Samsung has released a new video in support of Google’s #GetTheMessage campaign which calls for Apple to adopt RCS or “Rich Communication Services,” the cross-platform protocol pitched as a successor to SMS that adopts many of the features found in modern messaging apps… like Apple’s own iMessage.
Unless the EU makes them, they’re not adopting rcs. I could see them putting out an imessage app for Android though. Probably ad supported to make the experience extra shitty for us. They’d quickly own the messaging market, at least in the US.
Internal memos explicitly stated execs were worried that if they brought iMessage to android, poor families might buy their kids cheap android phones instead of iPhones.
Ok I’ll ask, how is iMessage fundamentally any different from texting (other than this RCS stuff)? You can still text. Or is it that weird color thing or checkmark that kids are social pressured into?
This was the experience Android users had initially, then Android started parsing them and adding the reaction to the message. This is also when iMessage started getting that type of message instead of the reaction, as a sort of dig at iMessage
Images are a lot lower resolution (and no “live” photos which are cute if your mom takes a pic of their pet bunny), you can’t add people to group chats or rename them, you can’t see if someone’s read or typed your message, you can’t “like” texts without them appearing like the above post, I think there are even sound bites, little games but I haven’t played with them.
Are “custom stickers” (or whatever they’re called) a thing on Android? My dad’s been having a blast taking a bunch of goofy pictures of himself and making stickers out of them. We get a good laugh out of them whenever he sends us a pic of himself leaning into the screen giving us the finger.
Iphone users keep sending me long horribly compressed videos i can’t see at all because it’s not a problem between iPhones. And something about group chats?
And Android users send me postage-stamp sized videos I can’t see at all. Not gunning, just saying it’s a problem in both directions (and apple’s fault). Also, Android doesn’t have the same easter eggs, like automatic confetti filling my screen when someone writes the word “congratulations!” in iMessage. Oh, right - iMessage gives me in-line replies and the ability to give a thumbs up/down/heart etc. response to a single message. Don’t know if android has this feature, but android users just get a blank text if I “thumbs up” a comment, for example.
Some android messaging apps have the ability to interpret emoji reactions and display them correctly. The issue with photo and video quality is infuriating, though.
Google Messages (RCS app) does that. It even works from iMessage to Android but that is just because Google parses the SMS text that says they reacted that iMessage passive-aggressively sends and makes it appear correctly. It’s not following RCS protocol, it’s basic text parsing is all.
Incidentally, Google also started sending the same pass-aggressive reacted SMS messages to iPhone users for those using those RCS features, so now Apple gets the messages Android users had to deal with for years (and still do, if they aren’t using Messages). I don’t know is Apple is doing the same parsing or not as Google, if they aren’t then somewhat ironically to Apple’s intention Android now has the better react experience.
It’s a lot of things, and Apple kinda backed into the lock-in aspect I think by mistake. At the time it debuted, you mainly used SMS when mobile texting, and SMS is garbage. It’s not encrypted, was limited to a small number of characters, etc. Picture/video messaging also isn’t part of the standard, so MMS was tacked on with massive limits, because the thing about SMS is that it wasn’t really designed with it’s own bandwidth in mind and instead piggybacked on the carrier signal in idle time (I’m real fuzzy on the details because it’s been so long, if someone knows exactly that would be helpful context.) Most importantly, in the US at least, SMS was a fee carriers absolutely scalped you for. When iMessage came out, carriers were still charging absolutely stupid prices for a package of like 200 texts and per text after, and receiving also counted towards that.
Apple says “hey we have the internet on this thing, let’s make it a feature that when you send to other iPhone users it doesn’t count against your text package” and then built a “modern” text platform. E2E, rich image/video support, the stuff you mention, etc. They made it so that you didn’t have to worry about whether your friend was on iPhone, you could send a message to their number and Apple would figure it out. The green bubble thing initially was just “btw you’re paying for this one.” The reason I say they kinda backed into the lock-in thing is because obviously the idea here was “buy an iPhone and stop paying stupid carrier fees” which is obviously a lock-in strategy, but that aspect of the carrier plans basically collapsed as Facebook released Messenger that same year, so it quickly became “unlimited for $20” and then just “it’s all in your plan (which we’re just being less obvious bout gouging you on.)”
The green bubble thing sticks around though in the US largely because the US is one of the few places where iMessage becomes a major player in the messaging space, probably because the US market sees a larger share of iPhone sales due to economics and Apple not really having a low-end strategy except “buy an older iPhone.” Other places go to WhatsApp or WeChat or whatever, but Apple continues to grow (I think around 55% in the US?) and now it’s an annoyance for everyone. I don’t think I’ve ever really seen anyone care about the green bubble other than “shit now I have to figure out how to send them this video of the whatever.” At least for younger generations, this just means that the primary text method becomes Snap (me and my wife are about the only people my kids open the Messages app instead of Snap for) while the olds all use Facebook Messenger, and those who refuse just spend more of their day annoyed.
Anyway, it was a nice convenience when it launched. Personally, I think Apple has little reason to develop and process messaging for free for Android and businesses don’t do things to be nice, but they’re all about service revenue, so I think they should release an Android app, and make it easy to buy stickers and shit like that, send money via Apple Pay, etc. iMessage has already subtly shifted that direction on iPhone and I know at least in my friend/family group we pass money around like that all the time, and this becomes another thing that’s sort of annoying when we hang out with someone who isn’t on iOS. also, probably obviously, but it’s not even like “oh we’re hanging out with the poor friend on Android” or anything, he is also holding a $900-$1200 phone, so the lack of interop on these types of things that should probably just be a protocol is annoying af.
Yes, having to figure out how to send a video is super annoying. The easiest default is FB messenger because everyone has it, but fuck I don’t like giving my private messages to meta.
My go-to is just to send an iCloud link. I technically have a Facebook account, but for various social reasons I don’t tell anyone and basically only use it for occasionally browsing marketplace. Even that is more data than I like to give Facebook.
Wikipedia sais WhatsApp was released 2009, two years before iMessage. So the idea wasn’t new and they most likely didn’t lock out Android users by accident.
Of course the idea wasn’t new. That’s very nearly Apple’s business model - they’re rarely first to market with a technology. I’m sure if I go look, AIM was probably in there pretty close the App Store launch. But Apple’s implementation was quite new. Everyone in the US at least was texting with the phone number as the identifier. Apple made it so that no one had to change any habits, use the same method for texting you have been literally in the same app you always have, and if you text another iPhone it just works better. They didn’t make it worse on Android.
I’m not sure how this is “lockout.” I already made the argument it’s a lock-in tactic, but like when Tesla came out with the supercharger network, should I be mad that it doesn’t gas up my Honda? Why would we expect that Apple is going to develop and maintain an app for Android for free and the massive amount of infrastructure that goes with it any more than I would expect Tesla to have added a gas pump to the supercharger network? And similar, it’s not like superchargers existing means all of the gas stations are gone.
It’s also worth noting that RCS functionally didn’t exist during development of iMessage (I think they were forming a committee to decide which committee will implement committee structure votes or something) and that even now RCS implementation is questionable at best between not having E2E as a requirement and the fragmentation that exists even across Android and most especially carriers (lots of examples of RCS being iffy in this thread alone) so it wasn’t like Apple looked at a fully-formed SMS/MMS replacement and chose to do their own thing.
Then you tack on 10 years of Google absolutely fumbling the bag with their messaging strategy (everyone reading is thinking of a different one - you’re all correct) and now we end up in the situation we’re in where not only did iMessage lock-in work for Apple, it worked better than they hoped and it’s not just keeping people on iPhone, it’s actively attracting people.
My optimistic take on this is that I hope they decide the lock-in isn’t worth it in favor of the type of model where they monetize through Apple Pay and stuff and build an Android app because I sincerely doubt there is any other way toward unified messaging, in much the same as Tesla now licensing superchargers to other EV makers. As it stands, Apple could give a shit about Samsung’s ads, and aside from the lock-in, a core of their brand is privacy/security so RCS as-is will be a non-starter. Well covered in this thread, but the EU isn’t coming to save us and the US has congress that can’t even regulate it’s own bowel movements, so
The Tesla comparison would work better this way: while you’re driving to another Tesla owner’s place, you’re having a smooth ride, no bumps, car works as expected. Then you put your other friends address into into the navigation and the radio switches to noisy FM and one of the headlights starts to flicker. It’s lock-out because no non-iphone user can join that club. It’s not lock-in, because every iphone user could easily switch to one of the “cross-platform” messangers. Not that I like Google. They’re both sh*t. But just opening up your infrastructure for others doesn’t mean you have to develop and maintain apps for other OSes.
SMS works the same as it ever has. Apple hasn’t broken anything, they’re not polluting SMS, it’s always been shit. The Tesla (probably touching a little more on real life) shipped with shitty QA that gave you a crap light and bad stereo. If you take Apple completely out of the equation and just process standard SMS between two Android phones, it’s still going to be garbage. If you add an iPhone, nothing changes. When you add iMessage into the mix, it’s still not breaking anything, only adding a shim on top of SMS, which admittedly sucks, but I think users would rather see “float liked your message” rather than no acknowledgement. This is also what’s happening on Android (and also iOS) a lot of the time.
But just opening up your infrastructure
“Just” is doing a frick-ton of work in that sentence. At a minimum, they would have had to build and maintain data centers, or at the very least add a lot of capacity to existing centers to support potentially quite likely a few hundred million to a billion Android users. Now you have to design and document APIs for other people’s use. This alone is why I said just build the app themselves, believe it or not it’s probably easier/less headache in the long term. And then there is supporting the API, the users on non-Apple platforms…
And why do they want to do that? We’re talking about many millions in expenditure per year for Apple for which they get nothing except less competitive advantage.
I can only tell you about Europe, because nobody here seems to use imessage. SMS are basically dead since the first generation of smartphones came out. They are used for OTP codes from banks sometimes but that’s it. The only reason why people use SMS in the US seems to be Apple. They didn’t make SMS worse than they were (which would be hard to achieve), but they basically force people to keep using them. Well, or abandon their apple friends. For the API, I think Apple could afford that, honestly. They don’t have to handle the data between Android phones if they support some form of federation. Only between Apple and Apple, and Apple and Android. Your operator also handles SMS when they go to or come from other operators. I think Apple just likes the peer pressure they seem to create with that app in the US. From a business perspective that might be smart, sure. Still, very malicious behavior. I’m glad there’s more and more regulation coming up (at least in the EU). If imessage wasn’t a niche here, they’d have to comply.
The only reason why people use SMS in the US seems to be Apple. They didn’t make SMS worse than they were (which would be hard to achieve), but they basically force people to keep using them.
I can’t explain why, but the default in the US is still to exchange phone numbers, and that means SMS. We have all of the same options, but moving to another messaging service just didn’t happen here. Even adjusting for time frame - iMessage had little power until at least 2013-14, which I’m by that time was probably long enough to move on in the EU and quite a lot of the rest of the world, and we were still using phone numbers.
Only between Apple and Apple, and Apple and Android.
This isn’t a standard that can be enshrined in law. I want to create NightOS on the NightPhone (which honestly sounds rad) this basically locks me out of doing that.
They don’t have to handle the data between Android phones if they support some form of federation.
Again, “support” doing a lot of work. You don’t just “support” a billion users. Huge time, attention, cost, even if you’re not storing the data.
Still, very malicious behavior.
“Malicious” implies intent. You can not like it, my post doesn’t even indicate that I like it (back to the original, I highlight a business case that makes sense for Apple to open this up) but just saying “I don’t feel like supporting your OS” is not malicious. Companies do it all. the. time. Any modern iOS device is many times more powerful than a Nintendo Switch or a Playstation 4, is every developer that doesn’t support iOS “malicious?” Even just regular people do this all of the time - me being on some social media but not others is not malicious, it’s just because I decide where my attention goes. We’re all making trade offs. The game companies don’t support Apple because the effort to profit ratio is too low. I don’t go on Facebook or reddit because as trivial, my ad impressions are actual money and I don’t want to support those companies. Apple so far hasn’t put iMessage on Android because it just doesn’t make sense for them to do it.
Your basic supposition comes down to “Apple should do a lot of work for less than free.”
It doesn’t make sense for them to do because their customers don’t seem to care.
“Malicious” implies intent.
It’s just a guess but all of Googles failed messengers were probably available for iOS, too. Apple on the other hand is known to intentionally make things incompatible with other brands.
Right, the customers who pay them to make the products they buy don’t care. Why would they put the immense amount of effort and money into building something for people who are not their customers? Apple isn’t a non-profit or a government program paid for by taxes.
Yes, Google’s messengers were available everywhere because that’s their business model. Google sells your eyeballs and is an advertising company. They’re not messaging, they’re not video, they’re not even search - those are just products to support their actual business which is to sell ads. Ad companies by default benefit from being anywhere that people who have eyes are.
Apple is not an ad company, they sell hardware. They gain nothing from making something for free for other platforms. They make stuff that enhances their products and provide them a competitive advantage. Like, basically every company ever. They do make things occasionally for other platforms, but only when it actually makes sense. The iPod, for example, launched as a Mac-only product, because at launch they thought this was an accessory that would sell Macs. When it turned out the iPod was a runaway success, they built iTunes and the iTunes Store for Windows and opened up compatibility. In modern times, AppleTV+ or Apple Music launched as Apple-only services. Then they decided to move to other things, so you can now watch AppleTV+ on a Fire Stick or Vizio TV, and Music is on Android…
Apple on the other hand is known to intentionally make things incompatible with other brands.
This is simply false. Not making something for everyone is not the same as making it deliberately incompatible. Even the only actual examples of Apple choosing something deliberately incompatible is often a trade-off that where Apple (and usually their customers) decide the trade-off is worth losing compatibility. The largest example is Lightning, and when it was invented it was the best connector available. Even now, I’d make a lot of argument it’s the best connector available, but the drop off to USB-C is no longer worth the trade-off of incompatibility. MagSafe (the MacBook kind) is another such, where Apple tried to drop their proprietary charger early in favor of USB-C and there was enough customer outcry they had to bring it back because it offers something USB-C does not.
Outside of these few rare examples, Apple actually has had to put in a large amount of effort in order to ensure compatibility. Most obvious example is things like working with Microsoft so Office would run on Macs, who actually do a lot of the things you claim about Apple. Through the 90s-2000s, MS couldn’t even be counted on to keep compatibility between it’s own Office versions so you’d be forced into buying a new license.
More relevant to today, Apple is the major reason why the web hasn’t developed into just Google Chrome, and other standards-based browsers like Firefox can still exist. Fortunately Apple is large enough that as long as they continue to run their own browser and engine (Webkit, which they contribute heavily to open-source) the web can’t simply fall into Google’s hands. Which, is another example of actual deliberate incompatibility, as Chrome/Chromium tends to only follow standards when it feels like it. Or even more simply, just run Firefox and see how Google’s products perform compared to just changing your user-agent. Or many other “chrome only” web apps. MS gave up and now runs Chromium, pretty much every other goddamn browser is Chromium based (Brave, Vivaldi, Arc, etc) and Firefox is now not relevant enough to stem the tide of Google. It’s just Apple and the few billion iOS devices that are keeping the open web, well, open. Because as previously described, Apple is not an ad company, and their benefit comes in continuing to sell devices that their customers like, which means a good web browser that isn’t spying on them.
Anyway, I’m out after this one. You can not like Apple or Google or whoever all you want, but best to stick to factual reasons that kind of make sense, at least. It’s like, I have another tab open where people are trying to argue with a straight face that Google should basically just make Youtube, which costs billions a year to operate, totally free with no ads and no fees. I obviously am not a fan of Google (I actually kinda hope they took the advice, Google dying would be a good thing for the web and privacy in general) but do people not understand that companies exist to make money and are by definition not charities?
iMessage is basically proprietary RCS. SMS doesn’t support images, for example. When you send an image via “sms” you’re really probably using “mms” behind the scenes, which has severe limits to quality. If you send an image with imessage, RCS, or any of a variety of custom messaging protocols, you can get the full-quality image.
They also support gimmicks like “reacting” to messages which get overlaid in-line with a heart icon. On SMS it is sent as “MooseBoys loved ‘be right there’”.
They also support gimmicks like “reacting” to messages which get overlaid in-line with a heart icon. On SMS it is sent as “MooseBoys loved ‘be right there’”.
Technically, yes SMS doesn’t support reactions. But you can do what Google does and just parse that text and “turn” it into a reaction for viewing purposes.
If an iPhone user sends me a reaction it looks fine to me, but funnily enough now when I send one back it looks the exact way Apple sends it to non Apple devices.
It is not open, it is controlled by the telcos, and google has been pushing their own proprietary version of RCS to the telcos.
It’s no better than iMessage. This isn’t a problem in the rest of the world, they just all use WhatsApp.
This is a legacy of the US being out in front of adoption of SMS, and it still being ingrained. It’s largely only a US problem. And it’s not even really a problem.
I love iMessage, but I have WhatsApp and signal and like 19 other apps that offer messaging for people who prefer it.
but I have WhatsApp and signal and like 19 other apps that offer messaging
That’s the problem. Maybe it’s a cultural thing, but Americans seem to be quite averse to downloading a new app or signing up for a new service just to communicate with someone if I have their phone number. As a result, it needs to be supported by default on all phones as shipped. Today, the only thing that fits that is SMS.
I guess. I’m American and interact with plenty of friends via discord, instagram and others. My friend group has a private discord and I use DMs instead of iMessage all the time.
how is iMessage fundamentally any different from texting
Not entirely sure what you’re asking but
iOS does not allow you to use any other messaging app for SMS. This is surely intentional to lock you into iMessage.
If you’re messaging iOS --> iOS your “text” messages (SMS) are automatically upgraded to the iMessage protocol, and there are a wide variety of features that are enabled without the user downloading any other apps or switching the protocol. It just happens.
Above commenter was saying that you’re not allowed to use any other app besides the default messages app to send SMS on an iPhone, so a third party can’t just come in with an SMS app that also implements RCS so everyone can be happy
Kids might want an Android phone for another reason than “we’re poor”. For a while, there were plenty of apps you could get on an Android that you couldn’t get on an iPhone. Customization was a big deal back when I was in highschool. All the cool kids had these shitty custom launchers that made their phone borderline unusable if you didn’t know how they were setup, but that was the cool thing to do back then.
I’ve got the money to buy an iPhone, but prefer Android for customization and app reasons still. Apple is far too restrictive of a phone that you own. I like the ability to side load apps, and I play a lot of emulated GBA/DS games, and apple doesn’t allow emulator apps on their store.
I can afford an iPhone 15 but I run a used OnePlus 6T I got on eBay for $100 because postmarketOS runs well on it. I ran a $200 PinePhone for a while before that. Bring on the phones that put the user’s control ahead of the profits.
I’d read it the way it was written. Apple has less expensive phones for people who want them, and honestly most poor families just get their phones through their carrier at a monthly rate, so your assertion isn’t really a necessary tactic.
Do you think the problem lies with Apple, or the idiot kids that somehow created a hierarchy around a text bubble color?
And let’s face it- if you owned/ran a company that was making fuck-tons of money because idiot kids rallied around exclusive text bubble colors, you’d want to keep that going as well. Don’t even try lying about it.
No, they’re not. They didn’t make the kids rally around bubble colors. They didn’t create the hierarchy. Nor did they create any enticements or reward those that used it. It just happened. Not doing anything to stop it isn’t exploiting it.
And expecting any company to cater to the stupidity of its or it’s competitor’s user base is fucking ignorant.
As I said- you k ow damn well you’d do the exact same thing about it- which is nothing. And collect tons of cash.
It’s not just the bubble color. The bubble color means it will be more difficult to exchange photos/videos (they get sent in MMS and compressed to hell) or use stickers/reactions properly.
So? Why is that Apple’s problem to fix? Whining about this is the same as whining to your neighbors because their kids have nicer sneakers than your kids do- and then expecting them to fix the problem.
If you want to have the features of an iPhone- GET AN IPHONE.
SMS isold and shitty, but its supported on every phone model. Apple stacked iMessage on top of it for rich media when both endpoints support iMessage. android and others stacked RCS on top of SMS for the same rich media purposes. When incompatible devices communicate (iOS<->non-iOS), they fall back to crappy SMS. You’re saying you like the separate-system status quo and if you want to communicate with one group or the other (iOS or non-iOS), switch devices. We’re saying why can’t we all just have one rich-media format that works for everybody?" I don’t care if Apple switches to RCS or opens up full-featured iMessage to everybody. I just want to be able to talk to all my friends without us having to buy the same hardware. Are you just being intentionally obtuse?
I have an iPhone, and the primary reason why is because 90% of my friends and family will not adopt another app for messaging. Why should they when literally everyone else they communicate with can take iMessages?
But when everyone is passing around photos and videos, the one person who greatly prefers open-standards gets (and sends) potato quality.
And that is really Apples “fault”. Not really, though, because it’s not an accident that they have an amazing messaging platform that is the system default and just so happens to be proprietary. And as such they have no incentive to fix it, because it will only lead to people like me leaving iPhone.
Yeah. I’m done arguing with these clowns. They think they’re entitled to something without having to pay for it. Apple’s messaging platform is superior.
End of story.
And why should they take a proprietary product and make it accessible to other platforms because a bunch of kids decided to create some bullshit ‘*Lord of the Flies-*like idolatry about it. I swear- they think Android is so superior to apple, and then cry about how Apple won’t they them have iMessage? ROFL!
I feel Europe is a lot more diverse than you think. In Norway, which have a fairly high percentage of iPhone users, iMessage is the most used - or at least I don’t know anyone who doesn’t use it by default.
A few friends chat are on Messenger or Snapchat. Signal / Telegram / WhatsApp etc are extremely rare.
Under new EU laws, Apple will be forced to allow interoperability with iMessage in the future. That doesn’t necessarily mean them adopting RCS or bringing iMessage to non-Apple platforms, but it does mean they’ll need to at the very least publish an API allowing external software or services to use iMessage.
I think they found imessage not to be a leading platform so AFAIK this isn’t the case for now. Maybe if more people start using it they’ll revisit the question.
Is there any precedent to ads in Apple products (apart from their store)? Although they’ll surely find other ways to annoy non-Apple users, I don’t think ads are “in style” for them.
I tried using the Apple app on Android for tracking the tracking thingies. Horrible, horrible app. I will not be trusting anything put out by Apple for Android unless they do a Microsoft and go all in. Otherwise, they will always have a reason to make the Android experience worse than the iPhone experience.
This is what I believe Google is actually trying to get carriers to do, and I suspect carriers (in some shape or form) will actually do this, just not in the way you think.
RCS will eventually become the dominant messaging standard, however, I think they’re actually working on a backwards compatibility for SMS and MMS in some capacity. In this way, phones (like the iPhone or older Android phones) will still be capable of sending and receiving SMS and MMS in typical elitist walled-garden fashion, but the carrier will receive it as an RCS message and relay it to an RCS-compatible device as an RCS message.
In this way, group chats with four Android users and two iPhone users will still allow those Android users to benefit from RCS from each other (typing indicators, reactions, potentially some level of E2E, support for large media, etc), while the iPhones in the group chat will actually be the ones having a negative experience (no typing indicators, reactions appearing as text messages, no E2E, obnoxious green bubbles) since Apple refuses to integrate RCS into their Messaging application. Of course Apple will continue to gaslight their customers through high contrast green bubble dark patterns, and continued refusal of adopting RCS or creating iMessage for Android. As they’ve made clear, they don’t care about giving their customers the best possible experience, and prefer to maintain market control for as long as possible.
The #GetTheMessage ads are likely gearing up for the eventuality of this change, and the Pixel x iPhone ads are all “buddy buddy, kill them with kindness” so they can out Apple as the hostile ones when they refuse to acknowledge the existence of other smartphones either through its aggressive marketing, or through refusal to adopt open standards.
If this were all to happen, depending on how well the RCS backwards compatibility worked and its ability to out Apple as the shut ins that they are, I could (crazy talk) foresee Apple creating a standalone iMessage app to, at the very minimum, keep Android users talking within their iMessage ecosystem.
RCS isn’t a good solution. As long as all RCS implementations are proprietary and Google doesn’t even include an RCS client in AOSP and doesn’t let you use a third-party client it’s just as shitty as iMessage. Just use Signal, it’s FOSS, cross-plattform and stores as little data about you as possible. It’s also not run by some garbage big tech corporation.
I lost half the people I’d gotten on signal when they removed sms. People liked it well enough when they could do all their messaging from one app on Android.
Why is it so hard for Americans to use multiple chat apps? Here in Europe, most people (especially those with friends/family in a different European country, because we use different apps in every country) have an entire folder full of chat apps on their phone. Sure, that’s not great, but pretty much everyone accepts it when I “force” them to use Signal.
Samsung and Google are just now getting around to supporting it
Hey now, I’ve been rocking RCS for three years. The only reason it took so long to begin with is because Google was trying to get service providers to implement it themselves. Google finally said fuck it and started doing it themselves iMessage style and then providers started playing along.
Centralized or not, it’s a massive improvement over basic SMS/MMS.
Edit: at least the concept is. Implementation aside, it’s crazy that there isn’t a cross-platform texting option that has more modern capabilities than what we’ve been using for the past couple decades.
That pretty much only affected the small percentage of American users that used Signal for the SMS integration. For everyone else it literally made no difference whatsoever. Besides, it is completely in line with their vision to not include SMS since it is an insecure protocol.
I'd argue the percentage wasn't small. The available population was Android users with SMS contacts.
Either way, it was an unforced error by the Signal leadership that gave away their competitive advantage in their home field to mainly Google and Facebook apps.
There is no way to convince me to go back to supporting Signal after that blunder. They destroyed my secure contacts network in less than two months after the announcement.
True, however it’s not as polished as Signal and not as noob friendly. I’ve been using Matrix daily for a couple years using Fluffychat and Element and not much has changed.
Phone number resolution is already a feature with identity servers but most servers don’t implement it.
Also have to choose a server increases the barrier of entry. I guess element works around that by defaulting to matrix.org although that’s not a great solution.
Because the technical part has been solved for a while and this has moved into being a social problem. My kids only use iMessage/SMS for people over thirty, and use Snap with all of their friends. In family groups, you standardize on on whatever. Most of my extended family decided on FB Messenger a while ago (I don’t participate, but my wife does and can fill me in.) My immediate family just uses iMessage. Friend groups I’ve seen generally do the same. They pick Telegram or WhatsApp or whatever, and then the quilting club just uses that. This also seems a very US centric issue - basically everywhere else is either on whatsapp or Line or WeChat or whatever.
Why would anyone want to stop using iMessage? It’s honestly quite good and the app integrations are great. Honestly the only iPhone users I know who don’t use iMessage are due to network effects (families in foreign countries where Whatsapp dominates).
It’s not about people wanting to stop using iMessage. It’s that over half of the mobile customer base CANNOT use iMessage because apple refuses to allow it. If Apple had created a solid Android app for iMessage, RCS would never have been created.
Transport Layer Security, or TLS, is a widely adopted security protocol designed to facilitate privacy and data security for communications over the Internet. A primary use case of TLS is encrypting the communication between web applications and servers, such as web browsers loading a website.
iMessage doesn’t ‘work’ unless you’re on an Apple device. Then it’s just falling back to using SMS, at which point Apple fanboys/girls start bitching because the text bubbles are ‘the wrong color’ which it’s seriously the most ridiculous first-world problem I’ve ever heard of.
RCS is an attempt to provide similar functionality to EVERYONE without the walled-garden lock-in.
While I’d much rather a fully open (inl source), non-proprietary solution exist, until such time RCS is at least an attempt at a step in the right direction.
Insert meme: You (iMessage user) can’t use RCS because Apple won’t let you. I (Android User) can’t use iMessage because Apple won’t let me. We are not the same…
at which point Apple fanboys/girls start bitching because the text bubbles are ‘the wrong color’ which it’s seriously the most ridiculous first-world problem I’ve ever heard of.
Wait…… isn’t this the whole point of the article? Samsung and Google are bitching because they don’t want to be green bubbles. Don’t make it out like this is all iPhone users. Google has had I can’t count how many substandard messaging apps, but now they’ve developed their own proprietary format and are crying for Apple to support it.
So let me get this straight, Google & Samsung want Apple to be forced to do something that will cost Apple sales and increase sales for their competitors. Good luck with that.
I’ve never originally seen, heard, or read anyone complaining about the wrong color bubbles except for iMessage users.
The article is just about Samsung and Google poking fun at Apple about it.
What I want is for all of the companies to, use a common (preferably open) standard for messaging as a default. I don’t give a shit which it is.
Ideally they would all do so voluntarily because it’s the right thing to do for their users. Since Apple refuses to let anyone else use iMessage, RCS was created, and made available to be used, even by Apple.
But apparently Apple can’t be bothered to play nice with others no matter what because all they care about is squeezing every possible dollar they can out of their suckers, I mean users.
What I want is for all of the companies to, use a common (preferably open) standard for messaging as a default. I don’t give a shit which it is. Ideally they would all do so voluntarily because it’s the right thing to do for their users. Since Apple refuses to let anyone else use iMessage, RCS was created, and made available to be used, even by Apple.
So Apple came up with a great system that encourages people to stay in the ecosystem, and Google is mad about it. So Google comes up with an iMessage clone, and now they’re pitching a fit that everybody won’t jump onto their implementation. Which, while RCS is open, Google’s implementation is not. “Apple is locking everyone into their system! Make them stop so we can get them locked into ours!”
But apparently Apple can’t be bothered to play nice with others no matter what because all they care about is squeezing every possible dollar they can out of their suckers, I mean users.
Wait… wait… you think Apple (or any other company for that matter) should do what’s best for those that aren’t they’re customers?? So I’m going to say this again a little louder for the people in the back - Apple is under no obligation to modify the way their products work to promote the competition, which will lose them sales. And as an Apple stockholder, I’m beyond fine with that.
So does 4G. Imagine if apple refused to support 5G? Yes the end consumer might not notice but apple refusing RCS is them refusing to update an old standard to it’s next version. I guess they dragged their feet with USC C and kept with a old USB 2.0 lighting cable for so long…
They could adopt RCS. But still keep iMessage users using their iMessage service backend and have the green/blue bubble thing still.
“What did the EU ever do for us?” in the monthy python mood. After usb c, apple is getting its proprietary model challenged again. When will Apple understand that in the long run it hinders innovation? And that openness and standardisation is a catalyst for it. RCS might not be the interoperable solution the EU pushes though. Anyway that’s the future of not using standards : lemmy.nz/post/2316522
AFAIK there is no open source messaging app that support RCS yet. It’s not even included in android AOSP (or is it? I can’t find any reference). It would help with adoption if google actually open-sourced the RCS client app.
Forgive me if I’m mistaken but did Signal adopt RCS? I they abandoned SMS for RC- if I recall - couldn’t SMS my friends on it anymore and abandoned ship lol
Fundamentally the problem is that SMS is rather dated and doesn’t support a lot of features expected of a modern messaging app. Apple decided to do what Apple does and made their own proprietary protocol that runs parallel to SMS. When you send a “text message” on iMessage it checks if the person you’re talking to is also using iMessage and if so sends the message via Apples private service. If they aren’t using iMessage it dumbs things down and send it via SMS as a fallback.
Google came along and more or less did the same thing but made their protocol (RCS) licensable which makes them slighty better than Apple, but it’s still not as good as an actual open standard.
Signal is yet another solution, but they were primarily focused on security and encryption rather than new features, but fundamentally they did the same thing as iMessage initially. About a year or two ago Signal dropped the option to fallback to SMS so now you can only send Signal messages between Signal users. Unlike Apple or Google, signals protocol is open, but Signal itself is closed source and I don’t believe they allow interop with their service so I’m not sure their protocol being open actually does much good.
Basically everyone sucks in their own way, but if you want SMS interop then the least bad option is RCS currently.
Well that’s interesting. I didn’t think they had made their server source available, but I just checked their github and it does actually have a repo for their server.
The simple fact that iMessage has 0 interoperability makes it much worse than everything else.
So I doubt RCS could be as bad except if they remove the ability to operate with other RCS clients. And even for Google and Samsung that would be extremely stupid.
I’ve just been googling a bit because I haven’t read about RCS in a while, but I remember thinking then that the show stopping thing is that it’s not E2E, and Apple would be dumb to move to since iMessage is. It seems now that E2E is supported but requires clients to support it, which tbh seems the worst of all worlds. At least today I know blue = encrypted, green = not encrypted. If it’s optional and we end up in a “is this encrypted? we’ll see ¯*(ツ)*/¯” type of world that is honestly terrible. I also don’t know how great it would be if you have to rely on the client vendor to accurately report encryption status because there are some I trust, and especially when it comes to “just download whatever RCS client you want” I absolutely would not trust that.
“Enable” is incorrect, and why I was warning you about it. It’s on by default, so you need to “disable” it if you want E2E encryption
A blue bubble is unlikely to mean a message is E2E encrypted. That may not matter for your threat model, but Apple almost certainly has the decryption keys for your messages
Also very good point. My threat model is I don’t want script kiddies with shit that they can get (optionally) off of eBay to be able to read my messages because too many places still default 2fa and other identifiers to SMS. Until RCS defaults to E2E at least in transit, that’s tough. From there it’s still going to be the mercy of what the OS vendor decides, like Apple in this case. That said, if I were worried about government actors or a targeted attack, I would 1000% used advanced data protection.
Anyway, upvoting your comments as much as I can (+1) because you’re totally right and it’s a consideration you should have.
RCS predates iMessage, but it was never widely adopted. Google has been running with it, but it’s been with Google-specific changes to the protocol
If they can get others to adopt their extensions as a standard and offer an open source example implementation, it could probably be better than iMessage
Google has a problem getting other people to use standards they work on because they drop support for them all the time, though
Apple is not going to change this unless legally forced to because it is quite possibly the biggest driver of iPhone sales.
A whopping 87% of American teens use an iPhone, and the green text from Android SMS is the biggest reason. At that age people will do almost anything to fit in and get a date, and the green text was chosen specifically to elicit an “eww” response. Most of those teens will likely will continue to use iPhones as adults because it’s what they know.
As someone from the EU, I’m so confused about why this would matter to people. At that age, people will just find any excuse to bully regardless of what it is, it’s why uniforms don’t work either for those purposes. Hell, if someone were to try and shame me for the fucking color of my messages I’d be thankful, they’ve shown me another cunt to avoid associating with. In that sense it might actually be useful. (also, who even uses sms anymore?)
Meanwhile outside of the United States basically no one uses iMessage. Precisely because it’s so terrible it interfacing with non-apple devices. Everyone just uses WhatsApp which will work with anything.
Of course WhatsApp’s quite a crap program as well missing basic functionality but at least it’s not device specific.
The green text peer pressure means nothing to me, but you are 100% spot on about the ecosystem driving sales. My whole family uses apple and I get left out of so many group chats and face times that I’ve actually considered switching to Apple even though I’m a die hard Note fan. Apples hardware may be nothing special, but they have a killer feature in their seamless, closed ecosystem, and they know it. At the end of the day, a phones job is to communicate, and Apple does that seemlessly- with other Apple devices
It’s a slippery slope though. Unless you own a mac or pay subscribe to icloud storage tranferring photos and other files off your phone is gonna be a pain. Also, unless you get a mac with enough storage space it’s also gonna be a pain because iphotos doesn’t support direct transfer to external drives, so you gotta use image capture which is ridiculously barebones.
That’s what lured me in and also why I left. I wanted devices that worked together for accessibility reasons, not because I wanted to be on some over engineered chat network that only works with itself.
Just download Signal. Cross platform, verifably E2E, and verifiably no data collected by Open Whisper (as per their submission in a lawsuit). Also, one of the authors/architects of Signal occasionally trolls the companies that provide mobile spyware.
I tried using signal but I had a lot of problems with it. I wouldn’t get my messages. The people I messaged didn’t get my messages. There was an emergency and someone couldn’t get ahold of me when they really needed to. After that I deleted signal and moved on. That’s just my experience. Yours could be different.
I managed to move a big portion of my friends and groups over to signal and quite a few Android users initially had notification issues that were fixed by updates. Maybe give it another chance.
No, I moved some of my friends and family over to signal and they all left after our issues. Now that it doesn’t even have SMS and no one I know uses it there isn’t any incentive for me to go back.
Yes. Interop outside of matrix, thanks to bridges.
I can’t find any matrix app.
WDYM you can’t find any? Are you searching for a matrix client for a light bulb? Or client for a fridge?
Jokes aside for PCs and phones’ official client is Element, it can be used in browser or installed locally anywhere(Electron, duh). If you prefer something more native, then you can choose nheko for PC.
EDIT: you can get Element in F-Droid
EDIT2: apparently Thunderbird supports matrix too. Well, Thunderbird supported federated protocols since the beginning.
I’ll play with Element this weekend, but so far I’m seeing exactly zero benefits your average person. Sure it might be interesting if you have a mostly techy group that will install stuff.
This discussion is reminiscence of the “Linux” on the desktop one… (And why Linux still only has what? 1-2% market share)
Macintosh phone and laptop are not appropriate. I understand people are free to piss their money away as they wish. But I truly believe iLegacyTech and that absolutely brain damaged touchbar are holding back what could be otherwise productive desktop OS users. Also, it take over five years for apple to fix an emergency dialer unlock bug. It might still be there but I don’t care anymore.
Sorry I forgot to actually respond by mentioning the snotty attitude of apple users and their willingness to repeat off the wall technobabble advertisements.
Signal is the way to go. No need to expose metadata to your mobile carrier via RCS. Also, currently you need Google’s proprietary garbage message app to make use of RCS. There’s litterally no reason to do this.
I personally had a very bad experience with signal and I don’t think I’ll be using it again. Also now that they cut SMS support I think they only way I’d use it again is if an overwhelming amount of people start using it.
Why was your experience bad? Did you sign up for it when Elon Musk encouraged people to use it? Back then, so many people signed up that their servers were just overloaded. That’s to be expected with a user growth rate of 400% in one week. I’ve been relying on Signal for all of my communications for a year and a half now and I haven’t ever experienced any issues.
I signed up very early and it was based on an episode of All About Android on TWiT. Messages just weren’t going through. Mine out and others in to me. There was an emergency and someone really needed to get ahold of me and I didn’t get the message. After that I dropped signal.
Oh, that’s unfortunate. I understand why you dropped it after that experience. I can only tell you that they have massively improved and the experience is great now.
If it gets immensely popular I’d definitely consider using it again. Without SMS as a backup it isn’t very useful. I converted a few people over to it initially and after that incident we all left. I’m not really interested in playing evangelist again.
I wish we live in an ideal world where we could have a messaging application which is like email. Anyone can run their server and can have whatever messaging client they want. And everything is interoperable.
Not the same guy but this is basically impossible. I was able to get maybe two of the dozens of people I have to contact regularly to use it, then they dropped SMS support and it’s been dead ever since for me.
I used it too. I miss it, but i get why they removed it: it just kinda breaks the Signal user experience and trust model. This app lives and dies by the users trust their conversations will be private. By having an option to message someone in a completely unencrypted, easy to intercept mode like SMS it risks this trust for little gain (some power users like us liked it). By removing it, the app concentrates on what is expected from it and removes a big possibility for user error while fleshing out its marketing image even more. It makes perfect sense but its a tad annoying.
I understand what you’re saying, but I feel it was pretty transparent the way they handled SMS vs. Signal Messages. I suppose it’s a bit like the D.W. meme, though.
Unfortunately, in doing so, Signal became Yet Another Messaging App. It really damaged their value proposition in my eyes.
If I need a separate app for SMS, WhatsApp, Messenger, Telegram, Signal, etc, it just becomes a chore to find enough friends willing to move to it exclusively.
The IM ecosystem really needs to be harmonized on the user end. I remember Trillian was this great app back in the day that brokered all your MSM, Google Chat, etc IM accounts into a single app that let you just focus on messaging people and not worrying about what platform was being used. We badly need this again.
Matrix can kinda emulate this kind of “all messages in one app” experience with bridges but you introduce a single server who decrypts all your end to end encryption so you pretty much have to self host. Also the bridges arent perfect so your msgs will sometimes look weird or not support some features.
A shared frontend would be a little more convenient, but is having multiple apps that big a deal? I think I have eight right now.
Android’s default Contacts app has buttons for each option a given contact has so there’s not even much cognitive load to pick the app you need if you start from there.
Most chat apps will sync with Contacts if you allow them to. If you don’t do that, then you have to remember which app you want for each person, which becomes inconvenient if you have a lot of contacts who use different apps.
I understand that they wanted stay true their philosophy but that decision is the reason we will never see Signal be relevant ever again. I hope they do a U turn
I always thought having SMS support in Signal created a significant risk of confusion about what kind of message the user was sending. Of course sophisticated users always knew the difference, but it’s for software that emphasizes security it’s better not to have to tell people who don’t understand the technical details “it’s secure unless…”.
It’s a valid point that it could potentially create some confusion when a user assumes that everything in Signal is secure. Unencrypted SMS threads could contain an open padlock icon and even an ominous red window border, but someone inevitably will not understand the difference.
However, my frustration has been how both convenience and security is reduced by removing SMS from Signal.
Many people will continue to use SMS for a variety of reasons, necessitating the use of an additional app. So now we have people continuing to communicate over this insecure protocol, but with the additional target vector of potential vulnerabilities in the supplemental app.
My understanding with RCS is that similar to SMS it uses the infrastructure of your phone carrier. First question: Do all carriers support this? Second question: Is there anything that prevents carriers from eventually monetizing this? At least with some sort of roaming trap when you are abroad…
Most carriers support it. When they don’t, the protocol can use a bridge. Google hosts a bridge. I guess you could also use the bridge if the carrier is trying to charge for it.
Sorry, this just reads to me as the little kid being angry he can’t join the bigger kids. I really believe that were the shoe and the other foot and were it Google with iMessage, they wouldn’t be so keen to let Apple use it.
Well Google is arguably the big kid here 70% of all cell phones are android phones. Also, Google puts its apps/services on Apple devices. There’s no way to rewind time, change a variable or two, and then play it back to see how things change.
Come on. There isn’t anything near parity with the cross platforming of apps. Apple has a few (three of them are music apps) and I believe Google puts all or nearly all their apps on iOS.
When did I say there was parity? I just pointed out they do create Android apps for some of their services.
They’re both acting in the interest of the company and not the user. Apple make money by selling devices. Protecting the services that push you to purchase Apple devices makes sense.
Google are an advertising company and by bringing their services to Apple devices they make money off the users.
By saying “apple puts their services” it implied to me that you were suggesting that apple actually put much of its inhouse software on Android, which isn’t the case. Not in the same way that saying “Google puts its services on iOS” is accurate because a great deal of Google’s software is available on iOS.
In our conversation who is saying anything about altruism? What I said was Google releases a lot of, in my opinion, incredibly useful software for free and then pays for it by selling ads. I feel like this is incredibly obvious and for me it’s a good deal because I like Google’s free services and I’d rather see ads about things I might actually be interested in than things I’m not interested in.
Apple can do whatever it wants. Currently they want to keep a barrier between Android and Apple users as a strategy for driving iphone sales.
A reason could be just to create a better experience for its users. Currently Apple to Android messages are SMS and MMS, which are unencrypted. Apple could ensure the security of its users’ messages by implementing RCS, which has E2E encryption.
Google puts out a lot of free services: Gmail, maps, docs, sheets, voice, etc. It makes sense that they’re paying for those services some how.
Broadcast television is free and paid for with commercials. TV targeted the ads with the content of the show. Soap operas are called that because women typically watched them and women in those days bought the household supplies and that’s who advertised on those shows.
Google’s basically doing the same thing. They just have a different way of targeting the add. It’s a pretty open exchange.
Add comment