The sooner we accept RCS is dead, the sooner we can choose the next platform
androidpolice.com
androidpolice.com
First, anything that requires a telco to be actively involved in service delivery beyond being a dumb IPv4/6 pipe is going to be terrible. Inserting those dysfunctional companies as man-in-the-middle on a global scale ensures mediocrity. RCS is a bad idea on that basis alone.
Second, iMessage is really good. It is consistently the best messaging app I've used in multiple dimensions. I use many other messaging apps on a daily basis and this gap is hard to ignore. WhatsApp is pretty strong in the greater ecosystem of messaging apps, but it isn't up to the standard of iMessage. There are other common apps used around the world are quite a bit worse. Too many messaging apps focus on trite features while underinvesting in a strong architectural core, and it shows.
Third, if you are going to have a big tech company orchestrating all of this, you can do a lot worse than Apple. Something being cross-platform or globally popular doesn't absolve it of being run by ethical organizations. Many popular messaging apps are expressly forbidden in some contexts, so they simply can't be used. I've never come across such a case for iMessage (or Signal), though I'm sure it probably exists somewhere.
There is a case for a strong cross-platform messaging app, but RCS isn't it. And whatever it is, it needs to be at least as good as iMessage or iMessage people won't use it. Average users just want something that is feature-rich, high-quality, and without a creepy company behind it. Most alternatives to iMessage struggle to clear this hurdle, so they feel like a downgrade to iMessage users. I don't think it is a tall order to produce something to the standard of iMessage but maybe I underestimate the difficulty because it doesn't seem to happen.
1. When sharing multiple photos a carousel of photos is created instead of a boring boxy grid of photos.
2. You can paste stickers of your Memoji (Apple’s Bitmoji) onto text bubbles. All my friends have discovered that feature through me and they love it!
3. You can send balloons or confetti for “happy birthday” messages.
4. The latest and greatest hardware features always have tight, polished iMessage integration (on-device Siri driven replies, Dynamic Island UI bounciness etc)
5. The UI has a few nice touches like loopy loops for threaded conversations, fun animation when a message is deleted, super tight integration with Siri
1. Seems a bit subjective, I tend to dislike carousels
2. I guess I haven't used memoji to fairly compare this, but when it comes to stickers I liked FB messenger's offering more
3. Messenger does this as well, with balloons instead of confetti iirc
4. Dynamic Islands requires iPhone 14 right? Seems like less of an iMessage feature and more of an iPhone 14 feature. As for Siri integration, I don't use Google Assistant much but I believe it can also reply on whatsapp/messenger, you just have to specify "WhatsApp" or "Messenger" in the command
5. When it comes to animations and other small UI quirks, a lot of it is subjective. I prefer Messenger's UI over iMessage, but probably because I'm used to it
2. 3. Sure. But nobody using iPhone to take group pictures is going to share it on FB messenger instead of WhatsApp or iMessage. I mean, the only reason we _don’t_ share on WhatsApp is the loss of quality and tight integration into iOS. There’s a million better Photo Album apps on iPhone. Everybody’s is definitely using the built in app more than anything else. Similarly, everybodys _prefers_ to use the “really good” feature of iMessage of being built into iOS.
One would say Messenger is at feature parity with iMessage. But those people tend to be people who say stickers on messenger are similar to Memoji on iMessage. Talk to one the user experience designers and they’ll pick out a 100 differences.
4. Yup sure does. But that’s the point. Did I say Dynamic Island? Oh, sorry, I meant the new LIDAR sensor on iPhone 12 Pro which takes better portrait mode photos at night. Oh, sorry, did I say LiDAR sensor on iPhone 12 Pro; I meant the new ultra wide lens on the iPhone 11 which takes better photos with the bokeh effect. Oh sorry did I say iPhone 11 Pro? I meant.. ultimately, as soon as a new hardware feature comes out the first messaging app that supports it is iMessage. So sharing software artifacts of that hardware (photos, Animoji, Memoji whatever) is always going to be “lossless” when done using iMessage. The real feature is: preserving iPhone users’ ability to share iPhone features with other iPhone users.
5. Sure
Doesn’t take away from the delightful features on iMessage though :-)
The people complaining about iMessage vs. Android green bubbles are going to go the way of Betamax vs VHS. Or blu-ray vs HDDVD. We’re all going to die and our children’s children will fight over something new vs some other thing new.
I think the case should be more for basic interoperability like the EU is doing. That's why iMessage is such a default on Apple's devices, basic interoperability with SMS. There would be a lot less people on iMessage if it was a separate app than SMS. Plenty of people would rather have a single app with good enough features, but can message everyone under the sun (SMS is not good enough). Similar to Pidgin and Trillian which had less features than using AIM or MSN Messenger directly back in the day.
(It's possible that this is what you meant, and if so, I apologize; but I feel in cases like this, when we're talking about technical solutions, it's important to be precise in our language so we can avoid misunderstandings!)
From a user perspective, just about everything about the UI/UX and integration with the rest of your environment in WhatsApp is inferior to iMessage. The integration aspect is understandable; it is easy for Apple to tightly integrate iMessage into the rest of their environment because they own it. Nonetheless, this integration is slick and a lot of subtle automagic happens as a result. I appreciate that bit.
The UI/UX gaps are less understandable, since that is a choice. WhatsApp is better than many other messaging apps but in my experience the UI/UX is noticeably inferior to iMessage in some ways. I think some of this just attempts to optimize engagement metrics or similar, because Facebook, sacrificing good design.
That aside, WhatsApp has distasteful behaviors that are just Facebook-isms that don't need to exist in a messaging app. I don't appreciate its aggressive attempts to scrape my life, for example. Every Facebook property has this characteristic.
I use both a lot and whenever I switch back to whatsapp I accidentally try to do telegram swipes because they are so much better and intuitive. When I switch to tg from wa this never happens because wa has trash UX.
I mean....does it need more than this?
Meta is a malicious entity, deliberately seeking to vacuum up as much of our private data as it can possibly get access to and use it for its own purposes, which are demonstrably hostile to human dignity and at best indifferent to human life.
Maybe but the issue here is not RCS but the refusal of Apple to sit at the table and discuss alternatives.
I'm not sure about the messages themselves, but I wouldn't be surprised if Google has extra metadata and supports features that only work within the world of GMail and gracefully degrade in other clients—but, unlike IMAP, I haven't worked with that directly, so I'm not confident either way.
(Concrete example: GMail has additional integration with Google Calendar just like Outlook has integration with Outlook's calendar, but I'm not sure how that manifests at the protocol level.)
Our goal should be to turn cell carriers into dumb data pipes. They have demonstrated repeatedly that trusting them with more is a bad idea.
We have that. It is called iMessage. It replaces SMS, has all the added features, and transparently "just works." You just need to upgrade your phone to one that has it.
Google should be asking Apple to release iMessage for Android, not this silly "green bubble" campaign.
I believe people have already been asking this for years, to no avail
Sorry to break it to you, but at least some people consider RCS to be DOA in that respect.
"Text messaging used to be a cash cow for carriers, but with the advent of unlimited texting and the commoditization of carrier messaging, there's no clear revenue motivation for carriers to release RCS. The result is that the RCS rollout has amounted to nothing but false promises and delays. The carriers nixed a joint venture called the 'Cross-Carrier Messaging Initiative'¹ in April, pretty much killing any hopes that RCS will ever hit SMS-like ubiquity."²
¹ "Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile kill their cross-carrier RCS messaging plans" https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/04/verizon-att-and-t-mo...
² https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/06/google-enables-end-t...
The "RCS" that Google implements does not follow the standards that have been around decades.
The interopability and push for RCS is a marketing exercise.
That's what most people do outside of the US. In Mexico for example everyone is on Whatsapp. Even iPhone users don't use Messages.
It's pretty amazing users in the US still rely on SMS to communicate between iOS and Android.
And yes, the burden is on Apple here. They have the lock-in.
except: it's not irrational as you might expect. seriously!
green bubble means that your single android friend has just downgraded your fun, interactive group (or solo) chat (with tapbacks, effects, group features, rich content integration, and cross device syncing) into some weird, featureless set of messages
the only solution you have, as an android user, is to convince your friends to use a cross platform chat. I personally try to get people to use Signal.
the simple reality is that the default messaging story on android is a hot mess, and apple has done a vastly superior job at the feature set and integration. and, having an android user "drag us down" naturally leads to denegration
Why? It's completely rational to be annoyed that one person is dragging everyone's experience down - even it's not really that person's fault.
> You choose to use an exclusionary and proprietary messaging protocol
First of all, it's not really a choice. You text your friend with the built in messaging app and it immediately just "works". There is no setup. Is this anti-trusty? IANAL.
And, per my previous post: "the only solution you have, as an android user, is to convince your friends to use a cross platform chat. I personally try to get people to use Signal."
> ostracize people who prefer not to spend an absurd amount of money on a phone.
iPhones start at around $430, which is about what a mid tier Android phone costs. And, that base iPhone includes top tier hardware that can hold its own against some of the most expensive Android phones.
You can buy an iPhone and expect it to receive OS patches for 5 years - and 8 year old phones are still receiving security patches from Apple. Nothing running Android comes close, except for maybe Google's own phones.
That comes out to about $20 a month on their two year payment plan, which includes damage repair - considering how long iphones last and receive support compared to android devices, it's a good value.
If spending money on a device is a concern, Apple actually offers some extremely good value.
> Your gripes are absurd
As I said before, the gripes are reasonable, especially to people who text heavily. Is this Apple's fault? Sure, but it's understandable why some iPhone users get annoyed when an Android user downgrades the quality of service - even if it's not entirely fair.
By the way, you seem to think I'm pro-lock-in or pro-apple. Which really couldn't be further from the truth. By the way, I have run into a lot of android users take some sort of pride in not using the "trendy fruit company" devices - which is also foolish. So I really think people need to step back from trying to feel superior and instead focus on how to ensure everyone has secure and private E2EE messaging
From a cursory search the best reference I could find was google’s whitepaper[1]:
> In order to store and exchange user public keys like identity keys and prekeys, we need to have a central key server. Unlike the RCS messaging servers, the key server is currently only hosted by Google
[1]: https://www.gstatic.com/messages/papers/messages_e2ee.pdf [2]: https://www.xda-developers.com/google-messages-rcs-api-third...
If you don't get your teenager Nikes/Birkenstocks then your kid is going to face some added difficulties. Kids will bully kids for not having iPhones regardless; blue texts wont change that.
FWIW, I personally don't think this ranks as something today's kids worry about. My sample size is just two, but both are on a bunch of text chains with peers. All chains are a mix of Android and iOS users, and they tell me that nobody cares.
That scummy company forfeited the benefit of doubt a long time ago.
Meanwhile over in Europe, we're trying to get people away from WhatsApp and on to things like Signal. Nobody gives two hoots about iMessage :D
But not all ISP are evil, here we have a lot of city operated ISP with free minimal service.
Also Apple: "If you want to text Grandma, buy an iPhone"
My read into that: "People who run unreviewed code on their smartphones are so dangerous that we need to socially ostracize them from their parents"
Yes, there's some friction- you do have to compile the project first- but seriously clone-compile-install can be done in two shell commands. You can even run a coveted JIT compiler and install non-safari browser.[0]
[0] https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/i...
What a take. Pay us every month to be able to own your device. We’ll take it back if you stop paying. At not even a small payment, that’s over twice what I pay for my, admittedly very cheap, contract.
The payment grants you software access to system calls that are blocked by apps installed from the AppStore and has nothing to do with the underlying hardware.
https://9to5mac.com/2016/03/27/how-to-create-free-apple-deve...
However, I suspect those things exist moreso because Apple would find it too onerous to destroy them. In fact, the JIT compiler thing requires having an active debugger connection from another machine. But they could and would change if they were pressured to: say, by Epic Games deciding to release a Fortnite IPA for sideloading via AltStore. They would absolutely either end free dev certs or ban people who provision other people's code.
"No sideloading" is policy, not capability. If Apple feels like their policy is being violated, they will shrink capability to match.
Maybe Android could pick up Matrix support out of the box?
It's also got a phone number matchmaking service for those who want it I believe, but for me it's a plus that it doesn't use the phone number as ID so you don't automatically have to share your number with everyone you chat with.
I love Matrix, but non-technical people don't care about these points (I do, though). Matrix needs to have a better official client than Element at its current state before I think it's even worth looking at becoming mainstream.
(I run a Matrix homeserver for myself with literally all of my chat communications going through it)
Edit: my comment sounds super defeatist, I want to clarify that my hope is that Matrix can become something I can recommend to anyone
You know, I probably should get more involved with sharing my feedback or contributing to the codebase where I can so the devs have another data point.
One of the features that does cause confusion for me though is Spaces. Some of my bridges (the whatsapp one in particular) took it upon themselves to put their messages in a separate space, which always has me hunting around for messages, I prefer having all my chats in the same place regardless of what bridge it came from. That was my #1 reason to use Matrix: To have everything in one place. I keep deleting the Whatsapp space but the bridge puts it back. It's a nice idea but only if I can set it up the way I want to.
Anyway I will see where you go with this, at least Matrix is a fully open ecosystem where I can always use the client I wish. Still looking for a nice high-density IRC-like desktop client too (the Xchat mode is nice but my main issue is with the chat list that is not compact enough, and it doesn't fix that). But anyway I'll find something. I know it's difficult to please everyone and it is probably a good idea to target the mainstream like you're doing.
It's not ideal (I'd love a more high-density view for the channel list in particular, the "xchat" view only makes the chats more high-density). But I'm certainly an outlier, most mainstream users would be happy with it as it is.
The one thing that could be improved IMO is the encryption process which is clumsy. Many times I log in a new client and it keeps prompting me to add it even though I've already entered the backup key. The process of granting one client through another has never worked for me.
I completely agree. Even though it reduces security/privacy, the fact that Signal doesn't make the user think about having to deal with managing keys I think is a very user-friendly feature. iMessage does this as well for its encryption.
> The process of granting one client through another has never worked for me
I pretty much only use my security key when logging into a new client, because I have also found that process can be unreliable.
Umm how do you expect that would work? One man's friend is another man's family :)
I agree the fragmentation is super annoying though. I use matrix with protocol bridges now to bring almost everything in one app.
My MVNO on telstra (RCS enabled) apparently doesn't, and coincidentally doesn't do VOLTE either (which telstra does do)