Xed

9secondkox2 said:

Wow. Nothing's incompetence exposed Sunbird's maliciousness. 

gatorguy said:

Xed said:

gatorguy said:

So after all this hand-wringing from iMessage/Apple Messages users and claims that Apple will never use RCS until the law tells them to, Apple decides to incorporate it anyway, and for better security and continuity. You don't say? 

"Later next year, we will be adding support for RCS Universal Profile, the standard as currently published by the GSM Association. We believe RCS Universal Profile will offer a better interoperability experience when compared to SMS or MMS. This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users."

It remains unclear whether it will be cross-platform E2EE or simply the RCS standard as defined by GSM.

EDIT: No it will not be end-to-end encrypted as it is with Google Messages, and will also be up to the carriers to activate it. Well, it's more than halfway there. At least no more SMS unless all else fails. 

So, still a green bubble with fragmented support and inferior security? Sounds wonderful. /s

Seems about right. Hopefully your RCS Apple messages will be encrypted sooner rather than later. 

dewme said:

coolfactor said:

While extremely expensive to set up, I think a service like this should always be free to access. Maybe the governments should be funding it along with 9-1-1 and the like.

I understand the sentiment but until this service is universally available on ALL brand devices I think there would be enormous backlash if the government was effectively subsidizing a feature that is exclusive to Apple devices. If this service was ubiquitous like 911 is then I would see no impediments to the government investing in technology that clearly has significant public value.

As nice as Apple’s current implementation is it’s still far from mature. I think there is a lot more upside potential that hasn’t been tapped into yet. At this point in its lifecycle I think it would be far more valuable and in the public interest if Apple opened the technology up to participation by other vendors and service providers as well as user groups who have a stake in the services provided. For example, the Coast Guard (and recreational boaters) would clearly benefit from this capability to help with search & rescue operations. Adding an existing government funded organization to the list of direct beneficiaries would help to  move this towards wider public support. 

kkqd1337 said:

Xed said:

s.metcalf said:

It'll be a very bad look for Apple when the first person dies after they had a capable phone but weren't subscribed to the service.  For this reason I don't think Apple could ever require payment for the feature when they're such a massively rich and profitable company, charging huge amounts for these latest devices and pay very little to no tax in most jurisdictions.  I don't think they can morally end the service, which fortunately most people will probably never have to use.

So a previously unavailable feature is now Apple's responsibility even after 3 years of offering the service for free? This reminds me of how stalking was all of a sudden Apple's fault if an AirTag was used even though Tile and other small trackers had existed for over a decade with no anti-stalking features in place to help people.

Yes It does leave a responsibility on Apple.

What if BMW disabled your airbags if you didn’t subscribe?