Tim Cook revealed the real reason Apple won’t fix green bubbles(theverge.com)
theverge.com
Tim Cook revealed the real reason Apple won’t fix green bubbles
https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/8/23343336/apple-tim-cook-imessage-blue-green-bubbles-texting-rcs
48 comments
> Also RCS involves the carriers, I cannot think of a worse party (other than google) to involve.
They're a better party than Apple or Google because they support multiple hardware and software ecosystems. I'd prefer some sort of nonprofit, but I'll take what I can get.
> RCS is not working perfectly for phones that ostensibly support it today (at least that's what I'm hearing from my android friends).
Well, fwiw I've heard the opposite.
They're a better party than Apple or Google because they support multiple hardware and software ecosystems. I'd prefer some sort of nonprofit, but I'll take what I can get.
> RCS is not working perfectly for phones that ostensibly support it today (at least that's what I'm hearing from my android friends).
Well, fwiw I've heard the opposite.
I have an Android and RCS works perfectly... This is someone coming from iPhones
Apple supporters don't seem to understand RCS is supposed to replace SMS/MMS - not replace iMessage.
iDevice <-> iDevice messaging will continue to use iMessage - it's everyone else that would receive RCS messages, and that's an enormous improvement over SMS/MMS. Not supporting RCS for non-Apple devices is absurd today, and would be trivial for Apple to implement.
So... we're left to believe it's an intentional decision to degrade messages with non-Apple devices.
As an aside, it's absurd to have proprietary texting protocols in 2022... Apple's iMessage might be great, but it requires an Apple device to work. That's frankly ridiculous. Let's get a standard that replaces SMS/MMS for everyone...
iDevice <-> iDevice messaging will continue to use iMessage - it's everyone else that would receive RCS messages, and that's an enormous improvement over SMS/MMS. Not supporting RCS for non-Apple devices is absurd today, and would be trivial for Apple to implement.
So... we're left to believe it's an intentional decision to degrade messages with non-Apple devices.
As an aside, it's absurd to have proprietary texting protocols in 2022... Apple's iMessage might be great, but it requires an Apple device to work. That's frankly ridiculous. Let's get a standard that replaces SMS/MMS for everyone...
> Apple supporters don't seem to understand RCS is supposed to replace SMS/MMS - not replace iMessage.
There may be some people who (wrongly) think that but I don't, my objection to RCS is because it's carrier-dependent and Google pretty much owns the "standard", I don't want a new messaging system with either of those things. SMS is fine for 2FA (for sites that refuse to let me use my 2FA app) and for all other chat there are a ton of other great alternatives. We don't need RCS, it's a solution in search of a problem and it has some very bad flaws IMHO. If I want "google messaging" I'll install their app, I don't want a new messaging platform forced on me that will stagnate and fall behind what will become the new "table stakes" for chat apps in a few years time.
There may be some people who (wrongly) think that but I don't, my objection to RCS is because it's carrier-dependent and Google pretty much owns the "standard", I don't want a new messaging system with either of those things. SMS is fine for 2FA (for sites that refuse to let me use my 2FA app) and for all other chat there are a ton of other great alternatives. We don't need RCS, it's a solution in search of a problem and it has some very bad flaws IMHO. If I want "google messaging" I'll install their app, I don't want a new messaging platform forced on me that will stagnate and fall behind what will become the new "table stakes" for chat apps in a few years time.
> and for all other chat there are a ton of other great alternatives. We don't need RCS, it's a solution in search of a problem
If you need to install a proprietary app to communicate with some subset of your contacts list... then that is not a good solution.
SMS lets you send a message to any mobile phone number in the world... it just works.
Why would someone want 3+ apps just to communicate with different circles of contacts? Who governs these apps and protocols? Some fly-by-night company that gets bought by Facebook and turned into an Ad Platform, or a company that doesn't take security seriously and leaks private messages everywhere? These are awful solutions.
iMessage is gated for only iDevices. That makes it a bad solution. While it may work great for Apple users, it was literally designed not to work with anything else. Guess what... Apple devices are the extreme minority of devices out there in the wild.
Perhaps RCS isn't the best replacement of SMS as it could be - but it is a huge improvement for majority of the world, and Apple not playing along makes them a bad actor - not Google. After all, RCS benefits Apple users too.
So the argument that RCS isn't as great as it could be, and it's driven by Google (the largest maker of mobile operating systems in the world!) falls very short.
If anything, Apple should collaborate on the RCS spec, if they feel it's lacking for some reason.
If you need to install a proprietary app to communicate with some subset of your contacts list... then that is not a good solution.
SMS lets you send a message to any mobile phone number in the world... it just works.
Why would someone want 3+ apps just to communicate with different circles of contacts? Who governs these apps and protocols? Some fly-by-night company that gets bought by Facebook and turned into an Ad Platform, or a company that doesn't take security seriously and leaks private messages everywhere? These are awful solutions.
iMessage is gated for only iDevices. That makes it a bad solution. While it may work great for Apple users, it was literally designed not to work with anything else. Guess what... Apple devices are the extreme minority of devices out there in the wild.
Perhaps RCS isn't the best replacement of SMS as it could be - but it is a huge improvement for majority of the world, and Apple not playing along makes them a bad actor - not Google. After all, RCS benefits Apple users too.
So the argument that RCS isn't as great as it could be, and it's driven by Google (the largest maker of mobile operating systems in the world!) falls very short.
If anything, Apple should collaborate on the RCS spec, if they feel it's lacking for some reason.
> If you need to install a proprietary app to communicate with some subset of your contacts list... then that is not a good solution.
RCS is effectively proprietary and will absolutely lag in features. I don't understand why people seem to think it's the end-all-be-all.
> SMS lets you send a message to any mobile phone number in the world... it just works.
And it hasn't changed since launch. RCS will similarly fall behind quickly. Why would we adopt a new languishing "standard", it makes no sense, everyone is going to have 3rd party chat apps anyways, why not use them?
> Why would someone want 3+ apps just to communicate with different circles of contacts? Who governs these apps and protocols? Some fly-by-night company that gets bought by Facebook and turned into an Ad Platform, or a company that doesn't take security seriously and leaks private messages everywhere? These are awful solutions.
And you think Google+carriers is the answer to this? Google is an ad platform, carriers are going to try to use this to extract more money/control.
> iMessage is gated for only iDevices. That makes it a bad solution. While it may work great for Apple users, it was literally designed not to work with anything else. Guess what... Apple devices are the extreme minority of devices out there in the wild.
Literally not part of this discussion. I do not care. Don't use it, use something else. iMessage being amazing or terrible has nothing to do with RCS being a waste of time.
> Perhaps RCS isn't the best replacement of SMS as it could be - but it is a huge improvement for majority of the world, and Apple not playing along makes them a bad actor - not Google. After all, RCS benefits Apple users too.
Bullshit. The carriers haven't even gotten their shit together when it comes to RCS and again Google effectively owns/controls RCS. It's not an improvement over what's a simple download away (other chat apps).
> So the argument that RCS isn't as great as it could be, and it's driven by Google (the largest maker of mobile operating systems in the world!) falls very short.
I'm not sure why you think being the largest makers of mobile operating systems is positive or matters in this discussion? Google is also the company that has an embarrassing number failed chat platforms in it's history. Google Talk used to be build on XMPP but they abandoned that even though it was extendable. They will either abandon RCS or continue to make it more proprietary than it already is. They are not good stewards of chat.
RCS is effectively proprietary and will absolutely lag in features. I don't understand why people seem to think it's the end-all-be-all.
> SMS lets you send a message to any mobile phone number in the world... it just works.
And it hasn't changed since launch. RCS will similarly fall behind quickly. Why would we adopt a new languishing "standard", it makes no sense, everyone is going to have 3rd party chat apps anyways, why not use them?
> Why would someone want 3+ apps just to communicate with different circles of contacts? Who governs these apps and protocols? Some fly-by-night company that gets bought by Facebook and turned into an Ad Platform, or a company that doesn't take security seriously and leaks private messages everywhere? These are awful solutions.
And you think Google+carriers is the answer to this? Google is an ad platform, carriers are going to try to use this to extract more money/control.
> iMessage is gated for only iDevices. That makes it a bad solution. While it may work great for Apple users, it was literally designed not to work with anything else. Guess what... Apple devices are the extreme minority of devices out there in the wild.
Literally not part of this discussion. I do not care. Don't use it, use something else. iMessage being amazing or terrible has nothing to do with RCS being a waste of time.
> Perhaps RCS isn't the best replacement of SMS as it could be - but it is a huge improvement for majority of the world, and Apple not playing along makes them a bad actor - not Google. After all, RCS benefits Apple users too.
Bullshit. The carriers haven't even gotten their shit together when it comes to RCS and again Google effectively owns/controls RCS. It's not an improvement over what's a simple download away (other chat apps).
> So the argument that RCS isn't as great as it could be, and it's driven by Google (the largest maker of mobile operating systems in the world!) falls very short.
I'm not sure why you think being the largest makers of mobile operating systems is positive or matters in this discussion? Google is also the company that has an embarrassing number failed chat platforms in it's history. Google Talk used to be build on XMPP but they abandoned that even though it was extendable. They will either abandon RCS or continue to make it more proprietary than it already is. They are not good stewards of chat.
As an iDevice user that admits to using iMessage - why do you care what SMS replacement the rest of the world gets?
At this point, anything is better than SMS, and no - it is flatly not acceptable to force people into using ad-hoc communications apps solely because Apple refuses to play nice with the community.
Seriously, iDevice to iDevice communications will remain in iMessage. You literally get to have your cake and eat it too.
> And you think Google+carriers is the answer to this?
Obviously they are. Google makes the most prolific mobile operating system in the world, and carriers have to transport the messages. Obviously this requires both of them to cooperate.
People want a replacement and upgrade from SMS - not a WhatsApp or some other 3rd party proprietary app that will go away eventually.
Time to get in line Apple. You're hurting your own users by refusing to modernize SMS for quite literally no good reason. Telling folks to just buy an iPhone is like telling them to slap a rubber band around their expensive device due to an obvious design flaw... it's just unacceptable.
At this point, anything is better than SMS, and no - it is flatly not acceptable to force people into using ad-hoc communications apps solely because Apple refuses to play nice with the community.
Seriously, iDevice to iDevice communications will remain in iMessage. You literally get to have your cake and eat it too.
> And you think Google+carriers is the answer to this?
Obviously they are. Google makes the most prolific mobile operating system in the world, and carriers have to transport the messages. Obviously this requires both of them to cooperate.
People want a replacement and upgrade from SMS - not a WhatsApp or some other 3rd party proprietary app that will go away eventually.
Time to get in line Apple. You're hurting your own users by refusing to modernize SMS for quite literally no good reason. Telling folks to just buy an iPhone is like telling them to slap a rubber band around their expensive device due to an obvious design flaw... it's just unacceptable.
> As an iDevice user that admits to using iMessage - why do you care what SMS replacement the rest of the world gets?
Because I don't want Google's messaging system adopted as a "standard". I don't want another chat protocol forced on me that will stagnate just like SMS. I don't want to involve the carriers at all.
> At this point, anything is better than SMS, and no - it is flatly not acceptable to force people into using ad-hoc communications apps because Apple refuses to play nice with the community.
Absolutely false, and I challenge the idea that RCS is "better" on the whole. RCS is not a "standard", RCS is not open source, it's literally just another proprietary chat protocol. That's not a step up in my book. It's painfully obvious that some kind of "open protocol" is not going to take hold, email is the only real example we have left of this and it's shit as well. No companies can agree and again, RCS is not open, it's effectively owned by Google. Would you ok with iMessage being the SMS replacement? (Don't waste time talking about how you think Apple wouldn't do that, just imagine we live in a world where they would).
> Obviously they are. Google makes the most prolific mobile operating system in the world, and carriers have to transport the messages. Obviously this requires both of them to cooperate.
And they make, in my opinion, a rather shitty OS. You clearly think differently (no pun intended) and that's fine but I don't want Google involved in chat. They have the worst track record as do carriers. Just look at the RCS rollout and how Google effectively owns the implementation, how is that good? The carriers refused to play ball until Google provided the implementation, why should we believe either will be good stewards of it?
> People want a replacement and upgrade from SMS - not a WhatsApp or some other 3rd party proprietary app that will go away eventually.
Look outside of the US buddy. SMS is pretty much a US-only thing and trust me, RCS is not going to bring people back in droves, they left SMS for better and they are staying there.
Because I don't want Google's messaging system adopted as a "standard". I don't want another chat protocol forced on me that will stagnate just like SMS. I don't want to involve the carriers at all.
> At this point, anything is better than SMS, and no - it is flatly not acceptable to force people into using ad-hoc communications apps because Apple refuses to play nice with the community.
Absolutely false, and I challenge the idea that RCS is "better" on the whole. RCS is not a "standard", RCS is not open source, it's literally just another proprietary chat protocol. That's not a step up in my book. It's painfully obvious that some kind of "open protocol" is not going to take hold, email is the only real example we have left of this and it's shit as well. No companies can agree and again, RCS is not open, it's effectively owned by Google. Would you ok with iMessage being the SMS replacement? (Don't waste time talking about how you think Apple wouldn't do that, just imagine we live in a world where they would).
> Obviously they are. Google makes the most prolific mobile operating system in the world, and carriers have to transport the messages. Obviously this requires both of them to cooperate.
And they make, in my opinion, a rather shitty OS. You clearly think differently (no pun intended) and that's fine but I don't want Google involved in chat. They have the worst track record as do carriers. Just look at the RCS rollout and how Google effectively owns the implementation, how is that good? The carriers refused to play ball until Google provided the implementation, why should we believe either will be good stewards of it?
> People want a replacement and upgrade from SMS - not a WhatsApp or some other 3rd party proprietary app that will go away eventually.
Look outside of the US buddy. SMS is pretty much a US-only thing and trust me, RCS is not going to bring people back in droves, they left SMS for better and they are staying there.
The rest of the world left SMS because their carriers charged way too much for it. In the US, it's really unusual these days to not have unlimited SMS built into even the most basic pre-paid plans. Apples & Oranges...
Your own personal feelings aside - why would Apple not adopt RCS for non-iDevices? Do they share your opinion? If so, why not push iMessage as the standard protocol and make it available on all devices, work with carriers to make it native, etc?
Because Apple wants you to buy an iPhone. They are not a good actor in this situation... it's really that simple.
Your own personal feelings aside - why would Apple not adopt RCS for non-iDevices? Do they share your opinion? If so, why not push iMessage as the standard protocol and make it available on all devices, work with carriers to make it native, etc?
Because Apple wants you to buy an iPhone. They are not a good actor in this situation... it's really that simple.
> The rest of the world left SMS because their carriers charged way too much for it. In the US, it's really unusual these days to not have unlimited SMS built into even the most basic pre-paid plans. Apples & Oranges...
They may have left only because of the cost but now the features are more than enough to keep them off SMS/RCS even if it was free.
> Your own personal feelings aside - why would Apple not adopt RCS for non-iDevices?
Why would Apple adopt a Google messaging service (which RCS is)? If the roles were reversed Google wouldn't bake iMessage into their platform, why should it be any different with the roles reversed.
> Because Apple wants you to buy an iPhone. They are not a good actor in this situation... it's really that simple.
And Google wants to own chat, they are not a good actor either. Apple being a bad actor or not wanting to expand iMessage access doesn't mean we should all jump on Google's chat version.
They may have left only because of the cost but now the features are more than enough to keep them off SMS/RCS even if it was free.
> Your own personal feelings aside - why would Apple not adopt RCS for non-iDevices?
Why would Apple adopt a Google messaging service (which RCS is)? If the roles were reversed Google wouldn't bake iMessage into their platform, why should it be any different with the roles reversed.
> Because Apple wants you to buy an iPhone. They are not a good actor in this situation... it's really that simple.
And Google wants to own chat, they are not a good actor either. Apple being a bad actor or not wanting to expand iMessage access doesn't mean we should all jump on Google's chat version.
I don't know what "owning chat" means here. This is a SMS protocol replacement... and it's designed so that any messaging system can be compatible and send/receive messages from other devices, operating systems, apps, etc.
Google isn't receiving, storing, and parsing your messages with RCS. It's a protocol, not a service.
Google doesn't really stand to gain anything here. There's no money to be made in having their name stamped on the original design... it couldn't matter less who created the original RFC or whatever.
If Apple had an alternative they were pushing as being better than RCS, then it would be fair for there to be a "battle" over which SMS replacement wins... but they don't have an alternative.
Besides, Google isn't the only proponent for RCS. According to Wikipedia, 88 carriers in 59 countries with approximately 390 million monthly users are already using RCS[1], dwarfing anything Apple could offer.
This leaves Apple with an unhealthy dose of NIHS... and it hurts their own users as much as it hurts the rest of the world. Apple had their chance to push for a better SMS protocol, but they decided to make it proprietary in true Apple fashion. Now the rest of the world got together and made a new better SMS protocol, and Apple is refusing to cooperate for no good reason.
This reminds me of the micro sim card battles of the early 2010's. Apple clearly had the better design, and today nearly all new phones use it (Apple designs and not). RCS is clearly a better design than SMS... so they should use it.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services
Google isn't receiving, storing, and parsing your messages with RCS. It's a protocol, not a service.
Google doesn't really stand to gain anything here. There's no money to be made in having their name stamped on the original design... it couldn't matter less who created the original RFC or whatever.
If Apple had an alternative they were pushing as being better than RCS, then it would be fair for there to be a "battle" over which SMS replacement wins... but they don't have an alternative.
Besides, Google isn't the only proponent for RCS. According to Wikipedia, 88 carriers in 59 countries with approximately 390 million monthly users are already using RCS[1], dwarfing anything Apple could offer.
This leaves Apple with an unhealthy dose of NIHS... and it hurts their own users as much as it hurts the rest of the world. Apple had their chance to push for a better SMS protocol, but they decided to make it proprietary in true Apple fashion. Now the rest of the world got together and made a new better SMS protocol, and Apple is refusing to cooperate for no good reason.
This reminds me of the micro sim card battles of the early 2010's. Apple clearly had the better design, and today nearly all new phones use it (Apple designs and not). RCS is clearly a better design than SMS... so they should use it.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services
> and for all other chat there are a ton of other great alternatives.
If Apple allowed me to replace the default messaging app, or allowed other services to provide "plugins" which integrate into the default app, I'd be fine with it not supporting RCS.
As things stand, any cross-platform messaging app which isn't SMS is a second-class citizen on the iPhone. Which I'm sure is exactly as intended.
If Apple allowed me to replace the default messaging app, or allowed other services to provide "plugins" which integrate into the default app, I'd be fine with it not supporting RCS.
As things stand, any cross-platform messaging app which isn't SMS is a second-class citizen on the iPhone. Which I'm sure is exactly as intended.
> As things stand, any cross-platform messaging app which isn't SMS is a second-class citizen on the iPhone
100% bullshit. I use Discord and Slack on my phone every single day, neither of them are at a disadvantage to something like iMessage. They support the same things I do with iMessage. Having all your chats in 1 app is just a game of "find the lowest common denominator" which is not a game I want to play.
100% bullshit. I use Discord and Slack on my phone every single day, neither of them are at a disadvantage to something like iMessage. They support the same things I do with iMessage. Having all your chats in 1 app is just a game of "find the lowest common denominator" which is not a game I want to play.
> 100% bullshit. I use Discord and Slack on my phone every single day, neither of them are at a disadvantage to something like iMessage
What does Discord and Slack require that SMS doesn't? Hint... an account for a proprietary service that may terminate or delete your account and/or history whenever they feel like it.
Seriously... everyone agrees SMS/MMS is terrible. Smoke signals might have higher resolution images these days... we need a replacement. Just because Apple has decided to make their own proprietary thing does not bar them from getting in line with the industry and supporting RCS for non-iDevices.
What does Discord and Slack require that SMS doesn't? Hint... an account for a proprietary service that may terminate or delete your account and/or history whenever they feel like it.
Seriously... everyone agrees SMS/MMS is terrible. Smoke signals might have higher resolution images these days... we need a replacement. Just because Apple has decided to make their own proprietary thing does not bar them from getting in line with the industry and supporting RCS for non-iDevices.
> What does Discord and Slack require that SMS doesn't? Hint... an account for a proprietary service that may terminate or delete your account and/or history whenever they feel like it.
I'm sorry, what are carriers? Also SMS isn't some open protocol that anyone can use, there are gatekeepers everywhere for SMS. Your "account" for SMS is your carrier account.
I'm sorry, what are carriers? Also SMS isn't some open protocol that anyone can use, there are gatekeepers everywhere for SMS. Your "account" for SMS is your carrier account.
That's not true. Your phone number is your "account", and phone numbers, by law in the US, are not tied to a particular carrier. You can take your phone number, and messages wherever you go.
How is this an advantage? Phone numbers are the worst identifiers, I don't want things tied to my number. Even if I can move my number to another carrier I want less in my life tied to 10 digit number that I don't really "own".
Also you can't take your messages with you unless you have them saved on your phone. SMS (and RCS as I understand it) don't account for storing/syncing your messages.
Also you can't take your messages with you unless you have them saved on your phone. SMS (and RCS as I understand it) don't account for storing/syncing your messages.
> SMS (and RCS as I understand it) don't account for storing/syncing your messages
It doesn't, which is the beauty of it. RCS is a protocol, not a service. Services can be built on top of the protocol, like storing/syncing messages - but the protocol has none of that.
Perhaps you are conflating services like iMessage (and their feature set) with the protocol that is responsible for transport and send/receive of the messages, and based off that conflation are negative on Google operating a messaging service. This is not that, however.
There will not be a single app for RCS... in fact there are already dozens (if not more) RCS compatible messaging apps, each with their own services/features. This is analogous to how SMS works... there is no such thing as "The SMS App".
It doesn't, which is the beauty of it. RCS is a protocol, not a service. Services can be built on top of the protocol, like storing/syncing messages - but the protocol has none of that.
Perhaps you are conflating services like iMessage (and their feature set) with the protocol that is responsible for transport and send/receive of the messages, and based off that conflation are negative on Google operating a messaging service. This is not that, however.
There will not be a single app for RCS... in fact there are already dozens (if not more) RCS compatible messaging apps, each with their own services/features. This is analogous to how SMS works... there is no such thing as "The SMS App".
> What does Discord and Slack require that SMS doesn't? Hint... an account for a proprietary service that may terminate or delete your account and/or history whenever they feel like it.
Right, instead SMS requires you to pay a monthly subscription fee, and if you change providers and phone numbers you have to update all your contacts.
Phone number tied messaging should be made a thing of the past, it's not something to champion anymore.
Right, instead SMS requires you to pay a monthly subscription fee, and if you change providers and phone numbers you have to update all your contacts.
Phone number tied messaging should be made a thing of the past, it's not something to champion anymore.
> and if you change providers and phone numbers you have to update all your contacts.
At least in the United States, mobile carriers are legally required to allow you to port your phone number. Your phone number belongs to you forever (unless you choose to discard it).
By contrast, most personal email addresses (which are what most people use to sign up for other services like Whatsapp) belong to for-profit companies, who can and do hold them hostage.
At least in the United States, mobile carriers are legally required to allow you to port your phone number. Your phone number belongs to you forever (unless you choose to discard it).
By contrast, most personal email addresses (which are what most people use to sign up for other services like Whatsapp) belong to for-profit companies, who can and do hold them hostage.
My wife moved from Argentina to the US, the cost would have been exorbitant to keep her number and service with perpetual international roaming. Plus, SMS to her number never worked anyways (from my phone, no clue how well it worked in Argentina but she never used it anyways). SMS has been shit forever, RCS is an attempt at yet-another carrier tied service that shouldn't be tied to your carrier.
If you have a phone, you have a phone number. You can send a SMS to any mobile phone number on the planet and are (basically) guaranteed delivery. You cannot say the same for some proprietary system like Slack...
Try moving internationally, see how well being tied to that US number for SMS/MMS/RCS will work for you. Or move to the US from another country, and see if any carrier will take that foreign number, or if any carrier from your home country will provide an affordable international roaming plan in the US for the longterm.
That's a fair point—if you move internationally, you can't keep your phone number.
I'd argue that's a fairly niche edge case, however, which still leaves us in a better situation than most digital identifiers. Google could relinquish my email address at any time for any reason and I'd have no recourse.
I'd argue that's a fairly niche edge case, however, which still leaves us in a better situation than most digital identifiers. Google could relinquish my email address at any time for any reason and I'd have no recourse.
Exactly, talking about this with apple fans on other places, they all talk about how iMessage is better... Nobody is talking about that.. were talking about how SMS/MMS is terrible and needs replacing.
And yes it is intentional.. the reason came out in the Apple vs Epic lawsuit. Apple won't adopt RCS because they are afraid of user churn and also that apple owning parents will buy cheaper androids for their kids.
Which when you know that, you compare that with the Tim Cook "~~let them eat cake~~ buy your mum an iphone" comment yesterday..
And yes it is intentional.. the reason came out in the Apple vs Epic lawsuit. Apple won't adopt RCS because they are afraid of user churn and also that apple owning parents will buy cheaper androids for their kids.
Which when you know that, you compare that with the Tim Cook "~~let them eat cake~~ buy your mum an iphone" comment yesterday..
IMO this is the same as the USB-C/Lightning controversy.
Apple came up with (an arguably) better solution than SMS w/ iMessage. Now there is a newer "standard" (USB-C yes, RCS not quite) and everyone wants to force Apple to change.
Apple came up with (an arguably) better solution than SMS w/ iMessage. Now there is a newer "standard" (USB-C yes, RCS not quite) and everyone wants to force Apple to change.
Most of the world doesn’t even use iMessage, it’s all WhatsApp/messenger/WeChat. This controversy is such a nothing burger in comparison to App Store policies.
There’s plenty of cross platform chat clients out there and new ones sprouting up all the time. I have an iPhone and I only communicate with a handful of people on iMessage, it’s not even that great of a chat app and it’s hardly the moat that people make it out to be.
There’s plenty of cross platform chat clients out there and new ones sprouting up all the time. I have an iPhone and I only communicate with a handful of people on iMessage, it’s not even that great of a chat app and it’s hardly the moat that people make it out to be.
Anyone have a GDPR compliant link for this article?
I only use the Messages app to get MFA codes for different applications. Don't they use something like Whatsapp in the US? I think it mostly a non-issue in Europe
This is a recurring type of comment. Some people use primarily WhatsApp or FB messenger. Other people's entire social network is on iMessage. Neither talk to users of Signal. And there are also separate groups of people who think everyone is on Telegram or WeChat.
Clearly there are network effects, and which app wins is varies between regions and groups.
Clearly there are network effects, and which app wins is varies between regions and groups.
[I'm an American] I've heard that the reason WhatsApp became so popular in Europe is because European cellphone services used to (still do?) charge for texts per message whereas in the US it quickly became commonplace for all service providers to include "unlimited texting" plans. From my perspective, I never felt the need to download any additional app for messaging - the default messaging app was always the go-to way to text people before smart phones, and then when the iPhone came out that just continued with iMessage as the new default messaging app.
If you text messaging is free. Does that include MMS? I am not sure why it a blue or green bubble is a big problem? You would still be able to send messages or media content?
The only difference I can see is the lack of end-to-end encryption and reactions (e.g. like a message)?
The only difference I can see is the lack of end-to-end encryption and reactions (e.g. like a message)?
I'm from the US. While there are certainly people that use it, I don't personally know anyone that uses Whatsapp, Signal, Telegram, etc... as their primary method of text communication. Nearly everyone I personally know uses iMessage or SMS, with a smaller subset using Facebook messenger.
No. iPhones are dominant enough in the US that most people communicate over iMessage, or SMS if you're the one guy stuck on Android.
This is the reason I haven't switched to Android—so it has worked on me at least.
This is the reason I haven't switched to Android—so it has worked on me at least.
iOS and Android are neck and neck in the US. There was a report about iOS passing Android just days ago, so they have similar market share. I can readily believe that at certain workplaces, almost everyone has an iPhone, but this isn't true generally.
I'm still seeing 60-40 in a quick Google search? https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-sta...
I'm sure it does depend on your community too, e.g. iPhones are more common among members of the upper-middle class. (Which is why iPhone use is well above 60% in my social circle.)
I'm sure it does depend on your community too, e.g. iPhones are more common among members of the upper-middle class. (Which is why iPhone use is well above 60% in my social circle.)
Green bubble doesn't need any fixing as such.
Google released 13 + messaging products in last 10 years. Apple provides much better compatibility to google Apps than google itself provides to its own apps lol :)
Google released 13 + messaging products in last 10 years. Apple provides much better compatibility to google Apps than google itself provides to its own apps lol :)
The only thing that needs fixing for me (iPhone) is to use black text instead of white on the lime green bubbles. White is too hard to read. That's probably fine with Apple too though.
Go to accessibility settings and enable increased contrast.
Thanks, I tried that and it works! I use dark mode and now instead of a black background with lime green bubbles and white text, it's darker green (and blue) bubbles with white text. Both are easier to read! Functionality is more important to me than aesthetics for a phone.
But that affects the entire OS, and makes it quite ugly.
Eh, it's maybe a bit less attractive but not "quite ugly". It mostly seems to take some bright shades (like reds, greens, and blues) and darkens them. It's not like MS's high contrast option (which does indeed make the whole system quite ugly, the perhaps does an even better job than the iPhone of improving visibility).
Users to Google: Can you provide better messaging experience?
Google: let me think
Google to Apple: Can you cripple your iMessaging experience so that these people would stop blaming me?
Google: let me think
Google to Apple: Can you cripple your iMessaging experience so that these people would stop blaming me?
How would it cripple the iMessage experience to fall back to RCS, instead of ancient SMS, when texting a non-iPhone?
Google version of RCS would cripple iMessage. standard RCS is not good enough to be used in practice. Basically google wants apple to use its own version of iMessage (conveniently calls it as RCS and make it looks like it is standard)
> Google version of RCS would cripple iMessage.
Why?
> Basically google wants apple to use its own version of iMessage (conveniently calls it as RCS and make it looks like it is standard)
They want Apple to use RCS exclusively when an Apple user texts a non-Apple user, at which point the iPhone currently falls back to SMS. How is any version of RCS worse than SMS?
Why?
> Basically google wants apple to use its own version of iMessage (conveniently calls it as RCS and make it looks like it is standard)
They want Apple to use RCS exclusively when an Apple user texts a non-Apple user, at which point the iPhone currently falls back to SMS. How is any version of RCS worse than SMS?
RCS is not working perfectly for phone that ostensibly support it today (at least that's what I'm hearing from my android friends). RCS is not really a standard as much as it's whatever Google wants (It's like Chrome is for the web but for messaging) and Google has the worst track record possible when it comes to messaging. Also RCS involves the carriers, I cannot think of a worse party (other than google) to involve. We wrested control from carriers years ago and this just hands them control back, it's absolutely absurd. The "standard" itself doesn't support E2E, no, that's a Google addon. It's a garbage fire and just because it's slightly better than SMS people act like it's the second coming, spare me, it's barely table stakes for a competent chat service (something google wouldn't know anything about).
It's a shit "standard", it doesn't even work currently, and it's just a thinly veiled way for Google to control messaging. RCS is stupid, just use any other chat service out there if you don't want to use SMS, it's really not difficult, only the US seems to have this issue (surprise).