[clay_the_ripper]

My take on this whole thing is that this is basically an elaborate plan to eventually use this in court against Apple to prove its anti-competitive practices.

If not for court, then at the least this is a press strategy orchestrated by someone with an interest in opening up the iMessage monopoly.

I’m sure the founder realized early on that the prospects of this becoming a valuable company on its own merits were slim - the vulnerability to Apple shutting them down was obvious. Which leads me to conclude he saw value to be created in just basically messing with Apple and forcing them to ban him.

[ccamrobertson]

> I’m sure the founder realized early on that the prospects of this becoming a valuable company on its own merits were slim

If you actually knew Eric and the history of Beeper you would understand how hilariously false, absurd and revisionist such a statement is. Eric only started Beeper after validating massive interest from Hacker News for a paid app that would unify disparate communication channels.

[jnovek]

On Hacker News and Reddit especially I am always flabbergasted by the tendency to ascribe some sort of wisdom and intent to the actions of early-stage founders.

If my experiences as an early-stage founder have taught me anything I can assure you that we don’t know our asses from a hole in the ground. Founding a company is a game where you throw shit at the wall as quickly as you possibly can until something sticks and then you desperately try to figure out why it stuck. If you can figure that out, you might just have product-market fit.

This is especially true for a first time founder. You learn as you go.

[clay_the_ripper]

True that you learn as you go. Also true that motives change - the world in 2024 looks very different to the world in 2020. Founders adapt, bring on new investors, find new ways to create value.

In regards to intent, I am not suggesting that he founded the company to do this. I am suggesting that the motives for their recent actions are driven by something other than finding product market fit.

[gnicholas]

> Eric only started Beeper after validating massive interest from Hacker News for a paid app that would unify disparate communication channels.

This may be true with regard to the general concept, but how does it relate to the decision to try to skirt the iMessage rules? Validating that people want a feature is different from (and somewhat orthogonal to) ensuring you can actually deliver it.

[jauntywundrkind]

People had found all sorts of paths that semi work, & Beeper tried to use this well known path. It was working. It still is working. But only to a point.

It seems silly to me to condemn Beeper, when Apple doesn't have any published followed enforced rules. It has a term of service, and it has behaviors others get away with, but it's unclear and undefined from Apple what actually will cause a problem & get your registration data cancelled.

There s almost no part of me that considers such a small narrow stance where it's on Beeper to be 100% exactly how the future is going to go before they make any moves.

[clay_the_ripper]

I have no personal information on this matter, this is pure speculation.

I agree that the original intent was to do as you say. But the recent actions suggest that new motives may be in play.

Clearly Eric is a very intelligent person. I find it hard to believe that he believed that reverse engineering such an elaborate workaround would work after Apple had already proven that they were willing to shut him down.

If Eric is as smart as you say, then obviously he did not expect this latest iteration to work. Which leads me to conclude there is value (for him, for his investors) in taking these actions to force Apple’s hand.

Then again, maybe he just wants to prove a point and use the exposure to promote their next app. Whether the app will succeed is unknown but the PR strategy so far is crushing it.

[jnovek]

Early stage is sort of a long string of Hail Marys. Critical problems that create new critical problems not far down the road.

I’m guessing that Eric knew that he had days before Apple patched whatever exploit he found. I’m guessing he was hoping to find another move he could make before that happened.

Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn’t. Big risk for big reward — imagine what a big deal it would’ve been if Beeper Mini actually found a sustainable way to make iMessage work outside of Apple?

[voakbasda]

I would not be surprised if it comes out that he has some backing from other companies that want to disrupt Apples monopoly on their service endpoints.

Collectively, there are many businesses that just need some precedent to give them ammunition to open up the App Store, iCloud, and more. It would not cost them much to back this kind of effort.

[pjerem]

Since Beeper main product is a multi protocol messaging app and iMessage is the only protocol that resists them, yes, it’s probably both.

I know it’s marketing but at the end of the day, they are fighting for a cause that matters to me and their bridges are open source so I wish them good luck.

[paulmd]

> Since Beeper main product is a multi protocol messaging app and iMessage is the only protocol that resists them,

That’s absolutely not true though. Discord is incredibly hostile to third-party clients today for example.

https://twitter.com/discord/status/1229357198918197248?lang=...

Can’t log into Xbox live or PS5 messaging with a third party client either I’d expect. It’s not an unusual ask for a “secure” system - even if they provide a web interface they certainly don’t let you pretend to be a fake Xbox and create an account and then connect some third-party crap that continues to pretend to be an Xbox.

Hell didn’t Microsoft just crack down on third party headsets of all things? You really, really think they’re ok with you spoofing a whole Xbox on their network?

https://www.engadget.com/microsoft-bans-unauthorized-third-p...

Hell even AIM and MSN would try to break Gaim and ban users who used it back in the day - they just weren’t starting from a good enough place to be very successful at it.

https://m.slashdot.org/story/13509

That’s the overall problem is the world doesn’t quite work the way people remembered it. AOL was never happy about Gaim, Xbox and Sony and discord carry on this legacy today. If you simplify the issue even further: Google isn’t going to leave an open smtp relay if you find a way to spoof it, they certainly aren’t going to let you run a commercial service reselling it.

The whole “but nobody EVER fought against adversarial interop or banned users for using it!” before schtick is objectively not how the world worked or works and I think most of the people saying it understand that perfectly well, it’s just an angle for them to press the attack.

[pxeboot]

I agree. There have always been highly skilled programmers capable of reverse engineering imessage, but everybody knew it would immediately get shutdown and not be worth the effort.

[realusername]

That's definitely possible, the beeper mini case will be used in courts against Apple, that's for sure.

[nixonaddiction]

i really doubt it was an elaborate plan. more, people were annoyed by apple's monopoly, engineered a solution, and apple proceeded to shoot themself in the foot by trying to hold on to the said monopoly. beeper mini is probably leaning into provoking apple after witnessing the reaction, which makes sense. it gives them press. we'll see how this plays out. i know the justice department is building a case, and they're probably salivating at this evidence, but the 2024 election could result in less antitrust friendly actors working against the case. possibly. i need to research the justice department more.

[rchaud]

An elaborate plan by who? If Apple opens up iMessage to RCS as promised to EU markets, Beeper Mini becomes obsolete overnight.

[cqqxo4zV46cp]

I’m genuinely surprised that this theory isn’t more pervasive.

I seldom buy into conspiracy theories but in this case I’d go a step further and suggest that Beeper Mini was secretly enabled in some way by other commercial entities incentivised to dismantle Apple’s walled garden. Maybe not from the start, but much more likely when the public game of cat and mouse kicked off.