Adopting a 7 year old standard is innovation? When you created the same functionality 13 years ago?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Adopt RCS Messaging Standard for Better Interoperability With Android Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That could still work...depending on how deep they insist the OS is. An Android (Linux) kernel under iOS would still practically be the same OS to anyone that uses it. Forcing the UI to change would be an absolute atrocity.
Because this isn't an attack on Apple. The EU are advocating for message interopability. It effects many players today, and removes the network effect allowing challenger startups in the messaging space tomorrow.
It is intentional on Apple's part. Yes, MMS has significant restrictions. But those restrictions only apply for Apple users if Apple forces the their users down to that level. The iOS Messages app is software and as such can do things to to work around the restrictions presented to their users. They could, for example, send all group messages traffic through iMesaage ( full resolution images/videos, typing indicators, etc) for all iMessage users, and also create MMS message group for all non-iMessage participants, but hide that from the iMessage users. Any incoming MMS messages from iMessage capable users would not be presented to the user (because they already got that message through iMessage). That would enable everyone to communicate together, but not restrict the features of the iMessage capable clients. Apple has had 2 decades to do something like this, but they've CHOSEN not to.
If we want actual message interoperability, it should not be relying on phone numbers to identify users. My PC should be just as capable of joining a conversation as my phone.
RCS does not currently have a standard for end to end encryption. That’s what they’re waiting for. Google has added an extension to their implementation of RCS that provides E2EE on Android, but Apple has adamantly stated they will not support any non-standard extensions. Probably for good reasons… I’m sure Google’s “E2EE” extensions somehow sends all data through their servers.
And yes, the bubbles will still be green.
The fact that the functionality is 13 years old and has had no improvements made to it should tell you the answer.
Yes, it does what you're saying it does not - splits the conversation into two separate groups when doing so. And it's still a pain in the ass. 2 decades huh? iMessage has only existed for 13 years. iPhones for 16 years. Where did those other 4 years come from? At the time iMessage came along, even using MMS for group chats wasn't a thing yet. Google itself didn't solve this problem, they waited for the carriers to solve it, so Apple should have been the leader here? You're looking to point fingers at something that just is what it is.
Yet it has had improvements made. Are we really going to have to walk through 13 years of changes to a piece of software that was a decade ahead of their competition? What nonsense.
So was that functionality created by Apple 13 years ago or wasn't it? You're starting to talk out both sides of your face here.
This thread can be summed up as:
Apple announces it will implement industry standard RCS capability into the iPhone to replace SMS/MMS, as requested by some users.
Some users decry ‘we didn’t mean that standard!’
Some people will complain about anything, even a good news story like this.
Apple announces it will implement industry standard RCS capability into the iPhone to replace SMS/MMS, as requested by some users.
Some users decry ‘we didn’t mean that standard!’
Some people will complain about anything, even a good news story like this.
Last edited:
That’s not what’s happening at all. Go to any of the telecoms and look at their RCS documentation, they’re all partnered with Google via a bundled messaging app. That means it’s Google’s infrastructure.
Apple’s “monopolistic”-ness has nothing to do with the carriers not investing in replacing SMS. In order to do that they’d literally have to rework how their networks work as sms was a happy accident in telecom. It’s the protocol that is used to negotiate with the tower, and somewhere in the past they realized there was enough bandwidth to also use it to sent text. RCS is not a replacement for that tower negotiation.
Apple is implementing the STANDARD. Google’s stuff is NOT part of the actual ratified Universal Profile standard, it’s added on top.
Yea that is rhe big question isn't it, how will rcs ( esp international) be charged if at all ( beond data usage ofc, but at current prices, data usage( at least for text) will be in significant compared to sending 1 sms to an international dest ( example my carrier, by noeamens the absolut chepest but far from the most exspensive charges USD .066/sms to any destination within the EU/EEA) compar thet to data and it is so many times more exspensive than data usage( remember smsis just 150 characters and longer messages are often charged as multiple messages ( at keast they used to be) that turns out to a ptity steap price/GB if you bother to do the math. So here is hoping RCS will pe coubnted as data usagerather than per message at current rates
To the contrary, it takes away a(n artificially maintained by Apple) barrier that prevents customers from switching operating systems. May that hurt Apple‘s business model of proprietariness, incompatibility and vendor lock-in? Yes.
There‘s may be no „need“ - but there’s a customer benefit of having iMessage features and/or compatibility on Android.
Data portability across apps, platforms and operating systems and having intercompatible means of communication on different OS is good for consumers.
Proprietariness, incompatibilities and vendor lock-in were never reasons that made me „love“ Apple.
It’s not as if instant messengers are very different or working fundamentally different from 20 or 25 years ago when we SMS, ICQ or Skype. They‘ve basically got the same feature set. Neither was or is iMessage a great innovation or revolution when and since Apple introduced it. It’s basically a copycat of other messengers, its most clever feature possibly being forcing users‘ devices to silently auto-register with it.
👉🏻 It‘s a good thing when basic communication features like that aren’t left to gatekeepers to use as leverage for vendor lock-in.
There’s enough headroom to make the best, most compelling smartphone you can, differentiate products and create innovative software features on smartphones - without being petty and relying on network effects and vendor lock-ins for very basic functionality to prop up your sales.
Last edited:
I think a lot of people are struggling with the notion that RCS has an underlying profile, which is the ratified standard. On top of that, companies can add proprietary extensions to add more functionality, as Google has done. Apple doesn’t need another proprietary messaging service; it already has iMessage.
RCS isn’t a replacement for over the top messaging services like imessage or WhatsApp, it’s a replacement for SMS/MMS.
It's only 2 parts under the hood. The MMS group is still completely intact. Actually it's not 2 separate conversations. It's a full featured mirror of the MMS conversation that is available to iMessage capable users. I'm not sure how you could construe that this would that bad for anyone involved.
My point is that Apple certainly has the resources to make the pain associated with Android communication go away ( or at least be significantly less painful). They've chosen not to.
Absolutely Apple has the resource to do it, but not the incentive (it’s unlikely to generate more profit, and if anything might jeopardise profitability). However, I don’t foam at the mouth over that. Business is gonna business.
If UP went through Google, then Google wouldn't have their own version.
And yes the can and do read everything that goes through their own protocol, they've admitted as much. They invented the encryption, which means it's not encrypted to them. They have the key.
That was my point to OP. The incentive for Apple is to make the whole situation less than ideal. That doesn't change with RCS. Their RCS implementation is likely going to come with its own set of pain, just like SMS/MMS, because it's int their own best interest to keep it that way.
When you have group chats, picture, video and audio messaging, it’s effectively a good replacement for a large part of WhatsApp users.
Again, UP is the same as SMS; it's just a protocol. Google's version goes through Google's servers; UP does not. Hence why it's universal. Google owns their version of RCS, they do not own UP. UP will go through their server when someone using UP texts someone using G-RCS and if there is not encryption in place, then they'll have just as much access as they do their own. That encryption will be up to the utilizers of UP, not UP itself.
Yey - finally we can have Spam in iMessage:
www.theverge.com
Google Messages users in India are reportedly drowning in ads
Including ads for gambling sites and personal loans.
www.theverge.com
Well Apple’s implementation of RCS is entirely in the hands of the GSMA. If the GSMA wants it to be a great, full featured service then they need to add that to the standard.
RCS won’t be better though, so I doubt it’ll make people switch from what they already use. RCS would have to offer something better than existing over the top messaging services to see people switch in any meaningful way.