> This is simply incorrect. iMessage is the default for iPhones.
You're an Android user, right? Suffice to say that you are wrong. Messages.app, not iMessage is the default. It is designed to handle SMS, MMS and Apple iMessage service. iMessage exists for Apple-to-Apple messaging and for those iPhone customers that choose not to have a carrier messaging plan. This is not an opinion.
> I'm not here in bad faith at all. Adding RCS support won't do much to fix the division apples has caused between iPhone users and other phone users.
What? That is certainly a take. I can't say anymore for fear of causing offence. In all sincerity and candor - you really do come across as someone with a chip on their shoulder.
> It's definitely a step in the right direction. Forcing Apple to be more open with iMessage is a good thing for consumers.
> They should have been using RCS from the start and cooperated with and contributed to the standard. Now, yeah it's pretty late and won't fix the problem they have caused.
So RCS will "fix" most of the "problems they have caused" here. What's more the main barrier, as ever, has been carrier adoption. Google only really started to push for RCS after miserably failing to deliver a coherent messaging platform strategy and releasing Google Messages in 2019. Whats more, their suposedly "open" E2EE RCS implementation is only available for Pixel and Samsung users. The carrier RCS landscape is a mess globally, with little to no use outside of US carriers, who have either switched to Google (privacy concerns) or have recently (last 5 years) added support for Universal Profile. By the way, the GSMA are a carrier-only body. Neither Google nor Apple were involved in the creation of RCS. Not that it matters as adoption by GSMA members has been, if I'm being generous, laughably slow. Google are involved by virtue of their acquisition of Jibe. Remind me, who is responsible for this problem?
> Because in the US Apple users insist on using iMessage.
Why is that? See above...
Edit: The issue I, and it seems many others have with Beepers approach is the commercialisation of someone else's property. Like it or not, de facto or not, iMessages is a private API. Hacking it for kicks is fine. Commercialising it is not. Bragging about to one one the big tech firms is going to end in tears. The merits of iMessages being open are obvious, but it's seems to be a market in which Apple doesn't want to be in. The service exists for customers of Apple's products and is directly tied to hardware ownership.
> Messages.app, not iMessage is the default.
This is semantics and you know it.
> iMessage exists for Apple-to-Apple messaging
There we go. iMessage is the default for Apple phones contacting other phones.
Given that iPhones are a majority in the US, iMessage is the default for most phones in the US.
> What? That is certainly a take.
I don't see how. I think it's perfectly rational. I'm surprsied you disagree so strongly to be hoenst.
> you really do come across as someone with a chip on their shoulder.
*shrug*
I feel the same way about you.
> So RCS will "fix" most of the "problems they have caused" here.
No, it really won't. It certainly won't do anything to fix the silly blue/green bubble divide they caused.
> What's more the main barrier, as ever, has been carrier adoption.
It doesn't really matter if carriers adopt something that the manufacturer of most phoens in the US does not support.
> Google only really started to push for RCS after miserably failing to deliver a coherent messaging platform strategy and releasing Google Messages in 2019.
OK, but that's almost half a decade ago now.
> Whats more, their suposedly "open" E2EE RCS implementation is only available for Pixel and Samsung users.v
Another reason Apple should have been contributing to and working on the RCS standard instead of alienating anyone who didn't want to buy their hardware.
Honestly they should have been investigated for antitrust violations.
> Why is that?
Because iMessage is the default for apple phones and most phones in the US are Apple phones.
> This is semantics and you know it.
Nope, it's a distiction. And an important one.
> There we go. iMessage is the default for Apple phones contacting other Apple phones.
TFTFY. To contact other phones, use SMS, MMS. Even better, talk to your iPhone friends and agree to use another service. What is wrong with that? Literally the rest of the world managed it.
> I don't see how. I think it's perfectly rational. I'm surprsied you disagree so strongly to be hoenst.
I disagree because every point you have made has be immature or wrong. Or both. blue/green doesn't exist anywhere in the world, and speaking with friends in the US, is a storm in a teacup. You bringing it up leads me to believe that your likely in your early twenties. Some advice; know-one cares outside your little circle.
> No, it really won't. It certainly won't do anything to fix the silly blue/green bubble divide they caused.
You said it, silly, and nor really big bad Apple's fault. They cannot solve for childish responses from people that should know better.
> It doesn't really matter if carriers adopt something that the manufacturer of most phoens in the US does not support.
It really does, if they want said manufacturer to adope their standard.
> OK, but that's almost half a decade ago now.
And it was going nowhere then. It's still not widley used.
> Another reason Apple should have been contributing to and working on the RCS standard instead of alienating anyone who didn't want to buy their hardware.
So Google restricting access to their proprietary implementation of their RCS service is Apples fault for not contributing to a standard that they were unable at the time to contribute to because they were not members of the standard body drafting the standard behind closed doors. That takes some mental hoop jumping. Are you smelling toast?
> Because iMessage is the default for apple phones and most phones in the US are Apple phones.
If that is genuinely the case, why isn't a problem for the rest of the world? Also, I gave you the answer. Google let Android users down. They bungled messaging on the platform massively.
* Reminder to future me. Don't respond. It's a waste of time. see https://xkcd.com/386/ https://xkcd.com/386/
> Nope, it's a distiction. And an important one
It really isn't. I find you making this point funny though after accusing me of being here in bad faith.
> TFTFY.
Not really.
> Literally the rest of the world managed it.
Well, Americans are weird. It's why the blue/green bubble divide even exists in the first place. And if Apple users don't get on board it's just the same situation that already exists right now.
> I disagree because every point you have made has be immature or wrong.
Well that's just plain not true. Although the same could easily be said about your arguments. And again this is funny after you claimed I'm here in bad faith, but you're the one throwing out insults and being dismissive.
> blue/green doesn't exist anywhere in the world,
lol what? It's a problem in the US and not in other countries. If you deny that you have to be pretty out of touch. There's a ton of articles written about it.
> You bringing it up leads me to believe that your likely in your early twenties.
Lol you're desperate to try and dismiss my argument any way you can and it's sad to see. You're about 20 years off.
> You said it, silly, and nor really big bad Apple's fault.
Ahh I get it. You're hooked on the Apple Kool-aid. That explains a lot of your responses to be honest.
And yeah, of course it's Apples fault. They're controlling the way it's implemented.
> They cannot solve for childish responses from people that should know better.
This coming from you is quite ironic.
> It really does, if they want said manufacturer to adope their standard.
Again, it makes no difference if the biggest manufacturer won't support it or chooses to bypass it for most of their users.
Please make sure you read the above line before replying.
> And it was going nowhere then. It's still not widley used.
And if Apple had contributed to the standard instead of offering their proprietary service instead, everyone would be better off.
> So Google restricting access to their proprietary implementation of their RCS service is Apples fault for not contributing to a standard that they were unable at the time to contribute to because they were not members of the standard body drafting the standard behind closed doors. That takes some mental hoop jumping. Are you smelling toast?
Good lord the fallacies here lol.
Google restricting access to their proprietary implementation has nothing to do with Apple not being interested in collaborating and working on a common standard.
> If that is genuinely the case, why isn't a problem for the rest of the world?
Why are many of the problems unique to or prevalent in the USA not problems in the rest of the world? Generally there's not a simple answer.
> Reminder to future me. Don't respond. It's a waste of time.
I honestly hope you won't respond against to this message although you seem like someone that's going to need to. Honestly it's discussions like this that make me wish HN had a block function. You've been rude and dismissive from the start.