this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
72 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37602 readers
338 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't know anything about Compaq. Was their business built on reverse engineering IBMs system and impersonating IBM hardware to gain unauthorized access to their servers and services?
They changed it in <3 days.
iMessage is a giant cash cow for them. They've stated as much. They will dedicate a massive amount of resources to ensure that is not lost.
Beeper users will eventually become tired after the 3rd or 4th time they can't send/receive messages to Apple users at all anymore because they can't deregister their phone number from iMessage and Beeper Mini is broken.
It was actually even more hardcore than that. They reverse engineered IBM's BIOS to create the first fully compatible non-IBM PC that could run MS-DOS and all IBM PC software natively. Then they won in court after proving they didn't copy any of IBM's source code and that the people who programmed the compatible BIOS had never even seen the original documentation for the IBM code, let alone the code itself.
I'm not even going to argue with you because all of that is way over my head.
Basically the answer to your question is "yes, and it was way more lucrative than Beeper Mini is"
This doesn't sound like anything that's dependent on IBM servers or services. It also doesn't sound like something that IBM could realistically fix easily and retroactively, which is the case here with Apple.