Google Says iMessage Is Too Powerful (arstechnica.com) 219
Google took to Twitter this weekend to complain that iMessage is just too darn influential with today's kids. Ron Amadeo writes via Ars Technica: The company was responding to a Wall Street Journal report detailing the lock-in and social pressure Apple's walled garden is creating among US teens. iMessage brands texts from iPhone users with a blue background and gives them additional features, while texts from Android phones are shown in green and only have the base SMS feature set. According to the article, "Teens and college students said they dread the ostracism that comes with a green text. The social pressure is palpable, with some reporting being ostracized or singled out after switching away from iPhones." Google feels this is a problem.
"iMessage should not benefit from bullying," the official Android Twitter account wrote. "Texting should bring us together, and the solution exists. Let's fix this as one industry." Google SVP Hiroshi Lockheimer chimed in, too, saying, "Apple's iMessage lock-in is a documented strategy. Using peer pressure and bullying as a way to sell products is disingenuous for a company that has humanity and equity as a core part of its marketing. The standards exist today to fix this."
The "solution" Google is pushing here is RCS, or Rich Communication Services, a GSMA standard from 2008 that has slowly gained traction as an upgrade to SMS. RCS adds typing indicators, user presence, and better image sharing to carrier messaging. It is a 14-year-old carrier standard, though, so it lacks many of the features you would want from a modern messaging service, like end-to-end encryption and support for non-phone devices. Google tries to band-aid over the aging standard with its "Google Messaging" client, but the result is a lot of clunky solutions that don't add up to a good modern messaging service. Since RCS replaces SMS, Google has been on a campaign to get the industry to make the upgrade. After years of protesting, the US carriers are all onboard, and there is some uptake among the international carriers, too. The biggest holdout is Apple, which only supports SMS through iMessage. "Google clearly views iMessage's popularity as a problem, and the company is hoping this public-shaming campaign will get Apple to change its mind on RCS," writes Amadeo in closing. "But Google giving other companies advice on a messaging strategy is a laughable idea since Google probably has the least credibility of any tech company when it comes to messaging services. If the company really wants to do something about iMessage, it should try competing with it."
Further reading:
Eddy Cue Wanted To Bring iMessage To Android In 2013
Apple Says iMessage On Android 'Will Hurt Us More Than Help Us'
"iMessage should not benefit from bullying," the official Android Twitter account wrote. "Texting should bring us together, and the solution exists. Let's fix this as one industry." Google SVP Hiroshi Lockheimer chimed in, too, saying, "Apple's iMessage lock-in is a documented strategy. Using peer pressure and bullying as a way to sell products is disingenuous for a company that has humanity and equity as a core part of its marketing. The standards exist today to fix this."
The "solution" Google is pushing here is RCS, or Rich Communication Services, a GSMA standard from 2008 that has slowly gained traction as an upgrade to SMS. RCS adds typing indicators, user presence, and better image sharing to carrier messaging. It is a 14-year-old carrier standard, though, so it lacks many of the features you would want from a modern messaging service, like end-to-end encryption and support for non-phone devices. Google tries to band-aid over the aging standard with its "Google Messaging" client, but the result is a lot of clunky solutions that don't add up to a good modern messaging service. Since RCS replaces SMS, Google has been on a campaign to get the industry to make the upgrade. After years of protesting, the US carriers are all onboard, and there is some uptake among the international carriers, too. The biggest holdout is Apple, which only supports SMS through iMessage. "Google clearly views iMessage's popularity as a problem, and the company is hoping this public-shaming campaign will get Apple to change its mind on RCS," writes Amadeo in closing. "But Google giving other companies advice on a messaging strategy is a laughable idea since Google probably has the least credibility of any tech company when it comes to messaging services. If the company really wants to do something about iMessage, it should try competing with it."
Further reading:
Eddy Cue Wanted To Bring iMessage To Android In 2013
Apple Says iMessage On Android 'Will Hurt Us More Than Help Us'
Palpable pressure? (Score:3)
Some do treasure
Rebellious pleasure
Burma Shave
Lolz. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And WhatsApp is waay more powerful in almost every country that is not the US.
Why? Is the US version of WhatsApp different than the international version???
Re: (Score:2)
Different in the sense that nobody uses it. Free texting became the standard intra-US before whatsapp existed; not so internationally.
Re: (Score:2)
SMS sucks ( no group messaging, no multimedia, no read receipts) and should have died as soon as permanent internet connectivity became the norm back in 2007
Re: (Score:2)
SMS sucks
iMessage only uses SMS when talking to a non-Apple device.
The lock-in that Google is complaining about is caused by the suckage of SMS.
Re: (Score:2)
This whole thing is weird. iMessage is the old iChat plus a fallback to SMS if you're on, or connected to, a phone that supports it.
Google has half a dozen chat systems they could use to do the same thing. Pushing some half baked update of the half baked SMS system is... weird.
Re: (Score:2)
No SMS is great. The great thing about SMS is that it works without internet connection and also works with almost no phone cell coverage. The problem is the carriers can't get off their lazy asses and agree on a better SMS standard. It always comes down to the same thing: Corporate greed.
Re: (Score:2)
SMS sucks ( no group messaging, no multimedia, no read receipts) and should have died as soon as permanent internet connectivity became the norm back in 2007
Read receipts are possible with SMS, but they are not enabled by default. Group messaging is also possible. Multimedia are possible with MMS (with limited picture quality).
But I agree that it's an old outdated standard that should have been replaced a long time ago.
Re: (Score:3)
When people say SMS, they mean SMS/MMS. The only thing that lacks is read receipts, which from a privacy standpoint I kind of like that I don't have to share whether I've read something or not.
Re: (Score:3)
It is in 2022.
I send and receive payments through a dedicated app; this functionality doesn't belong in messaging.
Re: (Score:2)
^^^^ This, a 100%.
Outside of the US, and maybe a couple other countries, no one cares about iMessage. WhatsApp though, is massive. To the point that the recent Facebook outage had a real economic impact in many places where WhatsApp is the most common day-to-day communication method - people do actual business with it.
Re: (Score:3)
So Google are you willing to share your data for say Google Maps to Apple to help them fix their Apple Maps so it is just as good if not better than Google Maps, so you can get access to the iMessage format to make your chat system just as good if not better than Apples?
While in general competition is a good thing, however sometimes the competitors just don't realize that they are playing a failing game and should give up trying, and join the winning side.
Re: (Score:3)
So Google are you willing to share your data for say Google Maps to Apple to help them fix their Apple Maps so it is just as good if not better than Google Maps, so you can get access to the iMessage format to make your chat system just as good if not better than Apples?
Even if Apple Maps were much better than Google Maps, I would still use Google Maps. It's just habit. I simply don't WANT to change what I use for a mapping app.
The same is true for iMessage. I don't WANT RCS and I'm not going to use it, as long as iMessage is available, I don't care how fucking good it is.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
RCS with end to end encryption is already a possibility but Apple is not on board.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. It's spot on to what's needed to replace SMS, in my opinion. US carriers hate it and some have worked together to fake a botched rollout (sans encryption) just to "prove" it won't work (at least that's what it seems like).
Re: (Score:3)
Apple...like walled gardens and profiting off of the proprietary...
Isn't that the 2nd or 3rd definition of "Apple" in the dictionary... since Macs came into existence? I don't think its anything they have ever run away from.
Its not like they built a wall around someone else's garden and locked in the people smelling roses. They build an empty walled garden and said the only way in is an expensive paradrop and people lined up around the corner to get on the iPlane. Now the outsiders are complaining Apple's walls are too high while neglecting their much larger... prairies
Re: Signal (Score:2)
Google just sucks at messaging. The old school Hangouts of 8 years ago was the best messaging system they put together, and they've been fucking the dog ever since.
This is basically Google telling the world that Apple is better at this, and now they are going to have a pout. Which is true, because Google's messaging "strategy" has been shit for years. I wish that Whatsapp also did SMS as a fallback, and I would bid Google Messages a solemn goodbye as I drag it to the remove button on my Pixel 6.
Re: (Score:2)
They killed Hangouts because it didn't fit in with Google Workspace. Which is a terrible reason. Now they're trying to make Chat a tab in their Gmail app and I hate it.
Re: (Score:2)
They killed Hangouts because it didn't fit in with Google Workspace. Which is a terrible reason. Now they're trying to make Chat a tab in their Gmail app and I hate it.
I'm not a fan of web apps (including Electron), and to be fair, we do get so much utility from the ease with which services of all sorts can be launched.
But I'm not a fan of web apps -- desktop native apps are needed for heavy stuff, like Blender, or your preferred sound or video editor...
but also, web apps miss the integration with all the niceties of the host OS. I can't tell the difference between what Hangouts was doing versus Chat in Workplace...
but can I get Chat to even show notifications? I rely on
Re: (Score:2)
XMPP has existed as a standard for many years, google actually used to support it too but they dropped the open standard in favor of their own walled garden.
Google complaining is just sour grapes because Apple's walled garden is more successful than theirs.
Standards don't remain static, there's no reason that existing standards can't be updated with new features while retaining backwards compatibility for users with older implementations.
Re: (Score:2)
Signal is an industry standard, the messaging protocol is open source.
The problem is that Signal Messenger LLC won't let anyone else interoperate with their servers, so rival apps cannot talk to Signal users securely. If they sorted out federation then Signal would be an ideal messaging service.
They haven't been very clear about why they won't open up, but it may be to prevent spam accounts. They require a phone number to create a Signal account. It's possible that the main flaw in the protocol is that it h
iMessage is just plain better (Score:3, Insightful)
I have verification that the message was received. With SMS it probably went through but who knows for sure. Plus iMessage is treated as data so it works over wifi without any cell reception. Very handy for buildings that get no cell signals. Oh you're going to tell me about the wonder of third party messaging apps now. Well which one is guaranteed to work with every single Android? Oh there isn't one. Google could have baked this into the OS ages ago but dropped the ball.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
But it doesn't work outside the Apple walled garden. Not a standard and it can't be implemented without Apple hardware so basically not available as a solution. So you either have SMS or nothing as your solution. Which is no solution at all. At least with Signal I can message from any server I choose. It's sad that you think you have something special.
Re: (Score:2)
So 11 years and hundreds of millions of users later we have RCS. This might become as popular as laserdisc!
Re: iMessage is just plain better (Score:2)
Except RCS requires a phone with a SIM because it's a telecom standard. Want to get your RCS message on your computer? Then you have to use Google's crap Messages for Web, on only one other device at a time.
iMessage delivers to any device with a client logged in, simultaneously. Meaning phone, tablet, desktop, and laptop. RCS cannot do that.
Re: (Score:3)
iMessage delivers to any device with a client logged in, simultaneously. Meaning phone, tablet, desktop, and laptop. RCS cannot do that.
It is supposed to do that. But it never worked. So I disabled "non SMS" for iMessage nearly a decade ago.
They have it backwards (Score:3)
They have it backwards. It's my own texts on iOS (as an iPhone user) that have a different background color depending on who I am texting with over which medium (SMS for green, iMessage for blue), not the other person's text. The other person I'm texting with always has the light gray background color.
For me it's always been the case since at least iOS 12 when I started owning an iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
Technical error in the article, but it's still a way that kids can tell if they can video call or not.
Re: They have it backwards (Score:2)
Or send a video without it being bitcrushed into oblivion with some shitty 20 year old codec at less-than-NTSC resolution. That is the biggest pain point with shitty SMS / MMS.
Hi Pot! (Score:2)
Pot, I'd like to introduce you to Kettle. The two of you have so much in common, I'm sure you'll get along like two peas in a pod...
Re: (Score:2)
Some pots and kettles work in "Induction Cooking" stoves, some do not.
Re: (Score:2)
Like AMP for example...
Created by Google as a way to control the web.
Young people are looking for status (Score:2)
And that is something you're not going to change. They seek status anywhere where they can find it. Clothes, cars, hobbies, even phone brands. It's all about status so they can figure out their place in the hierarchy of their social network. And with young people, that network is far more aggressively changing than relatively calcified social networks of the older people.
Apple is simply monetizing this impulse, just like many other fashion brands do. It's not a messaging system problem. And so, you won't be
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason that is so is because they prefer to be enslaved. It's not the phone that gives you status. It just binds your reality to think less of yourself. It's just a tool. Just remember, once people thought bell bottoms were cool...
Re: (Score:3)
Bell bottoms are still cool - as long as the chick wearing them is hot.
As with most things fashion - Just don't be an ugly pleb, and you can do what you want
Re: (Score:3)
Not sure who you think "they" are. I have an iPhone because I get security updates (not to mention version updates) promptly, even though my iPhone is old. Try that on an Android. You might never get a security update.
Google lying for self enrichment? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Google lying for self enrichment? (Score:2)
Except Apple doesn't allow anything else to do SMS on iOS, and Google forgot that Voice exists.
Apple/Non Apple texts were colored for a reason (Score:5, Informative)
My memory may be faulty here, but IIRC, IMessge when it was originally launched would show iPhone texts in a different color because they were unlimited and free through Apple services. Other texts were show in another color as they had or may have had SMS limits and fees. This was all back in the day when unlimited messaging was a new concept.
ret-conning the coloring as a deliberate effort to bully kids seems a bit disingenuous.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Such as RFC 6120, 6121 ?
This is Rich (Score:2)
lol at the company that once supported federated messaging (in the form of XMPP) but eventually got greedy and used "because mobile" as a BS pretext for turning its messaging service into a walled garden:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/... [zdnet.com]
I miss the days of "don't be evil".
Re: (Score:2)
At first I thought you were talking about Wave until you got to the end (ticks all those boxes). Instead of a walled garden, it was just an empty graveyard.
change this instead: (Score:2)
Whack your kids on the back of the head (gently) and tell them if the color of their fucking text messages matter, you'll smash the screen so *everything* is rainbowy and to grow the fuck up.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that many operators still charge a per message fee for SMS, especially for SMS sent to international destinations or while connected to a roaming network.
Messages sent over imessage use your data - either wifi or mobile data rather than a per message charge.
The different colors are to highlight the difference, so that the user is aware they may be faced with additional (possibly very high) charges for the green SMS messages. Users are naturally going to avoid something costly if they have a f
Re: (Score:2)
I'm glad you're not my father. I shudder to think what you would do if I forgot to fill up the car after borrowing it, or similar little things...
Apple does EEE too (Score:3)
This sounds an awful lot like embrace/extend/extinguish for SMS messaging. Also are a majority of humans complete jerks now, that they will bully people for not using a proprietary piece of software only available on an overpriced locked-down toy of a phone?
Re: (Score:2)
Check the comments on the linked article. People really are awful. And completely blind that they are living lock in and will pay whatever price Apple sets because it's the only option.
Re: (Score:2)
We iPhone users get security updates, so it's a price I'm willing to pay. (My iPhone is a 6s Plus, which when you think about it is rather old. But I still get version updates and more importantly, security updates.)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what that has to do with messaging. I'm not talking about you, so stop getting so defensive. I take it you haven't read the comments on that article either.
Re: Apple does EEE too (Score:2)
To be fair, SMS is in need of extinguishing. We just need a newer open ubiquitous standard to replace it. Which, we would have, if Apple implemented RCS into iMessage.
But what are ya gonna do...
Re: (Score:2)
It's at least half Google's fault (Score:5, Informative)
iMessage is so 'powerful' in part because Google has completely f@#$ed up its handling of Android messaging.
While Apple's been steadfastly behind iMessage and Facetime, with a steady game plan and two apps (chat and voice/video), Google has had the following completely disorganized and incoherent clusterf@#$ck:
- Google Talk
- Google Voice - This is still running for some reason, but due to making nice with carriers, the SMS can still be wonky
- Google Wave
- Google Buzz
- Slide's Disco (Google bought it)
- Google+
- Gmail chat
- Google Docs Editor Chat
- Google Hangouts
- Google Spaces
- Google Allo
- Google Duo
- Google Meet
- YouTube Messages
- Google Chat
- Google Maps Messages
- Google RCS Messaging
- Google Photos Messages
- Google Stadia Messages
- Google Pay Messages
- Google Assistant Messages
- Google Phone Messaging
- Google Chat (again)
If you want to learn more, read this: https://arstechnica.com/gadget... [arstechnica.com]
So yes, iMessage may be 'too' powerful, but Google has zero right to complain about it, since they turned android messaging into a ghetto.
Re: (Score:2)
Mindblowing, isn't it? Surely there is a very interesting inside story behind the mess.
Re: (Score:2)
lol. A ghetto. The imagery got me.
--
You don't need money to be creative. The ghetto builds champions every day. - DJ Snake
Re: (Score:2)
100% agreed... And not just because of messaging. Do not be evil Google!
Re: (Score:3)
Google Hangouts was perfect. Apart from the name. It handled its own messages and SMS. Built in voice and video chat. Android and web versions. Nice simple app with just the right amount of features, integrated into Gmail and other Google services.
I guess they killed it because there was no way to monetize it, and are now realizing that having a really good messaging app is necessary to drive people towards their other services.
The new Gmail integrated chat is horrible, especially on Android. They just scre
Re: It's at least half Google's fault (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is everybody else on board?
I'm just this year starting to get decent RCS support, I feel like somebody is not on board (carriers and/or phone manufacturers).
I'm not even sure if it works across phone networks consistently (it definitely didn't not too long ago).
It looks like Google got it working in spite of carrier support, not with carrier support.
Re: (Score:2)
They are not blocking RCS, they just don't provide an RCS client by default on their devices.
Android handset providers often don't either, you have to explicitly install the Google RCS client.
Basically... (Score:2)
This is the same thing they were trying to say about worker unions. Is this all they can do now? When making a better product and litigation fails, you build an ad campaign.
Gotta keep SMS. (Score:2)
When it all burns down, only SMS and cockroaches still operate. Need to keep SMS. All the fancy shit doesn't matter when you're at 0 bars.
RCS (Score:2)
As per Are Technica, RCS is bad, and anyone who likes it should feel bad [arstechnica.com].
the power of imessage is insignificant next (Score:2)
to the power of the DUPE.
Ecosystem lockin is creating a dangerous monopoly (Score:2)
The consumer ecosystem lockin is creating a monopoly for Apple which is as hard to displace as Microsoft was in business before the cloud and Web apps disrupted it.
Outside of the US Google is still hanging on, but I think in wealthier nations it's a losing battle. It's easier for Apple to spread top segment dominance downwards than Google pressing upwards, Apple can make cheap phones but Google can't make a privacy focused OS.
At this point a new competitor would have to come with 100s of billions just to ge
Re: (Score:2)
One business model is to make phones people like and want to use.
The other business model is to make software that lets you spy on people, and you give it away for free so that some people who make phones will use it.
It would be great to have some *decent* competition for Apple. Google ain't it.
Re: Ecosystem lockin is creating a dangerous monop (Score:2)
Google is caught in its businuess model, it's pretty much impossible to move out of it now.
Apple started small, this is no longer possible. The investment needed to offer a full ecosystem is already vast and getting ever larger as Apple extends its consumer electronic reach.
It would be nice for true competition to Apple to arise, it's just not realistic to expect it. Winner take all ecosystem lockin is effectively a new natural monopoly created by modern technology, there can be only one. Only severe incomp
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny, when Apple decided they were going to make a phone, lots of people said the same thing. You'll never compete with Blackberry, they've got the business market all sewn up, and everyone who can't afford a Blackberry but wants a smartphone just gets one of those Chinese ones. Oh, and Nokia makes that thing four or five geeks love for some reason. And even if you *could* do something, you're still going to fail because everyone loves BBM.
Turns out, smartphones kind of sucked, Apple tried something d
Re: (Score:2)
Blackberry didn't have the in house services ecosystem Apple has now. Blackberry didn't have the 10+ billion in acquisitions for in house hardware development. Blackberry didn't have it's own laptop OS. Blackberry didn't have any other ecosystem integrated consumer electronics. Blackberry didn't have it's own financial services. Blackberry wasn't developing its own car.
Apple started small, that is no longer possible.
They're envious and stupid (Score:3)
(Note, I don't like iPhones and I use Android)
Google was the only company who could've defeated iMessage. Long long ago, when the internet was getting really big for 'normies' - around 2002-2008 or so, pretty much _everyone_ had a gmail account.
Back then, people didn't have exhaustion from signing up to services, you tell someone you can get a free gmail, oh wow! and they'd do it.
EVERYONE had one (well, most people)
Google Chat was a heck of a simple, easy, reliable thing.
Google could've, made the one defacto chat standard for the web and eventually mobile, had they not REPEATEDLY dropped the ball on messaging solutions and I emphasize, REPEATEDLY. Kept killing off old, useful services, rebranding, launching something new and inferior.
They could've made some kind of web / sms solution which was amazing, before iMessage existed. They didn't though, the opposite, they made their chat services so poor, no one uses them, it's all signal, telegram, what'sapp, facebook messenger now. "Hangouts" (hah) or whatever is a distant memory.
Had they made this solution the iPhone users might have all used this, to a point that they never bothered with iMessage.
Alas it was not to be. Now iMessage is an Apple only product. I don't care for it as I don't like Apple but Google can hardly whinge, they dropped the ball. They're annoyed they got it wrong in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Long long ago, when the internet was getting really big for 'normies' - around 2002-2008 or so, pretty much _everyone_ had a gmail account.Not sure about the rest of your argument, but between 2005-2007, Gmail was invite only.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn formatting.
Long long ago, when the internet was getting really big for 'normies' - around 2002-2008 or so, pretty much _everyone_ had a gmail account.
Not sure about the rest of your argument, but between 2005-2007, Gmail was invite only.
RCS and Google Voice (Score:2)
Dialing 911... (Score:2)
Caller: Please send a Wambulance to 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View, CA 94043, immediately!
Crocodile tears (Score:2)
What a stupid lie ... (Score:3)
There is absolutely no difference between an SMS send from an android phone versus one send from an iPhone.
However iMessage is also a "messenger app" (that does not really work, so most people have it deactivated) - a messenger app like WhatsApp or Telegram or Signal.
So yes, if you send me a message via iMessage as a standard internet chat app text message then it is blue. If you sent me an SMS it is green.
Obviously if you have sent me an SMS, I only can answer/interact in SMS-ways with your and your message.
And why is anyone so stupid to complain about that?
uh, dummy (Score:2)
iMessage brands texts from iPhone users with a blue background and gives them additional features, while texts from Android phones are shown in green and only have the base SMS feature set.
That's because they are SMS messages you dummies.
They're worried about "ostracism"? If I were Apple, my response would be:
"We combined two messenger apps into one, allowing users to answer iMessage and SMS in the same app, with colour showing the difference. Of course we can make iMessage and SMS messages two seperate applications, no problem. Please help us with a good name for the SMS messages app. Maybe "broke friends"?"
While the rest of the world... (Score:2)
Laughs in whatsapp.
Who even uses these? (Score:3)
What? (Score:2)
Self-inflicted pain (Score:2)
Google having problems with messaging is summed up neatly by Ars Technica: [arstechnica.com]: Having had a ton of messaging apps, and never staying in anything for the long run, makes people not trust you.
As an aside, there's also section about RCS in the same article: RCS is bad, and anyone who likes it should feel bad [arstechnica.com].
THIS IS A DUPE (Score:2)
Not the first to say it, and hopefully not the last, but:
https://apple.slashdot.org/sto... [slashdot.org]
Only difference is this article comes from Ars instead of Apple Insider. Both reference the same Wall Street Journal article.
Google and Messaging (Score:2)
How many dead products do they have now? 10? More?
Apple has two live ones, and they both work.
Google has 5 live products, one more confusing than the other.
All these platforms are the same (Score:3)
Of course Google is no better than the others in this regard. They dabbled with XMPP (Jabber) protocol for a bit before deciding to release a succession of half assed proprietary IM/VOIP/Video platforms of their own. They're envious that other platforms are taking all the cake when they covet the whole cake themselves.
Perhaps it's time to rethink federated platforms. An industry group backed by some big companies could make it happen if they could get over their own short-term selfish interests for a second.
Sour grapes anybody? (Score:2)
Perhaps Google could color their messages green?
Apple would sue them for the 'look and feel' again I presume.
RCS is focused on the phone, not the user (Score:2)
RCS is a carrier standard and is SIM card based. Many devices and situations don't have a working SIM card. Imessage goes seamlessly to my phone, ipad, and computers - even if no sim is available, like on a plane in buildings where you have wi-fi but poor cell receiption. This is not unique to imessage - many other services, like whatsapp also work this way - but RCS thus has a major technical reason why it should not be at the core of any messaging solution.
FWIW, it also seems like the US carriers dropped [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:2)
RCS still works fine for me. It is pretty frustrating that iOS users screw it all up.
Wave was the best messaging app (Score:2)
Wave was by far the best messaging app. It was incredible and should have been integrated into GMail immediately, which would have encouraged other email providers to adopt the protocols. Oh, yeah, Wave was open source protocols that anyone could have implemented. But instead, internal corporate bickering caused Google to kill it.
Trial Transcript (Score:2)
"Yes, your honor, Apple is discriminating against other text messaging services, and harming our customers."
"Are they blocking texts from other SMS services?"
"No."
"Are they blocking texts to other SMS services?"
"No."
"Are they preventing you from rolling out SMS services?"
"No. Texts from non-iOS devices show up as a different color. This is destroying our business!"
Re: (Score:2)
The problem here is that it's creating an advantage for an iPhone-only network at school, where the kid with an Android device can't fully take part. Google's complaint is mostly that the handset makers haven't installed a compatible client.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You'd never catch Levis saying that their jeans are super unpopular and it's not fair because all the cool kids are wearing those Calvin Klein jeans and kids with shitty Levis jeans can't pretend they have CK jeans because of the damn logos.
But Google for some reason thinks that's a winning strategy.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, most of Google's failed messaging apps at least have an iOS version. Not sure if that matters, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Google have been doing the same thing..
The original gtalk used open standards and was interoperable, but all their various messaging options since then have been just as walled garden as apple.
Apple also originally promised to open up facetime/imessage, but have since reneged on that promise. The original facetime used p2p communications but they were sued over that, so they switched it to a client-server model which is a lot more costly for apple to operate.
Re: (Score:2)
idk
Re: (Score:3)
Apple aint your friend either
With Apple, you pay upfront.
With Google, you pay with your privacy.
Which is your friend depends on how much your privacy is worth to you.