this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
665 points (95.2% liked)

Technology

60056 readers
3883 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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
[–] echo64@lemmy.world 112 points 1 year ago (3 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

[–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 142 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 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.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 23 points 1 year 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

[–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year 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.

[–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I’ve just been reading the RCS Universal Profile Service Definition Document and it does stipulate encryption should be used but it 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”.

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] mr_tyler_durden@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Not to mention, you will get bored of it in two or three years and kill it off.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year 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.

[–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year 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).

[–] stevehobbes@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year 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.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] ericisshort@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 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.

[–] fignooton@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] ericisshort@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

No one said it wasn’t, but US is the largest and most affluent market and therefore the only one that matters. /s

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I haven't encountered any adults who actually care about that in one-on-one conversations. I have however been excluded from group chats because mixing iMessage and SMS users resulted in a degraded experience. The iPhone users were, of course unwilling to consider installing any other chat app.

I find the last bit pretty annoying. It takes about 45 seconds to download Signal and confirm your number.

[–] paintbucketholder@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I just had that conversation with a group of adults who all had iPhones and were unwilling to add non-iPhone people to a group or change messaging apps.

The reasons given were:

  • My iPhone is too old, I can't install another messaging app.
  • I'm not going to install another app where I have to remember another password.
  • Messages don't go through when we add a non-iPhone user to the group.

The conclusion by the group was "just buy an iPhone!"

And that's a group of adults. I can't imagine the bullying and peer pressure teenagers have to face over something as idiotic as messaging apps.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Meanwhile, I have six messaging apps on my phone (which is neither new nor high-end) and would be willing to install most others (not Facebook chat or Instagram) if it made communication easier for someone.

[–] akafester@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year 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.

[–] NoMoreCocaine@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

In finland everyone I know uses WhatsApp, and my friend circle and family also use Signal. So, eh.

[–] obbelusk@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

It's popular in Sweden too

[–] Apollo2323@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

It is proprietary but at least it will interoperable with other phones and carriers.

[–] stardust@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year 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.

[–] killeronthecorner@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year 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.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] incompetentboob@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Cue the EU.

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

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

We're saying the same thing.

[–] incompetentboob@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They’ll find some way to make it cumbersome and difficult to use so that no one bothers.

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm sure their shareholders will appreciate getting billion euro fines.

/s

At best they will keep it out of the US market, until US regulators get up to speed.

[–] echo64@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

iMessage isn't anywhere near as popular in the EU as it is in the US, so it's just not as big of a problem for them to target and apple is doing a good job lobbying them not to