How is iMessage better than GTalk on Android (except for the end to end encryption)? GTalk BTW. is a slighlty modified XMPP. It is not even incompatible with regular XMPP clients. It seems to have some additional features to save power by not sending presence updates when its not necessary.

AFAICT Apple did not revolutionize Instant Messaging with iMessage.

It's a seamless experience. Apple doesn't typically innovate on the actual technical software implementation. iMessage at a basic level is very simple. It's the integration in the platform. It's the fact that I do not need to know someone's email address to talk to them on gtalk. Also, what if you don't have a gmail address? Many people do not.

I type a phone number in, begin sending a message, and that seamless/transparent handshake occurs in the background where the device I am about to message tells me it's an iOS device supporting iMessage. I don't need to change the way I use my device.

You don't need to use Google Talk or have a gmail address to use XMPP. It's just another implementation of an existing standard.

I don't think that I need handholding from a protocol to the extent that it saves me from putting their chat address in my address book. If I don't know it, I can text them and ask:)

I don't ask their home number to automatically give me their work number.

It seems all that iMessage really does is enable users to discover connectivity through an alternative means and enable communication through that means. There's no reason you couldn't use the same mechanism to discover a JID/XMPP ID.

Well said. Just like facetime vs video chatting apps. Facetime is a natural extension to the phone functionality, something everybody is familiar with and using on a daily basis already.

thats only because its the default app that apple uses third party developers test to see if users are interested, the creates their own version and makes it the default on their phones.

I am not super familiar with this, but I don't think you can use GTalk to send SMS to a regular phone number can you? With iMessage it's the same app as regular SMS on the iPhone, and it uses iMessage instead of SMS if both sides have it, otherwise it falls back to regular SMS, it's a seamless integration that many people aren't even aware of.

with google voice you can push it to sms, email or gvoice service accessible from phone or browser, and also falls back to sms if not using gvoice. With that being said I hope Google does unify gtalk and gvoice for a better experience between chat/sms/email

Your argument that Apple revolutionized text messaging is kind of flawed. Even if you ignore IM/XMPP clients (they're not the same), fact is, RIM did it first with BlackBerry Messenger (BBM).

With BBM, you get end-to-end messaging between BlackBerry phones, with no limitations on the lengths of messages. You get a typing notice, delivery notice, as well as a read notice. You can transfer files, pictures, and video between devices.

BBM is also very tightly integrated into the OS, more so than any other platform. It requires no set up on the part of the user, all they need to do is exchange PIN numbers with their friends. No signup, nothing, it just works. Moreover, it allows developers to incorporate into their own apps, so they can provide in-app chat capability, as well as app-to-app communication ability (e.g. a multiplayer game initiated with you and a BBM friend). What's even better is that if that friend doesn't have the particular app/game installed, you can invite them to download it. When you go to invite a friend to use the app with you, it will only show you BBM contacts with that app installed (i.e. BBM knows what apps your contacts have). It's a pretty powerful setup, especially when combined with push notifications. It is leagues ahead of what XMPP can provide. Just ask WhatsApp or Kik.

RIM misstep (amongst MANY) is that they didn't translate this to other devices. They have delayed BBM on the PlayBook while they updated their infrastructure to allow 1 user to use BBM on multiple devices with multiple PINs. They're fixed this a while ago, and will release it for BlackBerry 10. They also don't have a desktop client available for public use.

So while iMessage is definitely an improvement over SMS (pretty much anything is), it still has a lot of catching up to do to BBM. Old school BlackBerry OS is a pretty shitty system, but they did get BBM right. Apparently, it's going to be very improved for BlackBerry 10. Here's hoping it is.

Edit: Reading some other comments here, I realize that iMessage's "innovation" is that when you send a text message to a phone number, it checks to see if they use iMessage too, and sends it that way instead. While that's cool, it's by no means revolutionary. Furthermore, you're still shackled by the limitations of SMS messages. That can be good, can be bad. Finally, I'm unclear of what happens when you're on your Mac or iPad: do you iMessage someone using their phone number still? Is that the unique ID?

The main UUID for an iMessage account is your Apple ID email address, but each account on iMessage can be hooked up to multiple email addresses also. For example if your contact for someone has a phone number and email addresses it will check for the phone number, then check for the associated email addresses. On my mac I receive all my iMessages because I set my reply to address to be one of those email addresses on the phone/pad. And yes, you can iMessage someone to their phone number form your computer / iPad.

iMessage supports all of the end-to-end messaging features above, but doesn't support letting devs use the messaging function other than being able to send one-off messages with attached photos / movies in iOS. Apple has something more like Xbox Live for doing in-app voice chat / messages (GameKit).

Reply to your Edit: You can have a phone number and multiple email addresses associated with your iMessage account. It really is quite a great thing at scale that would be almost pointless as a startup.

for people that are pro apple - apple didn't revolutionize anything, there were plenty of third party apps and companies prior to imessage that were providing the same service along with being cross platform. Apple is actually cannibalizing those services that were providing a valuable service to their customers and now are cutting them out. This is nothing more than further attempt to lock in users into their ecosystem.

This is completely false. When i'm out at a bar and I meet a cool girl, she gives me her number. I type it into my phone and begin sending her a text. Instantly my [Send] button shifts from green to blue to indicate that she is an iMessage user. It's seamless. It falls back on SMS automatically if iMessage fails. Otherwise, it just works.

Having multiple platforms for messaging is silly. Absolutely silly. If I have an iPhone and so does my sister/mom/random-stranger what am I guaranteed that we both have in common? One single messaging app. I don't want to ask a random stranger if they've used X Y Z free messaging app, that doesn't fly.

The only difference, aside from having one app do sms and internet text messaging, is that if I don't have iMessage I have to buy an entire phone or computer to get it, while if you don't have gtalk or similar all you need to do is install one app and register an account should you not already have one.

With iMessage, I can talk to maybe one or two people that I know. With gTalk, I can and talk to them all, even those on iPhones.

iMessage is not revolutionary. If anything, it's a step backwards. We've had BBM as a vendor locked message system for many years already.

I can't see it as a step backwards when it provides great functionality to hundreds of millions of people. I doubt iMessage would be anyone's sole IM platform, and in fact the OSX client supports AIM XMPP as well, so it's really more of an enhancement (where available) for iOS users. Apple isn't really trying to solve problems for people who don't buy their products. At some point in the future I could see AIM and XMPP being added to the iOS client to be used as a fall-back in the same way SMS is used now. So eventually there may be one client that is basically a proxy to various other services and just sort of figures it all out for you.

>Having multiple platforms for messaging is silly.

so what if shes on windows or android or blackberry or not using a smartphone. It works seamlessly as well if you both are using the same app to text. Theres nothing revolutionary about it.

I think that is the original argument behind this post. Let's make it open.

and that was the point of my reply to you , its just an attempt to lock users in to their ecosystem

> so what if shes on windows or android or blackberry or not using a smartphone.

Then she, transparently, gets an SMS instead, and I don't have to give a shit whether or not she has whateverthefuck app

They could have simply chosen XMPP with OTR.