Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Releases iMessage Deregistration Utility

Posted by samzenpus on from the try-it-now dept.

tlhIngan writes When moving from an iPhone to something else, if you were an avid user of iMessage, you may find your messages missing, especially from iOS-using friends. Indeed, it has been such a problem that there are even lawsuits about it. While Apple has maintained that users can always switch off iMessage, that only works if you still have your iOS device. Unless one also has other iOS devices or a Mac, they may not even realize their friends have been sending messages that are queued up on Apple's services via iMessage. Well, that problem has been resolved with Apple creating a deregistration utility to remove your phone number from the iMessage servers so friends will no longer send you texts via iMessage that you can no longer receive. It's a two-step process involving proof of number ownership (via regular SMS) before deregistration takes place.

136 comments

  1. Call me by Overzeetop · · Score: 0

    Call me when they allow cross-system forwarding like another phone number or Hangouts.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Call me by tooslickvan · · Score: 3, Funny

      Apple sent you a text via iMessage but you probably did not receive it.

    2. Re:Call me by jbolden · · Score: 1

      iMessage doesn't have to use PSTN. It works fine for people who don't have a number at all so it can't forward to a number.

  2. Overdue by blueshift_1 · · Score: 1

    While I'm still on iOS myself, this was a long overdue issue. It's incredibly frustrating to have to switch on/off imessage to send messages to people who have moved over to android. iMessage was/is a great idea, but it took a bit too long for this bug fix to be resolved.

    1. Re:Overdue by arbiter1 · · Score: 0

      Welcome to apple, commonsense fix's ot bugs take months if not years before they fix it, Example the flashback virus, Windows had update within a day of going public, Apple took 2 months to release a patch for OS X.

    2. Re:Overdue by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      In Apple's defense, it took them 54 days to decide the radius for the corners of the patch.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    3. Re:Overdue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I'm still on iOS myself, this was a long overdue issue.

      Because all the rabid fanboys (which is not all Apple users, just the vocal religious advocates) told us this wasn't a problem and that iMessages would just bounce and that the sender would see that they weren't "delivered" and it would instead be sent as SMS. But in fact they were delivered to the server, which is what the "delivered" label means in that context, so assuming the sender could connect to the iMessage server everything was "delivered" but that doesn't mean it reached the recipient.

      Never the less, the fanboys harped on in their own ignorance and that grew this misconception that the problem wasn't a problem at all. Don't blame Apple, blame the user...the usual mantra. There were a number of stories about this a long time ago and you can see the resident slashdot Apple fanboys doing exactly this in spite of the fact that it was unbelievably easy for them to try it out and understand that this really was an issue.

    4. Re:Overdue by macs4all · · Score: 1

      While I'm still on iOS myself, this was a long overdue issue. It's incredibly frustrating to have to switch on/off imessage to send messages to people who have moved over to android. iMessage was/is a great idea, but it took a bit too long for this bug fix to be resolved.

      I send SMS messages to Android users all the time from iMessage. What are you talking about? Are you talking about only from OS X, or iOS, too?

    5. Re:Overdue by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      February 14, 2012 to April 3, 2012 - is 18 days.

      And it's interesting that you had to go back 2.5 years for your mistaken example.

    6. Re:Overdue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I send SMS messages to Android users all the time from iMessage. What are you talking about? Are you talking about only from OS X, or iOS, too?

      You're dense. He's talking about sending messages from his iPhone to people who have switched from iOS to Android. Well, that's exactly what he said in his post:

      It's incredibly frustrating to have to switch on/off imessage to send messages to people who have moved over to android.

      When those people move on to Android, Apple doesn't automatically deregister their numbers as valid iMessage addresses. So when you try to text them, your iPhone uses iMessage instead of SMS because Apple's servers think your friend's number is still valid. Your friend never gets the message, and you never get an "undeliverable" error because Apple's servers dutifully hang onto the message, waiting for the next time your friend's phone connects to the server. Except that never happens because your friend's old iPhone is lost/sold/stolen/in a drawer while your friend is using Android!

      I know you can't comprehend people switching away from your beloved Apple, macs4all, but in the real world it does happen.

    7. Re: Overdue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Math bro

    8. Re:Overdue by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Today I learned that a month is 9 days.

      You learn something new every day!

    9. Re:Overdue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you can't comprehend people switching away from your beloved Apple, macs4all, but in the real world it does happen.

      Ah! That was the key: iOS -> Android Switchers. Skimming article at work == low reading comprehension sometimes...

    10. Re:Overdue by jbolden · · Score: 1

      It isn't really a bug. It is a correction for users not thinking, not reading and not paying attention. The system was doing what they told it to do.

    11. Re:Overdue by jbolden · · Score: 1

      That's correct. Delivered and Read are different statuses. Which is ironic given you are complaining about the rapid fanboys yet still even today haven't bothered to read the instructions they were telling you to read.

    12. Re:Overdue by blueshift_1 · · Score: 1

      The issue is when it sends a message to a person who was formerly iOS, but has since moved to android. It default to attempt to iMessage, however it doesn't truly fault out so that it then sends a text message. They just sit out on the apple iMessage servers. The only real work around was to constantly turn iMessage off, send message, turn iMessage back on. Just a hassle.

    13. Re:Overdue by macs4all · · Score: 1

      The issue is when it sends a message to a person who was formerly iOS, but has since moved to android.

      Yeah, I figured out that was the real issue later. You're right, that would be a hassle. Good that Apple (finally) fixed it, though I think all the hater bullshit is entirely unwarranted. It was just a thing that didn't come up in design meetings until after the "real world" started providing more use-case data.

    14. Re:Overdue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Pssst! You forgot about March!)

  3. Try explaining that... by sarguin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... to your grandma that if she wants to receive text message on their new Android/Nokia/... phone, she needs to turn off iMessage in their iPhone BEFORE activating her new mobile. Or if she forgot to do it, she just have to access an obscure Apple web page to do it. Thanks Apple for SMS service hijacking!

    1. Re:Try explaining that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could just do it for her, and skip the explanation.

    2. Re:Try explaining that... by kannibal_klown · · Score: 2

      SMS used to be quite limited in the USA, but most providers started making "Unlimited" SMS either the standard or a very cheap price.

      I still still send / receive SMS. It's the one universal method to reach someone (other than calling). Meanwhile some of my friends use iMessage, some Hangouts, some WhatsApp, some email, etc. Instead of dealing with a bunch of different apps I just use iMessage app for SMS and iMessage.

      But when it comes to sending pics or whatever, I just use Email.

    3. Re:Try explaining that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuker her from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

    4. Re:Try explaining that... by Tridus · · Score: 1

      There was 145 billion of them sent last year, so the answer is probably "lots of people".

      --
      -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    5. Re:Try explaining that... by Sowelu · · Score: 1

      Many places in semi-rural USA don't have reliable 3G, so SMS is a good fallback.

    6. Re:Try explaining that... by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thanks Apple for SMS service hijacking!

      I think Occam's razor applies here. You can either read it as "EVIL APPLE, take over SMS to screw people OVER!!!!!" or you can read it as "Apple tried to make imessage a seamless extension on SMS, and got them a little too intermixed". I kind of see it more as the latter. Witness this with the issue with SMS/google account intermixing in Google Hangouts.

    7. Re:Try explaining that... by danlip · · Score: 4, Interesting

      SMS used to be quite limited in the USA, but most providers started making "Unlimited" SMS either the standard or a very cheap price.

      Which they did after iMessage and other alternative messaging services came out, of course. I'm grateful to Apple for forcing their hand.

    8. Re:Try explaining that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then refuse to make it seamlessly work when you move away.

      And no, people moving off of Android devices still get their text messages when you send to them.

    9. Re:Try explaining that... by danbob999 · · Score: 1

      It's the one universal method to reach someone (other than calling).

      What happened to email? Way more universal as you don't need to write it on your phone. And you don't even need a cell phone.

    10. Re:Try explaining that... by danbob999 · · Score: 1

      Most providers have email to sms gateways. So there is no reasons for using SMS directly. Also, even with 2G you can send emails just fine.

    11. Re:Try explaining that... by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Not sure how "announcement of website to allow people to walk away" leads into refusal. Oh, it must be seamless? Are you an engineer? Do you realize the complexity of decoupling two things? If you mix salt and sugar into a bowl, are you then evil when you say you can't divide them?

      Please explain how iPhone corporate is supposed to know when you drop a SIM into another phone? Or are you supposed to call Apple if you move SIMs now? Which will lead to people complaining about how Apple is being a speedbump into moving SIMs from one phone to another.

      This is more complex than people think. Apple doesn't do itself favors sometimes when it hides complexity. This is one such time. People think there's some Illuminati thing going on, when complexity is just hard.

    12. Re:Try explaining that... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Or you could say, "Apple has a grossly oversized ego and thinks the world centers around them."

    13. Re:Try explaining that... by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      Obviously I use email when it's lengthy and not time critical. And I also use them when sending pics or files or whatever. And if it's something personal or not requiring specific text/instructions/addresses/etc. then talking is idea.

      But
      - Only *some* of the people I know have a SmartPhone setup with email push/fetch
      - Only *some* of the people I know are near a computer during the day enough for it to matter.

      So, an email might go days without being read by some.

      Everyone I know has a mobile on them. So if it's not a scenario where talking is appropriate, an SMS is the most sure way to send them something that they can see in a specific time.

      Obviously my techie friends will see an email just as fast as an SMS. But I still have friends with old flip phones because they just want something simple, and they're rarely online at home (and never at work) so email might as well be snail mail.

    14. Re:Try explaining that... by danbob999 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure every flip phone can receive email over SMS. By texting instead of emailing, you are being rude because you are forcing your recipient to reply from a small (phone) keyboard while he may prefer a real one. I don't see any reason to use SMS, just like I don't use TCP directly to write to my friends. SMS should only be a transport protocol to carry data in a more user-friendly format (such as not be limited to 130 characters).

    15. Re:Try explaining that... by loccohombre · · Score: 1

      It's not even simply when you move away. Case in point; My wife and eldest daughter are currently in Oz. With Three Mobile, they get free calls and SMS as though they were in the UK. My youngest daughter is still in the UK. My choices at the moment;

      1) Turn off iMessage on my iPhone so that I can communicate with wife and daughter in Oz, but not be able to communicate with youngest daughter or anyone else using an iPhone in the UK.
      2) Leave iMessage on and vice-versa.
      3) Constantly switch between the two in the hope of intercepting one of the protocols.

      It's a truly annoying high-jacking of a protocol by Apple.

      --
      "It's expensive, stupid, last only seconds - but makes your mouth hurt for days - it's BEE IN A BALLOON" - Kibo 3/1/95
    16. Re: Try explaining that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just turn off iMessage and fall back to SMS. every device will receive it. it's not rocket science.

  4. It's all about the Phone Number ID by Macrat · · Score: 1

    The real issue is that you can't opt out of automatically having your phone number become and account/id in iMessage.

    I want to use iMessage on my iPhone, but only with regular iCloud accounts, not with the phone number being used to create an account.

    Unfortunately, the iOS team doesn't give the user that option.

    1. Re:It's all about the Phone Number ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You can, just go into the imessage settings. In fact you are specifically asked if you want to add your phone number to imessage when you set up your phone.

    2. Re:It's all about the Phone Number ID by Rosyna · · Score: 2, Informative

      The real issue is that you can't opt out of automatically having your phone number become and account/id in iMessage.

      I want to use iMessage on my iPhone, but only with regular iCloud accounts, not with the phone number being used to create an account.

      Unfortunately, the iOS team doesn't give the user that option.

      The option is given when you set up a device for iMessage. It explicitly asks how you want to be contacted. By number, by email(s)/AppleIDs, or all of the above

    3. Re:It's all about the Phone Number ID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Plus you can always change it under "Send & Receive" in Message's settings is the Preferences app.

    4. Re:It's all about the Phone Number ID by Macrat · · Score: 1

      Plus you can always change it under "Send & Receive" in Message's settings is the Preferences app.

      Incorrect.

      You can change OTHER ids but the phone number id is greyed out and you can't deselect it.

    5. Re:It's all about the Phone Number ID by Macrat · · Score: 1

      You can, just go into the imessage settings. In fact you are specifically asked if you want to add your phone number to imessage when you set up your phone.

      Incorrect.

      Your phone number is used to create an ID immediately when you turn on iMessage. You have no choice in the matter.

    6. Re:It's all about the Phone Number ID by Macrat · · Score: 1

      The option is given when you set up a device for iMessage. It explicitly asks how you want to be contacted. By number, by email(s)/AppleIDs, or all of the above

      It does not. It only asks if you want to use OTHER ids that you have set up. Your phone number becoming an id isn't optional.

    7. Re:It's all about the Phone Number ID by jbolden · · Score: 1

      What does that even mean? What function does that setup serve? I can't even see the use case here. The phone number being associated allows the sender to fallback to SMS if they are trying to message you and they can't get data. It is a feature.

      Yes. Apple doesn't allow all possible combinations that are conceivable.

  5. iMessage isn't bad... by MMC+Monster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I actually like the idea behind iMessage: If you have internet access, sending a message via internet is potentially much cheaper than via SMS (unless you have an unlimited SMS plan). Even Apple's implementation of iMessage isn't too bad.

    The problem is that it's lock-in to Apple devices, of course. If Apple could get their head out of the sand and create a unified protocol with Google and whoever is left in the smartphone OS field (BlackBerry?, Mozilla?), it would be fantastic. Especially if the protocol was expanded a bit. Imagine being able to share files like via dropbox, but seemlessly through an SMS app?

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    1. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that it's lock-in to Apple devices, of course. If Apple could get their head out of the sand and create a unified protocol with Google and whoever is left in the smartphone OS field (BlackBerry?, Mozilla?), it would be fantastic

      Blackberry did that a long time ago with BBM, and BBM is available for iphone & android.

      Of course, no one cares... OOOOH! Shiny!

    2. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      and you just invented WhatsApp!

    3. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by UnderCoverPenguin · · Score: 1

      If Apple could get their head out of the sand and create a unified protocol with Google and whoever is left in the smartphone OS field (BlackBerry?, Mozilla?), it would be fantastic.

      I don't know about Blackberry or Mozilla, but Google supports XMPP messaging with at least several different messaging apps (and Linux/OSX/Windows programs). But even Google has some features that only work with its messaging app.

      --
      Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
    4. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by the_B0fh · · Score: 2

      Uh, do you not read slashdot?

      http://tech.slashdot.org/story...

    5. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      And it's not the default configuration for all devices!

      If we could force users to use a single program instead of the default ones, Internet Explorer would have died a decade ago.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    6. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except WhatsApp sucks rocks

    7. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Apple Lock-In ... but I repeat myself.

      My Choice is to go to the device agnostic Google, using Google Voice and Hangouts to do everything (and more) than any iDevice/iMessage can do. SMS from any computer with a browser. Apps for both iOS and Android, PC and Mac.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If you have internet access, sending a message via internet is potentially much cheaper than via SMS (unless you have an unlimited SMS plan).

      I'm not sure what plans are like in the USA, but here in Australia and from what I've seen from family in Europe people watch their data caps and couldn't care less about their SMS plans. The included value on SMSes even for the lowest tier plans is in the order of several hundred messages a day and you need to be a teenage girl in her first love to start worrying about hitting SMS allowances.

    9. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GoogleTalk is deprecated and its XMPP federation is broken. Hangouts does not support XMPP, the protocol is proprietary. This is the reason I use neither, I stopped using GT when federation stopped working and I refuse to use Hangouts unless I can use my own client. I never stopped using IRC and it is the only IM service I use today.

    10. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by exomondo · · Score: 2

      What lock-in? How exactly are you "locked in"? If you don't want it you can just not use it anymore or only use it when it's appropriate. Nothing stops somebody who is currently using iMessage from stopping using it and switching to email, Skype, Viber, Facebook Messenger, Google Hangouts, etc ... This idea that vendor-specific somehow means "locked in" is getting pretty ridiculous, it's nothing of the sort.

    11. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Google Voice is US only, and Google Hangouts is every bit as proprietary as iMessage.

    12. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd much rather use the system provided by the company trying to keep me buying their phones than the system provided by the company trying to keep mining all of my data to sell and advertise at me.

    13. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      You think you're not being mined? LOL funny.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    14. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Can I use iMessage if I don't have anything Apple? That is proprietary.

      Hangouts is available via web service, not proprietary. Closed network, possibly (except SMS works too, regardless of having GV or not)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    15. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      So I guess my XMPP connection from my desktop computer is just a figment of my imagination?

      I know that Chat/Hangouts isn't really XMPP anymore, but it does still support XMPP connections at least for regular messages.

    16. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't looked at other providers, but AT&T only gives two choices now: 20 cents per message or $20 per month for unlimited messages.

    17. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by kenshin33 · · Score: 1

      there's text secure, can use their service -over 3G/Wifi -, fall back to encrypted SMS or simple non encrypted SMS. Or YOU can choose if there are mutilple choices. I read somewhere that there's an IOS version in the works.

    18. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by jbolden · · Score: 1

      It did start to happen. Firefox gained share. Internet Explorer's share has been going up as it got better. But certainly there was a point during the end of the IE6 / IE7 era when share was dropping rapidly and people did switch.

    19. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by gauauu · · Score: 1

      GoogleTalk is deprecated and its XMPP federation is broken. Hangouts does not support XMPP, the protocol is proprietary. This is the reason I use neither, I stopped using GT when federation stopped working and I refuse to use Hangouts unless I can use my own client. I never stopped using IRC and it is the only IM service I use today.

      I receive all my hangouts messages in pidgin using XMPP, so somehow it works.

      (I'm not saying they have it all working correctly. I've never completely understood the mess that is voice/hangouts/google talk/etc. But I do know that when I get a hangouts message, it appears both on my phone and in pidgin via XMPP)

    20. Re:iMessage isn't bad... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      No, that's not the definition of proprietary. Being a "closed network" and indeed a closed protocol does indeed make it proprietary.

      And it's interesting that you are giving bonus points for Google leveraging SMS when Apple does too.

      Basically, you are starting from the position - Google right, Apple wrong - then making up your own definitions and rules to support that conclusion. That's intellectually corrupt.

  6. Re:Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats alot if you do it while having a gay sex orgy.

    But I'm a tolerant person and therefore i think its still better than actually developing shit nobody needs like /. devs with beta. They should try youporn or redtube to get some inspirations for orgies of their own.

  7. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait. Who the fuck needs iMessage? All it does is make your texts use the internet instead of SMS and fail. So what's the hype? Colorful emoticons?
    Texting is unlimited. Data is not.

  8. SMS to land line by tepples · · Score: 1

    I still still send / receive SMS. It's the one universal method to reach someone (other than calling).

    Universal among cell phone users that is. How many land line providers render SMS using text to speech?

    Instead of dealing with a bunch of different apps I just use iMessage app for SMS and iMessage.

    So what do you use to talk to people who use not-Mac PCs or Android tablets?

    1. Re:SMS to land line by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      Do people who use non-mac PCs and Android tablets not have cell phones too? This line of questioning seems a little extreme. He also said other than calling, so for a land line he would use the universal method of calling. I have comcast for my landline and they'll send the text message to my app if you send me one.

    2. Re:SMS to land line by tepples · · Score: 1

      Do people who use non-mac PCs and Android tablets not have cell phones too?

      Some do. But people who use a land line as a primary phone and a cell phone only for urgent calls (roadside assistance, finding someone in a large mall, letting an apartment dweller know to unlock the door and let him in, etc.) tend to choose a cheap pay-as-you-go plan because it's cheaper than an unlimited plan. Pay-as-you-go subscribers in the United States have to pay for each text message sent or received. And with QWERTY phones becoming hard to find, T9 isn't exactly the most convenient input method for replying to your texts.

    3. Re:SMS to land line by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Ehy don't you read what you quote? He stated clearly: SMS.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:SMS to land line by tepples · · Score: 1

      Then let me spell it out: You can't SMS to a land line telephone. You can't SMS to a PC. You can't SMS to an Android tablet. How do you send a message to someone who doesn't have a cellphone with an unlimited incoming SMS plan and expect your message to get read?

    5. Re:SMS to land line by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      What has this 'I spell it out' to do with the topic?
      And yes you can SMS to a land line phone or to a PC. In what yahoo part of the world do you live that you can't?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    6. Re: SMS to land line by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      I can receive SMSes just fine on a landline in the UK using a standard phone handset. If I want to receive SMSes on a PC, I can setup an ISDN modem to do so too.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    7. Re:SMS to land line by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      Universal among cell phone users that is. How many land line providers render SMS using text to speech?

      So what do you use to talk to people who use not-Mac PCs or Android tablets?

      My Android friends all use their GoogleVoice numbers for everything, so an SMS to a GoogleVoice number pings them everywhere: tablet, smartphone, some on their PC via Voice->Email alerts.

      All my other friends a cellphone on them 24/7. So an SMS reaches them right away. Many of them aren't near PC's that often so the phone is actually the best way to reach them.

      I email some, if the content is heavy enough (pics, long lext, etc.) and isn't time sensitive.

    8. Re: SMS to land line by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      To give our parent a point. Did not think about that before I saw your post. Perhaps SMS to land lines are limited to ISDN, as I have ISDN myself.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  9. Re: Huh by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

    But if you only have wifi or don't have sms for some reason you can still send them. Where I live I have cable internet, but no cell service.

  10. Re: Huh by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

    Not everyone has an "unlimited texts" contract. And when you compare the few dozen bytes required for a simple text message vs your data quota, it might as well be unlimited even with a monthly cap as low as 100MB.

    Also, iMessage also works on devices that are not a phone. This allows you to send a message from a Mac to another person who is on the road with his iPhone. Who the fuck needs SMS in 2014?

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  11. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can also iMessage to different countries and whatnot without extra fees.

  12. Metered text and unmetered data by tepples · · Score: 1

    Texting is unlimited. Data is not.

    Even if this is true of the plan to which you subscribe, it may not be true of plans to which other people subscribe. Consider someone with a PC at home and a $7/mo pay as you go flip phone. In this case, data is unmetered (or damn close to it at 300 GB/mo) and texts are 20 cents each: 10 to send and 10 to receive.

    1. Re:Metered text and unmetered data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That may be true for some people, but what about others. Consider someone who has to survive on less than one US dollar per day. They can't afford any plan or phone!

      (From the silly-what-if-scenarios dept.)

    2. Re:Metered text and unmetered data by tepples · · Score: 1

      Except unlimited data at home, unlimited local and incoming calls at home, and pay per incoming SMS is not just a silly what if scenario. It happens to be the plan to which I subscribe because I don't have a lot of contacts who are as insistent on using SMS as Anonymous Coward #48354057 is.

  13. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of use that don't use Apple stuff.

  14. Re: Huh by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    There's better options than SMS on other devices.

    What we need is for Apple, Google, Microsoft and others to just sit down and agree to a single messaging service. We have a single standard for email, for the Web, for images (JPEG, PNG, GIF), why is messaging still messed-up after all those years?

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  15. Great! Now how about... by OldSport · · Score: 0

    A utility for getting all my photos out of iPhoto, and all my data out of Time Machine?

  16. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've submitted a story about this topic recently but nobody liked it as it seems:

    http://slashdot.org/submission/3968785/eu-telcos-to-juncker-tear-down-that-wall-around-us-tech-companies-gardens

    I still think the title is cool.

  17. Re:Great! Now how about... by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

    Great! Now how about a utility for getting [...] all my data out of Time Machine?

    AFAIK Time Machine uses local storage. Then again I don't use iCloud, so maybe that's an option that I don't know about.

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  18. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IRC, jabber and xabber. Good IM clients with integrated support for a bunch of protocols and servers exist for every device I've ever heard of (with the possible exception of iPhones due to Apple's 'we hate you' policy towards users)

  19. No one seems to see the real privacy issue by davebarbarian24 · · Score: 1

    I was made aware of this by a friend of mine who recently moved, he switched his number, sent some "new number" texts. And replies from his friends were sent to the person who had his new number before him. He's never had an Apple device. Ever, and he was affected by this, in a much worse way than the usual "you don't get your texts" explanation. He was telling people "Hey this is me" those people then think: hey this is Joe, I can be sure it's him because he told me who he is. They then could respond with some personal information, and Apple sends it off to someone else. Luckily this didn't happen as far as I know but it's a scary thought.

    1. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      This was what I was thinking too. Apple doesn't appear to have considered the recycling of phone numbers at all, either when they first did the redirection or when they created the deregistration process. What their system should do is monitor the iPhone and, if it hasn't connected to the network in the last 30 days using the phone number in question, automatically deregister the device from iMessage and revert to vanilla SMS for it. Or they should at least allow controlling this all through the Apple account so the account-holder can deregister numbers when they don't have the device (eg. when it's been lost or stolen).

      Lesson for developers: Getting it right for the normal case is easy. What separates the professionals from the amateurs is how you handle the abnormal cases and the error conditions.

    2. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Recycling a phone number takes quite some time, at least in the United States. Years, not months. Your point still stands though. We should all be assigned a number at birth, have it tattooed somewhere on us and use that as our contact information. We no longer "need" area codes for things like long distance or "local toll". Let's just eliminate this potential privacy issue with recycled phone numbers.

    3. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does do exactly that. The number is deregistered automatically after a period of time (45 days, I think). The problem is that the service has no way of knowing whether the phone is just off or permanently out of use.

      Not all users encounter difficulty when switching. Because of the SMS fallback on delivery of messages, the majority of conversations work as expected. The problem is that the presence sensing on the service isn't perfect, particularly when multiple devices are registered to iMessage. There's no foolproof method of automatically determining whether the device is temporarily or permanently out of use. 45 days is a reasonable timeframe for an automatic deactivation to avoid frustrating people who went on vacation, but it's an eternity if you're actively using another device. There's no great way of balancing this, although the service probably should have an SMS short code to contact to "deactivate" the current number so you can just text from your Android phone to jump start the automatic process, but that would only work for associated phone lines, and the service is more complex than that.

      The issue isn't recycling of numbers or devices, but rather user education about remembering to tell Apple to deactivate the service before moving. It's just like changing your physical address--you have to put a little thought into it ahead of time to make sure it goes smoothly.

    4. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      The issue isn't recycling of numbers or devices, but rather user education about remembering to tell Apple to deactivate the service before moving. It's just like changing your physical address--you have to put a little thought into it ahead of time to make sure it goes smoothly.

      And this is what I meant when I said that dealing with the abnormal cases and error conditions is what separates the professionals from the amateurs. For the change-of-address process, for instance, it's prepared to handle the case where someone doesn't plan ahead. If mail begins piling up with nobody emptying the mailbox, the carrier will collect the mail and leave a note to pick it up at the local post office. If nobody comes to get the mail, it'll be returned to the sender. If someone else has moved in and marks the mail "Not at this address", the post office will return it to the sender and will make a note so any further mail to the same person will mostly get bounced back as well. The system doesn't just assume all is well and that people will always do the right thing, it's prepared to handle cases where somebody forgot to do the right thing or just plain screwed up and did the wrong thing.

      Similarly, iMessage shouldn't have just queued up undeliverable messages indefinitely. At some point the sender should've been informed that their message didn't go through, and delivery should've reverted back to basic SMS to bypass any problems within Apple's system. And 45 days is way too long. If the person's actively using another device that's receiving the same messages, then messages shouldn't be queuing up without being delivered. If the other device isn't receiving the same messages, then it can be ignored and the system should probably be taking action after no more than maybe 2 weeks without being able to deliver any messages to the device. Most people don't just go on vacation and forget to take their phone, so if it's out of touch with iMessage it's likely still reachable by regular SMS. As far as the system being more complex... well, the more complex the system the more numerous and hairier the abnormal/error conditions will be and the more thought needs to go into how to handle them safely and sanely (and management is all too often blithely oblivious to just how complicated the error handling can get).

    5. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by DavidRawling · · Score: 1

      While it's true that it takes months or years for the number to be re-issued, it takes only an hour for it not to be your number any more after you change providers (or, in the US perhaps even area codes?) In Aus we have number portability between the carriers, which is nice when you pay for it - but sometimes you have to change numbers for reasons outside your own control. I trust (from some of the above comments) that this new tool handles what would seem to be a fairly regular occurrence, though the summary suggests otherwise?

    6. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by jbolden · · Score: 1

      That person still had the number registered and likely had a mac.

      So number X is tied to account Y. Account Y can still be delivered via. a mac or iPad or ... So from Apple's perspective everything is good. That person didn't deregister their number with Apple.

    7. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by jbolden · · Score: 1

      First off Apple doesn't deliver via. SMS. The fallover to SMS happens on the phone. If you want your messages you pick them up with your Mac.
      Second, Apple has websites to change settings and tech support for people to call if they screw up. So they do handle the edge cases.

    8. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      No, they don't. For one thing, the problem here is that Apple's system has registered the recipient's phone as handling messages through iMessage rather than SMS, and tells the sender's phone to use iMessage. And then when the recipient's phone isn't able to receive messages via iMessage, Apple's system never tells the sender that the messages can't be delivered so the sender doesn't know to do anything. The recipient can't pick up "their" messages on their Mac because they may not own a Mac, and they no longer own their iPhone. So yes the problem's in Apple's system where it fails to detect and handle the case where text messages can't be delivered via iMessage.

      If Apple were handling the edge cases, this wouldn't've become so severe that they're having to do damage control now.

    9. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by jbolden · · Score: 1

      They aren't doing damage control they are releasing a utility. There hasn't been any damage to Apple. There have been a bunch of Android users screaming about Apple hijacking SMS and not understanding how iMessage works.

      Second, the sender incidentally does know to do something because his messages are going to be marked as queued but not delivered to any device. So the sender will be notified of a delivery failure. They will make their own choice what to do when messages are obviously getting through to Apple but not getting through to the recipient. The have the option to send via. SMS directly when they see this status.

      And finally, the recipient has other ways to rectify the situation. Changing the setting on a phone was one of the ways, the what they were specifically told to do. Screwing that up and not knowing anyone with a Mac to fix it is starting to move from edge case to ridiculous case, a user who is being deliberately obtuse. But they still offered a website for it and while there were a half dozen articles if the user Googled on how to fix the problem some people through the website was obtuse. Of course there was also tech support who could do it. And now to the 1/2 dozen ways to fix the problem they offer some utility. That's all that's happened.

      Users were being obtuse and shooting themselves in the foot. Android fans were lying about the situation. Apple released one more way to handle the problem.

    10. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by davebarbarian24 · · Score: 1

      I know it takes years. What happened here though was someone obviously changed their number, but kept receiving iMessages through that number keeping the number in Apple's database long enough for the number to be put back into the pool and assigned to my friend. The iPhones should be made smart enough to see that the iMessage was sent to a number different than the number assigned to the SIM currently in the phone and prompt them to change there number.

    11. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by davebarbarian24 · · Score: 1

      That's the fundamental flaw in this whole thing. Hopefully the carriers notice this (my friend had to contact his 5 times before they gave him another number for free) and make sure that Apple has been notified to take out the number before the number is put back into the pool. It seems ass backwards to me that the carriers have to do it but Apple sure doesn't seem to care to fix it. It's been a problem for at least 4 years and they're only now starting to address it. The form is nice and all but if it's not automated half the people won't do it.

    12. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by jbolden · · Score: 1

      Well Apple would love it if the carriers would just tell them when a number gets assigned to a new phone. But Apple doesn't know. It isn't that the carriers have to do it, or Apple doesn't care, but that the carriers don't want to incorporate Apple into their workflow.

      In the end it is a computer, garbage-in garbage-out. Someone has to take responsibility to maintain correct account informaiton If users don't care to do it, then obviously they don't care about messages going to the wrong people or not getting delivered.

    13. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by davebarbarian24 · · Score: 1

      You can't say it's the users fault. In my friend's situation the previous owner of the number was the one in control of whether he received his messages, not him. They were receiving all of their messages, plus any of his that were sent from an iPhone. You're living in a fantasy world if you think some random person is going to care about the fact that your messages are going to them.

    14. Re:No one seems to see the real privacy issue by jbolden · · Score: 1

      You can't say it's the users fault. In my friend's situation the previous owner of the number was the one in control of whether he received his messages, not him.

      Well its the other guy's fault for not deregistering his number. In your friend's case he needs to let Apple know. What I'm saying is it isn't Apple's fault they have no way of knowing the change took place.

  20. Re:Great! Now how about... by Imagix · · Score: 2

    For iPhoto: Select all of your photos... choose Export from the File menu. Pick "Original" as the format, pick a directory to dump them all into. Not sure what you mean about "all my data out of Time Machine". Almost like asking "all my data out of my ZFS filesystem" (and I mean _all_, not just the current state. Each and every snapshot I have ever made...).

  21. Maybe Apple should have gotten a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and sent the queued up imessages via SMS then sent a message to the client that sent the imessage that the recipient is now SMS only.

  22. Re: Huh by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Nobody calls iMessage explicitly. Apple users send texts using the regular texting app. It an Apple device is detected at both ends, the app automatically send the text over the Internet using iMessage; if it detects an infidel device at the other end, it falls back to SMS. The sender knows which choice was made by seeing the sent message in a blue or green bubble, respectively. The advantage to the user is that iMessage has no 140-character length limit, included pictures, etc. are faster, and the messages do not count against any SMS plan count limit.

  23. Re: Huh by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

    Texting is unlimited if you have it included in your phone plan. Many providers will otherwise double-dip on each SMS (charge both the sender and receiver)

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  24. Re: Huh by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

    What we need is for Apple, Google, Microsoft and others to just sit down and agree to a single messaging service. We have a single standard for email, for the Web, for images (JPEG, PNG, GIF), why is messaging still messed-up after all those years?

    Well, why was there ICQ, AIM, MSN Messenger, YIM, etc? Why did they all make incompatible messaging protocols?

    Because no one bothered to try to standardize something. Sure someone made XMPP, but damn if Google didn't drop support for it as well and make their own.

  25. Re: Huh by macs4all · · Score: 1

    IRC, jabber and xabber. Good IM clients with integrated support for a bunch of protocols and servers exist for every device I've ever heard of (with the possible exception of iPhones due to Apple's 'we hate you' policy towards users)

    Nice Try, Hater.

    Not only is Cisco Jabber available for iOS, and according to Xabber's Blog, Xabber is currently in development for iOS; but In about 2 seconds of Googling, I found FOUR iOS IRC Clients:

    Palaver

    Colloquy

    LimeChat

    Turbo IRC

    There may (probably are) more; but those are sufficient to put your little rant to rest...

  26. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was because microsoft did the microsoft thing: abuse everyone else's generous offer. Larry page gives a good explanation on this in a video linked by a story
    I've submitted.

  27. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Texting is unlimited.Texting is unlimited."
    Not for everyone, and I'm more than happy to give up unlimited texts for a decent health system.

  28. Re:Great! Now how about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or just open the iPhoto app as a folder, browse into the folders and copy the files out yourself.

  29. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google drops a standard and it's microsoft's fault. Check.

  30. Re: Huh by danbob999 · · Score: 1

    You mean just like email? Wow.

  31. Re:Great! Now how about... by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    A utility for getting all my photos out of iPhoto, and all my data out of Time Machine?

    You mean something that reads the HFS+ filesystem?

    Time Machine backups are copies of your files. If you have software that can read your original files then that very same software can also open the copy of the file that Time Machine made. You do not need Time Machine's interface to read these files.

    If you use Time Machine on a network drive then there's an additional step of mounting the disk image it creates, which is left as an exercise to the reader.

  32. WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's stupid that people need to do this, but they *have* been able to do this for years with just three steps:

    1. In any old web browser go to https://supportprofile.apple.com/MySupportProfile.do and login.
    2. If your iPad/iPod/iPhone isn't already listed in the Products, register it.
    3. Delete your iPad/iPod/iPhone from the Products.

    It's the last step that removes your device's UUID from all Apple service bindings related to your AppleID.

  33. Re: Huh by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

    the issue is that apple has interest in making it encrypted to meet customer expectations. imessages are so encrypted apple can't read them at all in transit. goog would hate this, and needs them to be sent in plaintext so they can advertise against them. this is why there will never be a cross compatible standard.

    next best thing tho. unlike whats app or similar, imessage is optional and transparent to the user. if i send a text to an iphone user, it goes through imessage, and if i send it to a droid person, it goes sms.

  34. Re: Huh by jbolden · · Score: 1

    iMessage integrates with you Mac so you can use it as a computer messaging client that also works well from your phone.

  35. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you even read the story, dumbfuck?

  36. Re: Huh by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    People like me whom have data turned off automatically when the screen is turned off to save battery life. The cost of receiving SMS notifications is at no cost to me (I get plenty of server notifications) and the cost of an SMS plan I can get is nothing to cry about.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  37. Recycled phone numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So dear Apple. What happens when I get a recycled phone-number, and that number previously was owned by a person using iMessage.. Why not auto-unsubscribe numbers/users if they have been inactive for a given time-period of a week or two??

  38. Re: Huh by jbolden · · Score: 1

    Because we have a email standard we still have spam two decades after it started becoming a problem. Thank you I'll take no standard and faster improvement. Email has been a disaster of a model.

    As for the web the proprietary layer is the plugins and how stuff renders on different browsers. And yes that's still broken.

  39. Re: Huh by jbolden · · Score: 1

    If you are going to submit stories you need to get an account. You wrote things like "Larry page", proof read. You also should have used an article with more editorial stance and content. There isn't enough there to get a conversation going.

    So you could have listed the who Vodafone, Telecom Italia, Telefonica, Orange, Telenor and TeliaSonera,Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent and Liberty. I was surprised to see Vodafone, Orange and Alcatel-Lucent on the list. They all have their own closed communications platforms. For Alcatel-Lucent they make a lot of money on licensing fees do they really want to open that? Sounds more like they want competitors regulated if they are signing the list.

    The part about US internet companies earning billions with services that are prohibited under European conventions. What do they want the EU to do about it? The EU has already passed the convention it is now time for the countries to pass the laws.

    "Furthermore, the American giant should contribute to the cost for network expansion in Europe." Why should they do that? I get why they would like to tax companies but heck why not tax Florida Orange juice while you are at it.

  40. Re: Huh by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    Because we have a email standard we still have spam two decades after it started becoming a problem.

    I have been receiving spam on Skype for years and it's not a standard. I don't understand how your argument is meant to prove anything.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  41. Re: Huh by jbolden · · Score: 1

    Well if email had not been a broad standard all sorts of systems could have been put in place to control spam. Skype for example doesn't have a serious spam problem as it is harder to fake accounts and you can refuse messages from anyone who you don't first invite. Something that's not possible with email.

  42. Re: Huh by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    Skype for example doesn't have a serious spam problem

    Speak for yourself. I have a common name 'Ash', and this earns me multiple spam contact requests a day. I have no baysian filtering or auto filters that work on Skype, I do on my e-mail. I consider the spam situation worse on my Skype currently.

    it is harder to fake accounts

    Why do you need to fake accounts on Skype when you can make genuine accounts look like others?

    you can refuse messages from anyone who you don't first invite

    I see the messages in the contact request, despite setting do not allow anyone on my contacts list to contact me.

    Something that's not possible with email.

    I have a whitelist system that works fine if I want to use it, in my e-mail. It's part of Zimbra opensource edition.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  43. Re: Huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for giving me insight on how to make stories get posted. I didn't know people downmod stories only because you sumbit as AC. didn't find a better native english TFA, as its mostly from german news.

  44. It must depend on the country by tepples · · Score: 1

    All my other friends a cellphone on them 24/7. So an SMS reaches them right away.

    Which country? In my country, pay-as-you-go cellular subscribers have to pay to receive each text message, so costing them money by hitting them with 5 texts in a row might not seem so friendly.

    1. Re:It must depend on the country by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      Here in the US, providers are finally relenting and having their subscription plans include unlimited SMS for either free or a small fee.

      All of my friends are on subscription plans with unlimited SMS. So that affects my decision.

      I *used* to have, back in the day, a pay-as-you-go so I wouldn't send SMS a lot to those people. I know how annoying that is.

  45. Just had to do this... by gunner_von_diamond · · Score: 1

    I went back to my old iPhone temporarily, but when I switched back to my android I wasn't getting some people's text messages. Thanks to this post, I know why! Went online to deregister my phone number and problem solved. It is a bummer to think how many text messages are now lost floating in cyber space.

  46. losing messages without an Android switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been "losing" messages since I got a second hand iPad. Some messages show up on the iPad but not my iPhone 4S. Seems the problem exists when two apple devices are available, not necessarily apple/droid.

  47. Well, it's the heretics' fault by yacc143 · · Score: 1

    I mean, getting removed from iMessage is not really something that Apple planned.

    Even if you deregister from iMessage, it might take 45(!!!) days till your phone number gets removed from all databases.

    http://www.businessinsider.com...

  48. Re: Huh by yacc143 · · Score: 1

    Ok, I want to know when person X (any person using a mobile phone) is reachable, so I can voice call him.

    Some fascinating observation, just because you have GSM service, that does not mean you have data service (especially when one is at the edge of network coverage, or e.g. while roaming).

    With SMS, you send a nice message with "delivery report" enabled, and the next time that teenager with behaviour problems is reachable, your phone will notice you via the delivery report. Next step, call said teenager (that sadly happens to be related to this parental unit), and discuss your concerns.

    Basically, SMS is standarized part of the GSM standard for decades now. With rather exact semantics. Apple tried to implement a short circuit this with their own service, and by doing so broke the semantics of this (in some way nowadays very simplistic looking) service.

    So it's absolutely correct that they get sued. The sad reality is that repeated inability to receive and/or send messages can cause significant damage.

    (send: "Hi Boss! My kid is in the hospital, will contact you in a couple of hours" => depending upon the boss you might find yourself out of work if you disappear for a couple of hours, and hospitals tend to have poor reception. Same thing the other way: "Hi John! We do have an issue here with VIP customer, please call me ASAP".)

    I know, that might sound over the top, but I have lost a contract in a similar scenario (you only need to have a team lead with a bad temper, that has a bad day).