Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#701

Post by ShadowBanThis01 » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 8:47 AM UTC

makeitdouble wrote: post #522

ShadowBanThis01 wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See the parent comment.

Parent comments is positing that only Google can do it with no specific argument on why it would be so. For instance, why would Samsung be barred from doing it ? What about Nothing ? Xiaomi ? The "monopoly" argument feels like vague hand waiving to me. It's probably a complex and costly situation, but nothing close to why we don't have different browser engines on iOS for instance.

The recent revelations about Google paying 36% of revenue from iOS to Apple made me wonder if that had something to do with the browser-engine lockdown. I guess it depends on what the terms of the deal are and whether it depends on the user agents conveyed by the browsers. Apple might want to make damned sure that there's no mistaking or misrepresenting traffic from their platform.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#702

Post by inkysigma » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 9:02 AM UTC

Shekelphile wrote: post #582

swozey wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you turn it off? What if you hire a contractor for some work and they need to send you pictures/video from an Android? Or a realtor, mechanic, craigslist seller, or just someone you don't have/want a personal relationship with. You're not adding these people to WhatsApp/Telegram.. I have probably hundreds more phone contacts than people I have on whatsapp.

> What if you hire a contractor for some work and they need to send you pictures/video from an Android? I would absolutely not want to do business with a contractor that uses an android phone. That's a serious red flag for someone doing work on a (usually very expensive) home to be using cheap tools.

Do you also exclude contractors that don't have a fully decked out Ford F-350? What if they carry a cheap $1 pen instead of a $50 pen to write some quotes for you?

Also, you realize there are android phones that are plenty expensive right?

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#703

Post by gigatexal » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 9:46 AM UTC

MikeRichardson wrote: post #693

gigatexal wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Standards come out of standards bodies. There's nothing other than a law or a lawsuit or the threat thereof that would compel to open iMessage as a standard. It's a competitive value-add to adopting the platform. Free markets are I create something awesome and profit from it not am then forced to allow you and everyone else to build off of my hard work unless I choose to or am forced to. If Apple was approached by go…

> The free-market works when someone else builds something -- in this case a better phone experience -- that would cause folks to move to that and abandon iMessage The free market fails when the cost for anyone else to enter the market is completely out of reach to anyone else.

That argument fails evidenced by all the various smartphone companies that have emerged. It’s not Apple’s fault that they failed to gain traction. They haven’t provided a marginally better experience or value add enough to make anyone move platforms.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#704

Post by fennecbutt » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 11:43 AM UTC

parineum wrote: post #523

Smoosh wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When elephants fight, the grass suffers.

When companies compete, consumers win.

Maybe small companies. But this isn't going to make any major difference to consumers; two bulls can lock horns and yet not budge a millimeter.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#705

Post by isametry » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 1:34 PM UTC

ThatPlayer wrote: post #554

TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not all iMessage users can send/receive RCS or SMS. What do you mean? If Apple includes RCS like they did SMS then it would operate as follows: Is target an iPhone with iMessage enabled? Yes? Use iMessage. No? Fallback to RCS. RCS doesn’t work? Fallback to SMS.

iPads can do iMessage. iPhones with no phone plan can do iMessage. iPod Touches, used to be the cheap messaging devices for kids before phone plans became more widespread. Macbooks. Those cannot send or recieve SMS/RCS.

And last but not least iMacs, Mac minis, Mac Studios and Mac Pros.

The word "Mac" encompasses all of those, just fyi.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#706

Post by daft_pink » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 3:51 PM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #531

daft_pink wrote: post #137

I really hope Apple allows us to disable many of RCS's features like read receipts and previews. I really don't want spammy users to start seeing read receipts, etc.

I'm worried about the spam. I hope they provide the ability to turn RCS off altogether if that's going to be a problem.

I don't think they can turn it off altogether, because it's essentially replacing sms, but I hope they allow us to disable a ton of the features or put it into a separate app.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#707

Post by bigfudge » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 4:10 PM UTC

randomdata wrote: post #678

bigfudge wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Bell, presumably the goal was to provide a monopoly to achieve an otherwise difficult goal: universal service. That's certainly the case with the post office in the UK (although now being eroded). For Microsoft: I think that's a weird argument. Plus I think there would have been lots of things pushing towards a single big player for desktop computing in the early-middle days (network effects).

No matter what the goal was, it remains that other players would have jumped in if there wasn't the legal impediments. But such regulation provided a moat in which they were able to build their monopoly. Same goes for Microsoft. Everyone and their brother would have released their own 'Windows' if regulation weren't there to disallow it. Again, that regulation offered a moat which allowed them to establish their mono…

From a long perspective I think the bell monopoly probably served an important purpose and may have been worth it. Not having universal service would have been socially divisive and culturally a problem. I think we need to stop judging things only on (presumed/assumed) economic efficiency. Non monetary values mean regulation is often important. We accept this with environmental and health/safety rules to some degree - I wish we could develop a language to argue for it more in other spheres.

On the Ms point.. is your argument that we should have no intellectual property rights for software at all? It seems odd to single out only this example. I’m broadly not in favour of software patents but I’m not clear that they were relevant to MS success anyway. I think you need to make a clearer argument about what regulations we would have forgone for others to really evaluate your case.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#708

Post by randomdata » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 4:48 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #691

randomdata wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mentioned there is a subset, but the subsets described is still a way to identify the group of people. You can try and twist language all you want, but there is no avoiding the fact that a corporation is just people. If people somehow magically disappeared, the corporate entity would disappear at the exact same time – it's the same thing.

> You mentioned there is a subset, but the subsets described is still a way to identify the group of people. A subset of the actions or interests , not a subset of the group of people (the latter would, indeed, be just a different group of people, but isn't what I said.) > If people somehow magically disappeared, the corporate entity would disappear at the exact same time – it's the same thing. No, its not the same t…

> A subset of the actions or interests

Direction is the word you are struggling to find, but it is the direction of the group of people. You have not added anything drawing attention to this so-called subset. It changes nothing about the discussion. It's just silly wordplay to divert our attention from your grievous error at the onset.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#709

Post by zamadatix » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

aalimov_ wrote: post #494

paxys wrote: post #466

Despite the usual "I want Apple to be a walled garden" sentiment that is prevalent on HN, I'm glad that the EU, DoJ and all the various corporate lawsuits are finally forcing Apple to open up their ecosystem, even if it is still far from where it should be. The smartphone is now the primary personal computer for most of the planet, and deserves to be treated as such.

I would assume that if you buy an iPhone you are (at least nowadays) aware that you are not going to be side loading applications or getting a device with third party bloatware installed that you can’t remove without a level of technical skill. How is it that they can be forced to open up their ecosystem if nobody is forced to purchase their devices, and when there are so many alternatives available. Especially when…

Aware or not, "you can go somewhere else" is not a valid excuse from being regulated - that rests solely on whether what is being done is deemed fair play by people. E.g. hanging the price of gas mid pump is not considered fair play and is regulated regardless if people can go to the other gas station in town and deal with whatever weird operations they have instead.

Whether there are more beneficiaries than advertisers or other mega companies is another easy one to answer: sure, people benefit more than advertisers/epic/etc by being able to use RCS (or hopefully iMessage) across platforms, as do other areas of opening up the Apple ecosystem. Does this hold in every case of opening up anything? Probably not, e.g. requiring the permissions model be allowed to have alternatives would very likely benefit shady actors a lot but the users extremely little.

Your last point is, in my opinion, the much more lively and core debate: at which point is the ecosystem opened the right amount? For me, still a bit farther than this, but not infinitely open.

As for which brand ecosystem for me: all the above. Windows for home, Linux+macOS for work, iPhone for phone, Android for tablet.

Re: Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year

#710

Post by surajrmal » Sat, Nov 18, 2023, 6:38 PM UTC

neilalexander wrote: post #602

TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RCS for iOS. 6 different ways it’s fragmented. :p Or maybe Apple will just implement it exactly as the spec says with no frills.

That is exactly what Apple will do: implement it by the spec. Then they can turn around to regulators and say they have done what they needed to do to be interoperable and, if compatibility problems arise, can point the finger right back at their competitors.

Why so cynical? Does Apple have previous experience doing such a thing? Typically everything they do they try to do well, and therefore I would expect them to make sure interoperability is good. The problem with Apple is that they only do what they want.