Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #147499 > unrolled thread

RCS messaging

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  RCS messaging Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2025-04-01 12:19 -0700
    Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-01 20:37 +0100
      Re: RCS messaging Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2025-04-01 14:33 -0700
    Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-01 22:49 +0200
      Re: RCS messaging Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2025-04-02 11:23 -0700
        Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-02 19:43 +0100
        Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-02 19:17 +0000
          Re: RCS messaging Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-04-02 23:44 +0000
            Re: RCS messaging "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-04-02 22:54 -0400
              Re: RCS messaging Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-04-03 06:13 +0000
            Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 03:16 -0400
            Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 06:11 -0400
              Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 06:19 -0400
                Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 06:49 -0400
          Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 13:02 +0200
        Re: RCS messaging sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2025-04-02 20:52 -0700
          Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 08:37 +0200
            Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 06:26 -0400
              Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 12:31 +0200
                Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 06:45 -0400
                  Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 13:10 +0200
                Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-03 12:00 +0100
                  Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 15:12 +0200
                    Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-03 14:20 +0100
                      Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 18:08 +0200
                      Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 20:57 +0200
                        Re: RCS messaging Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-04-04 10:21 +0100
                          Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-04 13:00 +0200
                            Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-04 16:13 +0200
                              Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-04 19:12 +0200
                                Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-04 23:22 +0200
                      Re: RCS messaging Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-04-04 01:20 +0000
                        Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-04 13:00 +0200
                          Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-04 12:00 +0000
                            Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-04 13:20 +0100
                              Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-04 13:12 +0000
                                Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-04 16:17 +0100
                                  Re: RCS messaging Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-04-04 20:01 +0000
                  Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-04 09:52 +0200
                Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 07:20 -0400
                  Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 15:13 +0200
                Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 13:26 +0200
                  Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 15:14 +0200
                    Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 20:58 +0200
                      Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-03 22:18 +0200
                        Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 22:22 +0200
              Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 13:22 +0200
                Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 08:55 -0400
              Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-03 12:00 +0000
                Re: RCS messaging Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-04-03 13:12 +0100
                  Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-03 12:26 +0000
                    Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 14:35 +0200
                      Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-03 13:47 +0100
                        Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-03 13:05 +0000
                        Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 15:27 +0200
                    Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 09:03 -0400
                      Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-03 15:47 +0000
                        Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 21:01 +0200
                          Re: RCS messaging Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-04 12:02 +0000
          Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-03 09:11 +0100
            Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 13:34 +0200
            Re: RCS messaging Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-04-03 12:38 +0100
              Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-03 13:05 +0100
          Re: RCS messaging micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-03 06:32 -0400
        Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-03 12:58 +0200
    Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-01 23:32 +0200
      Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-01 23:36 +0200
        Re: RCS messaging Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-04-18 11:48 +0200
          Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-18 13:37 +0200
          Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-19 09:38 +0200
            Re: RCS messaging Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-04-22 03:34 +0200
      Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-02 09:32 +0100
        Re: RCS messaging sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2025-04-05 10:49 -0700
          Re: RCS messaging "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2025-04-05 20:56 +0200
            Re: RCS messaging Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2025-04-05 21:41 +0100
          Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-05 23:08 +0100
            Re: RCS messaging Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-04-06 18:33 +0000
              Re: RCS messaging Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-04-07 18:36 +0100
                Re: RCS messaging Marion <marion@facts.com> - 2025-04-07 20:47 +0000
          Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-06 08:56 +0200
          Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-06 09:39 +0200
      Re: RCS messaging extra extra <extraextra@mailbox.org> - 2025-04-14 23:11 +0000
        Re: RCS messaging Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-04-15 08:43 +0200
    Re: RCS messaging Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-04-04 09:02 +0200
      Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-04 13:02 +0200
        Re: RCS messaging Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-04-06 13:26 +0200
          Re: RCS messaging Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-04-06 13:28 +0200
            Re: RCS messaging "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-04-06 13:47 +0200
      Re: RCS messaging Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> - 2025-04-04 09:08 -0700
        Re: RCS messaging Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2025-04-06 13:29 +0200

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

#147555

On 2025-04-03 10:11, Andy Burns wrote:
> sms wrote:
> 
>> The e-mail to SMS and e-mail to MMS gateways are very useful.
> 
> Yes, if they still existed here, I could see me using them to send 
> alerts from scripts etc.

True.

I found one comercial gateway here: 
<https://es.mailpro.com/faq/correo-electronico-a-sms>

They don't say if they charge per email. You have to register the from 
address with the service. Methinks it should be with password.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147556

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> writes:

> sms wrote:
>
>> The e-mail to SMS and e-mail to MMS gateways are very useful.
>
> Yes, if they still existed here, I could see me using them to send 
> alerts from scripts etc.

I found this:

https://www.clicksend.com/gb/pricing/gb/#sms

It charges 2.61p for a text, but you get 25 free (I think that is a
one-off, not every month).

https://www.clicksend.com/gb/sms/email-to-sms/

RCS on the way it says.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147559

Richmond wrote:

> I found this:
> 
> https://www.clicksend.com/gb/pricing/gb/#sms
> 
> It charges 2.61p for a text, but you get 25 free (I think that is a
> one-off, not every month).
> 
> https://www.clicksend.com/gb/sms/email-to-sms/
> 
> RCS on the way it says.

For paid SMS, I've used AQL before, they let credit last a long time 
within their system, they seem a bit shy to tell pricing on their website.

<https://aql.com/products/messaging>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147545

In comp.mobile.android, on Wed, 2 Apr 2025 20:52:57 -0700, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>On 4/2/2025 11:23 AM, Stan Brown wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> You do know that pretty much every carrier maintains a way to send an
>> email to a particular phone number?(*)  It's not just Verizon. (I
>> have Visible, but the email-to-phone thing is the same because
>> Visible uses its corporate parent Verizon's network.)
>
>The e-mail to SMS and e-mail to MMS gateways are very useful. I didn't 
>think that there would be an e-mail to RCS gateway.

Ambiguous.  You didn't think that but what do you think now? 

Anyhow, to see if what you once thought is correct, I just sent myself
an email/text and I got it. The field for replying says Text Message,
but for some recipients it says RCS and for others it says Text Message.
One might think that it says RCS for those who also have RCS, but I'm
not sure it works that way. 

The big question I have is, Why do I get 3 copies of many texts,
inclding the one I just sent?   Some are longer and include links, and I
still often get 3 copies of the entire text.  I thought people were
nagging me until I saw how common it is, so it's not them, it's me. Why
do they deliver 3 copies when the sender only sends one? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147549

On 2025-04-02 20:23, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 22:49:02 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2025-04-01 21:19, Stan Brown wrote:
>>> Android 15, Google Pixel 8a, Google Messages and Google's camera app
>>
>> moto g52 and moto g62, Android 13 both.
>>
>>> [quoted text muted]
>>> Bad -- None of these happened till I turned RCS chats on:
>>> 1. When I enclose a photo in a text, text and photo are transmitted
>>> as two separate messages. The same happens when someone encloses a
>>> photo in a message to me: it's two separate messages.
>>
>> Not here.
>>
>>
>>> 2. When I forward a message that I received via Verizon's email-to-
>>> text feature, and it contains a photo, the photo is queued for
>>> forwarding but the text is discarded.
>>
>> No Verizon here, so can't replicate.
> 
> You do know that pretty much every carrier maintains a way to send an
> email to a particular phone number?(*)  It's not just Verizon. (I
> have Visible, but the email-to-phone thing is the same because
> Visible uses its corporate parent Verizon's network.)

Not my carrier, no such feature here. Some providers had it, then 
removed it.

> 
> (*) "Email to MMS" or "Email to text" are good searches. My personal
> fave is this one:
>> https://community.sinch.com/t5/UCaaS-Admin-Portal/Sending-emails-to-SMS-or-MMS/ta-p/17339>
> 


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147502

On 01.04.25 21:19, Stan Brown wrote:
> Android 15, Google Pixel 8a, Google Messages and Google's camera app
> 
> A couple of months ago I turned on RCS chats. There are a couple of 
> downsides, but I wonder if there are any upsides.
> 
> Bad -- None of these happened till I turned RCS chats on:
> 1. When I enclose a photo in a text, text and photo are transmitted 
> as two separate messages. The same happens when someone encloses a 
> photo in a message to me: it's two separate messages.
> 
> 2. When I forward a message that I received via Verizon's email-to-
> text feature, and it contains a photo, the photo is queued for 
> forwarding but the text is discarded.
> 
> 3. If I start a text, then take a photo and share it with the 
> intended recipient of the text, Messages throws away the text I 
> typed. 
> 
> 4. When someone _starts_ typing a response to a text I sent, I get 
> the sound for a received text, and then I don't know whether to wait 
> for them to finish and hit send, or go back to what I was doing and 
> then get interrupted again when they do.
> 
> 5. Senders' emojis or likes are transformed into some very 
> distracting animations.
> 
> Good -- What am I missing?

Absolutely inferior security and privacy which is not obvious at the
beginning.

RCS is an act of defiance from Google because they never got a real
emessenger flying.

You better use the infamous Signal which is really good in any respect.
Less so Telegram and the houswife and teeny app WhatsApp.

You are to a certain degree dependent of what your friends an relatives
are using anyway. BTW: iPhone users do not appreciate RCS messages at all.



-- 
"Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147504

On 01.04.25 23:32, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> BTW: iPhone users do not appreciate RCS messages at all.

Explanation: The proprietary encryption of RCS is crap and is
undermining the security philosophy of iPhones.

RCS does not have a "raison d'être".

-- 
"Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147939

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-04-01 23:36:

> On 01.04.25 23:32, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>> BTW: iPhone users do not appreciate RCS messages at all.
> 
> Explanation: The proprietary encryption of RCS is crap and is
> undermining the security philosophy of iPhones.
> 
> RCS does not have a "raison d'être".

It has - it is the evolution of SMS/MMS as a common standard an not a
proprietary protocol like iMessage, Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp etc..

The implementation of a working encryption as part of the standard is
just a question of time:

<https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/article/rcs-nowin-ios-a-new-chapter-for-mobile-messaging/>

Quote:

"Today, we are celebrating a significant milestone in the evolution of
messaging with the launch of Rich Communication Services (RCS) support
on iPhone with the release of iOS 18. This launch is the culmination of
years of collaboration across mobile operators, device manufacturers,
and technology providers. It represents a step forward in bringing RCS’s
feature-rich messaging to more users across both iOS and Android.

[...]

While this is a major milestone, it is just the beginning. The next
major milestone is for the RCS Universal Profile to add important user
protections such as interoperable end-to-end encryption. This will be
the first deployment of standardized, interoperable messaging encryption
between different computing platforms, addressing significant technical
challenges such as key federation and cryptographically-enforced group
membership. Additionally, users will benefit from stronger protections
from scam, fraud, and other security threats."


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147945

On 2025-04-18 11:48, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Jörg Lorenz, 2025-04-01 23:36:
> 
>> On 01.04.25 23:32, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>> BTW: iPhone users do not appreciate RCS messages at all.
>>
>> Explanation: The proprietary encryption of RCS is crap and is
>> undermining the security philosophy of iPhones.
>>
>> RCS does not have a "raison d'être".
> 
> It has - it is the evolution of SMS/MMS as a common standard an not a
> proprietary protocol like iMessage, Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp etc..

True.

> 
> The implementation of a working encryption as part of the standard is
> just a question of time:
> 
> <https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/article/rcs-nowin-ios-a-new-chapter-for-mobile-messaging/>

This is too old. Dated Tuesday 17 September, 2024.
The encryption standard already exists.

...

> Additionally, users will benefit from stronger protections
> from scam, fraud, and other security threats."

How do they intend to do that?

On the same site, there is a more recent article:

<https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/article/rcs-encryption-a-leap-towards-secure-and-interoperable-messaging/>
RCS Encryption: A Leap Towards Secure and Interoperable Messaging
Friday 14 March, 2025
Tom Van Pelt, Technical Director, GSMA



There is an article that mentions "scam".
<https://www.gsma.com/newsroom/press-release/vietnams-digital-future-in-the-spotlight-as-gsma-summit-tackles-trust-inclusion-and-scam-prevention/>

Tuesday 15 April, 2025
Vietnam’s Digital Future in the Spotlight as GSMA Summit Tackles Trust, 
Inclusion, and Scam Prevention

But much blah blah blah, not how they intend to actually fight scams.

It links to another one, 
<https://www.gsma.com/about-us/regions/asia-pacific/gsma_resources/address-scam-apac/>
Sunday March 2, 2025
Towards a digital nation: addressing the scam economy in Asia Pacific
[download]
This is a 38 page PDF 
<https://www.gsma.com/about-us/regions/asia-pacific/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/240325-Towards-a-digital-nation.pdf>

GSMA
Intlelligence

Towards a digital nation:
addressing the scam
economy in Asia Pacific

I don't have the energy today to read that long piece. And if it is 
focused in a far away region, maybe it doesn't help me.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147962

On 18.04.25 11:48, Arno Welzel wrote:
> It has - it is the evolution of SMS/MMS as a common standard an not a
> proprietary protocol like iMessage, Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp etc..

That is what Google tells you. Companies do not send RCS they still send 
SMS. RCS is and remains Google's wet dream and expression of the 
frustration that it never got a safe messenger flying.

SMS and RCS are technically completely different things.

-- 
"Roma locuta, causa finita" (Augustinus)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147998

Jörg Lorenz, 2025-04-19 09:38:

> On 18.04.25 11:48, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> It has - it is the evolution of SMS/MMS as a common standard an not a
>> proprietary protocol like iMessage, Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp etc..
> 
> That is what Google tells you. Companies do not send RCS they still send 
> SMS. RCS is and remains Google's wet dream and expression of the 
> frustration that it never got a safe messenger flying.

Nope, it is already implemented - even by Apple.

> SMS and RCS are technically completely different things.

Which does not change what I said.

-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147509

Jörg Lorenz wrote:

> iPhone users do not appreciate RCS messages at all.

No complaints here ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147646

On 4/2/2025 1:32 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> 
>> iPhone users do not appreciate RCS messages at all.
> 
> No complaints here ...
Love RCS on my iPhone now that iOS 18.4 has rolled out.

RCS is definitely the future of messaging in the United States, where 
WhatsApp doesn't have the market penetration that it does in other 
countries. It's not really a big deal outside the U.S., since iMessage 
is not widely used, but a big deal in the U.S..

Cross-plaform end to end encryption, finally!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147647

On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 10:49:13 -0700, sms wrote:

> Cross-plaform end to end encryption, finally!

In the future:

<https://www.theverge.com/news/629620/apple-iphone-e2ee-encryption-rcs-messaging-android>

(Or did they implement it?)

-- 
s|b

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147649

"s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> writes:

> On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 10:49:13 -0700, sms wrote:
>
>> Cross-plaform end to end encryption, finally!
>
> In the future:
>
> <https://www.theverge.com/news/629620/apple-iphone-e2ee-encryption-rcs-messaging-android>
>
> (Or did they implement it?)

I think they implemented it.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/04/google-fi-users-on-iphone-finally-get-rcs-messaging/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147650

sms wrote:

> Cross-plaform end to end encryption, finally!

well, soon anyway ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147674

On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 23:08:47 +0100, Andy Burns wrote :


>> Cross-plaform end to end encryption, finally!
> 
> well, soon anyway ...

With respect to that prognosis, notice the important view I have below.
 *RCS/MLS in Messages will be the death of the independent apps*

The quantum change will happen, I'm sure, but it will be the death of the
myriad SMS/MMS messenging apps if they can't also implement RCS/MLS.

The messaging app that kicks ass over all others, IMHO, is PulseSMS.
 <https://home.pulsesms.app/overview/>

Although unfortunately, the source code was bought by MapleMedia, but the
implementation of the functionality is what is the important point to make.
  <https://tinyurl.com/pulsesms>

People who haven't tested SMS/MMS messengers have no idea how crappy the
Google Messages app truly is - which is why I decry it will win due to it
being the only game in town when it comes to RCS/MLS implementation.

Notice my point is DIFFERENT (and well educated) from all others, which is
that I agree Google's Messages with RCS/MLS will win in the end, and it
will kill all other messaging apps, which is bad because it's atrocious.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147678

Marion wrote:

> RCS/MLS in Messages will be the death of the independent apps

I suppose that depends if google exposeds MLS functionality through an 
API, I can't see any evidence they will, there's little enough RCS 
exposed by API.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147680

On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 18:36:24 +0100, Andy Burns wrote :


>> RCS/MLS in Messages will be the death of the independent apps
> 
> I suppose that depends if google exposeds MLS functionality through an 
> API, I can't see any evidence they will, there's little enough RCS 
> exposed by API.

I agree with you. Your point, understandably so, is that Google Messages
with RCS/MLS (along with Apple Messages with it too), is nirvana for you.

While I certainly applaud that finally, everyone can do two things:
a. Communicate with the "default" messaging app with everyone, and, 
b. Do that securely over either the Internet (RCS/MLS) or not (SMS/MMS).

That part is all good.

The part I am worried about, but which I'm powerless to change, is that
Android may become much like the Apple ecosystem in that there will likely
be only one "default" messenger, in a practical sense.

Worse than there being only one (practical) default messenger is that the
messenger that will be the (practical) default, will be Google's messenger.

In that sense, Android is moving to the subterranean cave that Apple
designed in that everyone is forced to use the monopolistic messenger app.

Hence, you can understand why I ask you, and everyone else who is
intelligent, to look out, for my sake, for a non-Google messenger app in
the future which implements RCS/MLS. Let me know if you ever find one!

Or at least, if not for me, do it for our grand kids' sake! :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#147657

On 05.04.25 19:49, sms wrote:
> On 4/2/2025 1:32 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>
>>> iPhone users do not appreciate RCS messages at all.
>>
>> No complaints here ...
> Love RCS on my iPhone now that iOS 18.4 has rolled out.
> 
> RCS is definitely the future of messaging in the United States, where 
> WhatsApp doesn't have the market penetration that it does in other 
> countries. It's not really a big deal outside the U.S., since iMessage 
> is not widely used, but a big deal in the U.S..
> 
> Cross-plaform end to end encryption, finally!

You still live in your bubble, idiot. And your comment redarding the use
of media in other markets is simply total nonsense.


-- 
"Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web