31–40 of 103 posts
Why doesn't Google have a go at building something better than iMessage rather than beg for regulations? Also, wrt to RCS its very much carrier oriented, and I personally would not want to have anything to do with them – next thing you know they'll have pay-for tiers or goddamn advertising in my messages.
[deleted]
Why doesn't Google have a go at building something better than iMessage rather than beg for regulations? Also, wrt to RCS its very much carrier oriented, and I personally would not want to have anything to do with them – next thing you know they'll have pay-for tiers or goddamn advertising in my messages.
I really don't get what is it that people like so much about iMessage that they use it instead of WhatsApp or even Telegram or Signal. I really don't get it. Can anyone explain what is it that is so good that you end up using a solution that 40% in the USA and 60% in the rest of the world cannot use?
I've never used WhatsApp, Telegram, or Signal but I have used iMessage/SMS. I really don't consider iMessage anything separate from being able to send SMSs; I just know that sometimes my messages are green and most are blue. I'd be surprised if iMessage users think as much about this as much as Android users and/or Google execs do.
I am guessing you're not a teenager in highschool.
I do have some slightly concerns about iMessage being opened up and no longer linked to Apple products for a spam standpoint. But I get plenty of SMS spam so I guess it's really not much of a difference. However kinda related I am curious about RCS. I tried looking this up but I can't find much concrete information on it. Is it actually universally E2E or only some? I find some reddit posts implying it's some. Do all…
The E2EE on RCS is an extension to the protocol developed by Google. I don't know who has implemented it other than Google. So if a user is on a carrier that does their own RCS impl (many carriers piggyback off of Google's so they don't have to deal with it), they may not have E2EE.
> Do all RCS messages go through Google's servers?
If your carrier isn't using Google's implementation, and you're messaging someone on a carrier also not using Google's implementation, then it won't go through Google's servers. Otherwise, it will. In theory, this won't matter, assuming the E2EE is implemented correctly and securely. I don't know if an audit has been done, though.
There's also the case where one person is on a carrier using Google's impl, and the other is on a carrier that is not, and that carrier has not implemented E2EE. Then the message will go through Google's servers, and Google will be able to read it.
This is how I understand it, anyway; I don't intimately know the details of the protocol, so this might not be 100% correct.
Sigh. It was to be expected that regulation intended to shield users from big tech harm is twisted to instead have one giant attack another.
So this is not about forcing Apple to make clients for competing platforms, but to allow businesses to send spam to more users? Well, thanks Google.
The argument is that Apple not allowing businesses to use a protocol on par with iMessage is the issue here.
I really don't get what is it that people like so much about iMessage that they use it instead of WhatsApp or even Telegram or Signal. I really don't get it. Can anyone explain what is it that is so good that you end up using a solution that 40% in the USA and 60% in the rest of the world cannot use?
It is wild to me that someone prefers to use a medium that is not end-to-end encrypted.
1. Are the people I chat with on there?
2. Is it free?
3. Do I have to install something?
4. Is it easy to use/sign up?
5. Does it have the bells and whistles I want?
..
X. What does end to end encryption mean?
So this is not about forcing Apple to make clients for competing platforms, but to allow businesses to send spam to more users? Well, thanks Google.
I don't think this is an accurate take. The DMA is about businesses and their relationships with consumers, so any regulation has to be targeted to that. The argument is that Apple not allowing businesses to use a protocol on par with iMessage is the issue here.
Sounds like spam to me
I really don't get what is it that people like so much about iMessage that they use it instead of WhatsApp or even Telegram or Signal. I really don't get it. Can anyone explain what is it that is so good that you end up using a solution that 40% in the USA and 60% in the rest of the world cannot use?
Messages is installed by default on iPhones, so people who are used to using SMS (most people) just use iMessage, and if they're communicating with someone without an iPhone, the app just degrades back to SMS.