It’s happening!!!

82 points

Now, if only Google wasn’t a cunt about allowing other apps for rcs, that would be great

permalink
report
reply
37 points

Imagine cross-platform RCS support built into Signal. 🥹💭

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Man that would be nice. Could finally have it be all in one again like Google Hangouts before it was killed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I still miss Hangouts + Voice

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Oh that’d be nice but since no more SMS in Signal I can’t see it going back in (unless they reversed course?)

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

IIRC their point was that SMS is insecure, so they don’t want people using SMS in Signal to think that this is Signal. With RCS, they could do what Apple will - be interoperable while providing extras with own platform (iMessage).

Admittedly, that doesn’t sound like enough reason to reimplement SMS and RCS alone would still be kind of inconvenient.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Why not have separate apps so users can opt to install one or the other?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Why do you use two apps for SMS or iMessage now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Samsung Messages is the only other, right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Technically anyone who makes an android device could have their own. The API is a system-level API, so any app signed with system certificates (aka, any app packaged with your phone) can use it. Any app you download from the play store can’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Afaik, yeah

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

What do you think Apple will do? 😁

Cue several years of Google and Apple pointing at each other and shouting “see, they don’t want to be compatible with us!”

RCS was an idiotic take from the start. It should’ve been a layer of encryption over SMS and remain otherwise stateless and platform agnostic.

But of course companies and governments don’t really want encryption. So it became something that’s trivially easy to subvert by each company that implements it, because it needs to pass through servers, and who controls the servers gets to be an ass about it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

RCS was an idiotic take from the start.

It’s origin came from a good place. The wireless industry, not Google, started driving the standard to retire/replace SMS/MMS. However, then the wireless industry was reduced to a duo-culture and Google decided to drive RCS after many years of carriers/manufacturers trying to do their own thing to little success.

Another route: MMS could be enhanced to have some modern features while still being backwards-compatible. The datagrams are just XML and the syntax is akin to E-Mail. Larger message sizes could be supported, while the gateways still handle resize/reformat for older device backwards compatibility. There was even a format for a few minutes in the early aughts called EMS that had some promise but it died from disuse. Message delivery confirmation has existed since GSM and CDMA.

There’s even a standard for IMS video calls that has been in the 3GPP stack since the 1999 release that would’ve allowed universal standard video calls. Since carriers hated building data networks and consumers weren’t ready for video calls, it just sat stagnant until iChat AV/FaceTime came along and popularized video calls. It’s still there, it could still be used.

Somewhere along the way, standards-based universal calls, video, and messaging took a back seat to tech bros and their proprietary stacks, and governments (at least the US) were too stupid and incompetent to understand what regulation was necessary to correct this path we are now on. Hopefully the EU can continue to help fix this.

permalink
report
parent
reply

It should’ve been a layer of encryption over SMS and remain otherwise stateless and platform agnostic.

Umm what?

SMS has a very short size limit. Implementing RCS as an encryption layer on top of it would require devices to send several messages just to cover a short one-word reply. They also often come out of order so they would need to include a numbering system so the client could piece them back together.

Granted that is already how SMS works on modern devices, but the underlying protocol is woefully inept at modern messaging and completely unviable for what you’re proposing.

How should media attachments work? I assume you expect that to just use encryption built on MMS? So media can come through even more compressed than basic MMS? None of the actual benefits of RCS would be possible if it was built on top of the existing ancient standards.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Encrypting doesn’t necessarily boost the size of the message. You can also use compression very effectively since it’s mostly text.

You don’t need to also solve media hosting, you can just leave it be links like it is now. Just adding encryption would be an amazing improvement.

There are no additional changes needed to the transport layer, it would be transparent for telcos. It can be an OTG encryption layer.

Initial key exchange would be the only part that would require a couple of additional one-time messages but it would be automated. And not all messages need to be encrypted, nobody cares that my package has been shipped. And it would be an improvement anyway from having zero encryption to being able to have encryption

The whole thing is so simple that it could be implemented today by all the SMS apps without missing a beat. The only thing missing is the willingness to do so.

In fact it could be added as an option in any SMS app very easily — only for people who are both on the same app of course.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

I have faith in Apple, it’ll be difficult but they’ll find a way to do this that still maintains all the toxicity towards green bubbles that they’ve worked so hard to cultivate.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

They are literally keeping the green bubbles for RCS users lmao

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Right, but the features will be mostly on-par with iMessage. The only thing you’d be missing out on are chat effects and the 3D avatar things. The stigma will stay for a little bit, but probably die out over time because the stigma developed in the first place not due to the color of the bubble, but because the color of the bubble meant worse features.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Exactly, some of my iPhone-using friends don’t care about the color itself, just that sending a video via MMS results in a 240p mess. Being able to properly RCS videos, and multiple photos, will alleviate all actual concerns. They don’t care about message reactions, and I don’t know a single person who uses the avatar things (I’m in my early 30s in NY)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yep

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

It’s going to be irrelevant. It will still be separate from iMessage. Different bubbles will still exist. People who aren’t using SMS now (Europe) will continue to not use RCS either. And Apple’s implementation of RCS will be independent from Goggle’s and not 100% compatible.

In fact I suspect the whole thing is an attempt to skirt the upcoming EU interconnection regulations. Apple thinks that if they say “look we’ve implemented RCS and it’s technically interoperable with other RCS implementations” they’ll get a pass — or be able to assign blame on other vendors for not interconnecting with them and drag the whole thing for a few more years.

permalink
report
reply
17 points
*

Glad that you emphasized Europe. Here in the states where iMessage is dominant, it’ll make a difference.

At the end of the day it’s not a bad thing. I’m also waiting for details with compatibility to be ironed out, but it’s a start.

Just surprised at the whole negative energy with this announcement considering this was a “when pigs fly” or “when hell freezes over” sorta thing. Again, it’s a start and hopefully Google opens it up (even if forcibly by the EU) down the road.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’m just extremely skeptical of anything that looks too good to be true coming from any of the incumbent tech giants. Call me cynical.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I care. Switched to iPhone and RCS is the one thing I miss.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Exactly. It’s in no way a bad thing for anyone. We’ll see the way that it’s implemented. It’s the first step. r/Android is rearing its head here. Let’s enjoy this for the moment

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

People who aren’t using SMS now (Europe) will continue to not use RCS either.

We’re all already on RCS in Europe. And you know what? Nobody cares. Or truly knows. Nobody opens their Messages, iMessage, whateveritbemessage.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I didn’t know we were on RCS which proves the point I guess. I do open my texts though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Maybe for 2FA. But for messaging with friends and colleagues? Everyone uses Signal, Whatsapp or telegram.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

We aren’t on RCS. The only SMS app that even uses Google’s RCS is Google’s Messages. Assuming you had that app preinstalled (which isn’t necessarily true for all manufacturers or all models), it comes off by default and you have to enable it (it’s called “chat features”).

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

This would be great if I could actually use it in AOSP without Google’s own app, and view/reply to RCS conversations on my laptop using a 3rd party application. Open the APIs, Google, or you’re just blowing hot air.

permalink
report
reply
5 points
*

+1 And why XMPP was always a better answer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah, I have a lot of mixed feelings about it, but I’m tending towards some forced adherence to standards. Or at least interoperability through open federation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The standard RCS lacks e2e encryption. You wouldn’t have been able to use other clients with the google messages app either way even if they were developed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s why we need them to open up the APIs in the short term, but the long term goal should be to get the Universal Profile advanced, and move away from a Google-centric implementation.

Which, to be fair, Google really did seem to want carriers implementing their own interoperable RCS solutions. But they needed shit to be done, so they ended up doing it themselves.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply

Google uses the Signal protocol for encryption and they do intend to allow for interoperability:

https://9to5google.com/2023/07/19/google-messages-mls-encrypted/

This is not something Google was ever against doing

permalink
report
parent
reply

[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]

permalink
report
parent
reply

Android

!android@lemdro.id

Create post

The new home of /r/Android on Lemmy and the Fediverse!

Android news, reviews, tips, and discussions about rooting, tutorials, and apps.

🔗Universal Link: !android@lemdro.id


💡Content Philosophy:

Content which benefits the community (news, rumours, and discussions) is generally allowed and is valued over content which benefits only the individual (technical questions, help buying/selling, rants, self-promotion, etc.) which will be removed if it’s in violation of the rules.


Support, technical, or app related questions belong in: !askandroid@lemdro.id

For fresh communities, lemmy apps, and instance updates: !lemdroid@lemdro.id

💬Matrix Chat

💬Telegram channels / chats

📰Our communities below


Rules

  1. Stay on topic: All posts should be related to the Android OS or ecosystem.

  2. No support questions, recommendation requests, rants, or bug reports: Posts must benefit the community rather than the individual. Please post to !askandroid@lemdro.id.

  3. Describe images/videos, no memes: Please include a text description when sharing images or videos. Post memes to !androidmemes@lemdro.id.

  4. No self-promotion spam: Active community members can post their apps if they answer any questions in the comments. Please do not post links to your own website, YouTube, blog content, or communities.

  5. No reposts or rehosted content: Share only the original source of an article, unless it’s not available in English or requires logging in (like Twitter). Avoid reposting the same topic from other sources.

  6. No editorializing titles: You can add the author or website’s name if helpful, but keep article titles unchanged.

  7. No piracy or unverified APKs: Do not share links or direct people to pirated content or unverified APKs, which may contain malicious code.

  8. No unauthorized polls, bots, or giveaways: Do not create polls, use bots, or organize giveaways without first contacting mods for approval.

  9. No offensive or low-effort content: Don’t post offensive or unhelpful content. Keep it civil and friendly!

  10. No affiliate links: Posting affiliate links is not allowed.

Quick Links

Our Communities
Lemmy App List
Chat and More

Community stats

  • 2.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 2.8K

    Posts

  • 34K

    Comments