Such a sad world we live in. When the internet was hitting the mainstream, virtually everything was standardized. There were RFCs for probably every standard the internet operated on. Email, HTTP, DNS, TCP/UDP/IP, etc.
Today, we live in a world where we can’t even decide on a fucking chat protocol without making it a proprietary piece of garbage. The internet has been consolidated into giant companies that see interoperability as a weakness that enable their competitors and prevent them from oppressing and exploiting their users.
A small group of gatekeepers that kill anything nice for their own short-term gains: it is sad but true that it feels like any technology that’s commercially successful will end this way.
Terrible. The next evolution to SMS MMS shouldn’t be proprietary and fragmented.Google Messages is meh and is the only RCS Unless you have a carrier device and use Samsung Messages which is soon going away. Apple and iMessage being Apple only ruined universal messaging and all users on Apple or Android should have not let this happen.
Unfortunately the world has moved on. As far as I cam tell, SMS is used by people in the US and little else. For the rest of the world, SMS is old news.
I have some hopes for the EU forcing all messemging apps to interoperable, but I won’t hold my breath for real user friendly change.
Why would they go with RCS though when Google’s proprietary messenger is the only Android client for that standard? Why not something open, like Matrix?
Because they can’t control Matrix
there’s no end-to-end encryption (E2EE) support between the two platforms
Called it. Malicious compliance, as expected.
They’re adhering to the bare minimum specifications of RCS.
E2EE is not part of the standard and only exists as a proprietary Google extension, using Google’s servers. Implying that implementing RCS would get everyone cross-platform E2EE is misinformation.
E2EE is not part of the standard and only exists as a proprietary Google extension
Yes, that is the point I was making, thank you for elaborating.
Implying that implementing RCS would get everyone cross-platform E2EE is misinformation.
Correct again, thanks.
And why should apple (or anyone for that matter) be forced to use googles proprietary code for an “open standard”?
Also,
There is, naturally, a wrinkle here. The RCS standard still doesn’t support end-to-end encryption. Apple, which has offered encrypted messaging for over a decade, is kind of a stickler about security. Apple says it won’t be supporting any proprietary extensions that seek to add encryption on top of RCS and hopes, instead, to work with the GSM Association to add encryption to the standard.
https://www.techradar.com/phones/iphone/breaking-apple-will-support-rcs-in-2024
And why should apple (or anyone for that matter) be forced to use googles proprietary code for an “open standard”?
They shouldn’t.
Well then why did you describe them not doing that as malicious compliance?
Because there are 5000 different open protocols they could have chosen from.
To support E2EE in RCS?
