This is 100% self inflected damage and they should have stuck with the original open/source based gchat. They went propriety and played themselves.
Also, most Googlers in the US use iPhone for personal and corp.
Is this why (as I understand it) Google has historically launched new apps/features on iOS first? I know firsthand that this is true for Google Voice (including before, during, and after the lengthy detour to Hangouts).
I don’t think it’s intentional, it’s just harder to provide a consistent bug-free experience on Android, even for Google’s own flagship device.
Whenever I ask someone the point of using Android, I always get back an answer of "oh, it's because it prioritizes user choice, I can sideload APKs, it's cheap" or something along those lines. But I'm old, I just want a device that mostly works and nothing more than that, and Android (historically) hasn't been it. Worth noting that my iPhone 8 plus still receives updates, a support cycle that long is something unheard of in Android circles.
Why is Apple or Google the only messaging option for you? Those are not the only services on the market. I feel like you're missing the forest from the trees here.
Europeans, latin Americans and other large demographics, don't have the bubbles struggle because people don't default to iMessage but cross platform messaging platform to not discriminate anyone. Crazy, I know.
The social issue exists in the USA and that is what they're complaining about. It does not matter what the rest of the world does when this thread is based on that - in a thread about US iPhone market share, no less. Cross-platform-apps would've been the solution for this already if they had any shot of doing so.
I have friends from Africa and India, and they use whats-app when communicating with people in their home country because it costs money to send regular SMS.
SMS is just so outdated.
The only problem with the apps is that people use different ones. But I use matrix with bridges to unifi them all into one. Very much like beeper.com .
I can't really start a campaign to get people to switch to Signal, I don't have that much social capital to burn with my friends/family. And I personally would never use WhatsApp, and while I understand the history of its ubiquity, I can't bring myself to pull myself back into Mark Zuckerberg's ecosystem.
I bet they are still getting updates Chrome, Gmail, Maps, and all the other core functionality from Google, though. Notably, the most security sensitive element is the system web browser. This also gets updated even when the base OS does not.
Android and iOS are different worlds. For most users, the update lifecycle differences are not large.
If people want to compete with Apple on iMessage, they need to offer a product that isn’t obviously inferior. The longer they wait, the harder it will be to displace iMessage in the iOS environment.
My work issued phone is an iPhone 11, which was released in 2019. It is running the latest version of iOS and it is still buttery smooth and a joy to use. The equivalent Android phones released in 2019 would be a Samsung Galaxy S10 (last update was to Android 12) or a Pixel 4 (last update was Android 13).
What is a crucial difference between Android and iOS: older Android releases do have updates for all apps, including those, that in iOS are bound to the system release, like the browser. So even old Android are getting current Chrome (or Firefox, if that's your choice), mail client, calendar, etc. With Android, new system release for existing device is just a number, as none of the critical apps are bound to it.
Everyone tells me that there are these mysterious kernel bugs that are super dangerous, but, tbh, I have yet to see evidence of that. The more important app layer still sees many updates, including a lot of key system components.
I'm sure Google could figure out how to make it play along nicer (they already implemented reactions, so don’t give me bullshit telling me they can’t improve it more) or - better yet, create a more solid alternative.
That's not really Apple's job. They made a superior piece of software and reasonably want to use it to encourage people to their platform.
You might not like it - but it is allowed.
If you'd like the features Apple offers, you're welcome to move to their platform. :P
No different than if you'd legally like to watch Star Wars at home, you'll need Disney+.
Disney isn't somehow required to also offer it on Netflix. :P It's called a feature of the platform. If you'd like that feature, use that platform.
Your cousin doesn't have D+? Well, I guess y'all aren't chatting about the new episode of 'Andor' that dropped that week.
They don't have an iPhone? Guess y'all have to deal with green bubbles.
That's part of how platforms - necessarily - differentiate themselves from one another to encourage users to them, just like console exclusives.
When I was a kid, if you liked Sonic, you had a SEGA. If you liked Mario, you had a Nintendo.
Nobody in the world in the 90’s was expecting a Sonic game on a Nintendo console or vice versa.
I don’t know what changed that people are suddenly freaking out about this, lol.
It shouldn’t have to be explained in a group as highly intelligent as this one that this is simply basic anti-competitive practice.
If iMessage was everywhere it would be a monopoly and y’all would be clamouring for some alternative anyway. :P
There’s literally just no pleasing some of you, lol.
Yes, this is how ridiculous the Apple ecosystem sounds from the outside.
Group chats also work fine if we’re all using Messenger - group chats work just fine if we are all using Signal - it’s almost as if software works as expected if it’s being used as expected.
Mind blowing, I know.
There is no other major chat platform that offers interoperability with services the platform owner does not own.
(Messenger and Instagram just got some sort of interoperability, but since they are both Meta properties, it only helps prove my point.)
What’s beyond ridiculous is to expect a SEGA Genesis cartridge to just run, unmodified on an SNES, which is what you’re demanding, here.
Yeah, a group game of Super Mario Kart 64 works awesomely on an actual N64 with a real cartridge and four controllers - but hey, why doesn’t it work the same on my PS1?
Well, fuck Nintendo for not opening up their game to other platforms! They have awful business practices!
…
…now that’s ridiculous shit, and what you’re almost literally saying; word for word, just with different hardware and software.
(The PS1 doesn’t even have 4 controller ports out of the box, even if it could run N64 software unmodified. The PS1 also had its own exclusives and benefits, such as Final Fantasy 7. Both platforms had their advantages and disadvantages. The N64 was far more powerful, but was hampered by cartridges, whereas the PS1 used CD media and could store much more, but push far less polygons.)
Why on Earth would it be Nintendo’s responsibility to make sure Kart 64 plays great on a PS1?
Isn’t half the point of a first party software release (either Kart 64 or iMessage) to provide a reason for users/players to choose that platform instead of whichever alternative?
Should GarageBand/Logic or iMovie/Final Cut suddenly be ported to Windows or Linux as well?
At what point does the ridiculous demand for interoperability stop? What do you want, only one monopolistic set of hardware and software for everything?
Personally I'm very happy for my Telco to just be a dumb pipe that supplies internet bits. Especially because that means I can get at my bits anywhere, not just on blessed networks. They're not however, they want lucrative "value add" features. Features that will have all sorts of strings attached.
But anyway, luckily RCS is dead. I'm not sure how they thought marketing "RCS" against WhatsApp could possibly work. Sure SMS was also a complex acronym but it only took off because there was nothing else. Acronyms are eschewed now by the mainstream. And even as a tech person I'm really happy not having to say "double you double you double you" anymore.
iMessage is ok, but it’s hardly the pinnacle of messaging software.
1) Who is being abused? The platform? Can you elaborate?
2) Can you give an example of the corporate brainwashing you’re referring to?
3) What are you glad about specifically?
There are several companies that already solved it, the world moved on, but only certain groups are harping on Apple and Google, nothing else. Why? Just use something else, Whatsapp, Signal, Telegram, they all work beautifully and are significantly popular.
There is a duopoloy in phone offerings and people in the USA just do it this way. If Google wants their market share - and to push back against Apple's offerings and prized position socially marked via bubble color - then it's on them. No other app is going to overcome the social issue here.
I'm saying that there's no reason why messaging should be put into hand of platform owners. The world is bigger, and if a third party makes a good entry, why ignore it and insist, that only Google and Apple are allowed?
Nope, Apple intentionally blocks anything like this to encourage people to buy iPhones. Basically what is happening is intentional.