[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by freudling 

If by data connection you mean 3G. iMessage does not require a data connection.

More accurately: iMessage does not require a cellular network data connection, you can use any WiFi of your own choosing. There, in principle, you still need to pay the provider, but very often, you're on a flatrate, meaning, so using iMessage doesn't cost you anything extra.

In any case, if you compare the data needed to route iMessage messages, I think it's probably a fraction of that necessary to load a news page with loads of images and flash content. So even if you use 3G, you will pay less.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

If by data connection you mean 3G.

No, by "data connection" I mean "data connection". iMessages still requires a connection to the Internet, does it not?
Sure, wifi is an option, but it's not terribly convenient.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

No, by "data connection" I mean "data connection". iMessages still requires a connection to the Internet, does it not?
Sure, wifi is an option, but it's not terribly convenient.

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here: surely, paying for data volume is cheaper than any of the alternatives, isn't it? It also cannot be worse than Blackberry's service, unless the argument is that you get better contracts with Blackberrys than with iPhones.

As I said, loading the homepage of, say, the New York Times is worth tens if not hundreds of messages.*

* I used WebInspector: opening nytimes.com downloaded 528 kB of data. This excludes ads since I have two adblockers running. If you say it requires 1~2 kB of data to route an iMessage, you can indeed send and receive ~250 iMessage messages instead of opening a webpage once.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

No, by "data connection" I mean "data connection". iMessages still requires a connection to the Internet, does it not?
Sure, wifi is an option, but it's not terribly convenient.

iMessage is the killer App. It's more valuable than BBM because you can use it for free without any cell plan or phone whatever. BBM cannot be used unless you have 2 things: an actual phone and one that is active with a carrier WITH a data plan.  So iMessage does everything that BBM does with the addition of it unshackling users from mobile carriers. All those gazillion million iPod Touch and wifi only iPad users get free texting/MMS to other iOS devices. RIM/carriers restrict users from using BBM unless they have a data plan.

iMessage is thus disruptive. No more 50 cent MMSes to other iOS users. Lots of savings: people can mitigate a lot how much they spend on texting every month with iMessage.

I've essentially thrown out my iPhone and contract. I use an iPod Touch with Skype for voice and SMS/IM. I've now been using more and more... FaceTime and it's better than Skype. With iOS 5 beta I've been testing iMessage and no question I'll be living in there. Ya there're limitations to just using an iPod Touch for telecom but my telecommunications every month is 5 bucks vs. the $200 it was before with my iPhone. Now I'm never worrying about all the extra charges and constraints on a mobile plan.

I know my solution isn't for everyone... I live in an area with free wifi everywhere.

The point is that iMessage is just one more feature that undifferentiates and dilutes RIM's offerings more. One more reason not to go with a BlackBerry. The list of reasons has grown quite large...

[imitchellg5]

Meh. Hardware-specific messaging doesn't seem to exciting to me.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

Meh. Hardware-specific messaging doesn't seem to exciting to me.

Well, that's all BBM is. iMessage, iCloud, strong content, long battery life... on and on... it's the sum total of these things that adds up to the Apple value equation. iMessage makes it just that much more valuable to buy into Apple.

[imitchellg5]

Yeah, I know that's what BBM is, and I know that's what iMessage is. And I'm saying it's not something that would make me rush out and buy an iPhone.

[Phileas]

BBM has been the one single feature that got BB a foothold in the teen and youth market - that and the fact the handsets are cheap.

I would not underestimate the importance of iMessage. It's one of the nails Apple is using to close BB's coffin.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

iMessage is the killer App. It's more valuable than BBM because you can use it for free without any cell plan or phone whatever. BBM cannot be used unless you have 2 things: an actual phone and one that is active with a carrier WITH a data plan.  So iMessage does everything that BBM does with the addition of it unshackling users from mobile carriers. All those gazillion million iPod Touch and wifi only iPad users get free texting/MMS to other iOS devices. RIM/carriers restrict users from using BBM unless they have a data plan.

I'm all for unshackling users from the mobile carriers (though, with iMessage, customers are just swapping the shackles). I'm just not certain I see kids wanting to hunt for wifi hotspots just to see if they have any new messages, or waiting until they find a hotspot before they can send a message.

Originally Posted by freudling 

iMessage is thus disruptive. No more 50 cent MMSes to other iOS users. Lots of savings: people can mitigate a lot how much they spend on texting every month with iMessage.

I guess I just don't get this. There are SO many non-carrier dependent messaging options right now. Even on the BlackBerry platform, people are slowly migrating away from BBM. I don't see how iMessage is anything new.

Originally Posted by freudling 

I've essentially thrown out my iPhone and contract. I use an iPod Touch with Skype for voice and SMS/IM. I've now been using more and more... FaceTime and it's better than Skype. With iOS 5 beta I've been testing iMessage and no question I'll be living in there. Ya there're limitations to just using an iPod Touch for telecom but my telecommunications every month is 5 bucks vs. the $200 it was before with my iPhone. Now I'm never worrying about all the extra charges and constraints on a mobile plan.

I know my solution isn't for everyone... I live in an area with free wifi everywhere.

I've lived that life ... did the same thing up until last last fall. It's not bad, but it does get annoying when you really want a connection but can't find a convenient hotspot. I'm in a middle ground right now: iPhone 4, no contract, running on a pay-as-you-go iPad data plan.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here: surely, paying for data volume is cheaper than any of the alternatives, isn't it? It also cannot be worse than Blackberry's service, unless the argument is that you get better contracts with Blackberrys than with iPhones.

I just looked at the AT&T plans page to try to explain my point further, and now I understand the confusion. Carriers in Canada offer cheap BlackBerry-specific plans, with data as low as 50MB (good enough for messaging, as you point out below)

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

As I said, loading the homepage of, say, the New York Times is worth tens if not hundreds of messages.*

My point is that Berry usage is much different from iPhone usage. Because the mobile web experience in the Berry sucks, most of the usage is limited to messaging. If you're ok with that, and your carriers offer cheap Berry data plans, you might not find iPhone very attractive if it means your minimum monthly bill is going to go up.

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Sure, wifi is an option, but it's not terribly convenient.

There are tens of thousands of college students who would say otherwise. They can easily spend 99% of their time on a campus blanketed with wifi.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

I'm all for unshackling users from the mobile carriers (though, with iMessage, customers are just swapping the shackles). I'm just not certain I see kids wanting to hunt for wifi hotspots just to see if they have any new messages, or waiting until they find a hotspot before they can send a message.

First, to say that wifi is inconvenient is contrary to reality. Wifi has allowed us to access the Web via our laptops without sitting at a desk strapped to an RJ-45 cable. It's incredibly convenient. Wifi has been disruptive to cell phone carriers. Until the iPhone, it wasn't pervasive on smartphones. In fact, carriers stymied it until the iPhone blew the lid off the whole industry.

Anyway, I'll make this really simple: you're crticisizing something that is a value add. Something that gives users choice. And something that people rely on. iMessage is everything BBM is plus the ability to do it all free over wifi.

60 million + iPod Touches sold and over 30 million iPads sold and counting. If you don't think iMessage makes RIM less relevant and Apple more competitive, that's cool. Let's move on.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by SSharon 

There are tens of thousands of college students who would say otherwise. They can easily spend 99% of their time on a campus blanketed with wifi.

In my experience as a college student who travels in between four campuses ATM, college wifi sucks. I can't even get it in some of the buildings, much less between buildings. Plus security is a pain in the butt, as well as firewalls.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

First, to say that wifi is inconvenient is contrary to reality.

When you have wifi access, it's incredibly convenient. Finding wifi access can't be horribly inconvenient.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

When you have wifi access, it's incredibly convenient. Finding wifi access can't be horribly inconvenient.

You know what's inconvenient? Dropping calls on a cell phone. No signal in areas where there should be one...

FYI, I spent the entire day all over downtown Vancouver. Everyone of these messages came over free wifi. From Starbucks, to the library, to the zillion dlinks around the city.

[imitchellg5]

Occasional dropped calls are more inconvenient than having to rely on wifi? Are you seriously making the argument that areas without cell service are more inconvenient than relying on wifi?

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

In my experience as a college student who travels in between four campuses ATM, college wifi sucks. I can't even get it in some of the buildings, much less between buildings. Plus security is a pain in the butt, as well as firewalls.

Over 5 years ago when I was at the university of maryland the class buildings and most of the open areas had wifi. Everyone had them set up in their dorms as well.

Every school is different, but I'm confident that most universities at this point have robust enough wifi to handle imessage.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by SSharon 

Over 5 years ago when I was at the university of maryland the class buildings and most of the open areas had wifi. Everyone had them set up in their dorms as well.

Every school is different, but I'm confident that most universities at this point have robust enough wifi to handle imessage.

"Robust" and "college students spend 99% of their time within wifi" are quite different arguments.

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

"Robust" and "college students spend 99% of their time within wifi" are quite different arguments.

There were thousands of students living on campus without cars on a campus were everyone walked everywhere. There were definitely thousands of students who spent 99% of their time within wifi. In other words, I'm arguing both.

[freudling]

Forget the wifi stuff. It's so pedantic. The point that was made about iMessage was simply that it's more trouble for RIM. That allowing messages over Wifi is an EXTRA value add that users cannot do with BBM. iMessage does everything BBM does, in addition to allowing messages to go over wifi: a phone is not needed to use iMessage. iPod Touches and Wifi iPads work over wifi. No phone number required. That's all.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

... iMessage does everything BBM does, in addition to allowing messages to go over wifi:

in addition to the gazillion other multi-platform messaging services that already exist. iMessage will obviously have an advantage over these due to the Apple brand and distribution of iOS iPhones, but I suspect (hope) multi-platform will likely win out in the end.

[Phileas]

I doubt it. Installing an app and then getting your friends to use it - like whatsapp and others - is a royal pain in the butt. I think that iMessage will likely kill oll of these apps, except for people who really do need cross platform messaging.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

I doubt it. Installing an app and then getting your friends to use it - like whatsapp and others - is a royal pain in the butt.

I agree. The native messaging will always offer a superior experience.

Originally Posted by Phileas 

I think that iMessage will likely kill oll of these apps, except for people who really do need cross platform messaging.

In almost every social circle of people I communicate with, there is at least one or two Android users ... and these are designers, where Apple typically reigns. I suspect it's very common to participate in social circles where a multi-platform solution would be preferable to a closed solution.

Honestly, I see email winning in the end. What does iMessage do that email doesn't?

[Phileas]

Email has been declining for years, especially for under 30's. I haven't seen any indications of that trend reversing.

Email is still king for business communications, for sure, but even there it's under threat. We use Skype - chat - to communicate, where in the past email would have been sent. Skype, to your point, was our choice because it is cross platform. However, 90% of my friends use iOS on their phones, so there I can see iMessage replacing other apps.

[Waragainstsleep]

Android will likely end up with some app that will talk to iMessage to some extent. It will be buggy and a bit flaky but it will also talk to skype, AIM, MSN, Google, Yahoo etc etc so users will harp on about how much better it is due to its openness.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

However, 90% of my friends use iOS on their phones, so there I can see iMessage replacing other apps.

What will happen to that disconnected 10%? Peer-pressured to iOS?

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

Email has been declining for years, especially for under 30's. I haven't seen any indications of that trend reversing.

Email is still king for business communications, for sure, but even there it's under threat. We use Skype - chat - to communicate, where in the past email would have been sent. Skype, to your point, was our choice because it is cross platform. However, 90% of my friends use iOS on their phones, so there I can see iMessage replacing other apps.

I've found myself using Skype in the workplace and then regretting it. It is much easier for me to search Mail.app then to try and remember if the conversation I'm thinking about took place over Skype. In some cases I've actually ended Skype conversations with coworkers telling them I'm going to email them a short version of whatever I asked them to do.

As for personal communications, I haven't used adium or ichat in months. I sometimes try to video chat with my parents on ichat only to have a connection error and it not work. In those cases I use skype, but then I sign out. I also don't use gchat or facebook chat ever.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

What will happen to that disconnected 10%? Peer-pressured to iOS?

You should go look at the data my friend.

Younger people are using social media and SMS/MMS most of the time. It's exploded with them. The average number of text messages a teenager sends in the US per month is on the order of 3000. Over 30 it starts to get much less. The time these younger people spend on social media sites like FaceBook is high. High to the point where they're always on it. Always checking in. On some studies, schools have been viewing it as pathological behaviour. Students can't stop checking in to see what's going on with other people.

They've been trained, by themselves, to post these short messages and pics up on FaceBook Walls... SMS/MMS is complementary. And in reality, they use the latter, just like social media, all the time.

[Phileas]

I think people use email and chat for different purposes. Stuff that's important, involved and/or needs to be documented, email can't be beat. But for short messages, which form the majority of our daily communications, it's too involved.

I am just back from a client meeting, where the head of IT is trialling Yammer. They've got a staff of 250, of which about 50 have taken to Yammer. Email use by that particular staff group has dropped by about 35%.

[Big Mac]

RIM's descent is a great case study on solid shorting opportunities. A company that gains a huge share, feels itself to be invincible, stops creating good new products and starts hoping sales will rebound. This was a screaming easy short.

[ryaxnb]

Originally Posted by Eug 

So a keyboard and an iPad. And a phone too?

For me, I take my iPhone, plus an 11.6" laptop. I leave the iPad at home. I have noticed my colleagues do the same. Well, some take the iPhone plus MacBook. Others take the iPhone plus MacBook AND iPad. I don't know anyone who takes just the iPhone and iPad, because it's hard to do real work on the iPad, but then again, in Hawaii that's probably a good thing.


I tried surfing on my iPhone 4 in Prince Edward County and it was a problem. A lot of sites just didn't work properly on iOS Safari, and some sites still used flash. However, that was a while ago. Perhaps they've changed their sites now.

I take everything whenever i go anywhere. Two gaming handhelds, a phone, a iPad, and my netbook & external HDD & DVD+RW. Usually dvd reader too. I like choice.

I'm pretty happy with my go-places setup, but i sometimes wish I could just carry my phone & Gp2X Wiz gaming device. That would probably never make me happy though.
I'm back, btw after a several year absence. Greetings!

[ryaxnb]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

I doubt it. Installing an app and then getting your friends to use it - like whatsapp and others - is a royal pain in the butt. I think that iMessage will likely kill oll of these apps, except for people who really do need cross platform messaging.

I think there are two major possibilities. One, Google Talk becomes dominant due to cross-platform nature of the service and being included by default with all android phones, and of course available for iphone an also for html5 an including html5 and flash video chat as well a integration with gmail and compatibility with pcs. The other possibility is that sms price goes down due to antitrust and other reasons (competition, eu regulations and fcc regulations.) then, sms becomes and remains dominant service possibly with Google voice like applications to make it easier and cheaper to use with smartphones and pcs.
I don't think iMessage can ever take off because of android not supporting it, whereas Google Talk is bundled with the leading android platform and supports others as well.

[imitchellg5]

Google Talk and Google Voice integration is very tight on pretty much every platform besides BlackBerry.

[ryaxnb]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

I agree. The native messaging will always offer a superior experience.

the problem with this assumption is that although fairly true, android's native system is in fact Google Talk which also is crossplatform. This, considering android's popularity I would say it is the most likely successor to sms if there ever is one.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

Google Talk and Google Voice integration is very tight on pretty much every platform besides BlackBerry.

And iPhone, which is about equivalent with BlackBerry in terms of Google Voice support.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

You should go look at the data my friend....

Huh? What does that have to do with my response to Phileas' comment about 90% of his friends being on iOS and therefore likely ending up as iMessage users (and, 10% of his friends ending up disconnected from the rest)

Yes, I get that many youth are SMS/MMS conditioned. However, I fail to see why you're telling me this?

I'm certain that iMessage will see a lot of use: it's got an Apple logo and it's free ... why wouldn't it be heavily used? However, I'm not certain it'll be the dominant messaging system for people with friends on multiple platforms. I also don't see it being something that attracts BlackBerry over to iOS. On the flip side, BlackBerry porting BBM over to Android might actually attract Berry users over to the Android platform instead, since they'll be able to maintain their existing connections (also, the interaction similarities between BlackBerry and Android will help as well).

[freudling]

Originally Posted by ryaxnb 

the problem with this assumption is that although fairly true, android's native system is in fact Google Talk which also is crossplatform. This, considering android's popularity I would say it is the most likely successor to sms if there ever is one.

Google Talk and voice has been around for quite some time. Hasn't taken the world by storm. Google Voice seems forever stuck in the US.

[Phileas]

Thing is, nobody cares about google talk, especially not the younger generation, where growth is coming from. Not only do they not care about google talk, they don't care about talk at all, any talk. They communicate by short message via SMS, BBM or the app of their choice.

BBM is the sole reason BB has a foothold in the teen market, for many teens that's the sole reason they choose a BB over an iPhone. iMessage makes that issue go away.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

BBM is the sole reason BB has a foothold in the teen market, for many teens that's the sole reason they choose a BB over an iPhone. iMessage makes that issue go away.

Why do you think BBM was such a deciding factor for teens in choosing BlackBerry

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Why do you think BBM was such a deciding factor for teens in choosing BlackBerry

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by freudling 

You don't know?

[Phileas]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Why do you think BBM was such a deciding factor for teens in choosing BlackBerry

Not what I think, there's solid research available on the reasons. BBM is chat on steroids, it allows teens to live a hive-life by keeping them in constant contact with their friends. The killer features are Group Chat and the receipt confirmation, i.e. they KNOW if their BFF has read their message.

Add to this cheap, or free, handsets and ultra cheap BB only data plans and you've got a winning combination. Many own the BB as a messaging device, the iPod Touch as their iOS device to listen to music and take advantage of apps. Cheaper entry-level iphones and iMessages for all iOS devices will kill that advantage.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

Not what I think, there's solid research available on the reasons. BBM is chat on steroids, it allows teens to live a hive-life by keeping them in constant contact with their friends. The killer features are Group Chat and the receipt confirmation, i.e. they KNOW if their BFF has read their message.

Add to this cheap, or free, handsets and ultra cheap BB only data plans and you've got a winning combination. Many own the BB as a messaging device, the iPod Touch as their iOS device to listen to music and take advantage of apps. Cheaper entry-level iphones and iMessages for all iOS devices will kill that advantage.

Can you show me this research? I'd love to read through it.

I agree with all that you've said; features they like, cheap/free handsets and ultra-cheap BB only data plan. iOS can cover the first two, but unless there are ultra-cheap iMessage-only plans, I don't think we'll be seeing an over-night migration of BB kids to iOS just for iMessages. (yes, yes ... iPod Touches on WiFi. Don't see it happening for the majority of teens)

[Spheric Harlot]

Cheap data plans and no SMS included already exist. We have several here in Germany for €10, with any minute of voice or any SMS costing 9¢.

iMessages eat almost no bandwidth, so that's almost perfect.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Can you show me this research? I'd love to read through it.

I agree with all that you've said; features they like, cheap/free handsets and ultra-cheap BB only data plan. iOS can cover the first two, but unless there are ultra-cheap iMessage-only plans, I don't think we'll be seeing an over-night migration of BB kids to iOS just for iMessages. (yes, yes ... iPod Touches on WiFi. Don't see it happening for the majority of teens)

iMessage uses data. So yes, you'd need data for it to work over the mobile network. Otherwise, messages will be sent over Wifi. If these latter 2 are not available, then messages will be sent as SMS/MMS on an iPhone. Unlike BBM, iMessage is not regulated by mobile carriers. As long as you have a wifi connection or data connection, it'll work.

Just like Blackberries, you can get cheap iPhones with data plans and unlimited SMS. With the iPhone some plans come with unlimited carrier wifi hotspot connections.

Again, iMessage does everything BBM does plus allows the user to send over wifi and to iOS devices that are not iPhones. In addition, it is not controlled by carriers.

[Phileas]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Can you show me this research? I'd love to read through it.

No. Sorry to be blunt about this, but research is expensive and I can't share data that we have paid for.

However, there is plenty of information available via google, also slideshare has some good insight.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Phileas 

No. Sorry to be blunt about this, but research is expensive and I can't share data that we have paid for.

Well, then don't reference it in ways that suggest you can't believe people don't know it. Also, if you can't truly reference it, then you probably shouldn't even bring it up, since it conflicts directly with my purchased research that I also can't share that claims the exact opposite of yours.

What you're claiming makes sense, but it's useless to make your point if you can't actually share the source material. If it's a Forrester or Gartner (or other) research paper, just point us to the title of the doc. Many of us also have access to those resources.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Well, then don't reference it in ways that suggest you can't believe people don't know it. Also, if you can't truly reference it, then you probably shouldn't even bring it up, since it conflicts directly with my purchased research that I also can't share that claims the exact opposite of yours.

What you're claiming makes sense, but it's useless to make your point if you can't actually share the source material. If it's a Forrester or Gartner (or other) research paper, just point us to the title of the doc. Many of us also have access to those resources.

If you head on over to Google, you needn't worry about purchasing research so much, or bugging Phileas. Supporting information on Phileas's posts is all over the Web.

RIM’s secret weapon :-) - Technology - Macleans.ca

Teenagers prefer blackberry because of BBM - BlackBerry Forums at CrackBerry.com

Telus caters to teen market with Blackberry social plans:

BlackBerry® Social Plans |  Plans |  TELUS Mobility

[Salty]

Just because Telus, Rogers, Bell and the smaller carriers all have cheaper blackberry plans that aren't as much as a real smartphone plan, doesn't mean that RIM is doing well, all that means is that they're doing a half decent job of capturing the very bottom of the barrel. Speaking as a sales rep, those are the LAST people you want as your customers. They do little more than complain and drag down your product's image. The longer you spend in these people's hands, the less likely anyone willing to spend real money on a phone is going to bother with your product.

I realized just how badly RIM had fallen a few years ago when I saw a girl holding a curve on the bus sit down revealing like five inches of butt crack.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Salty 

Just because Telus, Rogers, Bell and the smaller carriers all have cheaper blackberry plans that aren't as much as a real smartphone plan, doesn't mean that RIM is doing well ...

Nobody is arguing that. RIM is cratering. I've just been saying that I don't think iMessage is going to be a RIM killer. RIM will kill RIM before iMessage does (IMO)