7 ms·

I understand the concerns that they are bringing up, but I feel like saying just download another app completely misses the point of my SMS is so popular. It i

I understand the concerns that they are bringing up, but I feel like saying just download another app completely misses the point of my SMS is so popular. It is just... there. It does what I need it to do without standing in my way of communicating. It is also a standard that is not at the whim of a specific company shutting down a major service (that I am aware of) to continue communicating. I struggled for a while after my mom got an iPhone for her to understand the App Store. I feel like she may not fully be there but is using an iPad now solely instead of a computer so its close...ish. Maybe this is because I do use an iPhone and most people I communicate with are using iMessage that I just don't see the other issues mentioned here. But because I use iMessage, if for some reason apple were to shut down that service... I would just revert back to using SMS and communication will mostly just continue. Finally... If I want to start talking to a new friend I meet at the bar. I just give them my number, no conversation about which app they use or OS ever needs to happen. Edit: I know countries outside of the US are less dependent on SMS/iMessage. But it just feels like jumping through extra hoops for something that is built in.

schvenk 4y ago
(Original author here) I agree with everything you said. SMS is popular for excellent reasons that are hard to overcome at this point. I wrote the article not because I expect it to create a behavioral shift at scale, but for the folks who, if they knew more, might care enough to do something—who agree with me that while sticking with SMS is easier than switching, maybe the benefits of switching are great enough to justify it.
- cortesoft 4y ago
  The problem I have is that no matter what, the decision to use something besides SMS/iMessage is going to be a decision to use more than one messaging app. Even if you are a great persuader and are able to get all of your friends and family to switch to your new app (which is never going to happen either), you are STILL going to need to use SMS for all sorts of things (new contacts, businesses, etc).
- Enginerrrd 4y ago
  Since you're here, I really dislike the opening paragraph: >Suppose you had two choices when chatting with your friends. The first will give you a great messaging experience, but you’ll need to sign up for a new app to get it. The problem is, that totally misses the actual friction point. It's not just that YOU have to do this, but so would ALL of your friends. Given how salient the rest of the post is, I'm certain this was intentional, and so it turns me off as a reader immediately because you are opening with something so disingenuous.
  - schvenk 4y ago
    I take your point. It wasn't intentional in terms of hiding the truth; it was intentional in terms of opening with something strong and not too nuanced. I had hoped getting into the nuance a couple paragraphs later would suffice, but given your comment I've updated the article with a hint of it up front. And as I argue in the article, it's not essential that ALL your friends switch. Most of us deal with fragmented communication in one form or another (unfortunately). I'm probably 20% email, 40% iMessage / SMS, 30% Telegram, 10% a smattering of other things. It's not ideal but it is reality and, if nothing else, I think starting small is an effective switching strategy.
Rayhem 4y ago
Yeah, this feels a lot like saying "My god, people, stop using telephones! Facetime has video! And the bitrate! It's a million times higher! It's 2023, why would anyone use a POTS call?!" Sure, nicer technical specs are...nice, but they're a far, far second to solving a problem. In an sms world: Problem: I need to contact a new acquaintance. Solution: Exchange phone numbers because everyone has them. Text. Or call. In a post-sms world: Problem: I need to contact a new acquaintance. Solution? Talk about messaging apps. Find the intersection of the ones you both use. Rank by favorite if it's not an empty set, then decide on the relative merits of choosing one in the middle of both your lists, otherwise attempt evangelism. Following evangelism, regress to "Yeah, admittedly the UI has some quirks -- here's how you do <thing you want to do>." Unfortunately, tech bro progress-at-all-costs featurejerking very often leaves a very large number of people out of the party. The elderly. The impoverished. etc. Despite the corporate mantra of all features all the time, we can actually elect to take old things and make them better instead of inventing the new hot thing all the time.
- theonlybutlet 4y ago
  In the rest of the world the answer is simply Whatsapp. China it's WeChat. No need to discuss. You can also see if their contact is in the app.
  - henrikschroder 4y ago
    No, that is not true, and five seconds of googling could have told you that.
    - progman32 4y ago
      What did you find?
      - henrikschroder 4y ago
        For example this map: https://www.similarweb.com/blog/research/market-research/worldwide-messaging-apps/ https://www.similarweb.com/blog/research/market-research/wor... This map also only shows the most popular, but that doesn't mean it's the dominant messaging app in that country. It's very, very messy.
below43 4y ago
Yes, I don't think replacing SMS with a private company/single organisation as the messaging platform provider is the solution (which is why I also count out WhatsApp also, despite currently relying on it heavily to communicate with Android users). I think in the end we need a cross-platform messaging protocol that replaces SMS/MMS that is not reliant on a single app vendor, provides end-to-end encryption and will be supported by mobile network providers. I can see why Google/Android's pushing for iMessage to be an open standard (they have a page dedicated to this that looks like it's written by a war propaganda writer: https://www.android.com/get-the-message/ https://www.android.com/get-the-message/). It would be nice, but it's also good marketing for iPhones so I fail so see why Apple will play ball unless the likes of the EU implement legislation to make it happen. Note: I'm not sure the assumption that only the US is dependent on SMS is accurate (I think that it's a standard that works globally and is currently relied on by majority of countries AFAIK).
- nerdjon 4y ago
  TBH I don't know the last part either. I just see it being said time and time again that I have started to assume it is true. But I do find the idea weird that they would jump through the hoops for it unless there is a major reason for it. Like we (US) had unlimited SMS a while ago that I think also helped.
- vlunkr 4y ago
  I wonder what would have to happen for iMessage to get adopted as a standard, or a similar standard to replace it. It's such a great technology, it's a tragedy that Apple has an iron grip on it.
- nikeee 4y ago
  I understand the desire to just use the default app. I feel the same for most of the stuff I use. However, being based on standards is more like being based on the lowest common denominator. Moxie describes the issue pretty good in his post where he explains why signal is not federated (any more): https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ When talking about things like encryption, RCS isn't that much better, it seems. Correct me if I'm wrong, but encryption is optional for the implementors. That doesn't seem to make it secure by default. And it's also not Google trying to push to open standards. In the past, Google made multiple attempts to get their own iMessage and did not succeed: https://www.androidauthority.com/rcs-google-3090142/ https://www.androidauthority.com/rcs-google-3090142/ It feels like the campaign for RCS ist judt a PR campaign against apple. Don't get me wrong, I think SMS is dated and I think it needs a replacement with something more modern and open that is not owned by a private company.
neogodless 4y ago
> The first will give you a great messaging experience, but you’ll need to sign up for a new app to get it. Yeah - they start with a false dichotomy. The above "first" requires you and everyone you ever want to exchange messages with to sign up for a new app (the SAME app) to get it.

schvenk 4y ago

(Original author here) I agree with everything you said. SMS is popular for excellent reasons that are hard to overcome at this point. I wrote the article not because I expect it to create a behavioral shift at scale, but for the folks who, if they knew more, might care enough to do something—who agree with me that while sticking with SMS is easier than switching, maybe the benefits of switching are great enough to justify it.

cortesoft 4y ago
The problem I have is that no matter what, the decision to use something besides SMS/iMessage is going to be a decision to use more than one messaging app. Even if you are a great persuader and are able to get all of your friends and family to switch to your new app (which is never going to happen either), you are STILL going to need to use SMS for all sorts of things (new contacts, businesses, etc).
Enginerrrd 4y ago
Since you're here, I really dislike the opening paragraph: >Suppose you had two choices when chatting with your friends. The first will give you a great messaging experience, but you’ll need to sign up for a new app to get it. The problem is, that totally misses the actual friction point. It's not just that YOU have to do this, but so would ALL of your friends. Given how salient the rest of the post is, I'm certain this was intentional, and so it turns me off as a reader immediately because you are opening with something so disingenuous.
- schvenk 4y ago
  I take your point. It wasn't intentional in terms of hiding the truth; it was intentional in terms of opening with something strong and not too nuanced. I had hoped getting into the nuance a couple paragraphs later would suffice, but given your comment I've updated the article with a hint of it up front. And as I argue in the article, it's not essential that ALL your friends switch. Most of us deal with fragmented communication in one form or another (unfortunately). I'm probably 20% email, 40% iMessage / SMS, 30% Telegram, 10% a smattering of other things. It's not ideal but it is reality and, if nothing else, I think starting small is an effective switching strategy.

Rayhem 4y ago

Yeah, this feels a lot like saying "My god, people, stop using telephones! Facetime has video! And the bitrate! It's a million times higher! It's 2023, why would anyone use a POTS call?!" Sure, nicer technical specs are...nice, but they're a far, far second to solving a problem. In an sms world: Problem: I need to contact a new acquaintance. Solution: Exchange phone numbers because everyone has them. Text. Or call. In a post-sms world: Problem: I need to contact a new acquaintance. Solution? Talk about messaging apps. Find the intersection of the ones you both use. Rank by favorite if it's not an empty set, then decide on the relative merits of choosing one in the middle of both your lists, otherwise attempt evangelism. Following evangelism, regress to "Yeah, admittedly the UI has some quirks -- here's how you do <thing you want to do>." Unfortunately, tech bro progress-at-all-costs featurejerking very often leaves a very large number of people out of the party. The elderly. The impoverished. etc. Despite the corporate mantra of all features all the time, we can actually elect to take old things and make them better instead of inventing the new hot thing all the time.

theonlybutlet 4y ago
In the rest of the world the answer is simply Whatsapp. China it's WeChat. No need to discuss. You can also see if their contact is in the app.
- henrikschroder 4y ago
  No, that is not true, and five seconds of googling could have told you that.
  - progman32 4y ago
    What did you find?
    - henrikschroder 4y ago
      For example this map: https://www.similarweb.com/blog/research/market-research/worldwide-messaging-apps/ https://www.similarweb.com/blog/research/market-research/wor... This map also only shows the most popular, but that doesn't mean it's the dominant messaging app in that country. It's very, very messy.

below43 4y ago

Yes, I don't think replacing SMS with a private company/single organisation as the messaging platform provider is the solution (which is why I also count out WhatsApp also, despite currently relying on it heavily to communicate with Android users). I think in the end we need a cross-platform messaging protocol that replaces SMS/MMS that is not reliant on a single app vendor, provides end-to-end encryption and will be supported by mobile network providers. I can see why Google/Android's pushing for iMessage to be an open standard (they have a page dedicated to this that looks like it's written by a war propaganda writer: https://www.android.com/get-the-message/ https://www.android.com/get-the-message/). It would be nice, but it's also good marketing for iPhones so I fail so see why Apple will play ball unless the likes of the EU implement legislation to make it happen. Note: I'm not sure the assumption that only the US is dependent on SMS is accurate (I think that it's a standard that works globally and is currently relied on by majority of countries AFAIK).

nerdjon 4y ago
TBH I don't know the last part either. I just see it being said time and time again that I have started to assume it is true. But I do find the idea weird that they would jump through the hoops for it unless there is a major reason for it. Like we (US) had unlimited SMS a while ago that I think also helped.
vlunkr 4y ago
I wonder what would have to happen for iMessage to get adopted as a standard, or a similar standard to replace it. It's such a great technology, it's a tragedy that Apple has an iron grip on it.
nikeee 4y ago
I understand the desire to just use the default app. I feel the same for most of the stuff I use. However, being based on standards is more like being based on the lowest common denominator. Moxie describes the issue pretty good in his post where he explains why signal is not federated (any more): https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/ When talking about things like encryption, RCS isn't that much better, it seems. Correct me if I'm wrong, but encryption is optional for the implementors. That doesn't seem to make it secure by default. And it's also not Google trying to push to open standards. In the past, Google made multiple attempts to get their own iMessage and did not succeed: https://www.androidauthority.com/rcs-google-3090142/ https://www.androidauthority.com/rcs-google-3090142/ It feels like the campaign for RCS ist judt a PR campaign against apple. Don't get me wrong, I think SMS is dated and I think it needs a replacement with something more modern and open that is not owned by a private company.

neogodless 4y ago

> The first will give you a great messaging experience, but you’ll need to sign up for a new app to get it. Yeah - they start with a false dichotomy. The above "first" requires you and everyone you ever want to exchange messages with to sign up for a new app (the SAME app) to get it.