Hopefully the EU (or, in an alternate reality, the US) will eventually force Apple to finally implement RCS messages (or, less likely, open up iMessage).
Why punish Apple for Google failing to create a good messaging service? Google failed to compete against iMessage in the US and failed to compete with Whatsapp worldwide. Now you want the government to step in to help Google make more money?
Let the competition dictate it. No need for the government to get involved. Maybe Google can spend $50 billion to create and market an alternative to iMessage if they truly care instead of these half-ass attempts once every 2 years.
Let's be real here. The only reason Google is pushing this is because they're losing Android users to iOS in the US due to the green/blue bubbles. It's a huge thorn for Android in the US. There is absolutely no reason any government, particularly, EU to push private messaging services to open up so Google can make more profit.
Apple implementing RCS messages should allow anyone to build a messaging app that will be able to integrate directly with iMessage.
It is letting the competition dictate it by leveling the playing field for a behemoth like Apple with every single other messaging app developer/company.
Large tech companies vertically integrating by using their walled gardens as a weapon is literally the point of the EU regulations. For EU regulators, its not taking a side in apple vs google. Its taking a side in mega corporations vs any other company or person
No, it would not allow anyone to integrate directly with iMessage. Apple would ship a competent way to send RCS messages and keep on adding more spices to iMessage.
RCS is better than text, but let’s not delude ourselves, it will likely never be better than iMessage or even WhatsApp.
Well you're talking about a userbase that's ecstatic to be overcharged for every single thing, and are heavily conditioned by Apple to view themselves as superior to other people because they bought a product.
The current scenario is so broken. You have multiple different platforms that do not interoperate with each other.
Different platforms have become the standard de facto in different regions of the world (iMessage in us, WhatsApp in Europe, WeChat in china, ..).
All of these platforms belong to private companies.
A sane landscape would be having platform interoperability, at least for the most common features and then let companies compete on features, not on user networks.
In Europe it is virtually impossible no to use WhatsApp, especially if you have kids. I don’t like it, but it’s one of the service I use the most, because I’m forced to.
I have a few messaging apps on my phone. It doesn't bother me at all that I communicate with my family using iMessage, some friends with Whatsapp, and some friends with other chat apps, and work using Slack.
What's the problem exactly?
To have a standard? Isn't that what phone numbers and SMS are if you want a standard way of reaching someone?
If you have other standards, you reduce innovation because in order to change anything, you have to get 100s of companies to agree and comply.
But if Whatsapp, iOS, Viber, WeChat, etc wants to make something better, they can write the code and release it tomorrow.
Users have chosen the private model. It's better. It's faster. It innovates more. If you want a standard, it'll just become like SMS years later. I don't want one single app. Each app does something better.
It's absurd. Imagine if it extended to voice calls. You could only talk to Apple users if you own an iPhone. Apple, and I guess you, would love it.
This is why we have regulated interoperability on many mass-market technologies. Imagine requiring a Ford to use certain gas stations or a Sony TV to view certain channels. There is no upside for the consumer when mass-market products leverage their popularity to create walled gardens.
You can send a SMS to iPhone users, and they'll see that in iMessage.
If you want a group chat with friends, there are a bunch of apps for that. If your friends wants those cool features but refuse to use any one of existing apps besides iMessage to talk to you, then they are not your friends.
I guess the coutnerpoint is that SMS was invented in, what, the mid 90s? And MMS invented in the mid 00s (?) when things like group chats or sending a video (!) over a phone (at least > 500KB) were inconceivable. We are long overdue for a new, modern, open standard. Apple has in a way invented a pseudo-standard and a) refusing to let others in and b) refusing to also support any other open standard. I think it's reasonable to expect we have a modern standard that supports now-simple things like half decent video transfer, files, groups, locations, etc.
the counterpoint is also that, internet is evolving way faster than those standards are able to keep up to speed.
Considering the issues folks are mentioning here about moving on to RCS and then possibly being unable to receive messages, etc... Americans can just do what the rest of the world does and use any app available on the app/play stores to chat. Whatsapp, kakaotalk, line, telegram, etc...
In fact they are forcing the big messaging monopolies to open up. However, iMessage doesn‘t play a big role here. It‘s WhatsApp they are after and I‘m glad they are.
Arguably false. Are you trying to imply that Apple users are the only common users of messages other than text or that Apple users use third party messaging instead?
Lots of providers implement RCS, lots of people use it. Perhaps none of the people in your particular region/circle of contacts do? My contacts almost all use signal. The exceptions where there are people that don't have any third party messaging apps, they use RCS. To those people, it's "just like a better MMS", they don't know any different, it just improves their messaging with no effort.
At least for the region I know, there are _a lot_ more Android users than iOS users, and third party messaging is really common. In practice, SMS is the last resort if you have nothing else.
All these conversations are always a rehash of "use this proprietary thing instead of that other proprietary thing". I am baffled that the conversation never ventures into technologies that put the user in control.
funny how you recommend Tgram and mention unencrypted RCS. By default all tgram messages are not e2ee (only if you use secret chats that are super limited in functionality so most users use classic chats) basically having access to any message (personal/group)
Because Google wants Apple to adopt RCS in order to prevent Android users in the United States from switching to iOS due to green/blue bubble social pressure.
I don't care what Google wants, I care about an open standard and ending vendor lockin. Did you think it was a problem when Microsoft refused to release MS Office for Apple as well, many years ago?
I use Google Docs exclusively. Sometimes I'll use Apple's built in document apps for local.
Microsoft probably makes more money having Office on Macs than not having it.
Office software competition would have built up from Macs not having MS Office. And MS Office would have stronger competition than today.
