Kind of off topic: I really like iMessage. Not to be an Apple fanboi, but it really is one of those things where It Just Works(tm). Encryption shouldn't have to be something the end user has to worry about; it should be transparent to the user while still being as secure as possible (HTTPS and TLS are a great example of this). For the user who cares about encryption, they don't have to configure anything. For the user that doesn't care, they still benefit.
By baking it into the OS, Apple ensures that anyone with an iDevice benefits from it. Compare that to having to download an app that may change depending on possible compromises. Anyone who's tried to convince a family member to use Signal, Telegram, etc. knows how much of a pain it is.
> By baking it into the OS, Apple ensures that anyone with an iDevice benefits from it.
But only people with iDevices benefit from it.
I prefer Signal to iMessage because iMessage is iOS only, and I'm disappointed with Google for not including an iMessage equivalent with secure messaging by default.
> Compare that to having to download an app that may change depending on possible compromises.
If you mean what I think you mean, using iMessage will not save you/them from this any more than using Signal would, the only benefit to iMessage is that it's already installed on iDevices when you buy them and has secure-messaging enabled by default.
Which is still a step above Android currently - which has no default-installed secure messaging app at all.
By baking it into the OS, Apple ensures that anyone with an iDevice benefits from it. Compare that to having to download an app that may change depending on possible compromises. Anyone who's tried to convince a family member to use Signal, Telegram, etc. knows how much of a pain it is.