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.
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.
They are incompetent enough. They also see no reason to switch. They will tell you that other apps will also use your data and that Whatsapp is working fine for what they do with it. Doesn’t matter if it’s true.
Some even use the status to share stuff like Instagram and are addicted to it.
They’ll tell you that there’s no point in installing two apps. I’ve had that topic often enough.
Yeah that’s a big problem that I’m trying to research solutions for myself too. It was way better when I could tell people to just install Signal and it’d replace their SMS app but be secure when others use it, but unfortunately Signal dropped SMS. Currently I just have all the apps, but since Signal does contact discovery (like Whatsapp) I follow a Signal, Whatsapp, FB Messenger, RCS (via Google Messenger), then SMS pattern and stopping when I can contact someone. Obviously, this has the issue that all these apps are getting far more data than they need and I’d like to look into a multiplatform app that does e2e. From what I’ve researched so far, Matrix bridges (servers that connect your Matrix account to a third party messaging service) might be the answer.
I haven’t tried it yet but there is a Matrix bridge that you can host if you are selfhosting a Matrix server (or use a commercial Matrix provider that already hosts it) that will allow you to connect to your Whatsapp friends without needing the Whatsapp app yourself that could be interesting for at least that use case docs.mau.fi/bridges/go/setup.html?bridge=whatsapp .
A few years ago I thought so as well, but today, everyone of my friends and family is on Signal. Also, it’s not complicated to use, it’s basically the exact same user experience as on WhatsApp or Telegram. If normies can figure out WhatsApp, they can figure out Signal.
I didn’t say it was FOSS. I said that unlike iMessage, which Apple refuses to allow Android to use, RCS is available to be used by Apple if it so chooses.
Yes, a FOSS protocol/standard would be better, and I hope we have one done day that is actually available and used by default by both iOS and Android (and any other future players in the field). But until that happens, RCS is at least allowed to be used by other companies so it’s at least a small step in the right direction, even if Apple continues to stubbornly refuse to use it.
Signal is also available on every platform, you don’t need to use whatever chat app your phone’s manufacturer wants you to use, it’s your choice. And Signal is probably the best choice right now.
The only way something replaces WhatsApp is if WhatsApp stops existing.
Besides, RCS is not in any shape or form ready to the general public, considering all the blatant inconsistencies and instabilities, let alone replace one of the most used, tried and tested messaging platforms out there.
I switched my parents group chat to RCS from whatsapp after pestering them for ages.
Over the span of 2 months we had 4-5 inconsistencies where I would recieve a message from my mum or dad in the group that would be in another language or clearly not be written by them. It wouldn’t show up on her phone but my brother and dad would see it.
Here’s the proof of the last occassion it happened. They’re never going to switch now…
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)
I think this issue is mostly a USA one, considering that most communications there have caps (data, phone time, SMS etc.) Paradoxically, the market there doesn’t work very well and prices are relatively high. Big corporations take advantage of it to lock people to their ecosystems. There is a high probability that this issue, will be regulated by the EU, since US policy makers are unable to solve much more important problems. For them this is not an issue. The market has solved it.
It’s entirely a US issue. Everywhere else just uses platform agnostic apps like WhatsApp, telegram, signal, etc to get round the issue. Americans hitch their wagons to a corporate manufacturer like an identity and then moan about people who buy the other brand having different coloured text message bubbles.
You missed that standards should extend beyond international borders and are important regardless, but especially for international interoperability reasons.
You missed that using proprietary messaging apps made by companies is the actual way to dickride corporations and that standards are literally the only way to avoid doing so.
There’s more to it, but those are the main pieces.
I’d argue the SMS/MMS reliance in the US is entirely because there have been no caps on it for years now. Nearly all plans you can get here have unlimited SMS/MMS included, even cheap prepaid ones.
Having a fixed allotment of texts or minutes hasn’t been a thing for over a decade at this point, and the only thing that’s expensive now is data.
That was my understanding. I was told one of the reason for growth in apps like Whatsapp outside the US was that data was cheaper than texting (probably just per message cost).
I haven’t sent an SMS since like 2013 or something like that. Couldn’t care less about this blue green controversy, my use of SMS is receiving 2fa codes and spam.
It’s hard to get phone service without unlimited SMS in the USA. Using it is still worse than most alternatives so I do find it weird that people aren’t adopting chat apps more eagerly.
Right, nearly all US carrier and MVNO plans have offered unlimited SMS and MMS for years now. It’s free, it’s built-in, and it’s easy. For most, it doesn’t matter if chat apps are better, so it’s been very difficult to convince people you chat with to switch to a different app.
You'd have to convince everyone to switch to it and most Americans are going to have the reaction of: "Why would I want another fucking app that I have to make another damn account for when I have something that does pretty much what I want built in"
Activity groups will usually use some other service for member messaging (ex: my D&D group uses Discord for campaign discussion even though we all have eachothers phone numbers, a outdoor activity groups like a hiking group may use a facebook page, etc.)
It’s not necessary to convince everyone to switch. Even one person switching from SMS to an internet-based chat app means a better chat experience with that person.
I’ve had multiple apps to be able to talk to everyone I know since about 1998, so I find the strong resistance you’re describing bizarre. I have encountered it a few times though.
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.
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.
Apple should support RCS as a cross-platform texting option. It is meant to be implemented by cellular providers, not device manufacturers, and meant to be a more capable replacement for existing texting. It is not under the control of any single software or cloud provider. Think of it as improving “the lowest common denominator”. I don’t see why I would choose to use it but I do want the option.
I use SMS mostly. From time to time Google asks if I want to activate RCS and presents a policy along with it, which I decline. Does it pass through their servers? If it does, that’s gonna be a big no.
I’m not quite sure why you’re against a message going through a particular company’s servers. If it’s privacy then as far as I know SMS & MMS are like sending postcards in that everyone can see them.
Yeah I don’t think you’re right in that. I don’t think SMS or MMS are encrypted in anyway. I imagine you have an Android phone and unless you’re running a custom OS like Graphene don’t you think your data is already accessible?
“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
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