www.www.www.com

Xed said:

www.www.www.com said:

Xed said:

www.www.www.com said:

Xed said:

www.www.www.com said:

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

RCS is now the standard for all Android phones, so it's wrong to say that Android users can't share high-res images by default.

Sure, RCS isn't perfect and is still mid-adoption, but you say it's not the solution to fixing cross-platform messaging without offering any other options. What would you rather see happen to improve how iOS and Android communicate? It's easy to criticize, but you don't seem to have a better solution to offer.

One thing in the article could be made more clear. FTA:
Google says RCS enables higher-resolution images, video, and more things like emoji reactions. However, other messaging services like Signal, WeChat, Facebook Messenger, and even iMessage already have these improvements. It is Google's problem that Android users don't have the same benefit by default.

I don't want to speak for the author, but from the above, it appears that the author did not mean to say Android users can't share high-res images by default at all, but rather it is the combination of multiple features that represents the "same benefit" that other platforms have that Android users don't have.

Also, it's not the author's responsibility to offer a better solution. Reporting the facts are, which I believe has been done in this article.

If the author is going to state, as a fact, that RCS isn't the answer, then he should tell us what the answer is. Otherwise it's just his opinion.

Pointing out why something doesn't work does not require saying what does work. End of story.

He never points out why RCS wouldn't work.

His argument is that Apple shouldn't adopt RCS because Google has made their own extensions to the Universal Profile, other apps have similar features (???),  and because it's not on every Android phone yet or integrated into every Google service.

None of those are actually reasons why Apple shouldn't adopt RCS, especially since Google has offered to help Apple get feature parity between Google's extensions and a possible Apple implementation.

I'd say that a current lack of end-to-end (E2E) encryption is one reason why Apple should include RCS into their Messages app. You might want to respond saying that it already exists—which is does if you look at specific RCS profiles and without looking at group chat features or whether someone has that disabled. I think that E2E encryption is a necessary attribute for modern messaging, not simply an option feature.

Would there be benefits to  Apple's customer base if RCS was adopted instead of just SMS? Of course, as most of us do interact with people with green bubbles. but there are definitely downfalls, as well as many difficult pitfalls for Apple for trying to shoehorn many competing and half-baked standards into a single something that just works.

Have you asked yourself why Google wants Apple to support this? At the very least they want Apple to support it so that it becomes popular. Do you think it's fair for Google to pressure another company into paying a lot of money writing and testing code so that another can benefit off their branding? Why not first make RCS good, safe, and popular amongst Android users. If that happens, then I think Apple will have no choice but to adopt it, but not the other way around. If you build it, they will come.

There's the Universal Profile and Google's extensions that's build on top of that. There aren't conflicting profiles, at least not ones that matter. 

So you want Apple to support one profile because Google says so while also saying "fuck you" to supporting RCS profiles for the plethora of carriers and phones that don't support it.  You honestly don't see a problem with that?

Again, get it working the same on all Android devices and Apple very likely have to support it just like they support SMS.

You don't seem to understand what the concept of an extension is.

Google's extensions are built on top of the Universal Profile and don't conflict with the profiles that the carriers implement.

You don't seem to understand that Google' extensions are a bandaid for a poor implementation. For the last time, make something that works and that people are universally using and Apple will have no choice to adopt it, but don't try to force Apple to adopt it to make it seem more credible than it is.

65c816 said:

www.www.www.com said:

One of the subheadings in the article is "RCS isn't the answer". I'm pointing out that if you're going to say that RCS isn't the answer, it's useful to say what is.

I disagree.  I can say death isn't the answer to life, but it doesn't mean I have any alternative.  There is always the possibility that there is no useful answer.  Sometimes, life sucks, and that's all there is to it.

Xed said:

www.www.www.com said:

Xed said:

www.www.www.com said:

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

RCS is now the standard for all Android phones, so it's wrong to say that Android users can't share high-res images by default.

Sure, RCS isn't perfect and is still mid-adoption, but you say it's not the solution to fixing cross-platform messaging without offering any other options. What would you rather see happen to improve how iOS and Android communicate? It's easy to criticize, but you don't seem to have a better solution to offer.

One thing in the article could be made more clear. FTA:
Google says RCS enables higher-resolution images, video, and more things like emoji reactions. However, other messaging services like Signal, WeChat, Facebook Messenger, and even iMessage already have these improvements. It is Google's problem that Android users don't have the same benefit by default.

I don't want to speak for the author, but from the above, it appears that the author did not mean to say Android users can't share high-res images by default at all, but rather it is the combination of multiple features that represents the "same benefit" that other platforms have that Android users don't have.

Also, it's not the author's responsibility to offer a better solution. Reporting the facts are, which I believe has been done in this article.

If the author is going to state, as a fact, that RCS isn't the answer, then he should tell us what the answer is. Otherwise it's just his opinion.

Pointing out why something doesn't work does not require saying what does work. End of story.

He never points out why RCS wouldn't work.

His argument is that Apple shouldn't adopt RCS because Google has made their own extensions to the Universal Profile, other apps have similar features (???),  and because it's not on every Android phone yet or integrated into every Google service.

None of those are actually reasons why Apple shouldn't adopt RCS, especially since Google has offered to help Apple get feature parity between Google's extensions and a possible Apple implementation.

I'd say that a current lack of end-to-end (E2E) encryption is one reason why Apple should include RCS into their Messages app. You might want to respond saying that it already exists—which is does if you look at specific RCS profiles and without looking at group chat features or whether someone has that disabled. I think that E2E encryption is a necessary attribute for modern messaging, not simply an option feature.

Would there be benefits to  Apple's customer base if RCS was adopted instead of just SMS? Of course, as most of us do interact with people with green bubbles. but there are definitely downfalls, as well as many difficult pitfalls for Apple for trying to shoehorn many competing and half-baked standards into a single something that just works.

Have you asked yourself why Google wants Apple to support this? At the very least they want Apple to support it so that it becomes popular. Do you think it's fair for Google to pressure another company into paying a lot of money writing and testing code so that another can benefit off their branding? Why not first make RCS good, safe, and popular amongst Android users. If that happens, then I think Apple will have no choice but to adopt it, but not the other way around. If you build it, they will come.

There's the Universal Profile and Google's extensions that's build on top of that. There aren't conflicting profiles, at least not ones that matter. 

So you want Apple to support one profile because Google says so while also saying "fuck you" to supporting RCS profiles for the plethora of carriers and phones that don't support it.  You honestly don't see a problem with that?

Again, get it working the same on all Android devices and Apple very likely have to support it just like they support SMS.

Xed said:

www.www.www.com said:

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

RCS is now the standard for all Android phones, so it's wrong to say that Android users can't share high-res images by default.

Sure, RCS isn't perfect and is still mid-adoption, but you say it's not the solution to fixing cross-platform messaging without offering any other options. What would you rather see happen to improve how iOS and Android communicate? It's easy to criticize, but you don't seem to have a better solution to offer.

One thing in the article could be made more clear. FTA:
Google says RCS enables higher-resolution images, video, and more things like emoji reactions. However, other messaging services like Signal, WeChat, Facebook Messenger, and even iMessage already have these improvements. It is Google's problem that Android users don't have the same benefit by default.

I don't want to speak for the author, but from the above, it appears that the author did not mean to say Android users can't share high-res images by default at all, but rather it is the combination of multiple features that represents the "same benefit" that other platforms have that Android users don't have.

Also, it's not the author's responsibility to offer a better solution. Reporting the facts are, which I believe has been done in this article.

If the author is going to state, as a fact, that RCS isn't the answer, then he should tell us what the answer is. Otherwise it's just his opinion.

Pointing out why something doesn't work does not require saying what does work. End of story.

He never points out why RCS wouldn't work.

His argument is that Apple shouldn't adopt RCS because Google has made their own extensions to the Universal Profile, other apps have similar features (???),  and because it's not on every Android phone yet or integrated into every Google service.

None of those are actually reasons why Apple shouldn't adopt RCS, especially since Google has offered to help Apple get feature parity between Google's extensions and a possible Apple implementation.

I'd say that a current lack of end-to-end (E2E) encryption is one reason why Apple should include RCS into their Messages app. You might want to respond saying that it already exists—which is does if you look at specific RCS profiles and without looking at group chat features or whether someone has that disabled. I think that E2E encryption is a necessary attribute for modern messaging, not simply an option feature.

Would there be benefits to  Apple's customer base if RCS was adopted instead of just SMS? Of course, as most of us do interact with people with green bubbles. but there are definitely downfalls, as well as many difficult pitfalls for Apple for trying to shoehorn many competing and half-baked standards into a single something that just works.

Have you asked yourself why Google wants Apple to support this? At the very least they want Apple to support it so that it becomes popular. Do you think it's fair for Google to pressure another company into paying a lot of money writing and testing code so that another can benefit off their branding? Why not first make RCS good, safe, and popular amongst Android users. If that happens, then I think Apple will have no choice but to adopt it, but not the other way around. If you build it, they will come.

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

roundaboutnow said:

www.www.www.com said:

RCS is now the standard for all Android phones, so it's wrong to say that Android users can't share high-res images by default.

Sure, RCS isn't perfect and is still mid-adoption, but you say it's not the solution to fixing cross-platform messaging without offering any other options. What would you rather see happen to improve how iOS and Android communicate? It's easy to criticize, but you don't seem to have a better solution to offer.

One thing in the article could be made more clear. FTA:
Google says RCS enables higher-resolution images, video, and more things like emoji reactions. However, other messaging services like Signal, WeChat, Facebook Messenger, and even iMessage already have these improvements. It is Google's problem that Android users don't have the same benefit by default.

I don't want to speak for the author, but from the above, it appears that the author did not mean to say Android users can't share high-res images by default at all, but rather it is the combination of multiple features that represents the "same benefit" that other platforms have that Android users don't have.

Also, it's not the author's responsibility to offer a better solution. Reporting the facts are, which I believe has been done in this article.

If the author is going to state, as a fact, that RCS isn't the answer, then he should tell us what the answer is. Otherwise it's just his opinion.

Pointing out why something doesn't work does not require saying what does work. End of story.