3 ms·
Let me see if I understand the strategic landscape around RCS correctly... * To the extent RCS: a) makes it easier for users to switch between mobile provider
by mrandish 7y ago
Let me see if I understand the strategic landscape around RCS correctly...
* To the extent RCS:
a) makes it easier for users to switch between mobile providers and keep advanced features that used to be offered for lock-in or more $$, or
b) makes it easier for users to switch between the old SMS network and wifi - then, it's not good for mobile telco provider's business models.
* To the extent RCS increases privacy for users (E2E encryption, etc) - then, it's not good for Google's business models.
* To the extent it allows feature-rich messaging to work across ALL major platforms (Android, Web & iOS)- then, it's not good for Apple's platform lock-in.
While I agree that an open, extensible, feature-rich, privacy-aware, cross-platform, cross-network messaging standard is highly desirable - is it correct that RCS (as currently formulated) is a non-starter and, from a strategic perspective, always was?
- rusk 7y agoI remember this the last time around, with MMS 20 years ago. It was a non-starter then and I’ve seen little this time around to give me confidence this will be different. The Google thing is a novel digression, but from where I’m sitting it looks like they’re just trying to fence off a section of the market for themselves and adding little else besides.
- 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y agoRCS does not have end-to-end encryption. It has network level encryption, but so does SMS, and that means anybody on the operator side can decrypt it. https://www.thercsblog.com/2018/10/16/rcs-encryption-the-lowdown/ https://www.thercsblog.com/2018/10/16/rcs-encryption-the-low...