Microsoft’s Phone Link app now lets you use iMessage from your PC

[badgolferman]

Microsoft is bringing access to iMessage on Windows through its Phone
Link app. A preview of the updated app will be available for Windows
Insiders today. The Phone Link app allows iPhone users to connect their
devices to a Windows laptop or PC and, with the update, will let iPhone
users send and receive messages via iMessage, make and receive calls,
and see their phone’s notifications inside Windows 11.

Microsoft is using Bluetooth to link Windows devices to iPhones,
passing commands and messages to users’ Messages (iMessage) app. That
means you’ll be able to message contacts that also have iPhones
straight from your PC, but there are some limits. You won’t be able to
send pictures in messages or participate in group messages. As you can
see in the screenshot of the Phone Link app at the top of the story, PC
users will be shown their iMessages conversations in a simplified form.


https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/28/23618224/microsoft-windows-imessage-support-phone-link-ios-iphone

[nospam]

In article <xn0nytlx9...@reader443.eternal-september.org>,

badgolferman <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Microsoft is bringing access to iMessage on Windows through its Phone
> Link app.

but what about those walls people keep saying exist?

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 01.03.23 um 12:51 schrieb nospam:

But the value of this $Microsoft$-app is extremely limited. Almost no
relevant features.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

[nospam]

In article <ttnm0j$1flc7$1...@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.ch>

wrote:

> >> Microsoft is bringing access to iMessage on Windows through its Phone
> >> Link app.
> >
> > but what about those walls people keep saying exist?
>
> But the value of this $Microsoft$-app is extremely limited. Almost no
> relevant features.

imessage on windows is an extremely relevant and very useful. it's
something mac users have had all along and now windows users can
benefit from it too.

[Joerg Lorenz]

Am 01.03.23 um 15:30 schrieb nospam:

No it is not.
No group chats and no pictures?
*Useless*.

[badgolferman]

>Useless.

Makes no sense considering WhatsApp finally allowed their client on
Windows with those functions enabled. I guess Apple doesn't want to
let go of the most important features of Messages lest people deciding
they don't need an iPhone or iPad anymore.

[nospam]

In article <xn0nytu5...@reader443.eternal-september.org>,

badgolferman <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Makes no sense considering WhatsApp finally allowed their client on
> Windows with those functions enabled. I guess Apple doesn't want to
> let go of the most important features of Messages lest people deciding
> they don't need an iPhone or iPad anymore.

a less conspiratorial possibility is that microsoft has chosen to not
implement certain features for version 1.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> Microsoft is bringing access to iMessage on Windows through its Phone
>> Link app.
>
> but what about those walls people keep saying exist?

We tested this app on the Windows newsgroup, nospam, albeit without this
new feature that Steve, I'm sure, will test out thoroughly for us all.
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/-MQM3UwUu-Q/m/VCjoOzNDAwAJ>

The walls then, from Microsoft (and Samsung, it turns out) were rather tall
and wide since the goal is to lock you into their own particular glue trap.

Now there are _two_ sets of corporate rat sticky trap with its walls.
Microsoft + Apple

All for something that nobody wants. :)
--
V chg gung ynfg wbxr gurer gb frr vs gur puvyq-yvxr abfcnz gnxrf gur onvg.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

> imessage on windows is an extremely relevant and very useful. it's
> something mac users have had all along and now windows users can
> benefit from it too.

If you compare the primitive functionality of iMessage, nospam, to the
functionality of a modern messenger, you wouldn't say that so confidently.

As always, without a single fact, you believe everything marketing has fed
you to believe about the Stone-age iMessage, hook... line... and sinker.

Want proof?

Simply compare the primitive iMessage to this modern messenger.
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=xyz.klinker.messenger>

Blurb in the sig.
--
Want an SMS app that is fast, secure, and packed with all the features and
customization you could want? Look no further.

Pulse SMS is a seriously beautiful, next-generation, private text messaging
app.

We care deeply about your experience with the app, and are committed to
creating the best SMS texting app.

To round out its best-in-class phone app, Pulse SMS re-imagines your
communication by giving you the ability to sync your SMS and MMS messages
across all of your devices. Send and receive texts and
pictures¡Xseamlessly¡Xfrom your computer, tablet, car, or any device with an
internet connection.

This is text messaging, done right.

---------

A Taste of the Features
Pulse SMS is jam packed with features. On top of syncing between all of
your devices, here is a small taste of what makes it the ultimate text
messaging experience:
- Unparalleled design and fluid animations
- Endless global and per-conversation customization options
- Suggested Smart Replies within conversations
- Password protected, private text conversations
- Share GIFs with your messages, from Giphy
- Powerful searching through messages and conversations
- Automatic message backup and restore with a Pulse SMS account
- Preview web links
- Blacklist pesky spammers
- Delayed sending to give you time to edit or cancel messages you send
- Automated replies based on contacts, keywords, and driving/vacation modes
- Dual-SIM support

Encryption Protocol
First and foremost, all of your conversations are stored in end-to-end
encryption. You never have to worry about your data leaking out and no one
can see your messages except for you, not even the Pulse SMS Team! With
Pulse SMS, you get privacy and peace of mind, right out of the box.

Privacy Protection Proof
In technical terms, we use PBKDF2 to encrypt your password and use it as a
key to encrypt messages and conversations.

Technical Encryption Overview

1) When an account is created, we generate two salts. One to use with
authentication and one for end-to-end encryption.

2) The one that we use with login is straight-forward and normal. We store
a version of your password, hashed against the first salt, and authenticate
you against this hash.

3) For the encryption, we hash your password against salt #2 and store it
locally on your device (computer/tablet/phone). Having this key is the only
way that you can decrypt messages. Since no one else has the password that
was hashed against the second salt, no one else will be able to decrypt
anything.

We share our privacy protocol publicly so our users have peace of mind
knowing their password is never stored anywhere and without that password,
there is no way to create the secret key used for encrypting and decrypting
the content stored in the backend.

Supported Platforms
Pulse SMS has a web app that you can use. It also has native apps for
tablets, MacOS, Windows, Google Chrome, Firefox, Linux, and even Android
TV. Check out all of our platforms, along with screenshots, here:
https://home.pulsesms.app/overview/

-------

Pulse SMS is the premier web, computer, and private texting application on
Android. Everything is instant, setup is a breeze, and it's design is
unlike anything you have ever seen.

Helpful Links

Website: https://maplemedia.io/
Privacy Policy: https://maplemedia.io/privacy/
Support: con...@maplemedia.io

[Jolly Roger]

What makes you think Apple is to blame rather than Microsoft?

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[badgolferman]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2023-03-01, badgolferman <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 01.03.23 um 15:30 schrieb nospam:
>>>> In article <ttnm0j$1flc7$1...@solani.org>, Joerg Lorenz
>>>> <hugy...@gmx.ch> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Microsoft is bringing access to iMessage on Windows through
>>>>>>> its Phone Link app.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but what about those walls people keep saying exist?
>>>>>
>>>>> But the value of this $Microsoft$-app is extremely limited.
>>>>> Almost no relevant features.
>>>>
>>>> imessage on windows is an extremely relevant and very useful. it's
>>>> something mac users have had all along and now windows users can
>>>> benefit from it too.
>>>
>>> No it is not. No group chats and no pictures? Useless.
>>
>> Makes no sense considering WhatsApp finally allowed their client on
>> Windows with those functions enabled. I guess Apple doesn't want to
>> let go of the most important features of Messages lest people deciding
>> they don't need an iPhone or iPad anymore.
>
> What makes you think Apple is to blame rather than Microsoft?
>

Are you serious?

[Andy Burnelli]

badgolferman wrote:

>>No group chats and no pictures?
>>Useless.
>
> Makes no sense considering WhatsApp finally allowed their client on
> Windows with those functions enabled. I guess Apple doesn't want to
> let go of the most important features of Messages lest people deciding
> they don't need an iPhone or iPad anymore.

Hi badgolferman,

I text from my PC all the time so I am glad you brought up this topic.

I had tested (long ago) the Microsoft phone link (they keep changing its
name just like most big companies do with projects that keep failing but
which MARKETING is desperate to promote as a special sticky glue trap).

At the time I had discounted Microsoft's phonelink as crapware that didn't
do anything we didn't already have _without_ the Microsoft login
requirements and requirements to download onto Windows 10 but requiring a
Microsoft Account in order to obtain it (same with Windows 11, in effect).

It needs to be stated that any messaging app that _requires_ not only one,
but _two_ mothership tracking accounts, is a bad design from the start in
my opinion - but let's look at the technical capabilities that you found.
<https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/28/23618224/microsoft-windows-imessage-support-phone-link-ios-iphone>

Your article was interesting in that it quoted Microsoft as saying "I
think" that's how it works, which doesn't engender confidence in the least.

From my reading of just the one article you kindly referenced,
badgolferman, are these the deviations from the norm as you see them?
a. It requires _two_ mothership tracking accounts
b. It works only over bluetooth (not Wi-Fi or USB for example)
c. It only messages iPhone users (not Android users)
d. No pictures (presumably no media other than text)
e. No group chats
f. Apparently the message is truncated when displayed on the PC
g. Apparently the PC won't see anything that it didn't itself send/receive
h. No blue/green bubbles due to inability to distinguish SMS from iMessage
i. Microsoft said its Android implementation is vastly superior
(which is important because I considered it almost complete trash)

Did you glean any other abnormalities from the norm in that article?
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to better understand this new Microsoft glue trap.

[FromTheRafters]

Andy Burnelli used his or her keyboard to write :

> From my reading of just the one article you kindly referenced,
> badgolferman, are these the deviations from the norm as you see them?
> a. It requires _two_ mothership tracking accounts
> b. It works only over bluetooth (not Wi-Fi or USB for example)
> c. It only messages iPhone users (not Android users)
> d. No pictures (presumably no media other than text)
> e. No group chats
> f. Apparently the message is truncated when displayed on the PC
> g. Apparently the PC won't see anything that it didn't itself send/receive
> h. No blue/green bubbles due to inability to distinguish SMS from iMessage
> i. Microsoft said its Android implementation is vastly superior
> (which is important because I considered it almost complete trash)
>
> Did you glean any other abnormalities from the norm in that article?

Might be more detail in M$'s blog which was published recently.
https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2023/02/28/previewing-phone-link-for-iphone-users-on-windows-11-with-windows-insiders/

M$ says "you'll be asked to grant a set of permissions that allow us to get
all your favorite content sync'd over" so I'd take a look at that.

This says only some people can get past the walled garden though, as you
have to be on the M$ Beta, Dev, or Release Preview versions of Windows 11.
https://www.xda-developers.com/microsoft-beta-testing-iphone-phone-link-windows-11/

That says M$ "is controlling the preview via the cloud" and it adds that PC
users "have full access to your iPhone's phone dialer" and in the same
sentence they talk about something called "Intel Union" but don't explain
what it is, only that it has limitations you wouldn't normally expect.

Googling, maybe they meant the "Intel Unison" app which this article says
is similar to M$'s phonelink app (previously named "Your Phone").
https://www.windowscentral.com/software-apps/intels-unison-app-connects-your-iphone-to-any-windows-11-pc-right-now

The Intel Unison app is here but only for "eligible Evo Windows PC's."
https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/intel%C2%AE-unison%E2%84%A2/9PP9GZM2GN26

[sms]

Nice. I can already do that on Windows, with AirMessage, but it will be
nice to have that capability without having to have a Mac running the
AirMessage server.

[sms]

On 3/1/2023 1:41 PM, badgolferman wrote:
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

<snip>

>> What makes you think Apple is to blame rather than Microsoft?
>>
>
> Are you serious?

LOL, I had to scroll up to see who you were responding to but I was
thinking "it has to be one of our favorite trolls," and I was not
disappointed.

[Jolly Roger]

It's a simple question.

[badgolferman]

Jolly Roger wrote:

>>> What makes you think Apple is to blame rather than Microsoft?
>>
>> Are you serious?
>
>It's a simple question.

Let's imagine how that conversation went...

Microsoft: "We'd like to integrate your iMessages into our Phone Link
app so people who own iPhones and Windows computers will have another
way to communicate with people."

Apple: "We thought you'd never ask! Here, take the whole thing. We
insist!"

Microsoft: "No thanks. We were actually thinking of making it
severely crippled by removing functionality such as group chats, MMS,
etc. You know, we don't really want people to use it. After all, we
want them to start using the Windows Phone again."


If you really think Microsoft wanted a severely crippled Messages
integration then everything Arlen says about you is really true...

[Jolly Roger]

I'll ignore the ad hominem. You claimed Apple is supposedly to blame for
Microsoft's shitty iPhone integration, and I asked what made you think
that. Your answer is pure speculation on your part. Apparently, you have
no idea what Apple's API allows, what choices Microsoft made, or why
they made them. For all we know, it's just as likely that Microsoft
implemented this very basic functionality due to design constraints or
business constraints.

[Andy Burnelli]

badgolferman wrote:

> Let's imagine how that conversation went...

I love that you're thinking the way normal people do, badgolferman.

> Microsoft: "We'd like to integrate your iMessages into our Phone Link
> app so people who own iPhones and Windows computers will have another
> way to communicate with people."
> Apple: "We thought you'd never ask! Here, take the whole thing. We
> insist!"

The iKooks will _never_ (can't ever) understand how Apple works.
You do. They don't. They can't. They won't.

> Microsoft: "No thanks. We were actually thinking of making it
> severely crippled by removing functionality such as group chats, MMS,
> etc. You know, we don't really want people to use it. After all, we
> want them to start using the Windows Phone again."

That was well done. Hilarious. And apropos. To the point exactly.

> If you really think Microsoft wanted a severely crippled Messages
> integration then everything Arlen says about you is really true...

Took you long enough to realize I do own basic adult cognitive skills...

:)

[Hank Rogers]

And shitloads of old books :)

[nospam]

In article <ttr0r5$2244l$1...@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli

<nos...@nospam.net> wrote:

> The iKooks will _never_ (can't ever) understand how Apple works.

massive projection.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> The iKooks will _never_ (can't ever) understand how Apple works.
>
> massive projection.

And yet, every claim I've made for app functionality, I've backed up with
the URL to the actual apps on the App Store, while you never have, nospam.

Never once have you shown any fact by me to be wrong, and yet, almost
everything you've ever claimed about Apple products, nospam, is wrong.

As Chris said to you a few hours ago, it's so hard for you to come up with
the apps that are so easy for you to fabricate existing for iOS, nospam.

[nospam]

In article <ttr75a$22pg8$1...@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli

<nos...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> >> The iKooks will _never_ (can't ever) understand how Apple works.
> >
> > massive projection.
>
> And yet, every claim I've made for app functionality, I've backed up with
> the URL to the actual apps on the App Store, while you never have

not only is that false, but some of the 'app functionality' you claim
doesn't exist doesn't actually need an app because it's *built* *into*
*ios*. needing to install a third party app is actually a *drawback*.

> Never once have you shown any fact by me to be wrong,

many people do that regularly, myself included.

[Andy Burnelli]

nospam wrote:

>> And yet, every claim I've made for app functionality, I've backed up with
>> the URL to the actual apps on the App Store, while you never have
>
> not only is that false, but some of the 'app functionality' you claim
> doesn't exist doesn't actually need an app because it's *built* *into*
> *ios*. needing to install a third party app is actually a *drawback*.

Look nospam, I know you're a liar and that you never back up your claims.
You said the same thing about graphical wi-fi debuggers, nospam.
Remember that?

Do I need to remind you of each and every one of your fabrications?
*It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/PZuec56EWB0>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0>

You're so used to lying about everything, you think by saying it's built
into iOS you can claim _everything_ is built into iOS (like you did with
graphical wi-fi debugging, nospam).

And yet it's not.
You lied.

If it really is built into iOS, you'd be able to show a reference URL about
it, and you can't. Also you'd be able to show the GUI to it. And you can't.

You lied.
You _always_ lie.

It's how I know you would stab your own mother in the back nospam.
It's the kind of despicable person you are.

>> Never once have you shown any fact by me to be wrong,
>
> many people do that regularly, myself included.

And yet you can't point to a single one, nospam.
That's because they don't exist.
You're lying.

It's your nature to lie, nospam.
It's how I know you're a truly despicable person.

That's not even an ad hominem attack.
That's just the truth.

Anyway, I'm different from you in that I'm not only intelligent, but I'm
confident in myself such that if you did find me make a mistake, just point
it out and I'll own up to it. I'm not a small child like you are, nospam.

*Updating the "wrong - by badgolferman" thread from May 29, 2019*
<https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/Pg9fi_sV3CU/>

Point out my mistakes and I'll own up to them because I'm an adult.
*Name Just One*

[badgolferman]

Andy Burnelli <nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> *Updating the "wrong - by badgolferman" thread from May 29, 2019*
> <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/c/Pg9fi_sV3CU/>
>
>

Wow! Has it really been almost four years since that thread? And yet here
we are all this time later and not much has changed…

[Andy Burnelli]

> And yet here we are all this time later and not much has changed...

Hi badgolferman,

Nothing has changed since the first day I went to Michelle's iPad newsgroup
for help and the iKooks sent me on a wild goose chase because nothing they
said worked (and it was before I knew that all they do is fabricate
functionality which they _hate_ the iOS devices just cannot ever do).

I didn't know it then, so I couldn't understand why they would so brazenly
lie about functionality that didn't exist - but I know why they do it now.

Hence it was good you opened the original thread in 2019 because the point
is valid that a confident adult can quite easily admit when they're wrong.

It's the child-like iKooks who can _never_ admit when they are wrong.
Which wouldn't be so bad if these iKooks just didn't lie all the time.

Asking nospam or Jolly Roger or Lewis or Alan Browne et al., to own up to
their own words is like trying to get Putin to tell the truth for once.

The fact the iKooks can't admit they're wrong and that they feel desperate
to lie says a _lot_ about them, badgolferman. It's how I know that...
*They use the Apple product to bolster their ego*

Their whole lives, they've been told they're stupid; but Apple doesn't tell
them that they're stupid. Apple _loves_ them, in fact. Apple adores them.

And... in turn, *they defend Apple to the death*. No matter what.

If Apple products can't do something, they fabricate that it does.
If Apple does something wrong, they say Google or Samsung forced them.

Since they lie all the time, they can't admit that they're wrong.
Because that would bring truth to the lie.

In the adult operating system newsgroups, if someone's wrong, they will
admit it, because their goal is to learn from each other & help each other.

On this newsgroup, the goal from people like nospam is to lie about
everything that Apple can't do or that Apple did so Apple looks good.