First, this isn't a Google app. Google is pushing the RCS standard, a standard that some carriers already support.
And yeah, it doesn't support encryption so it's clearly inferior to something like Signal, but open standards that don't live in a silo are still important. For instance, I have friends that almost exclusively chat through Facebook Messenger. Since I won't install Facebook Messenger, I chat with them over SMS. A "better SMS" would be nice, and might help ease people out of the FB Messenger silo.
That's another bigger factor: if Apple doesn't include it as a standard for their mobile phones it's not going to get anybody anywhere unless all carriers seem to care to implement it at all. At which case I'm not seeing why pushing for XMPP wouldn't be as valid? Carriers have the capability to power XMPP networks that work accross carriers... Also requires less reinventing the wheel and being locked down to "Google said do this."
>Google can't make good message app - it's against their business model. You can't make targeted ads when you can't read user messages.
I think that last argument doesn't float for me.
Facebook chat is very popular and has remained the same since launch, I assume. I don't actually have it myself but I see people use it all the time.
And I do know that you're able to setup Facebook chat in 3rd party clients with OTR/omemo support. But that's besides the point because it's only done by a very small minority.
My point is that Facebook is a major player in targeted ads and their chat system is also unencrypted and resembles what google has tried to develop.
So I think google's issue is not with the ads but something else. I agree that they've taken a few too many stabs at trying to develop a chat system. But I can't see how they're failing because of their ad business.
Google could encrypt the content with end-to-end encryption like Moxie did with TextSecure and SMS. The RCS content would be encrypted between Android Chat users.
But from every move Google has made recently, it seems to think that people have forgotten about the Snowden stories. So they now have ZERO interest in anything that is end-to-end encrypted, because they think they can now get away with it.
They threw an option in there for Allo, but it was never meant to be used by users anyway, and now they're killing Allo, too. I don't think they'll ever talk about end-to-end encryption again because they want all of that data for themselves.
Now, the very least Google could do for its users is encrypt the RCS messages between its Android Chat users with some kind of Noise/HTTPS encryption. That would still give them all the user data, but at least they'd be protecting users against the carriers exploiting all of that data, too. So it would be very similar to them using HTTPS for websites or for DNS, and I see no reason why Google wouldn't do this.
I still wouldn't use Android Chat because I don't trust Google at all anymore, especially after their recent interest in working with the Pentagon for developing autonomous military drones, but at least it would benefit everyone else.
Also, there was a recent thread on /r/Android, and it seems nobody outside of US cares about SMS anymore (which means they don't care about RCS either, which is basically SMS+):
At this point isn’t building the software that enables people to be content using your phones significantly more valuable that reading texts in transit? The advertising gains could be had by building local profiles using unencrypted texts on the device itself. Just encrypt as it flows through the network, in that case I at least know google can read them but nobody else can.
The opportunity cost of screwing up something as basic as messaging experience on a phone is enormous.
Additionally with Android I still can’t send/receive sms via my computer like I can with my iPhone using 1st party tools (yes sms, in addition to iMessage work with my iPhone). I’d like to use android but this sort of messaging experience is table stakes.
What the heck is Google doing? I’d want to work there just to fix this because they are blowing it.
If Apple were to open iMessage (both to other platforms and the spec/implementation) they could own the messaging market almost over night.
Of course there is no real benefit for them in doing so though. They have no interest in being the dominant messaging platform. So it will almost certainly never happen :(
For now it seems the best option is Signal as it falls back to standard SMS if it cannot send via IP. Of course you lose the advantages of E2EE and all the other lovely features of Signal but is it at least graceful for the user experience. Wire appears to be just as good as Signal with the exception of it not falling back to SMS. If you don't want that though I seems to be down to personal preference.
>> You can't make targeted ads when you can't read user messages.
Sure you can. You can target ads based purely on the rate and timing of messages. If you are sending 100 messages an hour, starting at exactly 3:30 every day. You are probably a highschool kid with a smartphone. If you are only sending one or two a week, always during lunch hour, then you are an adult with a 9-5 job. At a minimum, they can estimate your sleep cycle.
> You can't make targeted ads when you can't read user messages.
Google could. They have entire Google Accounts profiled. If a Google account is required to use the app, they can use information gathered outside of it.
Here's what would work. Chat that just works with gmail. Not another chat app. Chat with gmail. Is the other person online? Message is immediately delivered. Is the other person not online? Message is queued. ID of another person? Their email address or a phone number. That's it. Just
> Google's Anil Sabharwal told technology news site The Verge that "RCS continues to be a carrier-owned service", which means that messages can still be legally intercepted.
No thanks. We should push toward services which offer end-to-end encryption.
>To develop Chat, Google has worked with more than 50 mobile networks including Vodafone, T-Mobile and Verizon and manufacturers such as Samsung, LG and Huawei.
Why? This is a proposal for a protocol that works over the internet. What do networks and hardware makers have to do with this?
In practice the only entity they would have to talk to for a SMS replacement would be Apple. The world does not actually need a universal SMS replacement however. The world needs a universal instant message protocol that works everywhere; not just on phones.
I think this is really short-sighted. I’ve got 3 kids, and they message with bunch of their friends on tablets. Not phones connected to carriers - WiFi tablets. This isn’t uncommon either. Why require a cell carrier to back your messaging app? It’s just soooo limiting!
Google Chat was officially shut down on June 26, 2017. To continue chatting and video calling, try Hangouts. Learn more about Hangouts.
Google Chat, the simple Google Talk chat experience in Gmail, launched in 2005. In 2013, we began replacing Google Chat with Hangouts, while still giving users the option to continue using Google Chat.
Hangouts offers advanced improvements over Google Chat such as group chat, Android and iOS apps, group video calling, and integration with other Google products."
How quaint. Is Google Fax still in late Beta and will be released next month?
But seriously - Is 'SMS replacement' even a thing now? I think I only ever chat to my wife via SMS these days because she won't install third party apps on her phone and has no social media accounts. All my friends, colleagues and kids send messages to each other via about 3 different chat apps depending on age (kids) and context.
SMS is still very widely used by parties who don't know each other. In theory, anybody with a phone number can receive an SMS (though not always in reality, because SMS is a bag of suck). So your pharmacy can SMS you when your prescription is ready, your mechanic can SMS you when your car is fixed, etc.
I don't personally know anybody who still uses SMS to communicate directly with friends or frequent real-world contacts. But I also don't know anybody who still watches real-time broadcast TV with ads. I assume there are still a lot of both out there in the world, however.
Where are you based ?
Here in France, SMS / MMS are still the most widely used. More than any other third party app.
Most of phone carriers plans here offer unlimited sms / mms for free now, so it's pretty much THE default.
It would be interesting to see a messaging apps usage comparison, country by country.
In many parts of the world SMS is still very popular (most popular?) and upgrading that experience seems a net win. I wish there was a push for end to end encryption but I doubt the carriers would have agreed to that given that in many countries they are legally obligated to hand over data when a court deems it necessary.
And the list of Google products that haven't been killed off numbers in the hundreds. Seriously, what large software development company hasn't ended development on some of its products? People dragging out Google Reader every time Google launches something new is getting old.
Is the title misleading or am I confused? Google can only rollout its app on stock Android for Chat (known as RCS), the supposed successor to SMS that is (also) a carrier protocol that comes with the ubiquity and disadvantages of SMS. Google announced recently that it has worked with several telecom carriers around the world, Android OEMs, etc., on the implementation and rollout of RCS. But it's not the one that's going to be doing any rollouts by a large measure.
"Google has stressed that Chat is not a new Google app. Since RCS is a communications standard, it is up to individual mobile networks and phone-makers to switch on the functionality."
The title should be something like: Google has started the global roll-out to support a new messaging standard.
This is definitely going to work - it's just iMessage for Android. Google can deploy a default version of Chat in the next one or two Android releases. Users won't notice the difference except that SMS has some nicer features.
Google can snoop on Chats directly if the web service backing them is Google run. Even if they can't, a better default messaging experience will take business away from competitors like WhatsApp and Messenger.
> An not even encrypted "on the surface" (as Facebook's WhatsApp):
As a Telegram user who feel betrayed by and doesn't like WhatsApp, -can we try to keep this sane?
Unless you have extraordinary proofs then WhatsApp is effectively E2E encrypted as verified by multiple industry experts.
The current problem is not message encryption but metadata leaking to an owner that is known to "move fast and break things", and is considered untrustworthy by many of us.
- that is, again, unless you have proof that their encryption is broken.
I do not recommend WhatsApp as long as they are owned by Facebook and don't have a business model that is compatible with putting users first, I just think we should be careful about throwing around accusations.
.. Or just being the advertising company they really are. Turns out it is really hard to be a tech company, when the primary target is to spy on you and not create actual useful products.
Is this something that users will have to opt in to to use or will it be a seamless integration with existing applications? i.e., will it require the download of a new app or will it just be something that extends Android's existing messaging app?
From all the articles I have read on this, it is never mentioned if this will be in AOSP or part of Google Play Services. I really hope they allow any app to use RCS messages instead of keeping it in their own walled garden.
[+] [-] sp0ck|7 years ago|reply
Does it use IP and carrier as a fallback (to protect against data retention/archiving text messages): NOPE
Apple made it with first approach. Google:chat app, sms app, allo, duo, hangount
This will be next on the list.
Google can't make good message app - it's against their business model. You can't make targeted ads when you can't read user messages.
[+] [-] Pharylon|7 years ago|reply
And yeah, it doesn't support encryption so it's clearly inferior to something like Signal, but open standards that don't live in a silo are still important. For instance, I have friends that almost exclusively chat through Facebook Messenger. Since I won't install Facebook Messenger, I chat with them over SMS. A "better SMS" would be nice, and might help ease people out of the FB Messenger silo.
[+] [-] giancarlostoro|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] INTPenis|7 years ago|reply
I think that last argument doesn't float for me.
Facebook chat is very popular and has remained the same since launch, I assume. I don't actually have it myself but I see people use it all the time.
And I do know that you're able to setup Facebook chat in 3rd party clients with OTR/omemo support. But that's besides the point because it's only done by a very small minority.
My point is that Facebook is a major player in targeted ads and their chat system is also unencrypted and resembles what google has tried to develop.
So I think google's issue is not with the ads but something else. I agree that they've taken a few too many stabs at trying to develop a chat system. But I can't see how they're failing because of their ad business.
[+] [-] mtgx|7 years ago|reply
But from every move Google has made recently, it seems to think that people have forgotten about the Snowden stories. So they now have ZERO interest in anything that is end-to-end encrypted, because they think they can now get away with it.
They threw an option in there for Allo, but it was never meant to be used by users anyway, and now they're killing Allo, too. I don't think they'll ever talk about end-to-end encryption again because they want all of that data for themselves.
Now, the very least Google could do for its users is encrypt the RCS messages between its Android Chat users with some kind of Noise/HTTPS encryption. That would still give them all the user data, but at least they'd be protecting users against the carriers exploiting all of that data, too. So it would be very similar to them using HTTPS for websites or for DNS, and I see no reason why Google wouldn't do this.
I still wouldn't use Android Chat because I don't trust Google at all anymore, especially after their recent interest in working with the Pentagon for developing autonomous military drones, but at least it would benefit everyone else.
Also, there was a recent thread on /r/Android, and it seems nobody outside of US cares about SMS anymore (which means they don't care about RCS either, which is basically SMS+):
https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/8dvm9x/nonus_based...
[+] [-] tbrock|7 years ago|reply
The opportunity cost of screwing up something as basic as messaging experience on a phone is enormous.
Additionally with Android I still can’t send/receive sms via my computer like I can with my iPhone using 1st party tools (yes sms, in addition to iMessage work with my iPhone). I’d like to use android but this sort of messaging experience is table stakes.
What the heck is Google doing? I’d want to work there just to fix this because they are blowing it.
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|7 years ago|reply
They had one in Google Talk. Then they killed it.
[+] [-] izacus|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] satysin|7 years ago|reply
Of course there is no real benefit for them in doing so though. They have no interest in being the dominant messaging platform. So it will almost certainly never happen :(
For now it seems the best option is Signal as it falls back to standard SMS if it cannot send via IP. Of course you lose the advantages of E2EE and all the other lovely features of Signal but is it at least graceful for the user experience. Wire appears to be just as good as Signal with the exception of it not falling back to SMS. If you don't want that though I seems to be down to personal preference.
[+] [-] sandworm101|7 years ago|reply
Sure you can. You can target ads based purely on the rate and timing of messages. If you are sending 100 messages an hour, starting at exactly 3:30 every day. You are probably a highschool kid with a smartphone. If you are only sending one or two a week, always during lunch hour, then you are an adult with a 9-5 job. At a minimum, they can estimate your sleep cycle.
[+] [-] xboxnolifes|7 years ago|reply
Google could. They have entire Google Accounts profiled. If a Google account is required to use the app, they can use information gathered outside of it.
[+] [-] noja|7 years ago|reply
No but it requires a data plan!
[+] [-] SomewhatLikely|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notyourday|7 years ago|reply
Here's what would work. Chat that just works with gmail. Not another chat app. Chat with gmail. Is the other person online? Message is immediately delivered. Is the other person not online? Message is queued. ID of another person? Their email address or a phone number. That's it. Just
(a) make it actually work
(b) make it not lose messages
[+] [-] wereHamster|7 years ago|reply
No thanks. We should push toward services which offer end-to-end encryption.
[+] [-] jlgaddis|7 years ago|reply
Just in time to kill it off!
[+] [-] upofadown|7 years ago|reply
Why? This is a proposal for a protocol that works over the internet. What do networks and hardware makers have to do with this?
In practice the only entity they would have to talk to for a SMS replacement would be Apple. The world does not actually need a universal SMS replacement however. The world needs a universal instant message protocol that works everywhere; not just on phones.
[+] [-] djrogers|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] huffmsa|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lainga|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zaarn|7 years ago|reply
Google is making it difficult to keep track...
[+] [-] limeblack|7 years ago|reply
[1] https://youtu.be/PCh-qRYMAKk?t=3m39s
[+] [-] hnburnsy|7 years ago|reply
https://support.google.com/chat/?hl=en
"Goodbye Google Chat
Google Chat was officially shut down on June 26, 2017. To continue chatting and video calling, try Hangouts. Learn more about Hangouts.
Google Chat, the simple Google Talk chat experience in Gmail, launched in 2005. In 2013, we began replacing Google Chat with Hangouts, while still giving users the option to continue using Google Chat.
Hangouts offers advanced improvements over Google Chat such as group chat, Android and iOS apps, group video calling, and integration with other Google products."
[+] [-] cyberferret|7 years ago|reply
But seriously - Is 'SMS replacement' even a thing now? I think I only ever chat to my wife via SMS these days because she won't install third party apps on her phone and has no social media accounts. All my friends, colleagues and kids send messages to each other via about 3 different chat apps depending on age (kids) and context.
[+] [-] veidr|7 years ago|reply
I don't personally know anybody who still uses SMS to communicate directly with friends or frequent real-world contacts. But I also don't know anybody who still watches real-time broadcast TV with ads. I assume there are still a lot of both out there in the world, however.
[+] [-] mlok|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] datguacdoh|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jayess|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hliyan|7 years ago|reply
Google Notebook
Google Reader
Google Buzz
Google Wave
Google Plus
Google Health
Google Knol
Google SearchWiki
Google Allo
I'm not really sure if I want to get onboard with this new thing.
[+] [-] bitmapbrother|7 years ago|reply
https://pastebin.com/5tYG5YCL
[+] [-] ac29|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] redog|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] benevol|7 years ago|reply
[0] techies exempt.
[+] [-] newscracker|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maym86|7 years ago|reply
"Google has stressed that Chat is not a new Google app. Since RCS is a communications standard, it is up to individual mobile networks and phone-makers to switch on the functionality."
The title should be something like: Google has started the global roll-out to support a new messaging standard.
[+] [-] mshenfield|7 years ago|reply
Google can snoop on Chats directly if the web service backing them is Google run. Even if they can't, a better default messaging experience will take business away from competitors like WhatsApp and Messenger.
[+] [-] dragonwriter|7 years ago|reply
It's neither like iMessage nor specifically for Android.
> Google can snoop on Chats directly if the web service backing them is Google run.
It's not, it's (like SMS) carrier infrastructure. Chat is just an RCS client app, RCS is the SMS replacement technology.
[+] [-] benevol|7 years ago|reply
An not even encrypted "on the surface" (as Facebook's WhatsApp):
> it does not offer encrypted messages
Not in this life.
[+] [-] reitanqild|7 years ago|reply
As a Telegram user who feel betrayed by and doesn't like WhatsApp, -can we try to keep this sane?
Unless you have extraordinary proofs then WhatsApp is effectively E2E encrypted as verified by multiple industry experts.
The current problem is not message encryption but metadata leaking to an owner that is known to "move fast and break things", and is considered untrustworthy by many of us.
- that is, again, unless you have proof that their encryption is broken.
I do not recommend WhatsApp as long as they are owned by Facebook and don't have a business model that is compatible with putting users first, I just think we should be careful about throwing around accusations.
[+] [-] romanovcode|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sumedh|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] donttrack|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ac29|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jacksmith21006|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MistahKoala|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] exabrial|7 years ago|reply
The carriers shouldn't be involved in messaging at all, sigh. SMS was a downgrade from AIM and ICQ.
[+] [-] jgresty|7 years ago|reply