Most businesses, consumers, and developers universally continue to ignore the primary reason that iMessage is a closed platform, rather than an app on every platform as iTunes is:
Apple is using device serial numbers for anti-spam, supported by a fully-authenticated hardware and software stack that does not allow user modification. This permits Apple to simply “console ban” any Apple device that spams on iMessage. This makes it prohibitively expensive to send spam over iMessage. They have been doing so since iMessage was launched.
Android offers no such attestation that I’m aware of. Windows, on Pluton, could offer this attestation securely — and that is a key deliverable of Pluton.
It’s easy, then, to predict what Apple’s first non-Apple platform will be: Microsoft Windows 12, only if secure-booted, with Pluton-signed attestation that the kernel is unmodified. And it’s easy to predict how Apple will implement anti-spam: by applying “console” bans to specific Pluton chips by their serial number.
If Android wants to join the party, then Android phone builders need to implement secure boot with hardware-signed attestation of non-rooted-ness, in the style of Apple T2 + macOS or Microsoft Pluton + Secure Boot. Until then, Apple iMessage will remain single platform.
(I recognize that this is extremely unpalatable to device hackers, but the same freedom to modify an OS kernel that hackers desire is also the freedom to spam all users, as we have seen repeatedly with all messaging software platforms operated without hardware-backed attestation for the past thirty years — including email, Jabber, and HN itself.)
I'd rather live in a world with spam than a world where corporations get to decide what I run on my devices, and cripple a bunch of critical applications if I decide I want to, y'know, actually do whatever I want with the hardware I own.
I'm not unsympathetic to Apple's difficulties and goals here (assuming this spam problem is actually the reason, though I'm skeptical that there aren't also self-serving reasons that would be sufficient for Apple), but I'm so tired of society's slide toward "security at any cost, and to hell with freedom" since the 9/11 attacks over 20 years ago.
(It's possible and likely that slide has been going on much longer, but I was a teenager in the 90s and not really aware of such things. But I think it's undeniable that the aftermath of 9/11 was a big turning point for the surveillance state and for average citizens being so scared of everything that they'd be willing to give up essential freedoms just to quell that fright.)
It isn't about opening up iMessage. The article is about using RCS instead of SMS/MMS as the fallback. It's a pretty reasonable ask that will raise the quality of service when texting with the majority of the market. They can continue to lock down iMessage however they want.
There are literally multiple internal Apple emails released through court testimony where Apple executives clearly explain how important iMessage is to lock-in to iPhone and how if parents can just buy an Android and install an iMessage app it would mean disaster.
In none of these emails is spam or privacy or security even mentioned.
The primary reason Apple is doing it for platform lock-in, plain and simple. They literally said so themselves internally. Any other explanation is fanboyism.
> If Android wants to join the party, then Android phone builders need to implement secure boot with hardware-signed attestation of non-rooted-ness, in the style of Apple T2 + macOS or Microsoft Pluton + Secure Boot. Until then, Apple iMessage will remain single platform.
This exists and has existed for years, via the SafetyNet Attestation API [1].
There are literally emails leaked, that say iMessage is closed, because Apple wants monopoly in this area.
Yet in every thread recently someone spreads FUD how without uncle's Apple protection, bad world will hurt you, when reality shows that's nonexistent problem on other platforms.
This doesn’t work though. I receive enough iMessage spam specifically through Apple ids that I wish I could disable the ability to message me unless you use a phone number.
The gist of the article has been a soapbox of mine for years. We wouldn't stand for "you can only send Gmail email to other Gmail users" (Fidonet people know), and shouldn't settle for similar with messaging. That said, this spam angle is an aspect I hadn't fully considered.
You can build a hackintosh, generate a serial number, and get on iMessage without any fully-authenticated hardware or even a legitimate secondary Apple device. Spammers use these setups to iMessage spam to great effect.
I think the onus is on Apple to open the platform.
And yet I get plenty of spam via text on my iPhone. What is more, I cannot block numbers from texting me (unless there's an option I haven't found). What is more, a clearly spam text will stay as an alert number grabbing at my attention until I open up and see whatever spam image text was sent my way to dismiss it which is surely a security risk.
I used to work at Apple but this messaging stuff is really damning.
How does unmodified software relate in any way to the ability to console-ban bad actors? It's apple's servers, apple's accounts, and apple's devices. They are perfectly capable of burning a private key into the fuses of every device they sell, keeping a revocation list, and requiring a valid signature from an unrevoked key to log in and send messages. You can't get around that with any quantity of homebrew or custom software. Same reason that you don't see spam on Nintendo Switch games - if Nintendo bans your hardware you're not getting back online unless you buy a new Switch, and that's enough of a cost to make spam uneconomical. You can't do that with Android because maintaining a single revocation list across many manufacturers would be impossible - or because Google would have to host it and they'd get mobbed by angry HNers frothing at the mouth about their privacy - but Apple is totally capable of it and already gets a free pass on whatever walled garden shenanigans they can imagine.
You can disable Secure Boot on a Mac and still use iMessage.
In this state, it would still be theoretically possible to attest to some kind of unique hardware ID, as the Secure Enclave is still locked down. But even if it weren't, it would be good enough to just distribute a unique key with each device. Sure you could take it off the device, but who cares? If it got banned, you'd still need to buy a new device for a new key.
…But given the sibling comment (by pxeboot) about using iMessage in a VM, I'm not sure whether any of this is actually done.
“I am concerned that the iMessage on Android would simply serve to remove and obstacle to iPhone families giving their kids Android phones,” Craig Federighi, Apple software senior vice president, wrote in 2013."
They'll find another reason not to implement it on other platforms.
Any limitations/restrictions that Apple imposes on their devices that usually provides them some competitive advantage is ALWAYS explained away as 'protecting' the user. It's a joke how often this corporate spin is used as an excuse.
This is a great point which I haven't heard before in this age-old debate.
But until Apple's dominance starts to wane, there's no chance in hell they will provide iMessage for other platforms unless forced by regulation.
If push comes to shove, they can implement heuristics which run texts from non-Apple devices through a harder spam filter. Spam isn't non-existent on the iMessage network, and there already seems to be a rudimentary spam filter in place.
> Apple is using device serial numbers for anti-spam, supported by a fully-authenticated hardware and software stack that does not allow user modification.
This can't be true. It is trivial to get iMessage working in a macOS VM with randomly generated hardware IDs.
> the same freedom to modify an OS kernel that hackers desire is also the freedom to spam all users
Yes, and that is absolutely fine. Computer freedom is more important than the ability to prevent spam. It should be illegal to prevent the rooting of devices or even put up any roadblocks for the user. It doesn't really matter how much this freedom impacts their networks. The freedom to run whatever software we want and interoperate with everything without being discriminated against should be our inviolable right.
If that is the main reason, then why not use RCS when communicating with Android devices, and their own proprietary system when communicating with other iPhones. And or push to add an optional attestation to RCS that apple can use.
I have two cell phone, android and iOS. On Android I install my own spam filter message app and see no spam at all.
On contrary, I still get plenty of spam from iMessage.
This is just wrong because as others have pointed out, you can have a fully virtualized macOS environment with no secure boot or any kind and iMessage will run just fine.
Also, since basically every device that receives message also receives sms, isn’t this irrelevant?
What do you mean Android doesn't have an analog? It has both secure boot and device attestation. It has multiple APIs that can be used to design applications requiring varying levels of trusted computing context.
There's the high-level SafeyNet API which essentially lets you assert that you're running on a non-modified device running non-modified software in the context of a verified boot:
It also has the lower-level Keymaster 3 API (since 2017) which provides HSM-signed certificates with the device attestiation extension, including the system trust level and verified device identifiers:
Microsoft is the one that's late to party... And your hypothesis seems pretty dependent on an argument that Apple can't build iMessaging on other platforms because they're the only platform with device attestation. That's simply not true.
If Apple wanted iMessage on other platforms, they've had at least 5 years to build it in the way you theorize must be required.
> Until then, Apple iMessage will remain single platform.
This seems to be a strawman - no one is asking for cross-platfrom iMessage, just for Apple to upgrade it's officially-supported cross-platform messaging stack (SMS) from the 90s.
iMessage spam has been through the roof for me the last couple of months. 1 or 2 messages a day with no obvious reporting mechanism. Whatever Apple is doing, it’s not working and it’s disingenuous to claim this is the reason iMessage isn’t on Android.
So the reason to track and identify every app on every device and have a switch to remotely brick it is to reduce spam ?
My BS detectors just tripped.
Would you be ok if your home had the same "security" features? Say BigCo home builders install a front door, sensors, cameras and scanners in your home that allow them to monitor track and remotely lock you out of your home, your water and power supply ? Their reason? ... so that they can shutdown "bad neighbors" and keep the neighborhood "clean". And remember there's no fkin way you can get rid of those scanners, cameras and other control mechanisms.
But ya'know they gave you a piece of paper that says "we respect your privacy" with BigCo logo on it ?
I don't get why Apple, MS or anyone should be able to get away with this.
I never get spam on any other networks either. Be it WhatsApp, telegram, signal or even matrix.
It's not that big a problem apparently, and doesn't require giving up that much control.
On the other hand I social never use iMessage. It's not very popular here in Spain at all because of the Apple-only thing. Android is far bigger in marketshare here.
I can understand Google's frustration but they have no one to blame but themselves.
Everyone is familiar with their graveyard of failed messaging applications (along with their graveyard of products generally).
When I had an android phone, I tried RCS with someone else on Android. It never worked. I'm sure it's improved, but as the common theme of this story goes, Google blew their chance.
I also don't trust google to abide by the "standard" they've created. Their track record is abysmal. I don't want to use yet another messaging service that they've built. I don't trust it to exist in the future, receive support and updates, and for it to be maintained. If google abandons it that means the telecoms are stuck holding the bag and when we demand even more from the next iteration of messaging apps, RCS will go the way SMS has today.
This is nothing more than Google reaping the results of their own failures. It's a shame they squandered the opportunity over the last 15 years to develop a cohesive messaging app strategy across their products, but its their shame and now they have to pay the price.
In a last ditch effort they're trying to throw all the blame on Apple who was able to innovate and launch a successful messaging service years ago. Apple recognized that SMS could be improved, and they improved it. They didn't wait for anyone and they recognize the importance of continued support - a quality Google does not seem to foster.
Google had their chance over and over again but they blew it over and over again. I don't care about the little things RCS adds, message bubbles, delivery confirmation etc. These may be nice additions but they truly don't make a large difference. If an Android phone wants to send a high quality image, video etc they can share a link. That's good enough for me.
Google failed, miserably and publicly. This latest campaign is just embarrassing for them.
I don't love RCS[0], but Apple implementing it (including the E2EE extensions) would strike a huge blow to messaging fragmentation immediately, at least in the US.
Hell, Apple doesn't have to ditch iMessage; they just have to support RCS for messaging with Android users, or group messaging with mixed Android/iOS devices.
I would also (grudgingly) accept an opening of the iMessage protocol so Google could implement it in the Android Messages app. Not ideal by any measure, and I figure Apple would never do this (and I suspect Google would hypocritically not want to do this anyway), but it would at least improve things.
The thing that's sad overall is that the current state of affairs is just a result of an anti-consumer corporate pissing match. The only losers here are the users, both on iOS and Android. And meanwhile both Apple and Google get to tout the benefits of their preferred solution as if they're both the good guys, fighting for their users. When in reality they're merely fighting for their own market dominance.
[0] Tying messaging to your carrier is just a continuation of the crappy SMS "portability" experience. Sure, most RCS backend implementations are currently provided by Google, but one thing I'd like to see would be the ability to select your RCS provider. Maybe others would crop up if this were an option, and if RCS were actually popular.
RCS is dead. The Cross Carrier Messaging Initiative (CCMI) has given up. Google is the one still pushing for it. iMessage is simply a big Apple moat. Why would Apple give it up to enhance Google's business position?
Google wants us to pick theirs over Apple's. Also note that to my knowledge, RCS is not available in all countries.
The other funny thing is that Google complains about SMS being insecure -- all while RCS does not support end to end encryption. Google Messages added that feature recently relatively (last year? please correct me below) and I still can't understand if it's on by default or not.
I would love a common solution, but rationally I can not blame Apple for keeping a (to me from experiencing both) superior experience that brings in customers. And Google has just managed to catch up. Google will need to make their messaging an order or two better, to the point that Apple will have to join.
P.S. Also, I am skeptical any time the phrases privacy, end-to-end encryption, and Google cohabitate the same statement.
Haven't received an SMS from a real person (in other words, all SMSes I get are 2FA etc) for, at least 5 years, maybe 10.
Even people who use iPhones don't send SMSes, MMSes or anything as obsolete (including RCS). Everyone just seems to use WhatsApp and Telegram (or if they don't know any better, Viber). Locale: Central Europe.
So, why would anyone stick to the obsolete stuff? Are there regions of the US which have cell phone signals but no Internet access?
I'm all for standards, but this is mainly sour grapes by Google. If they hadn't shot themselves in the foot dozens of times with messaging they could've dominated using the head start they had with Google Talk. Google should put all messages from iPhone users in comic sans.
First, Apple shaming Microsoft. Then, Microsoft shaming Google. Now, Google shaming Apple.
> missing read receipts and typing indicators
Life is better without both of these.
> no texting over Wi-Fi
This claim was odd. I visited Europe a few months ago and definitely sent/received SMS over wifi using my iPhone.
> When people with iPhones and Android phones text each other, Apple relies on SMS and MMS, outdated systems which do not always support texting over wi-fi. That means if you don’t have a cellular network connection, depending on your carrier and situation, you may not be able to send and receive texts.
Oh, so the claim was deliberately misleading. That's not a good way to build trust.
I still don't get why people use SMS/MMS anyway? I've been using WhatsApp for ages now and so does everybody else in my country - and every country I've been in, apart from China and Japan. My friend who's from the US once said "I've paid for those text messages, so I'm going to use them!" But if I send him a text from Europe to the US, I pay 1 damn euro per delivered text. WhatsApp is free! Is there any viable reason why Apple users use SMS so much?
I setup a BlueBubbles server on a spare Mac and I installed the BlueBubbles App. Boom. iMessages on Android. Done.
Messaging is already extremely fragmented. BB is only the eighth messaging app on my phone. Considering getting on Beeper to consolodate this madness. Matrix/Element was too rough to utilize as is.
Almost everyone I text with is on iMessage in the US. 95% or more of my regular contacts. Many are often outspoken about their cult like allegiance to iMessage. Finally some respect.
The look on their face when I send them an iMessage from my Galaxy is priceless.
Now, nearly all of the SMS messages I get are spam. Google Messages and the phone companies are pathetic at stopping them.
This is so funny because they don't even do a good job themselves with their own service.
I'm a Google phone user on Google Fi, and make heavy use of the web app (message.google.com/web) in addition to texting via the phone. Once you get a long conversation history, the phone experience becomes poor - conversations won't load, messages won't send - and the web will often lose sync and need to be re-paired (which may or may not itself work). On top of that, some days messages just will not send quickly, not over wifi or 5g, to the point that it's too hard to converse via text and we just give up.
Google has an alternative configuration for Fi users, btw: you can do all your calls and texts through Fi, have Fi store your messages and voicemails, etc. Except you have to turn off RCS for this, because Fi doesn't support it. So you get the SMS/MMS experience they are complaining about, and on top of that they convert all your audio and video to 3gpp and downscale the heck out of it such that it's nearly worthless.
Who knows what's realistically possible but I wonder if Google is going about this the right way. Call up Tim Cook and say we'd like to give Android users a better messaging experience, how can we work with you to do that. Don't try to embarrass Apple into helping you - Apple very likely does not care - and certainly if you're going to point out where their choices lead to a worse experience for your users, make sure you're not doing the same thing.
I would agree more if the RCS standard wasn’t also hot garbage…
I would encourage anyone who is curious to read more about it. It’s taken so long to gain traction that it has also become somewhat legacy. Also, it still requires a carrier sponsored phone plan? How is this “modern” in comparison to say every other carrier agnostic messaging app in existence?
> iPhones make texts with Android phones difficult to read, by using white text on a bright green background.
Wow. I can't really come up with anything creative to blame Google for this one. Whatever you want to say about Google's messaging mess and RCS - Apple seems to go out of their way to make it inconvenient to text with Android users.
Also it doesn't sound like Google's asking Apple to give up iMessage - just that they use RCS instead of SMS/MMS to talk to Android users. Not an unreasonable ask given RCS is likely to be a widely adopted standard and an non-trivial improvement over SMS.
Edit: Color aside, the read receipts, MMS quality, Wifi send etc all seem worth fixing with RCS.
SMS to me is solely the channel for machines to force a bad MFA implementation on me and couriers to tell me something is on the way/nearly there/delivered. All person to person comms, without exception, iPhone or Android users, is via WhatsApp. Anecdata from UK.
This is pretty disingenuous I think. Other than Android who is using RCS?
Why can't I message between WhatsApp and an RCS client. Or any other chat technology, how about Google Chat to RCS, or Slack to RCS, or anything else.
Their examples for 'the modern standard adopted by most of the mobile world': Motorola, OnePlus, Google Pixel, Samsung, Snapdragon are all providers of Android phones, so clearly they would use the default Android messaging service.
I have a few folk (mostly family) who uses Apple messaging, everyone else seems to be on WhatsApp.
This is a complete non-issue. I have no idea why people are complaining about this, except as another way in which Android users are trying to force their ecosystem choices on everyone else. The majority of people globally don't even use built-in messengers, they use WhatsApp or a similar application, most of which uses similar stylistic design choices as Apple uses for SMS, so it's hardly an issue.
I'm well aware that high schoolers get bullied for being poor and not being able to afford an iPhone. High schoolers were getting bullied for being poor and not being able to afford fancy clothes before cell phones were even a thing, and prior to smartphones were bullied for being poor and not being able to afford pagers or a cell phone (or a car, or ... or ...).
High schoolers are assholes and will find some excuse to torment each other regardless of what aesthetic and design choices somebody in Apple's UX team makes for their built-in messaging app. This is a massive nothingburger and I honestly have no idea why the media gives this any credence other than the shift of the media generally towards being anti-tech.
[+] [-] altairprime|3 years ago|reply
Apple is using device serial numbers for anti-spam, supported by a fully-authenticated hardware and software stack that does not allow user modification. This permits Apple to simply “console ban” any Apple device that spams on iMessage. This makes it prohibitively expensive to send spam over iMessage. They have been doing so since iMessage was launched.
Android offers no such attestation that I’m aware of. Windows, on Pluton, could offer this attestation securely — and that is a key deliverable of Pluton.
It’s easy, then, to predict what Apple’s first non-Apple platform will be: Microsoft Windows 12, only if secure-booted, with Pluton-signed attestation that the kernel is unmodified. And it’s easy to predict how Apple will implement anti-spam: by applying “console” bans to specific Pluton chips by their serial number.
If Android wants to join the party, then Android phone builders need to implement secure boot with hardware-signed attestation of non-rooted-ness, in the style of Apple T2 + macOS or Microsoft Pluton + Secure Boot. Until then, Apple iMessage will remain single platform.
(I recognize that this is extremely unpalatable to device hackers, but the same freedom to modify an OS kernel that hackers desire is also the freedom to spam all users, as we have seen repeatedly with all messaging software platforms operated without hardware-backed attestation for the past thirty years — including email, Jabber, and HN itself.)
(No, I do not work at Apple.)
[+] [-] kelnos|3 years ago|reply
I'm not unsympathetic to Apple's difficulties and goals here (assuming this spam problem is actually the reason, though I'm skeptical that there aren't also self-serving reasons that would be sufficient for Apple), but I'm so tired of society's slide toward "security at any cost, and to hell with freedom" since the 9/11 attacks over 20 years ago.
(It's possible and likely that slide has been going on much longer, but I was a teenager in the 90s and not really aware of such things. But I think it's undeniable that the aftermath of 9/11 was a big turning point for the surveillance state and for average citizens being so scared of everything that they'd be willing to give up essential freedoms just to quell that fright.)
[+] [-] stusmall|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kalleboo|3 years ago|reply
In none of these emails is spam or privacy or security even mentioned.
The primary reason Apple is doing it for platform lock-in, plain and simple. They literally said so themselves internally. Any other explanation is fanboyism.
[+] [-] stetrain|3 years ago|reply
My iPhone gets plenty of spam SMS messages, alongside my iMessage chats. The sanctity of iMessage communications doesn't stop that.
Swapping SMS for RCS support messages doesn't increase the spam surface.
[+] [-] tadfisher|3 years ago|reply
This exists and has existed for years, via the SafetyNet Attestation API [1].
[1]: https://developer.android.com/training/safetynet/attestation
[+] [-] dzikimarian|3 years ago|reply
Yet in every thread recently someone spreads FUD how without uncle's Apple protection, bad world will hurt you, when reality shows that's nonexistent problem on other platforms.
[+] [-] wilde|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shireboy|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AnthonyMouse|3 years ago|reply
SMS on the other hand... but iPhones receive SMS too, don't they?
[+] [-] runjake|3 years ago|reply
I think the onus is on Apple to open the platform.
[+] [-] robbomacrae|3 years ago|reply
I used to work at Apple but this messaging stuff is really damning.
[+] [-] saulrh|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lern_too_spel|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] comex|3 years ago|reply
In this state, it would still be theoretically possible to attest to some kind of unique hardware ID, as the Secure Enclave is still locked down. But even if it weren't, it would be good enough to just distribute a unique key with each device. Sure you could take it off the device, but who cares? If it got banned, you'd still need to buy a new device for a new key.
…But given the sibling comment (by pxeboot) about using iMessage in a VM, I'm not sure whether any of this is actually done.
[+] [-] soperj|3 years ago|reply
They'll find another reason not to implement it on other platforms.
[+] [-] calsy|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dt2m|3 years ago|reply
But until Apple's dominance starts to wane, there's no chance in hell they will provide iMessage for other platforms unless forced by regulation.
If push comes to shove, they can implement heuristics which run texts from non-Apple devices through a harder spam filter. Spam isn't non-existent on the iMessage network, and there already seems to be a rudimentary spam filter in place.
[+] [-] pxeboot|3 years ago|reply
This can't be true. It is trivial to get iMessage working in a macOS VM with randomly generated hardware IDs.
[+] [-] matheusmoreira|3 years ago|reply
Yes, and that is absolutely fine. Computer freedom is more important than the ability to prevent spam. It should be illegal to prevent the rooting of devices or even put up any roadblocks for the user. It doesn't really matter how much this freedom impacts their networks. The freedom to run whatever software we want and interoperate with everything without being discriminated against should be our inviolable right.
[+] [-] thayne|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jerryzh|3 years ago|reply
So I don't think it works.
[+] [-] upbeat_general|3 years ago|reply
Also, since basically every device that receives message also receives sms, isn’t this irrelevant?
[+] [-] dcow|3 years ago|reply
There's the high-level SafeyNet API which essentially lets you assert that you're running on a non-modified device running non-modified software in the context of a verified boot:
* https://developer.android.com/training/safetynet/attestation
It also has the lower-level Keymaster 3 API (since 2017) which provides HSM-signed certificates with the device attestiation extension, including the system trust level and verified device identifiers:
* https://source.android.com/security/keystore/attestation
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bweeks-acme-device-at...
Microsoft is the one that's late to party... And your hypothesis seems pretty dependent on an argument that Apple can't build iMessaging on other platforms because they're the only platform with device attestation. That's simply not true.
If Apple wanted iMessage on other platforms, they've had at least 5 years to build it in the way you theorize must be required.
[+] [-] sangnoir|3 years ago|reply
This seems to be a strawman - no one is asking for cross-platfrom iMessage, just for Apple to upgrade it's officially-supported cross-platform messaging stack (SMS) from the 90s.
[+] [-] Rackedup|3 years ago|reply
I don't get random spam on Matrix/Element... it even handles video calls and more...
Do you get spam calls on your iphone?
[+] [-] cbsmith|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] harles|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alickz|3 years ago|reply
https://twitter.com/techemails/status/1463558823109660677?la...
>short version - don't make mail, calendar, iMessage work on Android and it's impossible to switch
[+] [-] gofreddygo|3 years ago|reply
My BS detectors just tripped.
Would you be ok if your home had the same "security" features? Say BigCo home builders install a front door, sensors, cameras and scanners in your home that allow them to monitor track and remotely lock you out of your home, your water and power supply ? Their reason? ... so that they can shutdown "bad neighbors" and keep the neighborhood "clean". And remember there's no fkin way you can get rid of those scanners, cameras and other control mechanisms.
But ya'know they gave you a piece of paper that says "we respect your privacy" with BigCo logo on it ?
I don't get why Apple, MS or anyone should be able to get away with this.
[+] [-] GekkePrutser|3 years ago|reply
It's not that big a problem apparently, and doesn't require giving up that much control.
On the other hand I social never use iMessage. It's not very popular here in Spain at all because of the Apple-only thing. Android is far bigger in marketshare here.
[+] [-] bern4444|3 years ago|reply
Everyone is familiar with their graveyard of failed messaging applications (along with their graveyard of products generally).
When I had an android phone, I tried RCS with someone else on Android. It never worked. I'm sure it's improved, but as the common theme of this story goes, Google blew their chance.
I also don't trust google to abide by the "standard" they've created. Their track record is abysmal. I don't want to use yet another messaging service that they've built. I don't trust it to exist in the future, receive support and updates, and for it to be maintained. If google abandons it that means the telecoms are stuck holding the bag and when we demand even more from the next iteration of messaging apps, RCS will go the way SMS has today.
This is nothing more than Google reaping the results of their own failures. It's a shame they squandered the opportunity over the last 15 years to develop a cohesive messaging app strategy across their products, but its their shame and now they have to pay the price.
In a last ditch effort they're trying to throw all the blame on Apple who was able to innovate and launch a successful messaging service years ago. Apple recognized that SMS could be improved, and they improved it. They didn't wait for anyone and they recognize the importance of continued support - a quality Google does not seem to foster.
Google had their chance over and over again but they blew it over and over again. I don't care about the little things RCS adds, message bubbles, delivery confirmation etc. These may be nice additions but they truly don't make a large difference. If an Android phone wants to send a high quality image, video etc they can share a link. That's good enough for me.
Google failed, miserably and publicly. This latest campaign is just embarrassing for them.
[+] [-] kelnos|3 years ago|reply
Hell, Apple doesn't have to ditch iMessage; they just have to support RCS for messaging with Android users, or group messaging with mixed Android/iOS devices.
I would also (grudgingly) accept an opening of the iMessage protocol so Google could implement it in the Android Messages app. Not ideal by any measure, and I figure Apple would never do this (and I suspect Google would hypocritically not want to do this anyway), but it would at least improve things.
The thing that's sad overall is that the current state of affairs is just a result of an anti-consumer corporate pissing match. The only losers here are the users, both on iOS and Android. And meanwhile both Apple and Google get to tout the benefits of their preferred solution as if they're both the good guys, fighting for their users. When in reality they're merely fighting for their own market dominance.
[0] Tying messaging to your carrier is just a continuation of the crappy SMS "portability" experience. Sure, most RCS backend implementations are currently provided by Google, but one thing I'd like to see would be the ability to select your RCS provider. Maybe others would crop up if this were an option, and if RCS were actually popular.
[+] [-] eftychis|3 years ago|reply
Google wants us to pick theirs over Apple's. Also note that to my knowledge, RCS is not available in all countries.
The other funny thing is that Google complains about SMS being insecure -- all while RCS does not support end to end encryption. Google Messages added that feature recently relatively (last year? please correct me below) and I still can't understand if it's on by default or not.
Here is a random article about RCS state. Feel free to google for more: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1327240-in-the-us-rcs-text-m...
I would love a common solution, but rationally I can not blame Apple for keeping a (to me from experiencing both) superior experience that brings in customers. And Google has just managed to catch up. Google will need to make their messaging an order or two better, to the point that Apple will have to join.
P.S. Also, I am skeptical any time the phrases privacy, end-to-end encryption, and Google cohabitate the same statement.
(Edit)P.S.2. Just use https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/bluebubbles/9P3XF8KJ... in the meantime.
[+] [-] ivoras|3 years ago|reply
Haven't received an SMS from a real person (in other words, all SMSes I get are 2FA etc) for, at least 5 years, maybe 10.
Even people who use iPhones don't send SMSes, MMSes or anything as obsolete (including RCS). Everyone just seems to use WhatsApp and Telegram (or if they don't know any better, Viber). Locale: Central Europe.
So, why would anyone stick to the obsolete stuff? Are there regions of the US which have cell phone signals but no Internet access?
[+] [-] MBCook|3 years ago|reply
Group chats? Totally plain text in the clear. No encryption at all.
RCS is not good enough. Fix the issues, develop something better, I don’t care.
Only E2E is good enough.
[+] [-] xnx|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] __derek__|3 years ago|reply
> missing read receipts and typing indicators
Life is better without both of these.
> no texting over Wi-Fi
This claim was odd. I visited Europe a few months ago and definitely sent/received SMS over wifi using my iPhone.
> When people with iPhones and Android phones text each other, Apple relies on SMS and MMS, outdated systems which do not always support texting over wi-fi. That means if you don’t have a cellular network connection, depending on your carrier and situation, you may not be able to send and receive texts.
Oh, so the claim was deliberately misleading. That's not a good way to build trust.
[+] [-] radiojasper|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kriskrunch|3 years ago|reply
Messaging is already extremely fragmented. BB is only the eighth messaging app on my phone. Considering getting on Beeper to consolodate this madness. Matrix/Element was too rough to utilize as is.
Almost everyone I text with is on iMessage in the US. 95% or more of my regular contacts. Many are often outspoken about their cult like allegiance to iMessage. Finally some respect.
The look on their face when I send them an iMessage from my Galaxy is priceless.
Now, nearly all of the SMS messages I get are spam. Google Messages and the phone companies are pathetic at stopping them.
[+] [-] saxonww|3 years ago|reply
I'm a Google phone user on Google Fi, and make heavy use of the web app (message.google.com/web) in addition to texting via the phone. Once you get a long conversation history, the phone experience becomes poor - conversations won't load, messages won't send - and the web will often lose sync and need to be re-paired (which may or may not itself work). On top of that, some days messages just will not send quickly, not over wifi or 5g, to the point that it's too hard to converse via text and we just give up.
Google has an alternative configuration for Fi users, btw: you can do all your calls and texts through Fi, have Fi store your messages and voicemails, etc. Except you have to turn off RCS for this, because Fi doesn't support it. So you get the SMS/MMS experience they are complaining about, and on top of that they convert all your audio and video to 3gpp and downscale the heck out of it such that it's nearly worthless.
Who knows what's realistically possible but I wonder if Google is going about this the right way. Call up Tim Cook and say we'd like to give Android users a better messaging experience, how can we work with you to do that. Don't try to embarrass Apple into helping you - Apple very likely does not care - and certainly if you're going to point out where their choices lead to a worse experience for your users, make sure you're not doing the same thing.
[+] [-] obnauticus|3 years ago|reply
I would encourage anyone who is curious to read more about it. It’s taken so long to gain traction that it has also become somewhat legacy. Also, it still requires a carrier sponsored phone plan? How is this “modern” in comparison to say every other carrier agnostic messaging app in existence?
Also this: https://twitter.com/RonAmadeo/status/1480679515298934786
[+] [-] blinkingled|3 years ago|reply
Wow. I can't really come up with anything creative to blame Google for this one. Whatever you want to say about Google's messaging mess and RCS - Apple seems to go out of their way to make it inconvenient to text with Android users.
Also it doesn't sound like Google's asking Apple to give up iMessage - just that they use RCS instead of SMS/MMS to talk to Android users. Not an unreasonable ask given RCS is likely to be a widely adopted standard and an non-trivial improvement over SMS.
Edit: Color aside, the read receipts, MMS quality, Wifi send etc all seem worth fixing with RCS.
[+] [-] simonjgreen|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] milleramp|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sunsetandlabrea|3 years ago|reply
Why can't I message between WhatsApp and an RCS client. Or any other chat technology, how about Google Chat to RCS, or Slack to RCS, or anything else.
Their examples for 'the modern standard adopted by most of the mobile world': Motorola, OnePlus, Google Pixel, Samsung, Snapdragon are all providers of Android phones, so clearly they would use the default Android messaging service.
I have a few folk (mostly family) who uses Apple messaging, everyone else seems to be on WhatsApp.
[+] [-] rhacker|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] boesboes|3 years ago|reply
I tried to go back to a non-smart phone, but it was impossible due to not having whatsapp. That might be a 'local' thing though, not sure.
Anyway, they should just release imessage for android; that would piss off meta too, which is a win in my book ;)
[+] [-] tristor|3 years ago|reply
I'm well aware that high schoolers get bullied for being poor and not being able to afford an iPhone. High schoolers were getting bullied for being poor and not being able to afford fancy clothes before cell phones were even a thing, and prior to smartphones were bullied for being poor and not being able to afford pagers or a cell phone (or a car, or ... or ...).
High schoolers are assholes and will find some excuse to torment each other regardless of what aesthetic and design choices somebody in Apple's UX team makes for their built-in messaging app. This is a massive nothingburger and I honestly have no idea why the media gives this any credence other than the shift of the media generally towards being anti-tech.
[+] [-] willio58|3 years ago|reply