Live data from Hacker News

I hope Apple never adopts RCS

blog.mogery.me

121–130 of 156 posts

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#121
post #45

RCS is inferior to iMessage simply because it doesn't work on tablets and desktop computers. Since RCS is tied to mobile carriers, who don't want to give up control over those juicy messages, the problem will persist forever.

EDIT: wrong iMessage is device centered - your messages are just relayed to desktop by the mobile messaging app. Android messages can do this too [1], So can Samsung [2] [1] https://support.google.com/messages/answer/7611075 [2] https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS00087322/

No. SMS is proxied to your phone from your desktop but iMessage to iMessage communications don’t need an iPhone at all.

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#122
Like the author, I hope to see some kind of open system get adopted. 3rd party apps are popular in a lot of places but they are the wrong solution because you rely on a company offering a free service to behave. In Japan, the dominant messaging app LINE has been struggling to get spam under control, and has had some recent security scandals with personal information being viewed by a Chinese affiliate and user payment data being leaked on GitHub. Because of these and other issues, some younger users want to drop LINE completely and move to alternatives like Discord and iMessage, which is bringing fragmentation back.

If a centralized messaging app became dominant in America, it would likely attract antitrust attention too. These apps have to make money somehow, usually by selling emoticons, charging business users, or adding features like payments. I doubt the current FTC would be pleased if Meta realized their old ambition of creating America's WeChat.

RCS may not be perfect but I would rather see Apple adopt it if the alternative is nothing. The messaging experience for America would be a lot better for it. Google's rhetoric around this seems to indicate there's no current interest in collaborating to build a better standard, so it seems to be a far off ambition.

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EDIT: wrong iMessage is device centered - your messages are just relayed to desktop by the mobile messaging app. Android messages can do this too [1], So can Samsung [2] [1] https://support.google.com/messages/answer/7611075 [2] https://www.samsung.com/us/support/answer/ANS00087322/

No. SMS is proxied to your phone from your desktop but iMessage to iMessage communications don’t need an iPhone at all.

Ah thanks for the correction

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#124

Although i'm very much a fanboy of the matrix protocol, i really wish Apple and other big players would at least consider something like matrix...That is, a protocol that is secure, extendible, but still universal enough to be federated; not proprietary. I imagine decades ago there might have been similar (though maybe lower intensity) debates when email was becoming popular. I'm so glad the elders were wise enough (…

This is what the new EU DMA regulations are hoping for too.

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fragmentation of these third party apps gets frustrating very fast though. I'm in the UK and my work uses Slack and also wants me to use WhatsApp for OOH contact. My friends are mostly on Discord. My family is mostly only available via iMessage. A few of the more privacy conscious use Telegram or Signal. A few of the more OSS conscious use Matrix. Some chat is still on IRC (actually I like that...). Users relying…

> A few of the more privacy conscious use Telegram or Signal. Here in Germany, almost everyone I know is on Signal. That is not privacy conscious people or even tech-affine ones, almost everyone uses it in addition to WhatsApp. WA is mainly used when it works better (in bad connection situations, something that is embarrassingly relevant in Germany, Signal messages sometimes don’t work without an indication of it hap…

I'll ask this here...

I haven't touched any 3rd party messaging app, and I'd like to have my family start using one. But I'd like one that works on desktop as well... windows and linux. Does Signal, Telegram, or the others let you do that without jumping through hoops?

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#126
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t own any Apple hardware and no desire to own any, let alone keep it turned on. I do already have a mobile phone number that works. I believe I am among the majority of adults in Australia in this combination (though it’s quite slim and based on estimation). If you’re already in the Apple ecosystem, fine, and that is kinda the target of the article; but it’s worded in a way that I don’t like and find extremely…

That's fantastic that you have a mobile number that works. How can you use it on a WiFi-only tablet to send messages to people using that number? Yeah, I know, you use third-party apps for that. That's not the point.

How is a third-party app that's available for both Android and iOS worse than iMessage that's iOS only? How is a mobile number that can be bought from literally hundreds of different carriers all over the world worse than an Apple ID that only Apple can provide and can take away at any time?

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A few of the more privacy conscious use Telegram or Signal. Here in Germany, almost everyone I know is on Signal. That is not privacy conscious people or even tech-affine ones, almost everyone uses it in addition to WhatsApp. WA is mainly used when it works better (in bad connection situations, something that is embarrassingly relevant in Germany, Signal messages sometimes don’t work without an indication of it hap…

I'll ask this here... I haven't touched any 3rd party messaging app, and I'd like to have my family start using one. But I'd like one that works on desktop as well... windows and linux. Does Signal, Telegram, or the others let you do that without jumping through hoops?

Telegram works pretty smoothly in that regard. The desktop apps are fully featured; the only thing you have to use a phone for is the initial signup.

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#128
post #68

The SMS/RCS/iMessage/blue bubble-green bubble debate is almost entirely exclusive to the strange market of the US. Almost everywhere else in the world, users have simply adopted a variety of 3rd-party messaging apps that use the phone's Internet rather than GSM connection, like WhatsApp, Telegram, Messenger, Signal, WeChat, etc. EDIT: While I understand the need for a 'universal E2EE messaging standard', we don't hav…

The blue bubble/green bubble thing is Google's iPhone is just "round corner" argument. They're very good at pushing the "our competitor is evil" style messages rather than being honest about the genuine reasons why others aren't embracing their various platforms. Google have repeatedly failed at making legitimate competitors to popular chat services such as Whatsapp, so Google is trying to sneak around the competitio…

iMessage is non-interoperable by design. RCS is at least a standard, and better than the existing SMS standard. So it's progress, even if E2EE isn't there yet.

Re: I hope Apple never adopts RCS

#130
post #124

Although i'm very much a fanboy of the matrix protocol, i really wish Apple and other big players would at least consider something like matrix...That is, a protocol that is secure, extendible, but still universal enough to be federated; not proprietary. I imagine decades ago there might have been similar (though maybe lower intensity) debates when email was becoming popular. I'm so glad the elders were wise enough (…

This is what the new EU DMA regulations are hoping for too.

I sure hope they succeed!
Post reply on HN