The long fight to make Apple’s iMessage compatible with all devices has raged with little to show for it. But Google (de facto leader of the charge) and other mobile operators are now leveraging the European Union’s Digital Market Act (DMA), according to the Financial Times. The law, which goes into effect in 2024, requires that “gatekeepers” not favor their own systems or limit third parties from interoperating within them. Gatekeepers are any company that meets specific financial and usage qualifications, including Google’s parent company Alphabet, Apple, Samsung and others.
RCS as a standard isn’t a replacement. RCS as a base project is dead.
Specifically Googles implementation is a replacement, but then it’s the exact same situation we’re in now, just with Google instead of Apple.
No, because I can dig up official documentation for googles implementation. Where’s Apples iMessage documentation?
RCS is a replacement for SMS, it was intended for carriers to implement it as is standard in the EU. In the US however, the carriers have infamously resisted calls to get off their ass and implement it. Even Google was calling on carriers to do it for years, they only came out with their Jibe platform because the carriers weren’t doing their jobs
Does documentation matter if it’s still a closed platform? Imo it doesn’t.
RCS requiring 3rd party servers makes it not a replacement for sms. SMS is a very well thought out protocol that works exactly as intended, it just doesn’t have the bandwidth required for modern media.
Google can call on carriers all they want. It’s still a proprietary google implementation which is no better than Apple. And I trust Apple a hell of a lot more than google (which still isn’t a lot).
Yes, because documentation as I’m referencing it is for accessing the API. You can’t access iMessages API (Well without serious reverse engineering effort) so therefore they have no documentation
RCS is a standard, Google has it’s flavor and Apple could just as easily have their own or any other flavor.
SMS is antiquated and should be used for nothing more than a fallback at best. It’s 30+ years old.
I still don’t see that as any different. Apple has a proprietary implementation, google has an proprietary implementation. You like google because they have documentation. Neither is an open platform, yet you seem to be pushing google like it’s the bastion of open communication.
RCS is not standard, will not be standard and should not be standard.
SMS works perfectly fine. So what if it’s 30 years old. It still works exactly as intended.
It doesn’t have to be open, just provide publicly accessible APIs so that apps can interconnect with it. Google provides this, Apple does not.
To be clear IDGAF about Google. I promote RCS and you can say it’s not a standard, but it is. It’s maintained by the GSM Association and they put out a universal profile that anyone can implement and extend just like Google did and Apple could easily do. They’re just extending an existing standard.
Even in the Google messages app I can change the RCS backend servers at any time, you don’t have to use Googles RCS implementation
Doesn’t everyone hate it when google extends APIs? Think it’s called EEE (embrace, extend, extinguish). They have a history of killing standards as soon as they have enough market share.
If you change off of googles servers you lose features. I’d consider that no longer an open platform. So despite not needing to use their implementation, if you want the modern features RCS is often advertised as having, you have to go through google. That’s not an open standard.
The only 2 features I’m aware of the you lose are e2ee and those sticker things, all other modern features in RCS are present in the Universal Profile and there’s no reason that e2ee won’t come to the Universal Profile in time.
Like I said I’m not enthralled that Google is the one bringing RCS to the US, but I prefer Google over the carriers (Who were supposed to do it in the first place)