- cross-posted to:
- signal@lemmy.ml
You must log in or # to comment.
Now, if only Google wasn’t a cunt about allowing other apps for rcs, that would be great
Imagine cross-platform RCS support built into Signal. 🥹💭
Man that would be nice. Could finally have it be all in one again like Google Hangouts before it was killed.
I still miss Hangouts + Voice
Same I legit think it could’ve been Google’s actual competition to iMessage but they fumbled the bag so badly it’s crazy.
Oh that’d be nice but since no more SMS in Signal I can’t see it going back in (unless they reversed course?)
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.
they could go the apple route and just make sms messages an ugly color
Why not have separate apps so users can opt to install one or the other?
Why do you use two apps for SMS or iMessage now.
I don’t understand. I don’t do that. But I have Whatsapp, telegram, signal and discord installed, and those are all quite separate apps.
The point being, why would I want my Whatsapp install to come integrated with a whole discord client? I can already just install both, which is much easier and keeps things separate.
The point is getting adoption. Especially in the US, where people actually use iPhone, no one wants to download a second app because iMessage is ‘good enough’ 99% of the time.
Samsung Messages is the only other, right?
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.
Afaik, yeah
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
They are literally keeping the green bubbles for RCS users lmao
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.
Yep
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)
RCS supports message reactions, just not the crazy iMessage effects.
deleted by creator
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.
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.
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.
I care. Switched to iPhone and RCS is the one thing I miss.
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
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.
I didn’t know we were on RCS which proves the point I guess. I do open my texts though.
Maybe for 2FA. But for messaging with friends and colleagues? Everyone uses Signal, Whatsapp or telegram.
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”).
deleted by creator
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.
+1 And why XMPP was always a better answer.
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.
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.
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.
Pay special attention to the Universal Profile. That’s the core spec everyone agreed on a few years ago, the one used for basic texting.
You know what isn’t in there? Encryption. Google will need to either disable encryption in chats with Apple users, or Apple users won’t be able to join encrypted groups.
Is this better than using SMS? Obviously yes. Is this going to fix the iMessage problem? Only if you don’t care about privacy.
I personally don’t ever chat via SMS or RCS so I don’t really care either way, but unless Google opens up and documents its encryption, the user experience will still degrade when talking to iOS people.
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
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
I have no doubts it will be implemented in a way that still benefits Apple and its ecosystem. Also to help their cause to keep iMessage locked into Apple devices with that EU ruling. Still, this is great news.
I don’t think Apple will need (or want) to do anything “malicious” since Apple is implementing RCS the standard which between the carriers and Google mismanaging and fragmenting messaging for years - see: X carrier phones can only send RCS messages to X carrier phones, Google’s implementation is not the RCS standard and is partially proprietary - it’ll take a while to get S.S. RCS, The Standard steered right.
I hope Apple’s involvement is ironically a kick in the butt to get everyone on the same page and get a standard rather than the current “Google iMessage” solution.
Edit: Typo
Are there any FOSS RCS apps? Should this be the ‘open’ standard the EU are enforcing?
There aren’t any because there’s no point. And no, I hope this won’t be the standard.
There are two things called “RCS”: there’s a theoretical specification; and exactly one implementation that has managed to get any real traction, and that’s purely because it’s pushed by Google.
The RCS spec was attempted by various companies and all implementations died when they figured out they’d have to make them compatible and open their servers to each other. Even if they wanted to it would be a mess.
SMS succeeded because it doesn’t need servers, it’s just pieces of text being sent around.
Google is the only one still pushing their RCS because they figure if they tie their version of it into Android they will own the messaging on Android forever. They don’t want interoperability either.
If Google gets their way and their RCS becomes the EU standard it will lock the EU into a proprietary platform from one of the most vile data predators in the world.
There’s no point in making a FOSS implementation of RCS because the spec is highly dependent on who runs the servers. The only way it would make sense is if the EU would dictate a spec and force everybody to follow it and open their servers. In that take on things FOSS would be ideal.
Is the Google version of RCS not compatible with someone else’s RCS, then?
As in, I take it nobody else wants to run a server because it costs money, right? But suppose I did, and I had an RCS app to run with it. Would someone using my app be able to send a message to an Android user using Google Messages?
No. Google Messages only talks to Google’s servers.
The way it’s supposed to work is Google has some servers and an app, and you have your own servers and own app, and when someone sends a message from your app it goes your app > your server > Google server > Google app. And the same in reverse.
But in reality Google doesn’t let anybody’s servers talk to theirs and tries to make everybody use their app and their servers. Which they can afford to do because they own Android and can shove their app down anybody’s throat.
SMS uses servers, those servers just happen to be your telco’s servers. RCS was designed to work the same way, exchanging messages via servers hosted by carriers.
Nobody cared about RCS so Google took it upon themselves to host their own RCS server. Now most people who use RCS, use Google’s servers.
Assuming spec compliancy, anyone can make an app that communicates with a carrier’s servers, or with Google’s servers for that matter. In practice, the standard is obscure and the lack of system integration will have RCS apps fighting over who gets to do the RCS registration for your phone number.
Custom ROMs and such will probably get RCS support outside of Google Messages at some point in the future, and perhaps rooted phones will be able to use those same apps as well when that eventually happens. However, as it stands, RCS on Android would allow you to use one single app for rich messaging, and all other apps (including the Android system APIs) would have to fall back to SMS.
Furthermore, the RCS Google supports actually uses an E2EE scheme that isn’t publicly documented. That means your custom RCS app will likely need to reverse engineer Google’s encryption code (I believe it’s based on Signal for one on one, and MLS for groups?) or you won’t be able to read half of the messages.
SMS only transits the telco infrastructure, it doesn’t need servers in the client-servers sense, RCS does. Not only that but RCS needs them because it includes hosting for things like images and videos that are sent in messages.
I don’t think Google will allow anybody to partake in “their” RCS, the least of all custom ROMS. They will make it another thing like SafetyNet, designed to maintain their own control.
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
would much prefer matrix as the standard
If they did, it wouldn’t work on Android. There’s no user-level API. So only apps that come bundled with the phone can use the API.
Now we wait another 10 years for Apple to support third-party RCS apps I guess?
What is rcs?
RCS is like sms2.0, it supports better group chats, larger higher quality file transfers, read receipts… That sorta thing
For carriers it is a way to extend the (in my opinion outdated) idea of carrier-based chat system.
For Google it is a way to switch messaging on Android to their proprietary app, at least for some time, as other of their projects falied.
For users it is a way for people using Android certified by Google to normally message people using iPhone and it’s preinstalled chat app.
Google got jealous of iMessage and remade iMessage, but Android with the promise of making it more open.
They haven’t followed through on ‘more open’ until just now.
Rcs officially works on 2 apps. iMessage still has just 1.
But hopefully Rcs will actually become open in the future. Allowing anyone to make an Rcs app, like they can with SMS
That doesn’t answer my question at all.
It’s a protocol that implements modern text messaging features for sms, similar to imessage on ios. Since nobody has used sms since the nineties it’s probably useless for most of us but it’s interesting to see what tech giants fight about.
Believe it or not, millions if not hundreds of millions use SMS every day.
deleted by creator
RCS is open protocol, but has no open implementation and Android has no native support (only by Google Messages app that act as a bridge to Google Jibe RCS servers).
deleted by creator
It’s more likely Google has paid them.
There would have to be a court case and ruling before Apple could be threatened with a fine. For messaging this isn’t the case (so far). Apple doesn’t restrict access to messaging apps. You can install iMessage competitors.
The RCS apple is implementing is Google’s standard. That they control and have restricted access to. So far only Google, Samsung and Apple have been allowed to use it.
deleted by creator
Google probably isn’t paying enough.
confused messengers user noises
Which messenger?
Anything but mobile-only vendor-specific ones. Telegram rocks.
Telegram has the best client and there is no arguing about that. But it is specific to particular provider, which in my opinion is not a great one…
Long overdue, but this will be a benefit for all.
deleted by creator
I bet they do some thing like make it optional on the iPhone and the user needs to turn that setting on to get RCS. Obviously most users don’t care and will never look. 
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
