Is iMessages a text service, or an IM service? (via @jkhowland)

Everyone in my family got iPhones when it became available on Sprint. One of the things I was most excited for was iMessages. Almost everyone I text has an iPhone.

Communicating with the Messages App

iMessage merges with your text messaging on iOS, and your instant messaging on your computer in iMessages beta. We have three technologies effectively being treated as one. Dan Moren over at Macworld is making a case for this concept being overloaded.

On the face of things, instant messaging and text messaging are technologies that seem pretty similar: They both involve sending text and images over a network to a conversation partner or partners. Then again, you could say the same thing about instant messaging and email, and I think many of us would look askance at having our email accounts folded into Messages — or, for that matter, iMessage incorporated into Mail. So why do iMessage and IM need to occupy the same space?

An argument that iMessages and IM don’t belong together

There are three fundamental points in Dan’s argument: there is no easy way to turn iMessages off, block people, mark yourself as away, or sync statuses between devices.

The question we should be asking is more fundamental: Is an iMessage a text message or an instant message? Dan thinks of iMessage as a text message, and thus it’s bundle with the Messages app on iOS as natural and Messages app on the Mac as convoluted.

Dan has nailed it.

iMessages communicates with an email address (Apple account) first, and phone second. I have friends that won’t let me text them, but prefer iMessages.

His basic conclusion is that “even a meager degree of control on top of iMessage would be a welcome addition.” He simply hates that the service comes bundled with text messaging.

For now, one of the greatest strengths of iMessages is it’s simplicity. Let’s hope it grows in the future like the rest of the iOS platform has.

Image Source: 24 Media