* the spec is very very complex, and most parts are optional, so no two phones/carriers/manufacturers/OS versions will ever agree on anything but the basic minimal set of features.
* there is no specification for end-to-end encryption, and even if there were, it would be optional (as noted above)
* RCS is reliant on carriers which is idiotic given that they have time and time again demonstrated that they cannot be trusted (SIM theft, wholesale sale of location data, etc). It is not a simple set of packets moving over the internet. It could have been. But it is not!
* Carriers CAN and likely WILL charge for it, because they can and because sadly (as noted above) RCS is visible to them as something more than an encrypted stream of data
* Phone number-as-identity is so stupid, even apple admitted it by allowing <email>@icloud.com accounts to work with imessage. People move countries, they change numbers. Phone number is a stupid identity! Oh, and SIM theft exists. Repeat after me: phone number is not an identity!
Google fucked this up MAJORLY so many times, it is not even funny. Hangouts could have been this, if not for internal politics at google. Another google-created service could have been it too. Before google released their 50th messaging app (or is Google up to 60 yet?), people might have listened and adopted what they offered. At this point everyone is too burned by Google releasing new messaging apps and then sunsetting them year later.
In reality, RCS is a terrible non-solution to the actual problem of rich secure messaging between people with guaranteed delivery and typing indication. It is instead a money-grab for carriers and a data-grab for the NSA. Nice and easy to spy on a protocol with no encryption.
Exactly. Carriers will see this as another revenue opportunity with almost zero marginal cost. They'll pounce on charging a premium for it. They want the glory days of per-minute per-text charges where you had to buy large pre-paid packages or risk high per-message charges.
Google has failed themselves repeatedly at their chat offerings. I personally believe it is due simply to Google's incentives: You don't get a promotion for maintaining hangouts.
Wave, GChat/Talk, Hangouts, Allo. All failed by Google neglect. Why should RCS be any better. It isn't even dependent on Google's neglect. It is dependent on our already highly unreliable North American carriers.
I need to agree on this one too.
I just recently found out that my Samsung phone has video calling but, surprise surprise, carrier charges for that extra!
But of course any other video app over internet (such as Google Duo) works with no additional charges because mobile internet is basically free! (where free means 10$ for two lines sharing 40 GB of data monthly)
Then iMessage and WhatsApp happened and Google desperately tries to rectify the situation. See Hangouts SMS integration.
Latest two-prong attempt is Allo and RCS. Allo failed. The reason RCS kinda works out is that carriers can't combat iMessage alone anymore. RCS was conceived as asymmetrical response to iMessage which aligns both Google's and carriers' interests. Many carries don't even try to implement it and rely on Google's default client implementation and route through default google servers.
What if they just released an upgrade to their existing Messages app and enrolled everyone by default in a new Google version of iMessage?
That's basically what Apple did. Upgrade to iOS 5 and you're automatically enrolled in iMessage without any extra steps. Suddenly your messaging experience just got a whole lot better without any extra work.
iMessage automatically working with phone numbers was the main reason it catapulted to such high usage so quickly. People didn't have to change their workflow, they just got brought into it automatically.
Isn't that exactly what this article claims is changing? Google leading the main implementation also means most others will have to follow, and they very well could have an E2E mode similar to Allo's incognito mode. Not as good as always on, but still. Having it free through Google also makes it harder for ISP's to charge for it.
I’ve found it more reliable to use an email address for sender and recipient, then it avoids the limbo of trying to send, SMS fallback, etc.
Looking at the overview on wikipedia and gsma, this thing is feature creeped to the absolute rim before overflowing. Including parts of the specification for APIs and app integration if I'm reading it correctly.
Frankly, if a corporation wanted to lay the groundwork for itself to be the private contractor for when the government wants to make use of the data that can be hoovered from these open channels. It would look a hell of a lot like Google. All this feature creep in abundance is a great way to lock people into centralized monolithic apps or force them into new revenue streams (again, they're already trying it with my PAYG plan for MMS).
I could take it to its greatest logical conclusion especially considering the API, app integration & visible protocol fingerprint and just say this is a great way to introduce WeChat by Google.
I hope this doesn't sound irrational. But I for one find it irrational that I'm even in this position with regular texting versus MMS. It's like phone carriers are the only ones allowed to have shitty interoperability of this kind. Getting really tired of it. Also I hope you're right that their fuckups are resulting in lower adoption, because 68 (including T-Mobile) carriers have already signed onto the Universal Profile part of the spec:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Communication_Services#St...
I'm from the US but I've lived abroad the last four years. I'm still surprised so many people "back home" continue to use SMS texting. Everyone I know around the world uses WhatsApp. Literally, in every single continent I know and chat with people on WhatsApp.
Only Americans still use SMS from what I've seen. I just don't get it.
"Your Messages. We do not retain your messages in the ordinary course of providing our Services to you. Once your messages (including your chats, photos, videos, voice messages, files, and share location information) are delivered, they are deleted from our servers. Your messages are stored on your own device. If a message cannot be delivered immediately (for example, if you are offline), we may keep it on our servers for up to 30 days as we try to deliver it."
https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/?eea=1#privacy-policy-informa...
[0] http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-stat...
[1] http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide
I'm guessing the only thing that comes close to texting in terms of marketshare is iMessage. And that's simply because it is on every iOS device AND enabled by default.
My 70+ parents for example only know and understand SMS (and they've only recently started using it in the last six months). My brother uses Facebook chat but because I'm not on FB we have to use SMS as a lowest common denominator. He doesn't have friends on Telegram so he sees that as unnecessary bloat to add to his phone.
Unfortunately SMS still has bar none the easiest onboarding experience as it is the default chat mechanism on every phone.
Such a smart decision by Apple. How in the world am I supposed to know if my contact supports iMessage or not? I can’t without coordination. But Apple can and handles it.
Now someone may still use something else (FB, WhatsApp, etc) but SMS/iMessage is practically transparent.
https://community.signalusers.org/t/ios-backup-keeping-messa...
Meaning they're less defined by delivering a message, and more defined by the "value add" services they offer (like Payments, Notifications from third party services, customer support for third party services, etc).
RCS is more powerful than MMS, but less powerful than the internet-based messaging platforms it is competing against. It is also confined by geography, is confined to cellular devices, and disposes of anonymity/privacy.
Why would I want this? It takes me from the current requirement of "only needs an internet connection" to "need a cellular plan and device." It takes me from any moniker I want to [my phone number]. It takes me from "anyone in the world" to "US only." And on and on.
I don't get it. Why should I or anyone else care about RCS? Why do people? It seems like it solves yesterday's problems next week.
Is there no one in charge of strategy at Google? This is an embarrassment.
No. If there were, we'd have Hangouts with SMS fallback. Simple as that.
Thinking about that makes me think rolling out to other countries prior to the US was a good idea.
And Google taking the lead by implementing this for free seems like it should put a stop to any worry that carriers will charge for it.
___
NOT, they /will be/ temporary. They /should be/ temporary.
That's a garbage answer. Also, not defining temporary is a loophole. Temporary could mean from 1 second to infinity, depending on how Google wants to sling it.