Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 16:39:01 GMT :

> You're both wrong. There is no "conversion", and MMS messages aren't
> sent through the iMessage service. It's amazing this has to be explained
> like you're a five year old, but so be it: The iPhone is a cellular device as
> well as an internet device. As such, it has the capability to check with
> Apple's iMessage service to see if a recipient is a user that is logged
> into the iMessage service. If so, the message is sent through iMessage.
> If not, the message is sent through the cellular service as an SMS/MMS.
> Cellular providers require MMS messages to be reduced in quality as a
> way to reduce cellular data use, which is why videos are degraded when
> sent over the cellular service. That's it - no "conversion" takes place,
> and the iMessage service is not involved in cellular messaging.

Thanks for that detailed explanation, which outlines some (but not all) of
the ten or so discrete steps in the process of an iPhone sending a short
video to both iOS and Android users (all using the default messaging app).

There is a downsampling so that's the conversion we are speaking of.
That downsampling is happening somewhere - where you don't say where.
Where is the downsampling occurring?

The process, based on what you said, appears to be this, is that correct?

1. iPhone sender is logged into the iMessaging Apple mainframe servers
iPhone recipient is also logged into the iMessaging Apple mainframes
Android recipient is not logged into Apple or Google mainframes
All have an active data connection to carrier towers & servers
Apparently on the Apple messaging mainframe server is kept a detailed
tracking of iOS-owners' AppleID associated with their phone number.
2. iPhone sender tries to send a short video to iPhone & Android recipients
3. That attempt to send apparently goes over the Internet first to Apple
mainframe servers which send back the decision of which of the
recipients AppleID's are logged into Apple messaging servers
(and which are not).

(I don't yet know what happens if there is no Internet connection
established by the sender's iPhone to Apple messaging servers though.)

4. Apple messaging servers accept only the videos whose AppleID's match
Apple's determination of who is logged into their messaging servers.
For those AppleIDs, Apple send the video over the Internet to the
recipients who are logged into the Apple messaging mainframe servers.'

(I'm not sure what happens if the recipient is on an iPhone and yet
they don't have cellular data Internet or Wi-Fi Internet at the moment.
What if the iPhone recipient only has a carrier non-data connection?

How is it sent when the message could be sent either way, right?
How is that message sent to iPhone owners?
a. Cellular-data Internet connection?
b. Wi-Fi Internet connection?
c. (It's probably not sent over the carrier's non-data connection.)

5. Apparently Apple messaging servers do not accept for transit on
their messaging mainframe servers any messages from the sender's
iPhone intended for people not recognized by the Apple messaging
mainframe server. Those are rejected apparently.

6. For any message rejected by the Apple mainframe messaging servers,
the senders iPhone is informed, again over the Internet of that fact.

7. Only at this point, apparently, does the sending iPhone resort to
sending the messages to the carrier (although this brings up the
question of whether only cellular data will work or if a local
Wi-Fi connection to the Internet to the carrier will also work).

8. Now is the problem of which machine does the downsizing of the
video, turning it into crap. Presumably the carrier does that.
Is that correct?

9. Once the carrier (presumably) downsizes the video, then it's sent
over the carrier's celltowers, one of which communicates with
the Android recipient's phone over the phone number identification.

Thank you for helping to hone how the process works.
I'm sure I got some things wrong above, and even if I got them right, there
are still questions in the analysis above, so where do we need corrections?

Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 18:16:16 GMT :

>> The two questions which need to be known to begin to understand the process
>> well enough to solve it are those which trace the path of the video clip.
>
> You can't "solve" it, without the *sender* using a *different* method
> to get the video to you, i.e. as has been mentioned, using some 'cloud'
> or other file transfer service.

I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
decent video from them.

Luckily, I have a bunch of unused iOS devices I might be able to re-purpose
as video recipients only. <https://i.postimg.cc/Xq5SpS4D/tmopromo02.jpg>

I'm working on a potential workaround as we speak, although it's using an
iPhone that was in my drawer of phones, and which is shown below after it
asked me to update it to the latest iOS release as of today of iOS 12.5.7
<https://i.postimg.cc/mD5SmkXP/iphone20240517update.jpg>

What I may try is insert my SIM card into that old iPhone and see if that
makes any difference - but the problem is the AppleID is registered to
someone else (I have the login/password but need to pull data off it
first).

In addition, I have plenty of iPads (where I only use one for Google Voice
which works better on an iPad than it does on Android for privacy reasons).
<https://i.postimg.cc/jdtzyBhV/ipadiphone.jpg>

As you're well aware, I don't log into any Apple or Google servers unless
I absolutely need to, where I might set up the iPad or iPhone for messages.

In addition, while I use PulseSMS without an account, I could also "maybe"
set up an account on PulseSMS to see if it can handle iPhone videos.
<https://home.pulsesms.app/overview/>

Lastly, when Apple figures out how to add RCS, that might also work then
to receive videos from iPhone users that are not crappy quality (but I
don't have much faith in that - yet - we'll have to just wait & see).

>> 1. Is the video split up on the iPhone, Apple servers or carrier servers?
>
> With "split up", you mean the communication path is split, the video
> isn't split.

Yes. Some of the videos go through the Apple mainframe messaging server.
Some don't.

They're split somewhere, either on the phone itself, or on the mainframe
(or on the carrier's mainframe but I think the carrier just downsizes it).

> Answer: (As Carlos indicated,) On the iPhone. Your mobile number is in
> the sender's (i.e. iPhone) contacts. The Messages app on the iPhone sees
> it's a mobile phone number, so it decides to send a MMS message. As
> Carlos mentioned, the decision must be taken on the iPhone, because the
> cost of the MMS message (even if it comes out of a bundle) must be
> charged to the iPhone user's mobile provider.

That makes sense, but what confuses me is I can put my SIM card into an old
(which I will do soon but the iPhone is registered to a different person's
AppleID as I had planned on extracting the data.

How does the iPhone know that I did that?
Probably it doesn't know I did that, right?

So I'd have to log into the Apple mainframe servers for it to know that.
Does that make sense?
>> 2. Is the video downsized on the iPhone, Apple servers or carrier servers?
>
> As we don't use MMS in the real world, I don't know where the
> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
> possibly very costly - mobile data.

True. Very true. That makes sense. too much sense. :) I believe you.
Thanks for knocking that sense into my head. It should only be that way.

Up until now I thought the carrier might have downsized the video - but
you're right. It makes all the sense in the world to downside it on the
iPhone before it gets to the carrier. Thanks.

> For comparison:
>
> When we do stuff like this from WhatsApp-to-WhatsApp - never mind who
> is on which OS platform - a full resolution video will be shrunk by
> WhatsApp to a reasonable resolution and sent. (If we want to send the
> full resolution video, at the possible expense of costly mobile data, we
> can of course do so as well.)
>
> For example the last video I got was 478x850 at 30FPS, which is of
> course way less than the camera (I think a Pixel 7) can do. (The 25s
> video was 5.75MB.)

That makes a lot of sense that the phone is doing the downsizing.

Assuming that, I only need to figure out now how the phone knows that some
recipients get downsized and others don't, given I can put my SIM card at
any time into an iPhone or into my Android phone.

Unfortunately, I don't have access to my iPads that have the T-Mobile
200MB/month cellular data for life (one is bricked by Apple, the other is
in someone else's hands but I can pick it up and have the sender add
_that_ phone number!). <https://i.postimg.cc/L6dFGXVd/tmopromo03.jpg>

This seems to be the best workaround - does it not?

a. I either get the iPhone registered to me and to my phone number
(which will take me a while and which is only temporary as I would
only do that for testing purposes given Android is preferred).

b. Or, I get the iPhone sender to add the T-Mobile 200MB/month SIM
for life AppleID (whatever it happens to be) to the group chat.

Does that make sense as possible workarounds to the problem set?

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 18:16:16 GMT :
>
> >> The two questions which need to be known to begin to understand the process
> >> well enough to solve it are those which trace the path of the video clip.
> >
> > You can't "solve" it, without the *sender* using a *different* method
> > to get the video to you, i.e. as has been mentioned, using some 'cloud'
> > or other file transfer service.
>
> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
> decent video from them.

I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
*sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
*your* control (and BTW also beyond his).

But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.

[...]

> Lastly, when Apple figures out how to add RCS, that might also work then
> to receive videos from iPhone users that are not crappy quality (but I
> don't have much faith in that - yet - we'll have to just wait & see).

As has been mentioned (by Carlos and me), RCS is a theoretical
solution, but whether or not Apple will add RCS functionality to iOS is
beyond your control, so *you* won't be "solve"-ing anything.

[...]

Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 01:24:31 GMT :

>> I'm not sending any videos, Jolly Roger.
>
> Who is doing the sending is irrelevant, and you know that.

We're talking only about iPhone users sending videos using their default
messaging app in the USA which is messages, to send videos to a group
comprising both Android & iOS users. Nobody is sending them from Android.

>> The iPhone user is sending the videos.
>> I'm simply a recipient - some of whom are on iOS & others on Android.
>>
>> The question is a simple one.
>
> The question has been answered above.

There are a few missing pieces, Jolly Roger, which I thank you for fleshing
out some of them, but there are further questions such as how does the
iPhone know that a recipient is on Android when I can pop my SIM card into
any iPhone where it will fit and then pop it back into Android at any time.

To test that, I'm resurrecting an iPHone and three iPads, one of which
Apple bricked because I didn't log into their servers, the other of which
Apple bricked for the same reason but allowed me to set it up after I went
to the store to let them copy down my government ID (laying waste to
Apple's brazen marketing lies about privacy) and the third iPad is my
wife's but which has been collecting dust since she got an Android tablet.

Here's a photo of those four Apple devices so you know I tell the truth.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg>

Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :

>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
>> decent video from them.
>
> I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>
> But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.

Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am damn
good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.

But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.

I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered munitions,
so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for that.

With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg

However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of those four
Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.

1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
(but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).

2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two years.
Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar worker
before they would even look at it.

3. The iPad at the top is a dedicated Google Voice iPad, which is only
used as a Wi-Fi speakerphone (as it doesn't have a SIM card slot).
Paradoxically, Google Voice is more private on an iOS device because
on Android just using it creates a Google Account on the Android phone.
On iOS it doesn't create another account (but you already have one).

4. The smaller iPad mini at the bottom is my wife's iPad, which has lain
fallow since my daughter gave her an Android tablet a year or two ago.
It's still logged into my wife's AppleID I think, as I'm charging it
up as we speak and updating the OS to iOS 12.5.7 (which is it's latest
as Apple fully supports one release, which is iOS 17 at the moment).

That iPad has a SIM card phone number (which is a special kind of data-only
number that T-Mobile gave me 200MB/month for life on) where I'm just not
yet sure if the iOS senders need to add that phone number or my wife's
AppleID. I suspect all they need is my wife's AppleID to send videos
via the iOS Messages app such that I can see the new baby in the videos.
<https://i.postimg.cc/nhpbcP50/tmopromo04.jpg>
>> Lastly, when Apple figures out how to add RCS, that might also work then
>> to receive videos from iPhone users that are not crappy quality (but I
>> don't have much faith in that - yet - we'll have to just wait & see).
>
> As has been mentioned (by Carlos and me), RCS is a theoretical
> solution, but whether or not Apple will add RCS functionality to iOS is
> beyond your control, so *you* won't be "solve"-ing anything.

Yes. Agreed. And I thank you and Carlos (and Andy Burns in the past)
for useful information about RCS, where my main issue with RCS is that
not a lot of Android messaging apps support RCS last I had checked.

As you're well aware, there's almost no chance that I'll log into a Google
(or Apple) server willingly - so if RCS requires an Internet account just
to obtain clear videos from an iPhone, I'm not likely to like that answer.

As you astutely said, we'll have to wait until "later this year" (probably
iOS 18) to see what kind of RCS implementation Apple is capable of doing.

On 2024-05-17 12:54, Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 01:24:31 GMT :
>
>>> I'm not sending any videos, Jolly Roger.
>>
>> Who is doing the sending is irrelevant, and you know that.
>
> We're talking only about iPhone users sending videos using their default
> messaging app in the USA which is messages, to send videos to a group
> comprising both Android & iOS users. Nobody is sending them from Android.

And you desperately don't want to look at the question of whether or not
an Android device can send an MMS message with video that is any better.

>
>>> The iPhone user is sending the videos.
>>> I'm simply a recipient - some of whom are on iOS & others on Android.
>>>
>>> The question is a simple one.
>>
>> The question has been answered above.
>
> There are a few missing pieces, Jolly Roger, which I thank you for fleshing
> out some of them, but there are further questions such as how does the
> iPhone know that a recipient is on Android when I can pop my SIM card into
> any iPhone where it will fit and then pop it back into Android at any time.

Messages app doesn't need to know if the recipient is on an Android
device...

....it only needs to know that the phone number isn't associated with an
iMessage account.

>
> To test that, I'm resurrecting an iPHone and three iPads, one of which
> Apple bricked because I didn't log into their servers, the other of which
> Apple bricked for the same reason but allowed me to set it up after I went
> to the store to let them copy down my government ID (laying waste to
> Apple's brazen marketing lies about privacy) and the third iPad is my
> wife's but which has been collecting dust since she got an Android tablet.

You had to prove to the store's satisfaction that you were the owner of
the device, doofus.

>
> Here's a photo of those four Apple devices so you know I tell the truth.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg>

That doesn't prove you're telling the truth about anything you said in
the preceding paragraph, Arlen.

On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>
>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
>>> decent video from them.
>>
>> I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>
>> But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>
> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am damn
> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>
> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>
> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered munitions,
> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for that.
>
> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>
> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of those four
> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
>
> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
> (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>
> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
> I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two years.
> Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
> allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
> privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar worker
> before they would even look at it.

Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.

Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 01:24:31 GMT :
>
>>> I'm not sending any videos, Jolly Roger.
>>
>> Who is doing the sending is irrelevant, and you know that.
>
> We're talking only about iPhone users
Stop this incessant bullshit! Come to the little brown apple church in the
vale.

Get baptised, repent, and sin no more.

Amen.

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>
>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
>>>> decent video from them.
>>>
>>>    I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>
>>>    But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>
>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am damn
>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>
>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>
>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered munitions,
>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for that.
>>
>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>
>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of those four
>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
>>
>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>     (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>
>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
>>     I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two years.
>>     Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
>>     allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
>>     privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar worker
>>     before they would even look at it.
>
> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.

Why wasn't he arrested?

The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 12:54, Andrew wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 01:24:31 GMT :
>>
>>>> I'm not sending any videos, Jolly Roger.
>>>
>>> Who is doing the sending is irrelevant, and you know that.
>>
>> We're talking only about iPhone users sending videos using their default
>> messaging app in the USA which is messages, to send videos to a group
>> comprising both Android & iOS users. Nobody is sending them from Android.
>
> And you desperately don't want to look at the question of whether or not an
> Android device can send an MMS message with video that is any better.
>
>>
>>>> The iPhone user is sending the videos.
>>>> I'm simply a recipient - some of whom are on iOS & others on Android.
>>>>
>>>> The question is a simple one.
>>>
>>> The question has been answered above.
>>
>> There are a few missing pieces, Jolly Roger, which I thank you for fleshing
>> out some of them, but there are further questions such as how does the
>> iPhone know that a recipient is on Android when I can pop my SIM card into
>> any iPhone where it will fit and then pop it back into Android at any time.
>
> Messages app doesn't need to know if the recipient is on an Android device...
>
> ...it only needs to know that the phone number isn't associated with an
> iMessage account.
>
>>
>> To test that, I'm resurrecting an iPHone and three iPads, one of which
>> Apple bricked because I didn't log into their servers, the other of which
>> Apple bricked for the same reason but allowed me to set it up after I went
>> to the store to let them copy down my government ID (laying waste to
>> Apple's brazen marketing lies about privacy) and the third iPad is my
>> wife's but which has been collecting dust since she got an Android tablet.
>
> You had to prove to the store's satisfaction that you were the owner of the
> device, doofus.
>
>>
>> Here's a photo of those four Apple devices so you know I tell the truth.
>>    <https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg>
>
> That doesn't prove you're telling the truth about anything you said in the
> preceding paragraph, Arlen.

Indeed. The man is obviously a member of the holy order of android. They
will fight to the death, same as members of the holy order of apple.

Each will continue forever, much like the jews and arabs. Go for it!

KILL EACH OTHER!

On 2024-05-17 15:17, Hank Rogers wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>>
>>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which
>>>>> doesn't
>>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to
>>>>> receive a
>>>>> decent video from them.
>>>>
>>>>    I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires
>>>> the
>>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>>
>>>>    But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
>>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am
>>> damn
>>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>>
>>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>>
>>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered
>>> munitions,
>>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for
>>> that.
>>>
>>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
>>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>>
>>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of
>>> those four
>>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
>>>
>>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>>     (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>>
>>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
>>>     I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two years.
>>>     Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
>>>     allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
>>>     privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar
>>> worker
>>>     before they would even look at it.
>>
>> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.
>
> Why wasn't he arrested?
>
> The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?

Because "suspicion" isn't the same as proof.

They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen,
they could point the police in the right direction.

On 2024-05-17, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 16:29:02 GMT :
>
>>> Thanks for helping out, as I'm trying to understand the process. 1.
>>> iPhone logs into their iMessaging Apple server (automatically)
>>
>> Wrong. iMessage is optional and opt-in.
>
> Please see this image

I don't need to see any image. iMessage is optional and opt-in. That's a
fact, Jack.

> most US iPhone owners do log into the Apple iMessaging servers

Your claim that the iPhone logs into iMesage automatically is FALSE - a
LIE.

> Most likely the reason you are unaware that Apple nags you dozens of
> times a day, every day, to log into their many tracking servers, is
> you log in.

Nope, sorry. Thanks for playing. Normal people rarely are asked to log
in dozens of times a day. You created that situation by logging in with
a fake email address and credentials you admitted you don't remember
which made it impossible for you to recover access to your account - a
very, very stupid thing to do. Then you turn around every chance you get
and try to blame Apple for your utter stupidity. 🤡.

> iOS is a dumb terminal

Bullshit.

>>> 2. iPhone sends a short video clip to multiple recipients using
>>> Messages
>>
>> The user could choose to send the video on another messaging app/service
>> if they wish.
>
> You do not understand

I understand that you are here bitching about MMS messaging video
quality when any other messaging app/service will preserve video quality
just fine.

> you have no clue what people do on their devices

That's ironic as fuck coming from the dumb ass troll who doesn't know
how something as basic as MMS messaging works.

>>> 3. Presumably that clip _first_ goes to an Apple iMessaging
>>> server????? (is that correct?) (or does the iPhone do the splitting?)
>>
>> Wrong again. The video is sent as an MMS message which goes through the
>> cellular carriers MMS service. Cellular carriers are notorious for
>> degrading MMS video quality to reduce data usage on their networks.
>
> You do not show that you understand the process, Jolly Roger, as we all
> know that it's _received_ as an MMS message on Android

You complete fool - it cannot be received as an MMS without it being
*sent* over the cellular network as an MMS. MMS messages are not sent
through iMessage - period.

> but that's no longer the question that needs to be answered.

I'm not answering a question. I'm telling you what reality is, dummy.
>
> The question that needs to be answered is the following:
>
> 1. Is the video split up (between platform recipients) on the iPhone,
> or on the Apple mainframe servers or on carrier mainframe servers?

The video isn't "split up" at all. As I have already told you, if the
recipient is an iMessage user, the video is sent via iMessage. If not,
it is sent via the cellular network as an MMS message.

> 2. Is the video downsized on that same server?

The video is downsized as a requirement for MMS messaging because MMS
has strict file size limits set by the particular cellular service
providers. For instance Verizon allows images up to 1.2 MB in size and
videos up to 3.5 MB in size. AT&T restricts videos to only 1 MB in size.
If a video is larger than that, it gets compressed automatically by the
cellular service provider before delivery. Note, Arlen, that iMessage is
not involved in any part of this process - nor is a log in to Apple's
servers required or used.

>>> That's the first point of confusion that I'd like to iron out.
>>
>> The fact that you are this clueless about basic messaging says all we
>> need to know about your claim to know more about Apple than anyone
>> else here. I'd feel embarrassed for you, except you sling insults
>> regularly here so you deserve the ridicule you get.
>
> And yet you also don't appear to know the answer to the basic question
> of where is the action of splitting up the video to two different
> outgoing mechanisms performed - nor where the downsizing is performed,
> Jolly Roger.

Bitch, I've known this for literal decades. It's no secret. You can find
this out with basic web searches. You're just a huge fucking clown. 🤣

>>> Where exactly do the clips get split into different outgoing
>>> mechanisms?
>>
>> It's very simple: Messages sent to iMessage users are sent with
>> iMessage. Messages sent to non-iMessage users are sent as SMS/MMS.
>> You've been told this countless times, and you continue to play dumb
>> in order to troll. You're playing dumb to bait someone into saying
>> something you can use as some sort of lame "gotcha" to sling more
>> insults and weak trolls around, polluting the newsgroup with your
>> bullshit. You're not fooling anyone.
>
> My goal is to solve the problem.

No, your goal is - as always - to troll the Apple news groups in the
guise of "asking for help to solve a problem".

> In doing so, I need to understand exactly where the problem occurs.

Already told you - you just don't like the answer.

> Can you confirm that what you're apparently saying above is that the
> action of splitting the outgoing messages into two channels is done on
> the iPhone? a. Channel 1 is to send it to other iOS users b. Channel
> 2 is to send it to non-Apple users

There are no "channels" each recipient is sent the message, either
through iMessage or through the cellular network, depending on whether
the recipient is an iMessage user.

> And can you confirm that the action of downsizing the video is also
> done on the iPhone?

Nope, it's done by the cellular service provider. Sorry, you don't get
to blame Apple for this (and we all know that's where you were headed).

> Bearing in mind anyone can put their SIM card into either an iPhone or
> an Android phone at any time...

Irrelevant.

> ...If both the splitting & downsizing occur on the iPhone

Wrong.

> how does the iPhone know who is an Android user without first
> communicating with the Apple mainframe tracking servers to derive that
> information, Jolly Roger?

How do you expect iMessage users to be able to message each other
*without* logging into the iMessage service, smooth brain? My god,
you're an idiot. 🤣

--
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

On 2024-05-17, Tyrone <none@none.none> wrote:
> On May 17, 2024 at 9:15:35 AM EDT, "Andrew" <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>> Tyrone wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 00:48:21 +0000 :
>>
>>>> Half my family is on Android, the other half iOS, so whenever the
>>>> iPhone users send a video through their text mechanism, it shows up
>>>> clear for their iPhone recipients but super blurry for their
>>>> Android recipients. <https://i.postimg.cc/cLBNKJb7/fuzzy.jpg>
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> Because SMS/MMS is used between Android and iOS. They have
>>> incompatible messaging systems, so they fall back to the Lowest
>>> Common Denominator. The quality drops in both directions.
>>>
>>> However, if everyone uses WhatsApp or Facebook messenger (or others)
>>> then videos will be sent in full quality. That's one of the (many)
>>> reasons these cross-platform messaging apps exist.
>>
>> Thanks for explaining it. I haven't received videos until a great
>> grandchild was born, as it has been a while since the last baby.
>>
>> This family is all on iPhones & iPads so everything comes from their
>> messaging app. The pictures come in fine.
>>
>> It's just the short (ten to fifteen seconds long) videos that are
>> blurry. Does that make sense from your experience that JPGs are fine
>> but not video?
>
> Yes. For SMS/MMS, pictures don't need to be compressed (unless its a
> VERY large, VERY high-res pic). But even a few seconds of video will
> be compressed.

Anything over 1.2 MB is compressed by Verizon and smaller by AT&T. Don't
care enough to check other providers.

> It sucks, and the only solution is for everyone to be on the same app.
> Either all on iPhones (using Messages) or all on Android (using the
> same messaging app) OR using a cross-platform app as noted above.

True. Most cross-platform messaging apps support high-resolution images
and video. Just pick one.

--
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

On 2024-05-17, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> The two questions which need to be known to begin to understand the
>> process well enough to solve it are those which trace the path of the
>> video clip.
>
> You can't "solve" it, without the *sender* using a *different*
> method to get the video to you, i.e. as has been mentioned, using
> some 'cloud' or other file transfer service.
>
>> 1. Is the video split up on the iPhone, Apple servers or carrier
>> servers?
>
> With "split up", you mean the communication path is split, the video
> isn't split.
>
> Answer: (As Carlos indicated,) On the iPhone. Your mobile number is
> in the sender's (i.e. iPhone) contacts. The Messages app on the
> iPhone sees it's a mobile phone number, so it decides to send a MMS
> message. As Carlos mentioned, the decision must be taken on the
> iPhone, because the cost of the MMS message (even if it comes out of
> a bundle) must be charged to the iPhone user's mobile provider

Close, but still incorrect. It's not about whether it's a phone number
or not. It's about whether the recipient is an iMessage user. iMessage
users can and do register their phone numbers as iMessage recipient
numbers, and they can also register email addresses.

>> 2. Is the video downsized on the iPhone, Apple servers or carrier servers?
>
> As we don't use MMS in the real world,

MMS has only been in use on mobile phones since 2002, and is still in
use by people all over the world today, though certainly not as much as
previous years, especially since more robust and feature-packed internet
messaging apps gained popularity - but make no mistake, it is still used
in the real world (and is what we are discussing in this very thread).

> I don't know where the
> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
> possibly very costly - mobile data.

No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
happens on the receiving cellular network.

--
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

On 2024-05-17, Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 16:39:01 GMT :
>
>> You're both wrong. There is no "conversion", and MMS messages aren't
>> sent through the iMessage service. It's amazing this has to be explained
>> like you're a five year old, but so be it: The iPhone is a cellular device as
>> well as an internet device. As such, it has the capability to check with
>> Apple's iMessage service to see if a recipient is a user that is logged
>> into the iMessage service. If so, the message is sent through iMessage.
>> If not, the message is sent through the cellular service as an SMS/MMS.
>> Cellular providers require MMS messages to be reduced in quality as a
>> way to reduce cellular data use, which is why videos are degraded when
>> sent over the cellular service. That's it - no "conversion" takes place,
>> and the iMessage service is not involved in cellular messaging.
>
> Thanks for that detailed explanation, which outlines some (but not all) of
> the ten or so discrete steps in the process of an iPhone sending a short
> video to both iOS and Android users (all using the default messaging app).
>
> There is a downsampling so that's the conversion we are speaking of.
> That downsampling is happening somewhere - where you don't say where.
> Where is the downsampling occurring?

I already told you it happens on the receiving cellular provider's side,
as each provider sets their own file size limits.

> The process, based on what you said, appears to be this, is that correct?
>
> 1. iPhone sender is logged into the iMessaging Apple mainframe servers

Oh, tHe HoRrOr - tHeY aRe LoGgEd InTo MaInFrAmE sErVeRs, yOu SaY??
aCk!!1! No other messagaing app or service requires you to be logged
into it, RIGHT, Arlen? 🤣

> iPhone recipient is also logged into the iMessaging Apple mainframes

Oh, noz!

> Android recipient is not logged into Apple or Google mainframes

Lots of Android users log into Google servers, Arlen. And that's
irrelevant as to this discussion, you tool.

> All have an active data connection to carrier towers & servers
> Apparently on the Apple messaging mainframe server is kept a detailed
> tracking of iOS-owners' AppleID associated with their phone number.

Yes, and the Android cellular MMS message server keeps track of the
phone number and account details (including the name and other details)
of the user.

> 2. iPhone sender tries to send a short video to iPhone & Android recipients
> 3. That attempt to send apparently goes over the Internet first to Apple
> mainframe servers which send back the decision of which of the
> recipients AppleID's are logged into Apple messaging servers
> (and which are not).
>
> (I don't yet know what happens if there is no Internet connection
> established by the sender's iPhone to Apple messaging servers though.)

Common sense should tell you that iMessage is an internet technology,
Arlen. When you aren't signed into iMessage, you naturally can't send
messages through the service. So messages are sent as SMS/MMS messages
through your cellular provider instead.

> 4. Apple messaging servers accept only the videos whose AppleID's match
> Apple's determination of who is logged into their messaging servers.
> For those AppleIDs, Apple send the video over the Internet to the
> recipients who are logged into the Apple messaging mainframe servers.'
>
> (I'm not sure what happens if the recipient is on an iPhone and yet
> they don't have cellular data Internet or Wi-Fi Internet at the moment.
> What if the iPhone recipient only has a carrier non-data connection?

No data connection and no internet means no messaging. Duh. Same for
Android smartphones.

> How is it sent when the message could be sent either way, right?

That "question" makes no sense as written.

> How is that message sent to iPhone owners?
> a. Cellular-data Internet connection?
> b. Wi-Fi Internet connection?
> c. (It's probably not sent over the carrier's non-data connection.)

You can't send messages without a cellular connection or internet
connection, Arlen. How in the holy fuck are you this clueless? You
regularly claim you know more about iPhones and technology than anyone
else here. 🤣

> 5. Apparently Apple messaging servers do not accept for transit on
> their messaging mainframe servers any messages from the sender's
> iPhone intended for people not recognized by the Apple messaging
> mainframe server. Those are rejected apparently.

Nope, wrong again. The iPhone doesn't even use the iMessage service for
Android recipients.

> 6. For any message rejected by the Apple mainframe messaging servers,
> the senders iPhone is informed, again over the Internet of that fact.

Nope. See above.

> 7. Only at this point, apparently, does the sending iPhone resort to
> sending the messages to the carrier (although this brings up the
> question of whether only cellular data will work or if a local
> Wi-Fi connection to the Internet to the carrier will also work).

Wrong again. The iPhone checks to see if the recipient is an iMessage
user, and if not sends the message through the cellular network instead.

> 8. Now is the problem of which machine does the downsizing of the
> video, turning it into crap. Presumably the carrier does that.
> Is that correct?

Yep. And each carrier has their own file size limits and compression
mechanism.

> 9. Once the carrier (presumably) downsizes the video, then it's sent
> over the carrier's celltowers, one of which communicates with
> the Android recipient's phone over the phone number identification.

Yup.

> Thank you for helping to hone how the process works.

You could have looked this up on the web in seconds, Arlen. 🤣

> I'm sure I got some things wrong above, and even if I got them right, there
> are still questions in the analysis above, so where do we need corrections?

"We" don't need any of this - your little exercise is rather pointless,
since all of this is common knowledge to anyone who knows anything about
technology, Arlen.

--
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

On 2024-05-17, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 18:16:16 GMT :
>>
>> >> The two questions which need to be known to begin to understand the process
>> >> well enough to solve it are those which trace the path of the video clip.
>> >
>> > You can't "solve" it, without the *sender* using a *different* method
>> > to get the video to you, i.e. as has been mentioned, using some 'cloud'
>> > or other file transfer service.
>>
>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to receive a
>> decent video from them.
>
> I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires the
> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>
> But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>
> [...]
>
>> Lastly, when Apple figures out how to add RCS, that might also work then
>> to receive videos from iPhone users that are not crappy quality (but I
>> don't have much faith in that - yet - we'll have to just wait & see).
>
> As has been mentioned (by Carlos and me), RCS is a theoretical
> solution, but whether or not Apple will add RCS functionality to iOS is
> beyond your control, so *you* won't be "solve"-ing anything.

Apple announced long ago they would be adding RCS support, and Arlen
knows this because he trolled about RCS and was informed of that right
here in this newsgroup. Pepperidge Farm remembers. 😉

--
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

On May 17, 2024 at 7:20:23 PM EDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

>> I don't know where the
>> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
>> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
>> possibly very costly - mobile data.
>
> No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
> happens on the receiving cellular network.

What seems to be missing in this discussion is that this happens in both
directions. From Android to iPhone also. Is the "shrinking" then done on the
Android phone?

No. The compression happens over the cell network.

So why is no one asking "Why are Android videos clear when sent to Android
phones but blurry when sent to iPhones?"

On 2024-05-17 16:41, Tyrone wrote:
> On May 17, 2024 at 7:20:23 PM EDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>> I don't know where the
>>> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
>>> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
>>> possibly very costly - mobile data.
>>
>> No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
>> happens on the receiving cellular network.
>
> What seems to be missing in this discussion is that this happens in both
> directions. From Android to iPhone also. Is the "shrinking" then done on the
> Android phone?
>
> No. The compression happens over the cell network.
>
> So why is no one asking "Why are Android videos clear when sent to Android
> phones but blurry when sent to iPhones?"

Indeed.

I believe I asked that question.

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 15:17, Hank Rogers wrote:
>> Alan wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>>>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which doesn't
>>>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to
>>>>>> receive a
>>>>>> decent video from them.
>>>>>
>>>>>    I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it requires
>>>>> the
>>>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is beyond
>>>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>>>
>>>>>    But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are two
>>>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I am damn
>>>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>>>
>>>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>>>
>>>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered
>>>> munitions,
>>>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training for that.
>>>>
>>>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they work,
>>>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>>>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>>>
>>>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of those
>>>> four
>>>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video receiver.
>>>>
>>>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>>>     (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>>>
>>>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple because
>>>>     I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for two
>>>> years.
>>>>     Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple declined to
>>>>     allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies about
>>>>     privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius Bar
>>>> worker
>>>>     before they would even look at it.
>>>
>>> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.
>>
>> Why wasn't he arrested?
>>
>> The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?
>
> Because "suspicion" isn't the same as proof.
>
> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen,
> they could point the police in the right direction.
>

So, it turned out he was innocent?

Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.

On 2024-05-17, Tyrone <none@none.none> wrote:
> On May 17, 2024 at 7:20:23 PM EDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>> I don't know where the (resolution) shrinking of the video is done,
>>> but I assume it's done on the iPhone. Doing it on other servers
>>> would mean a huge waste of - possibly very costly - mobile data.
>>
>> No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
>> happens on the receiving cellular network.
>
> What seems to be missing in this discussion is that this happens in
> both directions. From Android to iPhone also. Is the "shrinking" then
> done on the Android phone?
>
> No. The compression happens over the cell network.
>
> So why is no one asking "Why are Android videos clear when sent to
> Android phones but blurry when sent to iPhones?"

The answer is obvious: For the same reason videos sent from iPhones to
iPhones are clear - they aren't sent as MMS messages.

--
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

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-05-17 16:41, Tyrone wrote:
>> On May 17, 2024 at 7:20:23 PM EDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> I don't know where the
>>>> (resolution) shrinking of the video is done, but I assume it's done on
>>>> the iPhone. Doing it on other servers would mean a huge waste of -
>>>> possibly very costly - mobile data.
>>>
>>> No. The video is sent full size by the iPhone and the compression
>>> happens on the receiving cellular network.
>>
>> What seems to be missing in this discussion is that this happens in both
>> directions. From Android to iPhone also. Is the "shrinking" then done on the
>> Android phone?
>>
>> No.  The compression happens over the cell network.
>>
>> So why is no one asking "Why are Android videos clear when sent to Android
>> phones but blurry when sent to iPhones?"
>
> Indeed.
>
> I believe I asked that question.

Yes these trolls are just attacking apple, as usual.

Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 23:33:19 GMT :

>> There is a downsampling so that's the conversion we are speaking of.
>> That downsampling is happening somewhere - where you don't say where.
>> Where is the downsampling occurring?
>
> I already told you it happens on the receiving cellular provider's side,
> as each provider sets their own file size limits.

And you are most likely wrong, Jolly Roger, which Frank Slootweg explained.
But you tried so I'll leave it at that.

>> The process, based on what you said, appears to be this, is that correct?
>>
>> 1. iPhone sender is logged into the iMessaging Apple mainframe servers
>
> Oh, tHe HoRrOr - tHeY aRe LoGgEd InTo MaInFrAmE sErVeRs, yOu SaY??

Apple is like Ashley Madison, claiming privacy while it's always a lie.
You're logged into Apple tracking servers every moment of your life.

Apple's promise of privacy is as false as Ashley Madison's promise was.

> No other messagaing app or service requires you to be logged
> into it, RIGHT

There is no other common consumer platform which requires you to be logged
into it for the basic functionality of the phone - except for iOS, JR.

That you don't understand that fact is indicative of your religious mantra.

>> iPhone recipient is also logged into the iMessaging Apple mainframes
>
> Oh, noz!

That you are unaware that Android sends & receives messages through the
default messenger app without logging into Google servers is clear.

Only Apple requires you log into their mainframe servers for the messaging
functionality that Apple advertises and that you religious zealots love.

>> Android recipient is not logged into Apple or Google mainframes
>
> Lots of Android users log into Google servers.
> And that's irrelevant as to this discussion, you tool.

It's no longer shocking you don't understand that no other operating system
but iOS requires the user to be logged in 24/7/365 for basic functionality.

Google does not require that login into Google's mainframe servers.
Apple does.

Note: You can say "don't log in" but I've done that. Apple will
unilaterally brick your iOS device if you stop logging into the servers
for a period of time (two years in my case on two different iPads).

There's a reason Apple designed the iOS device to be a dumb terminal, JR.
It can't do anything that you love about iOS without Apple server logins.

>> All have an active data connection to carrier towers & servers
>> Apparently on the Apple messaging mainframe server is kept a detailed
>> tracking of iOS-owners' AppleID associated with their phone number.
>
> Yes, and the Android cellular MMS message server keeps track of the
> phone number and account details (including the name and other details)
> of the user.

So does the iOS cellular MMS service, Jolly Roger. Nobody said otherwise.
It's a necessary evil to obtain cellular phone service with MMS capability.

>> 2. iPhone sender tries to send a short video to iPhone & Android recipients
>> 3. That attempt to send apparently goes over the Internet first to Apple
>> mainframe servers which send back the decision of which of the
>> recipients AppleID's are logged into Apple messaging servers
>> (and which are not).
>>
>> (I don't yet know what happens if there is no Internet connection
>> established by the sender's iPhone to Apple messaging servers though.)
>
> Common sense should tell you that iMessage is an internet technology,

Ah, but Android's default messaging is not - although RCS may change that.

> When you aren't signed into iMessage, you naturally can't send
> messages through the service. So messages are sent as SMS/MMS messages
> through your cellular provider instead.

Exactly.
Without logging into Apple's mainframe servers, all the things you love
about your iPhone instantly cease to exist,. It's just a dumb terminal.

>> 4. Apple messaging servers accept only the videos whose AppleID's match
>> Apple's determination of who is logged into their messaging servers.
>> For those AppleIDs, Apple send the video over the Internet to the
>> recipients who are logged into the Apple messaging mainframe servers.'
>>
>> (I'm not sure what happens if the recipient is on an iPhone and yet
>> they don't have cellular data Internet or Wi-Fi Internet at the moment.
>> What if the iPhone recipient only has a carrier non-data connection?
>
> No data connection and no internet means no messaging. Duh.
> Same for Android smartphones.

I didn't say that. I said either or.

>> How is it sent when the message could be sent either way, right?
>
> That "question" makes no sense as written.

Either by WI-Fi Internet or by cellular data Internet.

>> How is that message sent to iPhone owners?
>> a. Cellular-data Internet connection?
>> b. Wi-Fi Internet connection?
>> c. (It's probably not sent over the carrier's non-data connection.)
>
> You can't send messages without a cellular connection or internet
> connection.

Again, there's the concept of either or that you need to study.

> How in the holy fuck are you this clueless?
> You regularly claim you know more about iPhones and technology than anyone
> else here.

I know how iOS updates and I know how Android updates. You don't.
I just don't deal with iOS messaging since the iPads are just toys to me.

>> 5. Apparently Apple messaging servers do not accept for transit on
>> their messaging mainframe servers any messages from the sender's
>> iPhone intended for people not recognized by the Apple messaging
>> mainframe server. Those are rejected apparently.
>
> Nope, wrong again. The iPhone doesn't even use the iMessage service for
> Android recipients.

There must be a method on the phone that tells the iPhone which people are
logged into the Apple mainframes and which people are not logged into them.

>> 6. For any message rejected by the Apple mainframe messaging servers,
>> the senders iPhone is informed, again over the Internet of that fact.
>
> Nope. See above.

I'm not sure if you're right. See above.

>> 7. Only at this point, apparently, does the sending iPhone resort to
>> sending the messages to the carrier (although this brings up the
>> question of whether only cellular data will work or if a local
>> Wi-Fi connection to the Internet to the carrier will also work).
>
> Wrong again. The iPhone checks to see if the recipient is an iMessage
> user, and if not sends the message through the cellular network instead.

How does the iPhone know if the iMessage user is logged into the Apple
mainframe servers? I'm not logged into my Messages app on my iPad.
>> 8. Now is the problem of which machine does the downsizing of the
>> video, turning it into crap. Presumably the carrier does that.
>> Is that correct?
>
> Yep. And each carrier has their own file size limits and compression
> mechanism.

I'm not sure if that's the case, as Frank made an eloquent argument that
the compression to shit of the videos is happening on the iPhone itself.

>> 9. Once the carrier (presumably) downsizes the video, then it's sent
>> over the carrier's celltowers, one of which communicates with
>> the Android recipient's phone over the phone number identification.
>
> Yup.

We're not sure yet where the downsizing to shit happens. Frank's argument
is valid that the carriers don't want to do it as that would negate the
whole point of limiting the amount of data sent to the carriers.

>> Thank you for helping to hone how the process works.
>
> You could have looked this up on the web in seconds.

I doubt it. Show me a full explanation on the net where it is explained.

>> I'm sure I got some things wrong above, and even if I got them right, there
>> are still questions in the analysis above, so where do we need corrections?
>
> "We" don't need any of this - your little exercise is rather pointless,
> since all of this is common knowledge to anyone who knows anything about
> technology, Arlen.

Actually, none of us (including you) knows how it works, as all of us
(except you iKooks) have openly said we're not sure how it works.

You iKooks are always sure but you're always wrong at the same time.
You don't actually know how it works any more than I don't know it.

If you can find an article that explains fully how it works, I'll not only
read it, but I'll be able to understand it - but I doubt it actually exists
since everyone glosses over the critical steps of where things happen.

Jolly Roger wrote on 17 May 2024 23:09:08 GMT :

>> Please see this image
>
> I don't need to see any image. iMessage is optional and opt-in. That's a
> fact, Jack.

Actually, if you stop logging into the various Apple mainframe tracking
servers, after about two years, Apple will unilaterally lock you out.

Ask me how I know this fact.

>> most US iPhone owners do log into the Apple iMessaging servers
>
> Your claim that the iPhone logs into iMesage automatically is FALSE - a
> LIE.

You log in once, and forever more it keeps you logged in Jolly Roger.
That you don't know that is no longer shocking about you Apple zealots.
>> Most likely the reason you are unaware that Apple nags you dozens of
>> times a day, every day, to log into their many tracking servers, is
>> you log in.
>
> Nope, sorry. Thanks for playing. Normal people rarely are asked to log
> in dozens of times a day. You created that situation by logging in with
> a fake email address and credentials you admitted you don't remember
> which made it impossible for you to recover access to your account - a
> very, very stupid thing to do. Then you turn around every chance you get
> and try to blame Apple for your utter stupidity.

You're wrong, Jolly Roger. I have the full login/password of all devices.
You just wish that were the case - but I went to Apple and they unbricked
one of my iPads so that I could log in again - using the SAME
login/password that I always used, Jolly Roger.

The second iPad they wouldn't unbrick because I had to produce the receipt,
even though I gave them my government ID to prove who I was.

Those to situations prove the lies Apple spews about privacy since there is
no privacy on iPhones for a huge variety of reasons, the fact you must log
into the Apple servers (or Apple will brick it) being just one of them.

>> iOS is a dumb terminal
>
> Bullshit.

Heh heh heh... you hate the truth about Apple products Jolly Roger.
It's no longer shocking you think you can download apps without logging
into Apple's mainframe tracking servers (yes, I know about the EU thing).

You can't.

>>>> 2. iPhone sends a short video clip to multiple recipients using
>>>> Messages
>>>
>>> The user could choose to send the video on another messaging app/service
>>> if they wish.
>>
>> You do not understand
>
> I understand that you are here bitching about MMS messaging video
> quality when any other messaging app/service will preserve video quality
> just fine.

The problem is simply that nobody in this thread has fully understood how
it works, least of all you and certainly I've said from the start I didn't.

You say you do but you say you understand everything and yet you're always
wrong, Jolly Roger. Like when you said Apple fully supports older releases.

>> you have no clue what people do on their devices
>
> That's ironic as fuck coming from the dumb ass troll who doesn't know
> how something as basic as MMS messaging works.

And yet, not only don't you know how it works on an iPhone when they send a
video clip to a group of users on both platforms, but nobody else knew
either.

The only difference is you claim to know everything when it's clear you
don't know how it works (e.g., it's highly likely the downsizing is done by
the iPhone as doing it anywhere else would negate the purpose of doing it).

>>>> 3. Presumably that clip _first_ goes to an Apple iMessaging
>>>> server????? (is that correct?) (or does the iPhone do the splitting?)
>>>
>>> Wrong again. The video is sent as an MMS message which goes through the
>>> cellular carriers MMS service. Cellular carriers are notorious for
>>> degrading MMS video quality to reduce data usage on their networks.
>>
>> You do not show that you understand the process, Jolly Roger, as we all
>> know that it's _received_ as an MMS message on Android
>
> You complete fool - it cannot be received as an MMS without it being
> *sent* over the cellular network as an MMS. MMS messages are not sent
> through iMessage - period.

I said we all know it's received as an MMS message on Android, JR.

>
>> but that's no longer the question that needs to be answered.
>
> I'm not answering a question. I'm telling you what reality is, dummy.

Except that you don't know how it works either, Jolly Roger.

The two things you don't know, and nobody so far knows, is
a. How does the iPhone know you're no longer logged into the
Apple mainframe tracking servers if it doesn't check them?
b. Where is the downsizing done?

>> The question that needs to be answered is the following:
>>
>> 1. Is the video split up (between platform recipients) on the iPhone,
>> or on the Apple mainframe servers or on carrier mainframe servers?
>
> The video isn't "split up" at all. As I have already told you, if the
> recipient is an iMessage user, the video is sent via iMessage. If not,
> it is sent via the cellular network as an MMS message.

That's what I mean by split. It's a fork.

>> 2. Is the video downsized on that same server?
>
> The video is downsized as a requirement for MMS messaging because MMS
> has strict file size limits set by the particular cellular service
> providers. For instance Verizon allows images up to 1.2 MB in size and
> videos up to 3.5 MB in size. AT&T restricts videos to only 1 MB in size.
> If a video is larger than that, it gets compressed automatically by the
> cellular service provider before delivery. Note that iMessage is
> not involved in any part of this process - nor is a log in to Apple's
> servers required or used.

Nobody is sure of that except you.
And you've never been right before.

So what you say is suspect without any cites to back up your guesses.

>>>> That's the first point of confusion that I'd like to iron out.
>>>
>>> The fact that you are this clueless about basic messaging says all we
>>> need to know about your claim to know more about Apple than anyone
>>> else here. I'd feel embarrassed for you, except you sling insults
>>> regularly here so you deserve the ridicule you get.
>>
>> And yet you also don't appear to know the answer to the basic question
>> of where is the action of splitting up the video to two different
>> outgoing mechanisms performed - nor where the downsizing is performed,
>> Jolly Roger.
>
> Bitch, I've known this for literal decades. It's no secret. You can find
> this out with basic web searches. You're just a huge fucking clown.

And you "knew for decades" that Apple fully supported older releases too.
And that was a lie since the start.
>>>> Where exactly do the clips get split into different outgoing
>>>> mechanisms?
>>>
>>> It's very simple: Messages sent to iMessage users are sent with
>>> iMessage. Messages sent to non-iMessage users are sent as SMS/MMS.
>>> You've been told this countless times, and you continue to play dumb
>>> in order to troll. You're playing dumb to bait someone into saying
>>> something you can use as some sort of lame "gotcha" to sling more
>>> insults and weak trolls around, polluting the newsgroup with your
>>> bullshit. You're not fooling anyone.
>>
>> My goal is to solve the problem.
>
> No, your goal is - as always - to troll the Apple news groups in the
> guise of "asking for help to solve a problem".

Nope. My goal is to receive the baby videos without the iPhone destroying
their quality. That's a simple goal. I've never cared about iPhone videos
until now - so it didn't matter until now.
>
>> In doing so, I need to understand exactly where the problem occurs.
>
> Already told you - you just don't like the answer.

Nobody agrees with you Jolly Roger.
And you've been wrong about everything in the past too.

So without a cite backing your claims, you're just guessing.

>> Can you confirm that what you're apparently saying above is that the
>> action of splitting the outgoing messages into two channels is done on
>> the iPhone? a. Channel 1 is to send it to other iOS users b. Channel
>> 2 is to send it to non-Apple users
>
> There are no "channels" each recipient is sent the message, either
> through iMessage or through the cellular network, depending on whether
> the recipient is an iMessage user.

Yes. It's a fork. But the question isn't whether it's a fork or not.
It is.

>> And can you confirm that the action of downsizing the video is also
>> done on the iPhone?
>
> Nope, it's done by the cellular service provider. Sorry, you don't get
> to blame Apple for this (and we all know that's where you were headed).

On 2024-05-17 17:22, Hank Rogers wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-05-17 15:17, Hank Rogers wrote:
>>> Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2024-05-17 13:16, Andrew wrote:
>>>>> Frank Slootweg wrote on 17 May 2024 19:49:16 GMT :
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not a bad problem solver, so I might find a workaround which
>>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>>> require the IPhone sender to change their habits just for me to
>>>>>>> receive a
>>>>>>> decent video from them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    I'm quite sure you can't "solve" the problem, because it
>>>>>> requires the
>>>>>> *sender*'s device (iPhone) to do things differently and that is
>>>>>> beyond
>>>>>> *your* control (and BTW also beyond his).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    But by all means, eat your heart out and experiment away.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your advice, where solving and working around issues are
>>>>> two
>>>>> different things, where I agree I can't solve the problem - but I
>>>>> am damn
>>>>> good at finding workarounds to every problem that I care to address.
>>>>>
>>>>> But I need to understand better how the iPhone sends video first.
>>>>>
>>>>> I worked in the Silicon Valley on industrial software considered
>>>>> munitions,
>>>>> so I'm not bad at workarounds - although I had a lot of training
>>>>> for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> With Apple products, I don't have any formal training on how they
>>>>> work,
>>>>> so all that I know about them is what I experience myself dealing with
>>>>> them. https://i.postimg.cc/rwD6NrKX/ipadsandiphone.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I think I have a workaround to the problem given out of
>>>>> those four
>>>>> Apple iOS devices, one of them might be repurposed as a video
>>>>> receiver.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. The iPhone is registered to another AppleID which I need to remove
>>>>>     (but only after I take all the data off that iPhone first).
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. The "Activation Required!" iPad at left was bricked by Apple
>>>>> because
>>>>>     I ran an experiment by not logging into Apple servers for
>>>>> two years.
>>>>>     Since it was a gift, I can't prove it's mine so Apple
>>>>> declined to
>>>>>     allow me to activate it - again giving proof to Apples lies
>>>>> about
>>>>>     privacy since I had to show my government ID to the Genius
>>>>> Bar worker
>>>>>     before they would even look at it.
>>>>
>>>> Because they suspected you of having a stolen device, Arlen.
>>>
>>> Why wasn't he arrested?
>>>
>>> The sorry bastard should be in jail, right?
>>
>> Because "suspicion" isn't the same as proof.
>>
>> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was
>> stolen, they could point the police in the right direction.
>>
>
> So, it turned out he was innocent?

No. It turned out that no one (apparently) reported the device stolen.

Which is not the same thing.

>
> Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.
>
>

Hank Rogers wrote on Fri, 17 May 2024 19:22:44 -0500 :

>> They wanted his ID so that if it turned OUT that the device was stolen,
>> they could point the police in the right direction.
>>
>
> So, it turned out he was innocent?
>
> Hard to believe, since he hates apple with all his soul.

Whoa. I do not hate Apple. I don't like Apple but I don't like Google or
Microsoft either. But there's no difference to me. I simply tell the truth.

And, Apple told me its their policy that you need two things for them to
unbrick a device that they themselves bricked because I didn't log into it
for more than two years (even though the login/password were correct).

1. Proof of ownership
2. Government ID (which they copy)

So much for privacy on Apple devices.

Notice they unbricked the one that I bought at that store.
But they wouldn't unbrick the one I couldn't prove was mine.

Now let's look at this from an adult viewpoint since apparently Alan Baker
has been claiming I stole the iPad that I brought to Apple to unbrick.

Only Alan Baker would say that someone would do that, because if it was
stolen, there's been plenty of time for Apple to be informed of that.

Since they have my ID, they could call the cops at any time should it be
reported stolen in the future. The point is Alan Baker is a moron.

What he's doing is making kindergarten excuses for Apple's behavior.
But I do enjoy your wit as I have Alan Baker & Jughead in my killfile.