But trying to spin this into something it's not is imo disingenuous.

I'm not saying Apple should allow "freeloaders", I'm saying Apple should not abuse its position into coercing non-iPhone users by playing dirty. I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears though, just look at how they coerce users into using iCloud or making it so only the 1st party solution is able to run background tasks properly. And that's fine - I will continue to go around recommending anything but Apple products to others, and support politicians that advocate against big tech abusing their positions.

Is everything this guy writes this one-sided?

[electric_snail]

> Is everything this guy writes this one-sided?

Yes.

[mcphage]

> This is similar to Microsoft abusing its position to bundle Internet Explorer.

I think the issue there was Microsoft using its OS position to force other companies to bundle their browser—and not a competitor’s—versus Apple doing all of this with only their own products.