642
Pressure grows on Apple to open up iMessage (finance.yahoo.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
198 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Pressure grows on Apple to open up iMessage::Samsung has joined Google’s campaign to force Apple to make iMessage RCS-compatible—but European regulators are more likely to get that job done.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 106 points 2 years ago (4 children)

The pressure doesn't matter, apple makes a legitimate amount of money from people scared of being a different colored bubble. Unless someone actually writes it into law and makes a provision that all the bubbles must appear the same, nothing will change

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 140 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

    This is weirdly only a thing in America. In Europe, where I live, iMessage isn’t that popular and iPhone users never seem to care about the bubble colour (likely because WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Element, and Threema are so popular, everyone is used to using multiple chat apps anyway).

    Edit: Also I’m not sure why everyone is championing RCS - it’s yet another proprietary communication standard like iMessage and isn’t open thus can’t be easily implemented in other chat apps.

    Rather then pressure Apple to support and further popularise another closed protocol, we should be pushing for something open like Matrix or Signal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    : Also I’m not sure why everyone is championing RCS - it’s yet another proprietary communication standard like iMessage and isn’t open thus can’t be easily implemented in other chat apps.

    RCS is an implementation of GSMA Universal Profile and is interoperable with it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don’t see any public license for GSMA Universal Profile and it seems you have to engage directly with GSMA to get any detail on the standard. Very much the opposite of things like Signal which not only are the standards public but so are the reference implementations.

    I still don’t see an argument for why yet another proprietary standard and protocol is a good thing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    well RCS is to be the successor to SMS, which I believe was also introduced by GSMA

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    What you are using on Android isn’t RCS, it’s RCS+Google’s proprietary extension. There is no encryption in the spec, and the original implementation that went through carriers is ignored and it goes through Google. It’s essentially Google’s iMessage and they are trying to find their way into breaking Apple’s market share under false pretense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I’ve just been reading the RCS Universal Profile Service Definition Document and it does stipulate encryption should be used but is hardly defined how encryption should be implemented nor does it set an interoperable standard for it. I like RCS even less now.

    “Methods for encryption, client verification, user authentication and access authorisation are applied by the client and the network on a per interface and protocol basis.”

    So basically RCS is happy for there to be interoperability with regards to encryption, almost forcing interoperable implementations to forgo encryption so that different implementations can communicate.

    Signal protocol is far far far better a standard than this lazy “service definition”.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yea, the standard is great for a decade+ ago when it came out, but I’d never trust it as is over other things like Signal or even iMessage. Google’s RCS implementation is as trustworthy as anything else Google makes. They don’t even support it across all their products last I heard. It’s a joke.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I know, but isn't the point that Google Messages is interoperable with other implementations such as T-Mobile's or Verizon's?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    That may be the point, but it’s not working out that way. The spec is older than iMessage. It failed. Google just took it and made their own implementation. I’m not sure if Google’s RCS works with Verizon’s for example, I’m sure basic things do. AFAIK third party developers can’t implement it in their apps, so you have to have an Android phone to use it. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. The entire thing relies on Google to keep it running.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    RCS is still IP based so why SMS should be replaced with RCS over Signal still isn’t clear. RCS and Signal are both IP based protocols yet one is proprietary and the other is libre. If we’re getting rid of SMS, we should be replacing it with something anyone can implement without any concerns for licensing or the standard being controlled by a single entity (which Google seems to be positioning themselves to be).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    It is controlled and monetizable by the telcos. It isn’t better. And it’s barely standardized. Google sells a service to telcos to implement RCS that doesn’t really work well with anyone else’s RCS, or didn’t.

    Go look at the amount of threads with people saying “my RCS message from my Samsung didn’t get to my friend on T-Mobile with a pixel”.

    This is not the future anyone deserves.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I have never heard of anyone in the U.S. who cares about the bubble color either. The only reason I ever cared was that it used to mean there was a good chance it wouldn't get through if it was a green bubble, but that doesn't seem to be the case anymore. I've gotten iPhone-to-iPhone green bubbles when there's been some sort of communication difficulty to Apple's servers and it had to go straight SMS.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Are you dating or in school at the moment? I if not, it might be that you’re just oblivious to this trend, because it is definitely a thing in many social circles.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Seeems mostly a US centric thing though. I've never experienced this, 99% of people here with smartphones have whatsapp/telegram and use that almost exclusively, even iphone users.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (6 replies)
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I have to say that in Denmark at least, iMessage seems to thrive quite well. There are quite a lot using Facebook messenger, but SMS and iMessage is a close second. This is entirely from my point of view. Never met anyone using the examples you mention, unless they are communicating with foreigners on a daily basis.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Also I’m not sure why everyone is championing RCS - it’s yet another proprietary communication standard like iMessage and isn’t open thus can’t be easily implemented in other chat apps.

    My guy, this entire article is about Google and Samsung trying to convince Apple to adopt RCS.

    Is a completely open standard better? Yeah, absolutely.

    Would RCS basically create unified rich communication for virtually everyone? Also yes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Also yesterday, Reuters reported that the European Commission has begun trying to establish whether iMessage should be brought under the remit of the EU’s new antitrust law, the Digital Markets Act, which imposes interoperability requirements (among other things) on so-called gatekeeper services that are part of many people’s daily lives.

    Apple’s iOS operating system, App Store, and Safari browser already fall under the DMA, which is likely to force Apple to allow third-party app stores on iPhones and iPads, but Apple so far managed to lobby the Commission into leaving iMessage out of it. If the Commission decides after its investigation that iMessage is worth regulating in this way, Apple would have until August next year to introduce some form of interoperability—presumably with RCS.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago

    Two related issues are being confused/conflated here.

    The first is the American cultural significance of the green and blue bubbles. This is the thing that Europeans generally don't care about as most are using WhatsApp et. al.

    The second is the lack of interoperability between chat protocols such that it degrades the experience for everyone. This is what the EU is targeting.

    I don't think the colours of chat bubbles for specific devices as displayed by other specific devices falls under that remit. The implementor must comply with providing the same service level though. Whether or not this will lead to less cultural significance for bubble hues in the US remains to be seen.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    It won't be with RCS. The "gatekeeper" criteria applies to interoperation between dominant technologies. RCS has very small adoption in Europe. If iMessage will make the cut it will have to integrate with Whatsapp, Facebook Messenger and Signal.

    Edit: I should clarify, there's RCS the standard and there's Google's implementation. Google's RCS is too small to be considered for itntegration. The standard on the other hand would be nice, in an ideal world; however, merging proprietary networks into an open standard is a very high goal and goes beyond what the EU wants to attempt at this time. Instead it will let the tech owners achieve interoperability in any way they want and can.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I don’t get why more people don’t understand this. There is literally no way Apple is going to ditch iMessage or open it up voluntarily.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Cue the EU.

    They already got Apple on USB-C, repairability and RCS are next.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    There's a difference between USB and RCS though. With RCS the standard was stillborn and the only surviving implementation is alive because it's Google-controlled and represents their Nth attempt at a message platform. I don't want to see something controlled by Google become a standard of communication. We've already seen what happens to such de facto standards, they have very bad aspects.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The EU will not mandate RCS, just like they did not mandate USB explicitly.

    They will only mandate standardization, which will force Apple, Google and Meta (as owner of WhatsApp) to agree on a standard and then enforce that standard.

    RCS is just the most likely outcome.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Maybe. Google certainly has a vested interest in RCS — but the others don't. RCS is a large standard which goes beyond interconnecting networks. They can just as well design something smaller that only achieves the minimum necessary.

    You have to keep in mind that these companies don't want this. If they can waste time designing a new standard, they will. They are also not looking to re-implement their entire networks,, they most certainly don't want to "open them up", they just want to comply with the letter of the law with as little change as possible.

    Also keep in mind that RCS has glaring faults, such as the lack of encryption.

    My guess is that they're going to try to agree on a common message format, common API and common encryption protocol and leave it at that. There are already plenty of standards out there that cover these needs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Perhaps. I am unfamiliar with merits of RCS versus alternatives.

    Howsver, any solution that enables extra proprietary functionality outside of the standard would be non-compliant, so I don't think they will be able to get a half-baked solution through.

    Also, the EU has zero interest to play softball with these companies. If they can punish them with a billion euro fine for not complying, they definitely will.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    any solution that enables extra proprietary functionality outside of the standard would be non-compliant, so I don't think they will be able to get a half-baked solution through.

    Again, there is no particular standard being mandated for this. The EU just wants interoperability – being able to communicate to a person using iMessage on their phone from your phone using Whatsapp for example. How the providers accomplish it is their business. The only pressure will be to not degrade the user's experience to the point the interop becomes a liability rather than a boon.

    the EU has zero interest to play softball with these companies. If they can punish them with a billion euro fine for not complying, they definitely will.

    OK but they cannot simply slap fines on them and call it a day. If the companies say "what you're asking for is too difficult" they will need to take the time to examine this claim. In fact I can guarantee right now that we'll see the deadline extended at least once.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    I’m pretty confident the blue and green colors have nothing to do with it. It’s simply the difficulties of using sms (or at least how Apple implements sms). iMessage allows much higher quality videos/images to be sent and enables group chats to be dynamic where people can be added and removed at will. On iOS sms group chats have to be made with every member in it at creation, if you want to add another person or remove a person then you have to make a whole new group chat. Compound this with iPhone dominance in North America it often presents an annoyance where the single android user forces all the iPhone users to use sms and all the difficulties/reduced features it comes with.

    WhatsApp, Telegram, and whatever chat app isn’t used in NA because it’s just harder to convince someone to download and make an account. Why should a user download another chat app? Why isn’t iMessage (sms) app good enough? Usually I’ve seen people just use instagram to chat with android users because sms is just so bad (at least on iOS, I’ve heard some things about how android works around the limitations).

    Yes Apple could implement better sms features but they won’t.

    So don’t just parrot “it’s because of the colors” it’s most likely due to users association with past experiences of “green chat bubbles”.

    Apple is still to blame here but it’s not because users are scared. Most iPhone users or phone users in general just want it to work and never think about what features they’re missing. Asking/convincing someone to download yet another app and set up yet another account to yet again be spammed by emails, texts, phone calls is just too much for a majority of people who are used to the simplicity of iMessage. It comes with your phone, you make a single Apple account, and it just works™.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    "Where every single android user forces iPhone uses to use sms" Apple forces this, they are very happy to do this, to make iPhone users hate the different colored bubbles and for people to absolutely not want to be the different colored bubbles.

    It's everything to do with the bubbles. You can't say it isn't. People literally talk about this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •