3 ms·

> In the meantime, RCS is missing really basic capabilities. For example, RCS encryption only works for 1:1 conversations, so things like family chats are not p

> In the meantime, RCS is missing really basic capabilities. For example, RCS encryption only works for 1:1 conversations, so things like family chats are not private. As opposed to iMessage, but certainly not as opposed to SMS which is what RCS would actually be replacing on the iPhone. Apple would rather have EVERY conversation with an android user unencrypted rather than work towards a solution.

CharlesW 4y ago
Apple is not standards-resistant, if that's what you're suggesting. Given their history of supporting standards (and occasionally leading a standard's adoption), that's clearly not the case. RCS is not a slam dunk. Juniper Research says RCS-capable subscribers represent less than 13% of global mobile subscribers in 2022. (They project that that will double to 40% by 2026, FWIW.) End-to-encryption is not part of the RCS standard, but is instead a Google-proprietary layer on top of that. I assume that Apple can't seriously consider adopting RCS until that omission is fixed. It would be crazy for Apple to create a Google dependency for something as critical as messaging, especially given Google's long history of failures in this area.
- enragedcacti 4y ago
  fwiw I completely agree, RCS is completely dead outside of Google dragging it forward and thats a huge problem, I just don't think the largest company on the planet shrugging their shoulders and saying "maybe your grandma should buy an iPhone" is acceptable. Their historical position has hurt their own customers, android users, and the standardization process itself. RCS (or a different standard) would be in a completely different place if Apple in their US market leadership position had made an effort. They could open the iMessage spec, they could publish an iMessage app for Android, or they could just contribute in good faith to the standardization process. Their hostility to this particular standardization process (I don't contest that Apple is happy to support many standards efforts, such as USB) is driven by profit to the detriment of pretty much everyone else.

CharlesW 4y ago

Apple is not standards-resistant, if that's what you're suggesting. Given their history of supporting standards (and occasionally leading a standard's adoption), that's clearly not the case. RCS is not a slam dunk. Juniper Research says RCS-capable subscribers represent less than 13% of global mobile subscribers in 2022. (They project that that will double to 40% by 2026, FWIW.) End-to-encryption is not part of the RCS standard, but is instead a Google-proprietary layer on top of that. I assume that Apple can't seriously consider adopting RCS until that omission is fixed. It would be crazy for Apple to create a Google dependency for something as critical as messaging, especially given Google's long history of failures in this area.

enragedcacti 4y ago
fwiw I completely agree, RCS is completely dead outside of Google dragging it forward and thats a huge problem, I just don't think the largest company on the planet shrugging their shoulders and saying "maybe your grandma should buy an iPhone" is acceptable. Their historical position has hurt their own customers, android users, and the standardization process itself. RCS (or a different standard) would be in a completely different place if Apple in their US market leadership position had made an effort. They could open the iMessage spec, they could publish an iMessage app for Android, or they could just contribute in good faith to the standardization process. Their hostility to this particular standardization process (I don't contest that Apple is happy to support many standards efforts, such as USB) is driven by profit to the detriment of pretty much everyone else.