Google's New 'iPager' Ad Shames Apple for Using Outdated Messaging Standard

[dwaite]

And even if RCS is E2E encrypted, who holds the keys? Does anyone actually trust Google? You can complain about many things Apple does, but I trust when they say some **** is private, that it’s PRIVATE.

Generally, even without an software backdoor or cryptographic deficiency: there's a system that maps the identifier (phone number) to a set of public keys. But from there, it isn't possible to know that list is honest - that the keys don't correspond to another party than the user.

 

[AndiG]

Why would they want to lower the standards of their product by allowing things that don’t work as well inside of it? This is not a problem in need of a solution. It’s a solution about to create a problem. Anyone that cares has figured out how to send messages to everyone in their social circles.

This is not so hard to understand. It wouldn‘t be difficult to extend RCS - iMessage is simply a part of Apples lock in strategy.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple...s-and-putting-it-on-android-would-hurt-apple/

I don‘t get those fanboys defending Apple by any means necessary. Same 💩happened with Lightning - now its gone, everyone is happy and loves the new features.

 

[cmcbhi]

Personally, anything that keeps Google out of my life is good.
Anything that allows any part of Google in my life is ungood.

 

[GalileoSeven]

Yet again, Google's protestations aren't going to gain any traction here. Not only is the smartphone customer base firmly entrenched into one camp or the other (Apple or Android), but absolutely no one is going to trust any Google-derived/associated tech 'standard' with the reputation they've got (Apple's no paragon of trustworthiness either, but Google is at the absolute bottom of the barrel here)

The more Google pushes this, the more pathetic they'll look.

 

[BuffaloTF]

This is not so hard to understand. It wouldn‘t be difficult to extend RCS - iMessage is simply a part of Apples lock in strategy.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple...s-and-putting-it-on-android-would-hurt-apple/

I don‘t get those fanboy defending Apple by any means necessary. Same 💩happened with Lightning - now its gone, everyone is happy and loves the new features.

It has nothing to do with that and everything to do with the fact RCS died years ago and Google is hijacking the name and releasing something that’s strictly through their servers to collect metadata. And they want all of it. I don’t get all these fanboys defending Google like they’re their friends.

 

[itsshevee]

Don't all RCS messages traverse Google servers? No thanks.

No. RCS is an open standard. Most carriers have their own RCS services and Apple can set up their own RCS servers if they want.

 

[BuffaloTF]

No. RCS is an open standard. Most carriers have their own RCS services and Apple can set up their own RCS servers if they want.

Well it’s unfortunate then that we’re talking about Google RCS, which is a closed-source, proprietary service that simply uses the name. No carriers have their own RCS system anymore, they’re all shut down and using Google RCS. And why is that the case? Because all of those carrier systems… they couldn’t send messages to each other. They were closed user groups. So… you’re saying Apple should release… iMessage and call it RCS?

 

[trusso]

It saddens me that all the top-rated comments are bashing Google as a matter of course, with no care for the specifics of the situation. Whatever you think about Google, Apple is the one being a stick in the mud here. RCS is an industry standard that Apple refuses to adopt for petty business reasons (greed), and as a result, everyone’s experience suffers.

Apple, you have more than enough money. Pretty business practices because “shareholders” is like cutting off your left hand to spite your right. We’re the same people.

 

[BuffaloTF]

It saddens me that all the top-rated comments are bashing Google as a matter of course, with no care for the specifics of the situation. Whatever you think about Google, Apple is the one being a stick in the mud here. RCS is an industry standard that Apple refuses to adopt for petty business reasons (greed), and as a result, everyone’s experience suffers.

Apple, you have more than enough money. Pretty business practices because “shareholders” is like cutting off your left hand to spite your right. We’re the same people.

RCS is not an industry standard. And this is Google RCS, which is a proprietary system that uses the name of a dead proposed standard.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It saddens me that all the top-rated comments are bashing Google as a matter of course, with no care for the specifics of the situation. Whatever you think about Google, Apple is the one being a stick in the mud here. RCS is an industry standard that Apple refuses to adopt for petty business reasons (greed), and as a result, everyone’s experience suffers.

Apple, you have more than enough money. Pretty business practices because “shareholders” is like cutting off your left hand to spite your right. We’re the same people.

RCS is a dead standard and, because it’s dead, Apple doesn’t support and some carriers that implemented it has dropped support for. “Google RCS” contradiction of true RCS being native to the carrier, like SMS. That’s why it falls back to SMS. And, it doesn’t matter who it is, Google or anyone. If it’s no longer the replacement for SMS as it was initially intended to be, it should just be allowed to sink back into the grave the GSMA planted it in.

 

[trusso]

RCS is not an industry standard. And this is Google RCS, which is a proprietary system that uses the name of a dead proposed standard.

RCS is a dead standard and, because it’s dead, Apple doesn’t support and some carriers that implemented it has dropped support for. “Google RCS” contradiction of true RCS being native to the carrier, like SMS. That’s why it falls back to SMS. And, it doesn’t matter who it is, Google or anyone. If it’s no longer the replacement for SMS as it was initially intended to be, it should just be allowed to sink back into the grave the GSMA planted it in.

Please cite your sources. I haven't found anything saying RCS is a dead standard, and Google's implementation of RCS does not make it a proprietary standard (unlike, say, iMessage). If what you say is true, then fair enough, but right now all I'm reading is disparaging remarks on RCS with no evidence to back them up.

 

[AZhappyjack]

Google is continuing on with its relentless #GetTheMessage marketing campaign in an attempt to get Apple to adopt the RCS messaging protocol. In its latest ad, Google shows off the "iPager," which Google describes as a device that "uses outdated messaging tech" like Apple uses "when texting with Android."

RCS, or Rich Communication Services, is a communication protocol designed by and adopted by Google. Google has been pushing Apple to implement support for RCS, but Apple devices continue to support the older SMS protocol. Google claims that Apple is responsible for all the issues that Android and iPhone users have texting one another, including lack of encryption, broken group chats, pixelated pictures and videos, and the green bubbles.

"iPager isn't real, but the problems that Apple causes by using SMS are. Let's make texting better for everyone and help Apple #GetTheMessage and upgrade to RCS," read's Google's video.

Major U.S. carriers and other carriers worldwide have adopted support for RCS, but Apple has no plans to do so despite Google's multi-year effort. Google has used billboards, ads, websites, social media campaigns, and more to get Apple's attention and to try to convince iPhone users to request the feature from Apple, but so far, it hasn't worked.

In September 2022, Apple CEO Tim Cook said that RCS is not a priority for Apple. "I don't hear our users asking that we put a lot of energy in on that at this point," he explained. To one reporter who said he was having an issue texting his mother on an Android device, Cook said "Buy your mom an iPhone."

It is not clear if Apple will ever adopt RCS, but so far, it does not sound like the company has any interest in doing so. If Apple did adopt RCS, it would allow for end-to-end encryption for conversations between iPhone and Android users, as well as higher quality media. Apple already offers these features for the iMessage service that works from iPhone to iPhone.

Article Link: Google's New 'iPager' Ad Shames Apple for Using Outdated Messaging Standard

Google is just pissed that they are excluded from Apple's messaging ecosystem... and they're crying and trying ("Hey, Apple, abandon your secure messaging environment in favor of our own standard") ... but Apple won't budge... take that to the bank...

 

[R2DHue]

Well it’s unfortunate then that we’re talking about Google RCS, which is a closed-source, proprietary service that simply uses the name. No carriers have their own RCS system anymore, they’re all shut down and using Google RCS. And why is that the case? Because all of those carrier systems… they couldn’t send messages to each other. They were closed user groups. So… you’re saying Apple should release… iMessage and call it RCS?

Agreed.

And Google is SO fervid about Apple adopting Google’s RCS, one has every right to be suspicious about their ostensibly “altruistic” motives. Anyone operating from a default position of “Don’t trust Google” should be excused.

Remember, at its beginning, Google’s internal slogan or credo was, “Don’t Be Evil.” Yet its initial funding came from the CIA and NSA, first in the form of an MDDS grant.

And how did Google get Google Earth up and running so fast? By buying a company called Keyhole, a company which was funded by the CIA — and the CIA and the Pentagon were also its clients.

(Now they have Google.)

Google Earth came into being so quickly because all the satellite data already gathered over many years by a U.S. Intelligence agency called the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) was in Keyhole’s possession. That’s why Google bought Keyhole.

For a company whose credo was “Don’t Be Evil,” Google seems to have sold its soul to the devil from the very start.

All this and more can be read in the book, I’m Feeling Lucky: The Confessions of Google Employee Number 59.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Please cite your sources. I haven't found anything saying RCS is a dead standard

You can look up when the last time RCS was updated. Living standards get updated regularly to meet the needs of active users. GSMA.com would be a good resource as they created RCS.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Google is just pissed that they are excluded from Apple's messaging ecosystem... and they're crying and trying ("Hey, Apple, abandon your secure messaging environment in favor of our own standard") ... but Apple won't budge... take that to the bank...

It’s bigger than that, Google is pissed that they had an opportunity to essentially BE WhatsApp, and squandered it horribly. They wouldn’t care one iota about iMessage if every other message on the internet was theirs. This isn’t a serious attempt by Google. And, they know this will be completely ineffective. This is probably money they’ve resigned themselves to throw away every few months or so for funsies.

 

[BuffaloTF]

Please cite your sources. I haven't found anything saying RCS is a dead standard, and Google's implementation of RCS does not make it a proprietary standard (unlike, say, iMessage). If what you say is true, then fair enough, but right now all I'm reading is disparaging remarks on RCS with no evidence to back them up.

Sources are all within this forum post sprinkled across various 18 pages, please feel free to read and catch up, I won’t be doing your homework for you.

As to why it’s proprietary… it’s because it is. And closed. You can go to developers.google.com and search for RCS APIs til the sun goes down and you’ll find zero. The only “RCS” now is Google RCS and it’s all controlled by them. And worse, if you want the E2EE, you need to use Google Messages.

 

[trusso]

Sources are all within this forum post sprinkled across various 18 pages, please feel free to read and catch up, I won’t be doing your homework for you.

I sympathize, but when you make a claim like this it's upon you to back it up.

Agree to disagree, I suppose. I'm not doing your homework for you.

 

[BuffaloTF]

I sympathize, but when you make a claim like this it's upon you to back it up.

Agree to disagree, I suppose. I'm not doing your homework for you.

It’s been backed up - as I said, it’s all within the previous 18 pages. Start reading. I’m not doing your homework for you, and you’ve done none - like, literal years behind in news. 4 of them, to be exact.

Edit: I’ve had a change of heart for ya. Here’s your starting point for homework. I expect a book report after. It will be graded. I’ll even provide notes.

Google takes RCS rollout into its own hands after carriers totally botch it

www.androidpolice.com

-Google will be spinning up its own RCS/Chat services
-Unlike carrier implementations
-Google can circumvent the carriers
-connect to Google's Jibe

 

[trusso]

@BuffaloTF Thank you. Was that so hard?

I read the article. Not scientifically, but I read it. It sounds to me like the carriers (stupidly, I might add) all tried to roll their own versions of RCS, which is what you and others are accusing Google of doing. Perhaps that's the case, from a certain point of view. But since Google develops Android and is carrier agnostic (and appears to have been "forced" into spinning up their own implementation because of the shortsightedness and greed of the carriers), I'm at a loss on how this is prima facie a bad thing. It's at worst no worse than Apple developing iMessage and keeping it all to themselves, except that RCS is, despite Google's implementation, still based on an industry standard, and one that Google (and other parties) are eager for Apple (and everyone else) to adopt. While I'm not so naive as to think Google (or Apple) has my best interests at heart, I don't come away from that article with alarm bells ringing in my head (which I certainly do when I consider how Apple continues to push its own "lock-in" practices across all its devices and services).

I could cherry-pick quite a few quotes from that article, but one of interest is this:

And in the event a carrier/device combination already work with the standard, Google will let the carrier handle your messages.

We're certainly agreed that Google is not your friend. But neither is Apple. I honestly fail to see, from the information presented, that Google is attempting lock-in at all, let alone at anywhere near the level Apple is. Quite the contrary. Should we be vigilant? Always. But I'm not convinced this is the trap you think it is.

 

[duffman9000]

This is not so hard to understand. It wouldn‘t be difficult to extend RCS - iMessage is simply a part of Apples lock in strategy.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple...s-and-putting-it-on-android-would-hurt-apple/

I don‘t get those fanboy defending Apple by any means necessary. Same 💩happened with Lightning - now its gone, everyone is happy and loves the new features.

I agree this isn't difficult to understand. At all. Apple made a business decision not to improve messaging on Android. Why oh why would Apple want to help Google fix their message mess?

 

[BuffaloTF]

@BuffaloTF Thank you. Was that so hard?

I read the article. Not scientifically, but I read it. It sounds to me like the carriers (stupidly, I might add) all tried to roll their own versions of RCS, which is what you and others are accusing Google of doing. Perhaps that's the case, from a certain point of view. But since Google develops Android and is carrier agnostic (and appears to have been "forced" into spinning up their own implementation because of the shortsightedness and greed of the carriers), I'm at a loss on how this is prima facie a bad thing. It's at worst no worse than Apple developing iMessage and keeping it all to themselves, except that RCS is, despite Google's implementation, still based on an industry standard, and one that Google (and other parties) are eager for Apple (and everyone else) to adopt. While I'm not so naive as to think Google (or Apple) has my best interests at heart, I don't come away from that article with alarm bells ringing in my head (which I certainly do when I consider how Apple continues to push its own "lock-in" practices across all its devices and services).

I could cherry-pick quite a few quotes from that article, but one of interest is this:

We're certainly agreed that Google is not your friend. But neither is Apple. I honestly fail to see, from the information presented, that Google is attempting lock-in at all, let alone at anywhere near the level Apple is. Quite the contrary. Should we be vigilant? Always. But I'm not convinced this is the trap you think it is.

Would it have been so hard to search the thread for the same answers?

Yes. Every variant of RCS was a closed-user group. Yes. Google uses its own version of RCS. And yes. You lose E2EE if all they're doing is using Jibe and not Google Messages. They're sweetening the pot to use one variant, and only one variant. There are no APIs to connect as a 3rd party. No federation of servers to run your own server and get away from them. Google wants... metadata. All of it. The biggest black hole in their mobile pie.

 

[R2DHue]

It’s bigger than that, Google is pissed that they had an opportunity to essentially BE WhatsApp, and squandered it horribly. They wouldn’t care one iota about iMessage if every other message on the internet was theirs. This isn’t a serious attempt by Google. And, they know this will be completely ineffective. This is probably money they’ve resigned themselves to throw away every few months or so for funsies.

What I like about iMessage is that it’s NOT WhatsApp or Snapchat or even Discord or Telegram.

Using those apps requires signing up for what seems like a whole Social Media ecosystem.

Beyond simply establishing a Username and password, these apps want you to fill out all kinds of personal info, topics you like, “friend suggestion” offers, “visibility to others [strangers],” etc. You have to go through a whole gauntlet of screens and menus before you’re FINALLY able to start texting someone you know.

It’s like creating a facebook or Instagram account.

And they have to because they lack a hardware business model like Apple does. They can only make money by collecting and selling your personal info. YOU are the product they profit off of.

Apple makes a little money off iMessage IF users buy iMessage add-ons through The App Store, but that’s it. And if you buy zero iMessage add-ons it costs you nothing, and it’s just p2p texting or group texting to people you already know — usually IRL.

I had a friend who I simply couldn’t text with using iMessage, so I downloaded a BlackBerry messaging app that used the BBM standard he was using and, OMG, even that was the same experience — it was like creating a facebook or Instagram account. “What are your likes,” “would you like suggestions for other users (strangers) who share similar interests?,” “Do you want to be suggested to other [strangers].” (“Do you wanna make yet another network of online friends,” essentially. “May we see your X-rays please?”)

I mean, iMessage isn’t Tinder or Twitter or TikTok or Omegle, ffs.

Yes, iMessage uses your Apple ID and a password — but that’s it.

If I want to sign up for “Social Media platforms” disguised as basic texting apps, I can always download any of them from The App Store.

Google’s relentless, intense demand that Apple adopt Google RCS isn’t “for the good of humanity,” you can be sure. (Be wary.)

Trust GOOGLE⁉️ 😂

Apple should tell Google once-and-for-all to “GET OFF MY LAWN!”

 

[j_wong59]

But no one in the US uses it….

Sounds like a you problem. The world is much bigger than the uNiTeD sTaTeS

Why should they bother when everyone else would happily use third party apps to message people on Android? Hell, some people would even use them to message fellow iPhone users.

 

[j_wong59]

Google needs to get a grip. This is such an American centric issue that no one else cares about. Why should they waste time on something that majority of iPhone users won’t care about. There are plenty of third party apps out there and if you don’t want to use them, it’s a you problem.

 

[mwidjaya]

Apple should tell Google once-and-for-all to “GET OFF MY LAWN!”

Best response is no response (ignore Google's self-serving rhetoric).