Google Might Finally Help Kill SMS/MMS

[widgeteer]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/19/...ages-chat-rcs-anil-sabharwal-imessage-texting

Read the article. Both the solution and how they got there sound amazing.

How ironic would it be if Google had the last laugh on messaging?

 

[casperes1996]

Wait what? SMS/MMS is still a thing? All my bubbles are blue

 

[LIVEFRMNYC]

So Allo is dead then. Google Fked up once again.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Palm WebOS was the only one to do it right off the bat. Synergy - all messaging apps and systems were integrated into one central messaging API and interface, with synced contacts. So it didn't matter if a contact SMSed, AIMed (it was a while ago), Facebook Messaged, GChatted, Skyped, or whatever - it all showed up in the messages interface in the OS under that contact. All in one, super easy, very intuitive. Any messaging app could plug-in to that system easily.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Palm WebOS... all messaging apps and systems were integrated into one central messaging API and interface... So it didn't matter... it all showed up in the messages interface in the OS under that contact.

While that sounds appealing... I have a question:

How does the OS know which service to send a message through?

I could imagine having 3 or 4 different ways to message a single contact.

So if I want to send a message to "Frank"... does it send a text, or GChat, or Facebook, or Skype, or what?

Or do you have to manually choose from the various ways to reach that person?

Hell... it's bad enough when someone has multiple email addresses. Now imagine all the social networks you're connected through too... each with their own messaging component! 😛

 

[Michael Goff]

While that sounds appealing... I have a question:

How does the OS know which service to send a message through?

I could imagine having 3 or 4 different ways to message a single contact.

So if I want to send a message to "Frank"... does it send a text, or GChat, or Facebook, or Skype, or what?

Or do you have to manually choose from the various ways to reach that person?

Hell... it's bad enough when someone has multiple email addresses. Now imagine all the social networks you're connected through too... each with their own messaging component! 😛

You create a central hub where everything is just a plugin. The plugin itself would tell the service what it was from and would allow the response. And nobody would do that.

 

[Michael Scrip]

You create a central hub where everything is just a plugin. The plugin itself would tell the service what it was from and would allow the response. And nobody would do that.

Hmmmm... that explains when I receive a message into the hub and how I would reply.

But how do I send a new message from a hub like this? Do I have to specify SMS, FB, Skype, Twitter DM, Instagram DM, WhatsApp, etc?

I dunno. If someone sends me a Twitter DM... I can reply from the Twitter app. It doesn't really bother me. I'll probably be using the app soon enough anyway. 🙂

 

[Michael Goff]

Hmmmm... that explains when I receive a message into the hub and how I would reply.

But how do I send a new message from a hub like this? Do I have to specify SMS, FB, Skype, Twitter DM, Instagram DM, WhatsApp, etc?

I dunno. If someone sends me a Twitter DM... I can reply from the Twitter app. It doesn't really bother me. I'll probably be in the app soon enough anyway. 🙂

You'd have to choose that specifically.

 

[tbayrgs]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/19/...ages-chat-rcs-anil-sabharwal-imessage-texting

Read the article. Both the solution and how they got there sound amazing.

How ironic would it be if Google had the last laugh on messaging?

On paper sounds great but like all things messaging related with Google, I’ll believe it when I see it.

This paragraph alone (and more so the areas in bold) from the article is reason to give me pause:

The new Chat services will be turned on for most people in the near future, though timing will be dictated by each carrier. Google is optimistic many carriers will flip the switch this year, but there could be some stragglers. Chat messages will be sent with your data plan instead of your SMS plan, so you’ll likely only be charged for whatever (minimal) data it costs to send a message. Though, again, it will be up to the carriers.

 

[JaySoul]

We will be having this same conversation in 2 years time, I suspect.

 

[Breaking Good]

I can’t stand iMessage. It’s blocked on my employer’s WiFi network. So when someone sent me a message through iMessage, it was blocked until I left the office. I turned it off on my iPhone 6S+ and all other Apple devices and haven’t looked back.

 

[widgeteer]

On paper sounds great but like all things messaging related with Google, I’ll believe it when I see it.

This paragraph alone (and more so the areas in bold) from the article is reason to give me pause:

Yes and no. The carriers, and Google’s own history in messaging, should give anyone pause. In this instance I’m willing to be cautiously optimistic because 1) they already got carriers to sign on, 2) it’s not a new messaging app, it’s adding features to an existing program, 3) as the article correctly points out: SMS is going away one way or another.

The downside is Google’s pitch to carriers sounds kinda crappy for consumers in that they basically said “Hey, remember the good old days when you owned all texting? This can help give it back to you.” God help us once, say, VZW realizes they could monetize the default messaging app on Android phones vs begging people to use their stupid Verizon app.

It’s a mixed bag but anything that potentially brings the end to SMS/MMS will ultimately be a good thing.

 

[casperes1996]

I can’t stand iMessage. It’s blocked on my employer’s WiFi network. So when someone sent me a message through iMessage, it was blocked until I left the office. I turned it off on my iPhone 6S+ and all other Apple devices and haven’t looked back.

Well you can't exactly blame imessage for being blocked

Do you also hate sunlight, because sometimes it gets blocked by clouds?

 

[5105973]

https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/19/...ages-chat-rcs-anil-sabharwal-imessage-texting

Read the article. Both the solution and how they got there sound amazing.

How ironic would it be if Google had the last laugh on messaging?

I’m not the best judge of such things, but that came across as a well-written article. The fly in the ointment is the carriers and carrier greed. I think the OEM’s will get on board with it readily enough if it’s sold to them as a way to finally be competitive with iMessage and make their phones as attractive to consumers as an iPhone, especially in countries where the iPhone is popular.

It does bug me that because the carriers are ruling the roost here, Chat won’t have end to end encryption.

In the wake of the security breeches and manipulations I’ve endured as a customer of Yahoo and Facebook, I am coming to value offers of security and privacy more even though I’m not really transmitting much that is of interest. Most texts involve what’s for dinner, actually. It’s the principle of the thing. In case I do need to text hubby about a problem with the kids or discuss what the oncologist said about one of our parents.

Also it doesn’t sound like there’s a solid timeline for this and Google is at the mercy of the carriers to move on this when they feel like it. Good luck with AT&T. The eye roll emoji in this forum isn’t as good as the Apple Emoji version to convey the look I’m casting at the US carriers on this.

 

[oneMadRssn]

While that sounds appealing... I have a question:

How does the OS know which service to send a message through?

I could imagine having 3 or 4 different ways to message a single contact.

So if I want to send a message to "Frank"... does it send a text, or GChat, or Facebook, or Skype, or what?

Or do you have to manually choose from the various ways to reach that person?

Hell... it's bad enough when someone has multiple email addresses. Now imagine all the social networks you're connected through too... each with their own messaging component! 😛

It’s been a while, so my memory is not certain. Iirc, there was a default setting for new messages (typically sms, but it could be changed) and I think you could also set the default per contact (eg, default for Frank is gchat). But if were replying, it would reply vis the last messaging system used. There was a drop-down in the messaging window and it was easy to select which to use if you wanted to change.

The point was it sort of made messaging systems irrelevant. To the user, other than the icon, nothing was different because a message is a message regardless of what server it flows through.

What I liked was it put all the conversations into one timeline. So for a contact I could see the gchat convo in line with the sms convo and the facebook convo.

 

[widgeteer]

I’m not the best judge of such things, but that came across as a well-written article. The fly in the ointment is the carriers and carrier greed. I think the OEM’s will get on board with it readily enough if it’s sold to them as a way to finally be competitive with iMessage and make their phones as attractive to consumers as an iPhone, especially in countries where the iPhone is popular.

It does bug me that because the carriers are ruling the roost here, Chat won’t have end to end encryption.

In the wake of the security breeches and manipulations I’ve endured as a customer of Yahoo and Facebook, I am coming to value offers of security and privacy more even though I’m not really transmitting much that is of interest. Most texts involve what’s for dinner, actually. It’s the principle of the thing. In case I do need to text hubby about a problem with the kids or discuss what the oncologist said about one of our parents.

Also it doesn’t sound like there’s a solid timeline for this and Google is at the mercy of the carriers to move on this when they feel like it. Good luck with AT&T. The eye roll emoji in this forum isn’t as good as the Apple Emoji version to convey the look I’m casting at the US carriers on this.

The carriers are always the fly in the ointment. In this instance, I think it will actually be their greed that could speed things up. If they think that by enabling Chat they can grab back a swath of WhatsApp and FB Messenger people, it'll move fairly quickly.

The key will be how they roll it out initially. If it's in the form of "enhanced" texting with an additional fee, it'll be DOA. The carriers need to understand the monetization comes on the backend of people using Chat. If they charge people to get in the door it's not going to work.

P.S. The carriers are CRAZY for not jumping on this ASAP as it should be a slam dunk to lure people away from FB Messenger.

 

[casperes1996]

In case I do need to text hubby

Second time I read a post about talking to Hubby, and now I've got to ask..... Who's hubby? It sounds like a teddy bear... No offence to Hubby

 

[AustinIllini]

I'm annoyed that Google had to get with the carriers to make this solution a reality.

 

[tbayrgs]

The carriers are always the fly in the ointment. In this instance, I think it will actually be their greed that could speed things up. If they think that by enabling Chat they can grab back a swath of WhatsApp and FB Messenger people, it'll move fairly quickly.

The key will be how they roll it out initially. If it's in the form of "enhanced" texting with an additional fee, it'll be DOA. The carriers need to understand the monetization comes on the backend of people using Chat. If they charge people to get in the door it's not going to work.

P.S. The carriers are CRAZY for not jumping on this ASAP as it should be a slam dunk to lure people away from FB Messenger.

But you said it..how can they monetize this? Considering text messaging is including in the overwhelming majority of plans here in the US, just bringinf the data traffic back is of no benefit. And knowing the carriers, they’re going to try to charge a fee for it. And at that point, it’s as you mention, DOA.

I’m super duper skeptical about this for that very reason. What’s the motivation for carriers to roll this out unless they can monetize the hell out of it? It’ll then become fragmented as hell because every carrier will do something different. This just screams of Android updates at the mercy of the carriers all over again.

That’s the beauty of Apple’s messages—carriers have absolutely zero say in its implementation.

 

[widgeteer]

But you said it..how can they monetize this? Considering text messaging is including in the overwhelming majority of plans here in the US, just bringinf the data traffic back is of no benefit. And knowing the carriers, they’re going to try to charge a fee for it. And at that point, it’s as you mention, DOA.

I’m super duper skeptical about this for that very reason. What’s the motivation for carriers to roll this out unless they can monetize the hell out of it? It’ll then become fragmented as hell because every carrier will do something different. This just screams of Android updates at the mercy of the carriers all over again.

That’s the beauty of Apple’s messages—carriers have absolutely zero say in its implementation.

They can monetize going through a few different avenues:

• Increased data usage as people are now sending high res photos/videos/gifs/etc.
• Integration with 3rd party apps/services. The carriers will now get a piece of all those dumb stickers and other flotsom people pay for. You think ATT and Verizon haven't been a little green with envy over all the money Apple's App Store makes from selling that stuff through their own iMessage platform?
• This is the nefarious stuff that is a fact of life but still sucks: integration with different companies such as Uber, Grubhub, Fandango, etc will allow carriers to build more in depth profiles of their users, and then sell that data to advertisers.

All that and more is what's on the table. That's why I think this is the most viable means to finally get an iMessage like platform for Android for the first time in its existence. Google is being really smart here, it's actually playing on carrier greed, which is how they got them on board. Will both parties eff up this warm cup of coffee regardless?

Maybe. Probably.

 

[0007776]

Are there really that many people who are not on unlimited texting plans?

 

[Breaking Good]

Well you can't exactly blame imessage for being blocked

Do you also hate sunlight, because sometimes it gets blocked by clouds?

OK Now I have to admit this was pretty funny.

I should explain that my hatred toward Apple regarding iMessage is that there is no way to universally opt out of iMessage for your Apple/iCloud ID. If you set up a new device or do a factory reset on a device, it will automatically activate iMessage and associate your phone number and Apple ID with iMessage.

That will quickly populate to any of your contacts using iMessage and any text/SMS message sent from any of your contacts using iMessage will default to iMessage. However, if iMessage is turned off on your iPhone, you will never receive the message.

You then have to call Apple to get them to de-register your phone number from iMessage and then wait several days until your contact's devices realize that you are not on iMessage and begin to send texts through SMS again.

I'm not an IT expert, but I believe that my employer blocks all non-company messaging applications for security reasons. We use Skype for Business on our computers BlackBerry Connect on our smartphones.

The BlackBerry Connect application is platform agnostic (works with iOS or Android) and syncs with our Outlook and Skype for Business.

 

[5105973]

Second time I read a post about talking to Hubby, and now I've got to ask..... Who's hubby? It sounds like a teddy bear... No offence to Hubby

No offense taken, at least I don’t think so.

Hubby is actually a Sasquatch. We met up in one of the deep dark forests of the Pacific Northwest. I was out camping and minding my own business, spraying OFF mosquito repellent in a futile attempt to fend off bloodsuckers the size of birds.

And then I heard this ungodly racket.😕 It was an unearthly noise of primal rage from an inhuman throat. 😱And then small boulders came flying out at me from all directions. It was Hubby’s doing. I’d inadvertently trespassed on Sasquatch territory...😱😕

Fortunately, I’d forgotten to bring along my Lady’s shaving kit. Yes, I said “fortunately”. For what had initially seemed like bad luck from the perspective of good feminine grooming turned out to be a good thing. Hubby took one look at my fuzzy legs (I was wearing khaki shorts) and mistook me for a lady Sasquatch.

I can’t say as I’d had much luck with human men up to that point, so I flirted a bit with this tall, dark and hirsute stranger. And the rest is history. We’ve been together 30 happy years. 😀

Happy Friday. Have a great weekend. Don’t mind me. I’ve spent yet another afternoon driving angsty teenagers who were arguing for a solid 45 minutes about...everything. I don’t habitually drink, but I think I need to start. 🙄

 

[Dodgeman]

OK Now I have to admit this was pretty funny.

I should explain that my hatred toward Apple regarding iMessage is that there is no way to universally opt out of iMessage for your Apple/iCloud ID. If you set up a new device or do a factory reset on a device, it will automatically activate iMessage and associate your phone number and Apple ID with iMessage.

That will quickly populate to any of your contacts using iMessage and any text/SMS message sent from any of your contacts using iMessage will default to iMessage. However, if iMessage is turned off on your iPhone, you will never receive the message.

You then have to call Apple to get them to de-register your phone number from iMessage and then wait several days until your contact's devices realize that you are not on iMessage and begin to send texts through SMS again.

I'm not an IT expert, but I believe that my employer blocks all non-company messaging applications for security reasons. We use Skype for Business on our computers BlackBerry Connect on our smartphones.

The BlackBerry Connect application is platform agnostic (works with iOS or Android) and syncs with our Outlook and Skype for Business.

I am sure you can simply de register online and also just simply turn iMessage off.
(I activated an iPhone for a couple hours and iMessage was on, shut it off and still get text from iPhone and android users. )

 

[SteveJUAE]

But you said it..how can they monetize this? Considering text messaging is including in the overwhelming majority of plans here in the US, just bringinf the data traffic back is of no benefit. And knowing the carriers, they’re going to try to charge a fee for it. And at that point, it’s as you mention, DOA.

I’m super duper skeptical about this for that very reason. What’s the motivation for carriers to roll this out unless they can monetize the hell out of it? It’ll then become fragmented as hell because every carrier will do something different. This just screams of Android updates at the mercy of the carriers all over again.

That’s the beauty of Apple’s messages—carriers have absolutely zero say in its implementation.

I think your being over simplistic, texting may be bundled in a plan but that does not mean it's free and of course every time you send a rich content message outside of Imessenger carriers pick up a nice MMS fee not to mention that the data package charge in the first instance 🙄

Imessage convenience is trivial once you have a few contacts that are not IPhone owners as you are equally likely to have more than one app

I think Googles goal is admirable lets forget about workarounds like WhatsApp/Imessenger/Viber/Line etc etc and get to the source where SMS/MMS has had its day and a common standard for all is needed for all consumers. Let OEMs compete on good design of Apps and not the protocol