That means any solution would have to be Government / Regulatory driven as anything that is carrier driven will always be based on $$$ and carrier specific.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'It's Time for Apple to Fix Texting' Says New Android Website Pushing RCS Messaging Technology
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That means any solution would have to be Government / Regulatory driven as anything that is carrier driven will always be based on $$$ and carrier specific.
I don't think that's even a concern. To explain -- Dumbphones need to roll into LTE at a minimum here, and 5GNR over the next decade. There's no reason a straw sized data connection can't be added to what will be a mobile VOIP device (for lack of a better term, I guess) at the end of the day anyway, as the data will already be there to deliver voice. It's what drove the win for SMS - extra space available on what was already pinging the towers to maintain a connection.
Not saying it is,
There should be a default messages standard. Apple said no for iMessage. Google is presenting RCS (their version) and it is being adopted except pretty much Apple as the new standard default.
To someone's point, Google will need a public API or like some here mentioned, it will die.
Yeah all duly noted, but I'm not looking for a solution, well other than the impossible dream of a truly universal RCS. My ultimate solution was to just switch back to an iPhone, exactly how Apple wanted it. But I've also been using BlueBubbles lately, which is a fantastic solution if you have an old Macbook to use as a server, it's almost a perfect iMessage experience on Android. I'm kind of used to being back on an iPhone, but having BlueBubbles around makes it easier if I ever decide to go back to Android.
Fair enough, but it doesn’t seem like Google is interested in providing one. They seem to want to be the gatekeeper of smartphone messaging, and a public API would actually probably require federation (ie multiple compatible gateways not controlled by Google), otherwise Google could theoretically cut off access to smartphone messaging at will. Plus, we really need for it to be a global standard, and ain’t no way is China gonna let Google be the gatekeeper of smartphone messaging.
If Google were serious about RCS and didn’t want to be the gateway, they’d need to open source their implementation, at the very least, and maybe even submit it as an ISO or IEFT standard or something like that.
Android users can send SMS texts. I see it this way, here’s a person I want to tell that I’ll be there in 20 minutes. I send an SMS text to their Android phone. They reply, “OK”, letting me know they got the message… again from their Android phone back to my iPhone. This, right here, is a wonderful feat of technology! And, I wasn’t sending a video, I wasn’t sending a picture, just a text message. Some would say doing this would be called “suffering”. Some would say that it’s a “terrible” experience. However, in MY world, I just exchanged useful textual info with someone that will help us connect soon which is precisely what I wanted to do.
Actually, no matter what App someone may use to communicate, they can all also receive SMS messages. Sure, it doesn’t have all the frills of an app, but there hasn’t been a time when I’ve sent someone an SMS and they not be able to read or understand it. Outside the US, though, they’re likely to be charged to receive that SMS AND, charged to send a reply back. If someone feels their messages are worth another person paying a few dollars a day (and the recipient feels the same), then they can use SMS indefinitely. Most would probably rather not have their phone bill balloon because of texts going back and forth about the plot of a recently seen movie and its implications to the characters, though. It’s not that they don’t want to chat with the person on the other end, it’s just feels better when the volume of communication doesn’t come with an added expense.
Yes BUT there’s no two-way street for messaging. One either uses WhatsApp or one doesn’t use WhatsApp, there’s no compromise. If I want to communicate with someone else more than they want to communicate with me, I use their app to make it easy. This is a self-serving decision for me because I value their conversation and engagement more than any question of technology. I believe this is what most people are doing and why WhatsApp has the marketshare it has. It’s not that everyone got together and said, “Alright, we’re using WhatsApp”. When someone got a phone, they checked to see what others were using and just accepted it, likely without much emotion at all. It was a one way street, “We’re using this and if you want to chat with us using your phone, you’ll use this”.
You’re asking that something which isn’t, and has never been, a part of “basic smartphone functionality” become a part of basic smartphone functionality. And, the reason why it’s not basic smartphone functionality (and unlikely to become a part of “basic smartphone functionality”) is because each company has built their own messaging functions separate from the others. And, when dealing with encryption, the fewer folks that hold the master keys, the better so interoperability isn’t likely in the cards.
I can tell you RIGHT now, that if I knew a friend or friend of a friend that had a penchant for randomly messaging folks on their messaging app and offering them flights to the vacation they’ll be going on next week, on a whim, you’d BEST bet that I’m installing and turning on notifications for WHATEVER app is their choice.
If there’s no one on WhatsApp or FB messenger that you want to communicate with, why would you install them? If there was, and that’s the ONLY thing they use, (and remember YOU want to communicate with THEM) why wouldn’t you?I'd think that standard would need to occur as part of a spec'd out air interface. Whether that's a future NR release or even further down the road to whatever comes next, it needs to be that level in my mind. At the end of the day, we aren't China here all willingly set to use WeChat for everything -- but we would very likely take what's most convenient and use what comes "in the box" if it were there. Really, it needs to be that dumbed down for the user. Zero effort, muscle memory stuff.
Oh yes, what THEY wanted to create was likely impossible from the start. They were each trying to throw stuff in that would give them an advantage that they felt they could used to make more money with. They ended up with nothing but wasted time.
Carriers have started with smartphones? I haven’t read that in the news. All I’ve seen is Google RCS which only allows communication to other Google RCS enabled phones (which isn’t even all Android phones) and not a carrier solution which would work for all phones. I may have missed that, though.
Android users can send SMS texts. I see it this way, here’s a person I want to tell that I’ll be there in 20 minutes. I send an SMS text to their Android phone. They reply, “OK”, letting me know they got the message… again from their Android phone back to my iPhone. This, right here, is a wonderful feat of technology! And, I wasn’t sending a video, I wasn’t sending a picture, just a text message. Some would say doing this would be called “suffering”. Some would say that it’s a “terrible” experience. However, in MY world, I just exchanged useful textual info with someone that will help us connect soon which is precisely what I wanted to do.
Actually, no matter what App someone may use to communicate, they can all also receive SMS messages. Sure, it doesn’t have all the frills of an app, but there hasn’t been a time when I’ve sent someone an SMS and they not be able to read or understand it. Outside the US, though, they’re likely to be charged to receive that SMS AND, charged to send a reply back. If someone feels their messages are worth another person paying a few dollars a day (and the recipient feels the same), then they can use SMS indefinitely. Most would probably rather not have their phone bill balloon because of texts going back and forth about the plot of a recently seen movie and its implications to the characters, though. It’s not that they don’t want to chat with the person on the other end, it’s just feels better when the volume of communication doesn’t come with an added expense.
Yes BUT there’s no two-way street for messaging. One either uses WhatsApp or one doesn’t use WhatsApp, there’s no compromise. If I want to communicate with someone else more than they want to communicate with me, I use their app to make it easy. This is a self-serving decision for me because I value their conversation and engagement more than any question of technology. I believe this is what most people are doing and why WhatsApp has the marketshare it has. It’s not that everyone got together and said, “Alright, we’re using WhatsApp”. When someone got a phone, they checked to see what others were using and just accepted it, likely without much emotion at all. It was a one way street, “We’re using this and if you want to chat with us using your phone, you’ll use this”.
You’re asking that something which isn’t, and has never been, a part of “basic smartphone functionality” become a part of basic smartphone functionality. And, the reason why it’s not basic smartphone functionality (and unlikely to become a part of “basic smartphone functionality”) is because each company has built their own messaging functions separate from the others. And, when dealing with encryption, the fewer folks that hold the master keys, the better so interoperability isn’t likely in the cards.
I can tell you RIGHT now, that if I knew a friend or friend of a friend that had a penchant for randomly messaging folks on their messaging app and offering them flights to the vacation they’ll be going on next week, on a whim, you’d BEST bet that I’m installing and turning on notifications for WHATEVER app is their choice.
Listen I appreciate the diatribe, honestly I really do, but you just put up a wall of text and didn't say anything.
The entire SMS part seems like it just went way over your head. Basic functionality to me is what SMS/MMS was 15 years ago, a worldwide standard that everyone had to adhere to which had specific benchmarks that had to be adhered to like file sizes. Now just modernize that into today's world with increased file sizes and such. I get it, the entire conversation is around a true universal RCS solution being untenable, but that still does nothing for Android users trying to conform to iPhone users who use iMessages. SMS/MMS have been the baseline for basic functionality for a long time, there is no reason not to expect that to be upgraded somewhere along the line.So, get off the dumbphone boat because it clearly shows to anyone just how “not happening” RCS replacing SMS at the carriers is?
No
It’s absolutely the most important thing anyone needs to understand when they read “RCS is going to replace SMS”There’s already standard messaging for app driven phones. There’s a LOT of standards by this point.
WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Google Hangouts, no wait, is that Google Chat by now? OR is it Google Messages? The only thing Google RCS offers is “just another app” BUT THIS ONE HAS THE GOOGLE LOGO ON IT!
Last edited:
You would think, but I have no idea if that's something that can be mandated. In the US I would like to think something similar would be internet broadband requirements, the government tells providers what the minimum broadband speeds they have to offer. In that same vein they should be able to mandate that carriers provide, let's say a minimum video and picture file size and that it be interoperable regardless of device.
It would be nice to have a simple update to MMS that allowed for larger file sizes and more modern video codexes, yeah, maybe additional support for group messaging (adding people to a group, removing people from a group, increasing the group size). It would probably be a lot simpler to implement than RCS has been. Would typing indicators and read receipts be nice? Sure, but they’re probably not all that necessary for a “global phone chat” baseline.Listen I appreciate the diatribe, honestly I really do, but you just put up a wall of text and didn't say anything.
The plot thickens, as I was thinking about governmental mandates and upgrading MMS I came across this: https://www.fiercewireless.com/wire...to-include-rcs-declaratory-ruling-for-sms-mms
Isn't this right before the carriers ceded RCS to Google?
Edit: Hmm seems Rosenworcel was against reclassifying SMS/MMS on fears of censorship by the carriers, so she most likely wouldn't be open to RCS either.
Isn't this right before the carriers ceded RCS to Google?
Edit: Hmm seems Rosenworcel was against reclassifying SMS/MMS on fears of censorship by the carriers, so she most likely wouldn't be open to RCS either.
Last edited:
Looks like it. I think Verizon was one of the last carriers that was a major proponent of RCS, and it’s about 2019 when Verizon and AT&T threw in the towel, from what I’ve read on the topic.
There’s something really funny about the whole RCS saga. I’ve seen it pointed out before that IP has never been successful in anything but the Internet. There have been multiple attempts to use IP in broadcasting (ATSC 3.0, for instance) and in other fields, and the only place it has ever caught on was the Internet. It almost seems like a rule that IP based systems other than the internet fail and usually fail to even get off the ground. And RCS is IP based, even over the carriers. I’m not sure what it is about IP, whether it makes standards super complicated, whether it’s being shoehorned into contexts where it just doesn’t work, or whether it’s just the flavor of the decade for second system effect efforts.
Just wanted to make it clear that while some may have communicated that sending a text message between an iPhone and an Android device is “suffering” and “terrible” it’s realistically not either. “Annoying” perhaps, maybe for those that have never used anything other than iPhone messaging and that thought (incorrectly) that’s the way smartphones worked (rather than it just being how iPhones worked). For me, I have conversations with Android users all the time and we send and read messages fine and quite non-dramatically. I even have a group chat with Android and iPhone users… as far as I know, none of them consider it “suffering” to share a message about their child entering second grade even when including a picture.Listen I appreciate the diatribe, honestly I really do, but you just put up a wall of text and didn't say anything.
You’re right nothing prevents anyone from expecting that something more is out there. Unfortunately, not only is there not, there’s not even anything remotely on the way.
Same here, I have a group chat with two iPhone users and two Android users (my siblings and I). There’s another sibling who, for the longest time, had janky app-based SMS connections, and group chats didn’t work with him. He’s got proper texting now, but we can’t add him to our existing chat, of course. So I still mostly use Facebook Messenger to chat with him. That’s about the only drama I know I’ve had from using SMS. I can send long texts and the parts don’t seem to get lost or jumbled, and I can receive long texts, too. Pictures seem to go through with high enough quality. None of us send videos (when we do send videos, we usually use Facebook Messenger to make sure our mom gets them, too). My sister and I do occasionally use chat reactions, mostly the laugh one, but our Android using siblings haven’t complained about that. That’s probably my biggest use of SMS/MMS, but I sometimes get messages from other people I know who are Android users. And messaging them is about the same as messaging an iPhone user, except my bubbles are green instead of blue. I think the only real limitation of SMS I’ve ever hit is the lack of add/remove functionality in MMS groups. And most group chats I’ve been involved in apart from that have been short lived groups, for coordinating an activity or something. There’s a specific job that needs to be done, and the group chat loses its utility after that.
Edit: Basically, SMS/MMS actually works pretty well for the sorts of things I do with it, though some of that is definitely Messages magic sauce on the backend. I’ve never once thought to share video via MMS or iMessage, to be honest. Like I said, I’d typically do that via Facebook for the five connected people in the world I’d ever have any reason to send a video to in chat.
Last edited:
You might want to put your definitions in line with people's expectations. In my posts I put up a silly example of myself and my daughter's grandparents missing my daughter's winning soccer goal because we were all futzing around with sending and receiving videos, but in actuality that was a true story. Sure it may not be a big deal to some, but to others it may be very important, especially when it comes to family and happiness. I remember being told her grandmother actually had tears in her eyes because she missed the event. Life or death? No, not at all, but still important, at least in my opinion.
Your point is like saying broadband minimum speeds shouldn't be mandatory because low internet speed is just an "annoyance." I mean there was a time when we all got by just fine on 56k dial up connections, so why mandate over that if internet "basic functions" can be conducted? I'll tell you why, because expectations change, business and personal needs change, the world evolves and "basic" levels change. You keep falling back to the ability of modern phones to fall back to SMS/MMS, I get it, and that's extremely valuable in third world countries and other scenarios and should remain, just like 56k dial up is there if that's all you have. But at the same time SMS/MMS limits need to be raised to be in line with expectations in the modern internet age.
Isn’t that just a prioritization thing? For example, if I were messing around with replacing the memory card on a camera or carefully opening a can of soda to ensure it doesn’t spray, either one of those may cause me to miss a goal. I’ve had enough experience watching youth sports to know that, for me at least, I just need to focus on the event. Especially if I’m recording the event for someone else. It means you get a lot of “nothing” going on, but when that ONE thing happens, you’ve captured it.
But, I’ve never been in a position where I need to record and send while the event was going on… I feel for you having to go through that.I get your point, but broadband minimum speeds is FAR simpler than SMS/MMS, though. One ISP with the funds and the desire to do so can raise their broadband minimum speeds without talking to any of the hundreds/thousands of other ISP’s. Even a TINY change to MMS would require engaging every carrier around the world and they’d all have to agree on the change before going forward, especially if it requires a hardware rollout or core protocol changes. The idea that the current situation can be improved without the carriers is what brings us the “also-ran” Google RCS, which may not even last 3 years before Google gets bored and starts working on “Google Gravy” (because they’ve run out of talk/chat related names!).
That’s the thing. If carriers around the world are not even adopting RCS, Google harping on Apple is clearly ill intended, purely marketing PR just to put bad name on Apple without any merits. Google should be ashamed of themselves.