'It's Time for Apple to Fix Texting' Says New Android Website Pushing RCS Messaging Technology

[deathcab]

Folks: It's really simple. Buy a device that supports the features you care about. If you want RCS, buy an Android phone. If you want iMessage, buy an iPhone.

Yes, I would love to have an electric car that has Audi's design language, Lexus reliability, Mercedes' massaging seats, Tesla's charging features and network, Rivian's gear tunnel feature, 4Runner's roll-down back window feature, and more, but you can't get 1 car that has every feature that you want from 10 different manufacturers -- you find the one that checks the boxes you care about the most and buy it.

 

[deathcab]

The psychology to me is that green bubbles signify the message was not sent via iMessage. Period. Full stop. It’s not about “hating android.”

Agree. SMS messages from iPhones show up in green just like they do from Androids. Blue indicates it was sent via iMessage but does not indicate that the source was an iPhone (it could be an iPad or Mac).

 

[duffman9000]

What is Apple's motive not adopting RCS when the industry is moving towards it? Is it "Pure"? Why can't I send high resolution Photos and Video to family members who use Android? How does not adopting RCS benefit me as a user of Apple products?

So no, I didn't ignore whatever purity test you think these corporations have to pass. I just think its daft to think any corporation is "pure". Every single one of them want more customers and want more control of data because data is valuable. The modus operandi of any business is to make profits and all their actions is geared towards that motive, some for the benefit of the customers and others not. What does the website being an Android site have to do with anything? Google's motive is simple, make a better messaging experience across platforms thereby improving the image of Android messaging when compared to iOS. They also will now have control of the default messaging on Android just like Apple does on iOS. They all want control of data on their platforms.

You are choosing to ignore that RCS today is basically Google running the show. That link I posted explains how messages are routed. Google doesn’t provide public APIs for third party apps to use RCS and not rely on Google. Ron at Ars has thoroughly explained Google RCS but you want to ignore that.

You are also choosing to ignore that Google has screwed its messaging programs (and itself) repeatedly over the years. Why would anyone want to follow Google in messaging?

 

[ftaok]

DDG

OK, I looked this one up. "drop dead gorgeous"? Is that what you mean? I don't get it.

 

[kc9hzn]

OK, I looked this one up. "drop dead gorgeous"? Is that what you mean? I don't get it.

I’d assume the user means DuckDuckGo, an alternative search engine. I’ll evangelize for DuckDuckGo for a moment, my favorite feature is the bang keywords. What that means is that, from Safari’s search box, I can search Amazon by adding !a to my search string, or I could search Google with !g, Google Images with !gis, YouTube with !yt, TVTropes with !tvt, and on and on and on. I don’t have to go to that site to search because, thanks to the bang keyword, it executes the search on that site. I don’t know all the bang keywords, because the DuckDuckGo community is always adding more. Here’s a link to where you can browse all 13,565 bang keywords to date: https://duckduckgo.com/bang

Edit: Maybe I didn’t explain it well enough. Instead of doing a Google search with “site:en.wikipedia.org”, using !w uses Wikipedia’s own search box (maybe not the best example considering how poor Wikipedia’s search capabilities have always been, but still!). Then there’s the zero click info boxes, which DuckDuckGo did before Google, which are open source, usually link to a well known source (often Wikipedia, but it’s usually pretty easy to validate any given Wikipedia article), and not wonky robot generated things like Google’s. But StackOverflow is also supported, and there are plenty of other useful zero click info boxes. I’ve used DuckDuckGo for over 10 years now, and it would be hard to use anything else.

 

[aloyouis]

OK, I looked this one up. "drop dead gorgeous"? Is that what you mean? I don't get it.

DuckDuckGo

 

[aloyouis]

I’d assume the user means DuckDuckGo, an alternative search engine. I’ll evangelize for DuckDuckGo for a moment, my favorite feature is the bang keywords. What that means is that, from Safari’s search box, I can search Amazon by adding !a to my search string, or I could search Google with !g, Google Images with !gis, YouTube with !yt, TVTropes with !tvt, and on and on and on. I don’t have to go to that site to search because, thanks to the bang keyword, it executes the search on that site. I don’t know all the bang keywords, because the DuckDuckGo community is always adding more. Here’s a link to where you can browse all 13,565 bang keywords to date: https://duckduckgo.com/bang

Correct. Why anyone would use Google or Bing is beyond me.

 

[kc9hzn]

Correct. Why anyone would use Google or Bing is beyond me.

It was sweet when Apple added DuckDuckGo support to Safari on iOS, but, even before that, I got super used to typing ddg.gg in the URL field.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Also, Google is all about making sure „everyone's experience would be better“, is it now? Some of us have been here long enough to remember how Google Maps on iOS slowly, but steadily got worse than Google Maps on Android, such a subtle way of trying to make iPhone users switch … until Apple was fed up with this crap and made their own Maps app.

That one was REALLY short sighted. Because, all the developers that are currently using Apple Maps to provide location services would have been using Google Maps because that’s all there would be today. Google effectively shut themselves out of a large and growing market by not playing the long game.

Once again showing that “build your own” as a response to market trends is a powerful thing. We might be seeing some really innovative handsets today (not the nothing phone ) if more companies looked at Google and Apple and went, “No, I’m going to make my own”.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Thats why the public pressure is geared toward the government employees of various nations that will force Apple to adopt RCS. Mark this post. It will happen.

This Post Has Been Duly Marked — to make it easy to find. Because it won’t happen Maybe I’ll come back to check this when Google retires Messages and is at the time promoting “Google Textchatting”. (that is, of course, after the intervening failures of “Google VRoomTalk”, “Google Typeywords” and “Google TextThisTimeForSure”)

 

[Unregistered 4U]

You sure about that?
A lot of commentators, paid advertisers and journalists make it exactly about that.

A lot of commentators, paid advertisers and journalists want, more than anything else, to have a lot of eyes on their content. It helps them get paid better AND/OR just makes them feel good to know people are reading a being enlightened by/being incensed by their wit! So, they’ll pretty much put out what’s most likely to “engage” readers.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

SMS is a simple function of cell connectivity. It uses spare space (ever wonder why the 160 character limit?) in a particular cell communication packet, and pretty much every network/carrier supports it.

It’s not a simple function of non-GSM networks, though, it must be remembered. SMS as a feature ended up being so popular, that CDMA and other networks, which had no such spare space, kluged a solution that made it work similarly to how it worked on the GSM networks. Which shows the value of being a carrier based solution.

 

[ftaok]

I’d assume the user means DuckDuckGo, an alternative search engine. I’ll evangelize for DuckDuckGo for a moment, my favorite feature is the bang keywords. What that means is that, from Safari’s search box, I can search Amazon by adding !a to my search string, or I could search Google with !g, Google Images with !gis, YouTube with !yt, TVTropes with !tvt, and on and on and on. I don’t have to go to that site to search because, thanks to the bang keyword, it executes the search on that site. I don’t know all the bang keywords, because the DuckDuckGo community is always adding more. Here’s a link to where you can browse all 13,565 bang keywords to date: https://duckduckgo.com/bang

Edit: Maybe I didn’t explain it well enough. Instead of doing a Google search with “site:en.wikipedia.org”, using !w uses Wikipedia’s own search box (maybe not the best example considering how poor Wikipedia’s search capabilities have always been, but still!). Then there’s the zero click info boxes, which DuckDuckGo did before Google, which are open source, usually link to a well known source (often Wikipedia, but it’s usually pretty easy to validate any given Wikipedia article), and not wonky robot generated things like Google’s. But StackOverflow is also supported, and there are plenty of other useful zero click info boxes. I’ve used DuckDuckGo for over 10 years now, and it would be hard to use anything else.

OK, that makes much more sense. haha

 

[kc9hzn]

This Post Has Been Duly Marked — to make it easy to find. Because it won’t happen Maybe I’ll come back to check this when Google retires Messages and is at the time promoting “Google Textchatting”. (that is, of course, after the intervening failures of “Google VRoomTalk”, “Google Typeywords” and “Google TextThisTimeForSure”)

Ah, the best part of Google VRoomTalk were those random rooms where you could drive VR supercars! It’s a shame they killed it and brought out Typeywords! And Typeywords didn’t let you choose your own words, despite the name! But, of course, the teenage crowd hailed it as the second coming of Yo. I can’t wait for it to die and get replaced with TextThisTimeForSure, here’s to hoping it actually lets you text this time!

 

[Unregistered 4U]

SMS is a phone standard. RCS is an upgrade to that. iMessage uses SMS only. RCS is a global standard. It's not just Google.

RCS was MEANT to be an upgrade to that. All the carriers gave up on it, though. Google, at this point, is propping up a dead horse that can never be anything more than “just another app” since it will never operate at the carrier level.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

And the beauty of Android is that you can download and install the Google Messages app yourself if it is not default.

“You can download and install the Google Messages app yourself…” even if a person happens to be an iPhone user. the real “beauty” of an implementation would be to not have to do anything and have it work with whatever the native messaging app is. This would be the case IF, like SMS/MMS, RCS was adopted by the carriers. As Google’s solution is NOT adopted by the carriers, the best this can ever be, as shown by the Android experience, is “just another app” which offers no benefits that WhatsApp, Signal, or Telegram ALREADY provide as “just another app” solutions.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Ok flip it in reverse. I want to see a vacation photo from my boss who is an Android user. I can't. I own an iPhone.

Email will allow that.

What I bemoan, over anything else in my days on this earth, is that technology has not provided a way for images to be shared over the internet, they HAVE to be sent via text message. If only there was some book of faces, or an instant gram… or maybe a type of chat that focuses on snaps that could be used to send a large group high quality images. And, you know what, while I’m dreaming, heck WHY NOT VIDEO TOO? I can imagine a sort of ‘tube where the content is provided by you and delivered to anyone with a browser… NOT requiring a phone!

Alas, ‘tis only a dream.

 

[madeirabhoy]

Hmm, is this really true? I don't send annoying GIFs, I send pictures and videos of my kids to other family members. Do you really think having everyone send content via email is a solution? That's one of the primary reasons I even own a smartphone, the convenience of instantly messaging someone else. Why don't you try sending every video/picture by email for a month or two and let us know how convenient that is.

I send lots of pictures and videos to customers by email. Ona smartphone. It’s about the same amount of clicks as doing it by text and seems to be to be more normal to me as then they can access it on their phone or their computer.

 

[kognos]

RCS was MEANT to be an upgrade to that. All the carriers gave up on it, though. Google, at this point, is propping up a dead horse that can never be anything more than “just another app” since it will never operate at the carrier level.

You cannot redefine what it currently is based upon your opinion of it, and your use of language is incorrect.

Verizon: https://www.verizon.com/support/advanced-messaging-faqs/
TMobile: https://www.t-mobile.com/support/plans-features/advanced-messaging
AT&T: https://www.att.com/features/advanced-messaging/

None of them are saying anything close to "Whelp, we tried, it's dead, no longer working on it, don't use it". None of them are saying they "gave up". Those sites all indicate modern Android phones which are currently being sold with active support for this.

So please, don't invent history. RCS is an upgrade to SMS which is active and in use internationally.

Rich Communication Services - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Unregistered 4U]

You cannot redefine what it currently is based upon your opinion of it, and your use of language is incorrect.

Verizon: https://www.verizon.com/support/advanced-messaging-faqs/
TMobile: https://www.t-mobile.com/support/plans-features/advanced-messaging
AT&T: https://www.att.com/features/advanced-messaging/

None of them are saying anything close to "Whelp, we tried, it's dead, no longer working on it, don't use it". None of them are saying they "gave up". Those sites all indicate modern Android phones which are currently being sold with active support for this.

So please, don't invent history. RCS is an upgrade to SMS which is active and in use internationally.

Rich Communication Services - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

How many of them have implemented a solution similarly to how MMS/SMS has been implemented, that is, at the carrier level? Such that every phone on the network, regardless of if they’ve downloaded an app or not, can receive those messages natively?

Because, that’s the level they’d have to be implemented at in order to be replacements for MMS/SMS.

And, yes, by virtue of the fact that they’re ‘handing it off to Google’ rather than continue to work on it themselves, they have reduced their work on it to zero. No carriers are currently expending any effort propping up RCS, they’re just allowing Google to say they’re supported.

So please, don't invent history. RCS is an upgrade to SMS which is active and in use internationally.

But NOT at the carrier level in the same way that SMS is adopted. No need to invent history, just speaking current facts!

UPDATE! Ok, this is just TOO funny. following the Verizon link, click the “How do I get Advanced Messaging” link and you’ll get to the following.

https://www.verizon.com/support/advanced-messaging-faqs/get-advanced-messaging/get-advanced-messaging/

A 404 page!! These, quite clearly, are the actions of a company fully invested in the success of RCS LOL

And, interesting, T-mobile and Google partner to bring RCS… who does T-mobile partner with for SMS? For MMS? No one? Because it’s natively supported by the carrier as a core feature? Ah, I see. And, apparently, AT&T didn’t need to partner with anyone for SMS or MMS either. How could they accomplish this without a partner!? Ahhh, it’s because it was a feature that was worth them putting in the effort to support natively.

But, wouldn’t that mean that, by partnering with Google, that RCS is NOT worth them putting in the effort to support natively? Oh, I’m just providing the information, you form your OWN conclusions.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I send lots of pictures and videos to customers by email. Ona smartphone. It’s about the same amount of clicks as doing it by text and seems to be to be more normal to me as then they can access it on their phone or their computer.

I would imagine most people use some form of social media application. I know people that are ONLY on Facebook so they can see the latest pictures/videos from loved ones. I would imagine a lot of folks aren’t using email OR texting because they were born in the age where apps specifically built for sharing images and videos are already in existence AND most if not all of their friends (Android, iPhone and computer alike) already have accounts.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

but you'd think if Apple got on board with RCS, it would be a step in getting this all straightened out.

A big step would be carriers getting on board with RCS as it was intended from the start. Then, Apple would have zero say, the carrier would present the RCS message to the phone and it would be displayed inside Apple’s Messages app. This is, of course, NOT what Google is providing.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

If everyone is onboard with making RCS a standard Apple needs to get on the bandwagon.

Everyone isn’t onboard. The main folks that SHOULD be on board, the carriers that were meeting to discuss how to roll out the change, are not on board. The group that devised RCS is no longer interested in RCS. Get those folks on board and Apple would do what they’re currently doing today with SMS/MMS, just showing those alongside the iMessages in the Message app.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

My understanding is none of the wireless carriers in the United States even support RCS messaging but instead use Google to send/deliver RCS messages.

Right, and it’s not just the US carriers. No one is supporting RCS messaging at the carrier level which is what’s required to replace SMS/MMS at the carrier level.

 

[hobspain]

A company the size of Apple's taking the solitary stance that they will only use the absolutely lowest-common-denominator technology for inter-carrier communication is lazy, sloppy, insecure, and not protecting their own customers as well as the people that Apple consumers are trying to reach.

In other words, while you are essentially correct, its still a standard that should be used whenever available. Having Apple state that it uses RCS when it can is all I care about. This precedent is all over the internet (https vs http, TLS vs direct, etc) and and I don't accept as a general principle that Apple doesn't have the capacity to adopt it. It's just lazy that they don't, and harmful to consumers of both Apple and non-apple.

So to be clear and simple: it's like saying "we'll use HTTPS for apple consumers, but only HTTP for everything else. Even though there is a standard -- screw that standard."

And to any Apple employees who scan this, that's precisely what drives customers away. People have literally replied in this thread that the solution should be for those people to "just get iPhones". That's not how the world works. Apple needs to innovate beyond the walled garden to retain users, not play bully tactics and have the "angry mob" here insist the world needs to buy in to this proprietary messaging. SMS was the standard for all phones until now, RCS is the new standard, use it. I have seen people leave Apple over this and just start using 3rd party systems because firstly iMessage "aint all that" compared to the alternatives, and secondly, it's proprietary as hell.

And yes, other people can use pure data communications like WhatsApp, etc... that's not the point here. Just like SMS being a standard that's understood and accepted on all phones for basic text messaging, RCS is the evolution of that, and the new standard. It coexists and is the basic underlying text messaging solution for all phones.

I can’t agree with your view. There are vested interests in RCS and Apple would be a pawn for the favor of others.

See my pretty lengthy post explaining this:

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...cs-messaging-technology.2354162/post-31325320