Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhones in 2024

[Wally J]

Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year
https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/

"Apple has announced today that it will adopt the RCS (Rich Communication
Services) messaging standard. The feature will launch via a software update
"later next year" and bring a wide range of iMessage-style features to
messaging between iPhone and Android users.

Apple's decision comes amid pressure from regulators and competitors like
Google and Samsung. It also comes as RCS has continued to develop and
become a more mature platform than it once was."
--
Unlike most people, I base my assessments on the facts.
It's how intelligent people are taught to think properly.

[Andy Burns]

Wally J wrote:

> Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year
> https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/

A good thing from Android users PoV, and hopefully from Apple users PoV
too. Difficult to see any downside once it's up and running?

[Andrew]

The downside is to iMessage but it seems Apple has already planned for that
given the article provided this direct-from-Apple cautionary warning.

"RCS will simply supplant SMS and MMS and exist separately from iMessage
when available."

Later on the article reiterates "This is not Apple opening up iMessage to
other platforms. Instead, it's the company adopting RCS separately from
iMessage."

What do those cautionary warnings from Apple tell you about implementation?

[Andy Burns]

Andrew wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>>> Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year
>>> https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/
>>
>> A good thing from Android users PoV, and hopefully from Apple users PoV
>> too. Difficult to see any downside once it's up and running?
>
> The downside is to iMessage but it seems Apple has already planned for that
> given the article provided this direct-from-Apple cautionary warning.
>
> "RCS will simply supplant SMS and MMS and exist separately from iMessage
> when available."

So apple to apple will continue to use imessage, doesn't affect or
bother me.

> Later on the article reiterates "This is not Apple opening up iMessage to
> other platforms. Instead, it's the company adopting RCS separately from
> iMessage."
>
> What do those cautionary warnings from Apple tell you about implementation?

Not much, until the dog gets to see the rabbit.

One thing I noticed in TechRadar's reporting of the RCS news

"There is, naturally, a wrinkle here. The RCS standard
still doesn't support end-to-end encryption."

My Pixel5a reports E2EE when using RCS to a fellow android user

<http://andyburns.uk/misc/rcs-e2ee.png>

So is google RCS using a proprietary encryption method, or are TechRadar
wrong?

[Dave Royal]

On 16 Nov 2023 19:56:20 +0000 Andy Burns wrote:
>
>
>
>So apple to apple will continue to use imessage, doesn't affect or
>bother me.
>
>

>Not much, until the dog gets to see the rabbit.
>
>One thing I noticed in TechRadar's reporting of the RCS news
>
> "There is, naturally, a wrinkle here. The RCS standard
> still doesn't support end-to-end encryption."
>
>My Pixel5a reports E2EE when using RCS to a fellow android user
>
><http://andyburns.uk/misc/rcs-e2ee.png>
>
>So is google RCS using a proprietary encryption method, or are TechRadar
>wrong?

Quote: "Apple says that RCS does not currently support encryption that is
as strong as iMessage." From
https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/
--
(Remove numerics from email address)

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2023-11-16 20:56, Andy Burns wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>> Andy Burns wrote:



>> What do those cautionary warnings from Apple tell you about
>> implementation?
>
> Not much, until the dog gets to see the rabbit.
>
> One thing I noticed in TechRadar's reporting of the RCS news
>
>     "There is, naturally, a wrinkle here. The RCS standard
>     still doesn't support end-to-end encryption."

This is simply not true.

That Apple will implement it or not, is another issue.

>
> My Pixel5a reports E2EE when using RCS to a fellow android user
>
> <http://andyburns.uk/misc/rcs-e2ee.png>
>
> So is google RCS using a proprietary encryption method, or are TechRadar
> wrong?

They are wrong.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

That's a different thing to say.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2023-11-16 19:47, Wally J wrote:
> Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year
> https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/
>
> "Apple has announced today that it will adopt the RCS (Rich Communication
> Services) messaging standard. The feature will launch via a software update
> "later next year" and bring a wide range of iMessage-style features to
> messaging between iPhone and Android users.
>
> Apple's decision comes amid pressure from regulators and competitors like
> Google and Samsung. It also comes as RCS has continued to develop and
> become a more mature platform than it once was."

Nice.

It is true, not a joke?

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Your Name]

On 2023-11-16 21:22:50 +0000, Carlos E. R. said:

> On 2023-11-16 20:56, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Andrew wrote:
>>> Andy Burns wrote:
>
>
>
>>> What do those cautionary warnings from Apple tell you about implementation?
>>
>> Not much, until the dog gets to see the rabbit.
>>
>> One thing I noticed in TechRadar's reporting of the RCS news
>>
>>     "There is, naturally, a wrinkle here. The RCS standard
>>     still doesn't support end-to-end encryption."
>
> This is simply not true.

The actual RCS Standard itself currently does *not* include end-to-end
encryption. Google has added end-to-end encryption themselves in their
own app, making it non-standard.

We've already seen the problems that can occur when big companies try
to make up the rules themselves as the "standard". Microsloth tried to
do it with web standards in Internet Explorer, and caused lots of
problems for web designers, web browser makers, and users.

> That Apple will implement it or not, is another issue.

Apple won't be implementing Google's non-standard end-to-end
encryption. Apple might implement it's own non-standard encryption or
might wait for ti to be officially included in the actual standard.
Having competing non-standard methods would simply make it even messier
with messaging apps not compatible with each other ... defeating the
entire reason there are official standards in the first place!

[Carlos E. R.]

Ok then, not standard. Still I understand the google app will simply
drop encryption when talking to a correspondent that doesn't support it.

So not a propblem

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Dave Royal]

Google use the Signal e2ee protocol according to this:
<https://www.gstatic.com/messages/papers/messages_e2ee.pdf>
<https://signal.org/docs/>

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-16, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:
> Andy Burns wrote on Thu, 16 Nov 2023 18:57:36 +0000 :
>
>>> Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year
>>> https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/
>>
>> A good thing from Android users PoV, and hopefully from Apple users PoV
>> too. Difficult to see any downside once it's up and running?
>
> The downside is to iMessage

Articulate this supposed "downside to iMessage".

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[Patrick]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:07:19 +1300, Your Name wrote:
> We've already seen the problems that can occur when big companies try
> to make up the rules themselves as the "standard". Microsloth tried to
> do it with web standards in Internet Explorer, and caused lots of
> problems for web designers, web browser makers, and users.

Standards work well when applied to all three. Microsoft. Google. Apple.

Which of the three, especially considering almost all of Android is AOSP,
do you think most "try to make up the rules themselves as the standard?"

>> That Apple will implement it or not, is another issue.
>
> Apple won't be implementing Google's non-standard end-to-end
> encryption. Apple might implement it's own non-standard encryption or
> might wait for ti to be officially included in the actual standard.

This seems to be the case given Google seems to have done it on their own.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/06/google-enables-end-to-end-encryption-for-androids-default-sms-rcs-app/
"Google has announced that end-to-end encryption is rolling out to users
of Google Messages, Android's default SMS and RCS app."

They improved it since that initial E2EE rollout a few years ago.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/8/23824800/google-messages-rcs-end-to-end-encryption-default-group
"RCS messages in Google's Messages app will now be fully
end-to-end-encrypted by default"

> Having competing non-standard methods would simply make it even messier
> with messaging apps not compatible with each other ... defeating the
> entire reason there are official standards in the first place!

The unanswered question is what will Apple's implementation be?
https://www.axios.com/2023/11/16/apple-messaging-imessage-rcs-iphone
"This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the best"
"It's unclear exactly which RCS features Apple will support,
and how it will do so. Apple declined to comment beyond its statement"

For those who care about bubbles there's a tiny bit more about it here.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/11/16/tech/apple-adopt-new-messaging-standard/index.html
"The move, however, doesn't necessarily mean the green bubbles (Android or
other users) and blue bubbles (Apple users) that are displayed when
messaging someone on the other platform will go away anytime soon.

Chatterjee said that keeping the colors is an Apple marketing strategy that
will likely continue, despite the shift to the RCS standard.

'The blue bubble is a badge of the Apple tribe, and this distinctive
identity, as well as the company's iMessage platform, is not going anywhere
anytime soon,' Chatterjee said."

The unanswered question is how much of a Frankenstein will Apple make it as
it seems to be more in Apple's interest to implement it as bad as they can.

[Andrew]

Andy Burns wrote on Thu, 16 Nov 2023 19:56:20 +0000 :

>> "RCS will simply supplant SMS and MMS and exist separately from iMessage
>> when available."
>
> So apple to apple will continue to use imessage, doesn't affect or
> bother me.

I think Apple will implement it but in a way that you might not like.
Especially given they're being forced to adopt RCS standards by others.

What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
default messenger (just as Android only allows one default messenger)?

Will the user need to manually switch messengers to access RCS chats?
If that's the implementation, do you think that will be an improvement?

[Andrew]

Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 04:01:48 GMT :

>> The downside is to iMessage
>
> Articulate this supposed "downside to iMessage".

Apple is being forced to implement this RCS standard and Apple has already
said that they won't be integrating it into their home-grown messenger app.

As of now, there can only be one messenger app, so a potential downside is
Apple may need to open up their walled garden to multiple messenger apps.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Am 16.11.23 um 22:24 schrieb Carlos E. R.:

It is:

This is not Apple opening up iMessage to other platforms. Instead, it’s
the company adopting RCS separately from iMessage.

Apple also reiterates that iMessage is far more secure and
privacy-friendly than RCS. iMessage is end-to-end encrypted, and Apple
just took that up a notch with Advanced Data Protection for Messages in
iCloud. Meanwhile, Apple says that RCS does not currently support

encryption that is as strong as iMessage.

The issue with the blue bubbles? *LOL*

"I'll believe it when I see it*.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

[Jörg Lorenz]

Am 16.11.23 um 19:47 schrieb Wally J:

> Apple announces that RCS support is coming to iPhone next year
> https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/
>
> "Apple has announced today that it will adopt the RCS (Rich Communication
> Services) messaging standard. The feature will launch via a software update
> "later next year" and bring a wide range of iMessage-style features to
> messaging between iPhone and Android users.
>
> Apple's decision comes amid pressure from regulators and competitors like
> Google and Samsung. It also comes as RCS has continued to develop and
> become a more mature platform than it once was."

Idiot. Apple will implement RCS if at all in the manner and quality we
are used from Apple. Google plays no role in this picture:

Finally, Apple says it will work with the GSMA members on ways to
further improve the RCS protocol. This particularly includes improving
the security and encryption of RCS messages. Apple also told 9to5Mac
that it will not use any sort of proprietary end-to-end encryption on
top of RCS. Its focus is on improving the RCS standard itself.

For comparison’s sake, Google’s implementation of end-to-end encryption
is part of the Messages app on Android rather than the RCS spec itself.

[Andy Burns]

Andrew wrote:

> I think Apple will implement it but in a way that you might not like.
> Especially given they're being forced to adopt RCS standards by others.
>
> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default messenger)?

When I set Google Messages as my default messenger, it supports multiple
types of message (RCS/SMS/MMS ... I just happen to mostly ignore the latter)

> Will the user need to manually switch messengers to access RCS chats?
> If that's the implementation, do you think that will be an improvement?

I doubt they'll do that, at present an apple user doesn't have to choose
a different app in order to send an SMS to me, their phone realises I'm
not an imessage user, so it falls back to SMS. Next year I expect it
will have two levels of fallback, firstly to RCS, and secondly to SMS,
if someone else chooses to pay to send me an MMS I don't mind, but
they'll have no need to pay once apple has RCS.

[Andrew]

What some foresee is what's already been predicted in the news that Apple
will implement an unworkable solution that follows the letter of the law.

"Apple has a tendency to follow the letter of the law... while also kicking
and screaming about it. When similar EU legislation pushed it into offering
repair services, it was an expensive process that required users to lug
around bulky equipment. Apple was also reluctant to change the iPhone's
charging ports to the widespread USB-C standard, only doing so this year
once legislation forced its hand."
https://www.wired.com/story/apple-adding-support-for-rcs-could-kill-sms/

My suspicion is Apple will either create their own separate iRCS messenger,
or maybe open up the walled garden to a few compliant 3rd-party messenger
apps which follow Apple's strict "letter of the law" rules but which the
user has to also climb over glowing coals in order to switch to it (given
there can only be one default text messenger on any mobile device).

You have a more noble prediction of what Apple will implement in iOS 18
(since they said "later next year" & iOS 18 may likely be about then).

I hope you are closer to what Apple will implement under duress than I am.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2023-11-17 06:06, Andrew wrote:
> Andy Burns wrote on Thu, 16 Nov 2023 19:56:20 +0000 :
>
>>> "RCS will simply supplant SMS and MMS and exist separately from iMessage
>>> when available."
>>
>> So apple to apple will continue to use imessage, doesn't affect or
>> bother me.
>
> I think Apple will implement it but in a way that you might not like.
> Especially given they're being forced to adopt RCS standards by others.
>
> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default messenger)?

There is another item to consider: The EU will probably force all
message system to coordinate somehow and send/receive messages from/to
other message systems, somehow.

This includes the Apple imessage app. It will probably be forced to
interact with WhatsApp, for instance.

Will Apple restrict this to EU only?

>
> Will the user need to manually switch messengers to access RCS chats?
> If that's the implementation, do you think that will be an improvement?

See above.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Alan Browne]

You completely misunderstand what Apple said.

They said they would add compliance and function to be able to
interoperate with RCS. It is, to Apple, an extension of SMS/MMS - not
replacing iMessage in any way.

They also explicitly said they would not be opening up their messaging
(or other iCloud related components) to third parties beyond the 3rd
party support that has long been offered.

No downsides to the Apple eco-system, just as there is no walled garden.

--
“Markets can remain irrational longer than your can remain solvent.”
- John Maynard Keynes.

[Alan Browne]

RCS is still rooted in the phone system as the common communications
element whereas iMessage (and other iCloud services) are internet based
services.

So if you're on an iPhone or Mac (or other Apple device) and want to
send a text to an Android user, if the phone number isn't in someone's
iCloud account it is assumed to be non-Apple and the call is routed as
any SMS/MMS (and soon RCS) message: via the phone system - so a Mac
would use the user's iPhone to send the message.[1]

All this is transparent to the user as long as he has at least one phone
device and account that can do SMS/MMS/RCS. Not sure if Apple could
stop a 3rd party app from doing RCS - however that might not support the
case of a user doing the RCS from a separate device (a Mac).

Expect the Apple eco-system to continue to expand in capability and
features all over, including in iMessage while also adding RCS.

[1] Apple do this so well that: Once upon a time I left my iPhone at
work (30 km away). From my Mac I could still send SMS/MMS to Android
users. The Mac would delegate to my iPhone and conduct the exchange via
the internet. (Won't do voice calls, alas).

[Patrick]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 08:49:54 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
> RCS is still rooted in the phone system as the common communications
> element whereas iMessage (and other iCloud services) are internet based
> services.
>
> So if you're on an iPhone or Mac (or other Apple device) and want to
> send a text to an Android user, if the phone number isn't in someone's
> iCloud account it is assumed to be non-Apple and the call is routed as
> any SMS/MMS (and soon RCS) message: via the phone system - so a Mac
> would use the user's iPhone to send the message.[1]
>
> All this is transparent to the user as long as he has at least one phone
> device and account that can do SMS/MMS/RCS. Not sure if Apple could
> stop a 3rd party app from doing RCS - however that might not support the
> case of a user doing the RCS from a separate device (a Mac).
>
> Expect the Apple eco-system to continue to expand in capability and
> features all over, including in iMessage while also adding RCS.
>
> [1] Apple do this so well that: Once upon a time I left my iPhone at
> work (30 km away). From my Mac I could still send SMS/MMS to Android
> users. The Mac would delegate to my iPhone and conduct the exchange via
> the internet. (Won't do voice calls, alas).

You say this as if it's a big deal when any Internet service can do that.
It's not "Apple" doing it. Android does it too. So does Windows do it.
Even Linux does it. You're all excited about logging into a server farm.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 04:01:48 GMT :
>
>>> The downside is to iMessage
>>
>> Articulate this supposed "downside to iMessage".
>

> Apple has already said that they won't be integrating it into their
> home-grown messenger app.

I haven't seen any indication from Apple that RCS messages won't be
supported in the Apple Messages app. Go ahead and provide your source
for this, please.

Also, that's not a "downside to iMessage".

> As of now, there can only be one messenger app

That's simply not true. There are many messaging apps available for
iPhones, including WhatsApp, Signal, Facebook Messenger, and lots of
others. Whoever fed you this line of nonsense doesn't know what they are
talking about and shouldn't be trusted on the topic.🤣

> so a potential downside is Apple may need to open up their walled
> garden to multiple messenger apps.

There have been multiple alternative messaging apps available for iPhone
for decades. That's not a downside for iMessage.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote on Thu, 16 Nov 2023 19:56:20 +0000 :
>
>>> "RCS will simply supplant SMS and MMS and exist separately from
>>> iMessage when available."
>>
>> So apple to apple will continue to use imessage, doesn't affect or
>> bother me.
>
> I think Apple will implement it but in a way that you might not like.

You're saying that based on your gross ignorance on the subject.

> they're being forced to adopt RCS standards

You have no evidence this isn't being done willingly.

> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default messenger)?

That's exactly what is happening. Apple will be adding RCS support to
the default Apple Messages app, which is what most people in the United
States use anyway.

> Will the user need to manually switch messengers to access RCS chats?

Nppe. See above.

> If that's the implementation, do you think that will be an
> improvement?

People outside of the United States who already use alternative
messaging apps and services will continue to do so. Those people don't
typically use SMS anyway, so RCS won't be used by them. And for the few
that do use SMS, they are already used to those messages appearing in
Apple's Messages app. Also, when a message comes in it's displayed in a
notification on the screen regardless of what app is running at the
time, so tapping it opens whatever app it's from. This "concern" of
yours is a big nothing burger.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 07:12:44 +0000 :
>
>>> I think Apple will implement it but in a way that you might not
>>> like. Especially given they're being forced to adopt RCS standards
>>> by others.
>>>
>>> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
>>> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default
>>> messenger)?
>>
>> When I set Google Messages as my default messenger, it supports
>> multiple types of message (RCS/SMS/MMS ... I just happen to mostly
>> ignore the latter)
>>
>>> Will the user need to manually switch messengers to access RCS
>>> chats? If that's the implementation, do you think that will be an
>>> improvement?
>>
>> I doubt they'll do that, at present an apple user doesn't have to
>> choose a different app in order to send an SMS to me, their phone
>> realises I'm not an imessage user, so it falls back to SMS. Next
>> year I expect it will have two levels of fallback, firstly to RCS,
>> and secondly to SMS, if someone else chooses to pay to send me an MMS
>> I don't mind, but they'll have no need to pay once apple has RCS.
>
> What some foresee is what's already been predicted in the news that
> Apple will implement an unworkable solution that follows the letter of
> the law.

There is no RCS law. And Apple is on record saying RCS will be supported
in the Apple Messages app. You're chock full of shit.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Patrick <pat...@oleary.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 08:49:54 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
>> RCS is still rooted in the phone system as the common communications
>> element whereas iMessage (and other iCloud services) are internet
>> based services.
>>
>> So if you're on an iPhone or Mac (or other Apple device) and want to
>> send a text to an Android user, if the phone number isn't in
>> someone's iCloud account it is assumed to be non-Apple and the call
>> is routed as any SMS/MMS (and soon RCS) message: via the phone system
>> - so a Mac would use the user's iPhone to send the message.[1]
>>
>> All this is transparent to the user as long as he has at least one
>> phone device and account that can do SMS/MMS/RCS. Not sure if Apple
>> could stop a 3rd party app from doing RCS - however that might not
>> support the case of a user doing the RCS from a separate device (a
>> Mac).
>>
>> Expect the Apple eco-system to continue to expand in capability and
>> features all over, including in iMessage while also adding RCS.
>>
>> [1] Apple do this so well that: Once upon a time I left my iPhone at
>> work (30 km away). From my Mac I could still send SMS/MMS to Android
>> users. The Mac would delegate to my iPhone and conduct the exchange
>> via the internet. (Won't do voice calls, alas).
>
> You say this as if it's a big deal

No, *you* are on record "predicting" it won't work like this, which is
why he explained it.

> You're all excited about logging into a server farm.

No, *you* are all excited about Apple supporting RCS, and you're trying
your hardest to shit on it in some feeble way. It's not working. You've
made a fool of yourself with this nym, Arlen. Time to retire it. 😉

[Theo]

In comp.mobile.android Jörg Lorenz <hugy...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Idiot. Apple will implement RCS if at all in the manner and quality we
> are used from Apple. Google plays no role in this picture:
>
> Finally, Apple says it will work with the GSMA members on ways to
> further improve the RCS protocol. This particularly includes improving
> the security and encryption of RCS messages. Apple also told 9to5Mac
> that it will not use any sort of proprietary end-to-end encryption on
> top of RCS. Its focus is on improving the RCS standard itself.
>
> For comparison’s sake, Google’s implementation of end-to-end encryption
> is part of the Messages app on Android rather than the RCS spec itself.

The politics here is that the GSMA may not be in favour of E2EE, because
governments (and hence telcos) want their interception powers. Google have
gone it alone in terms of designing an E2EE extension for RCS (based on
Signal).

It may be that with Google and Apple both in favour of it, suddenly that
will apply enough pressure on the GSMA to ratify the E2EE spec, perhaps as
an 'option'. Then Apple and Google both happen to implement the 'optional'
E2EE. Or the governments may apply pressure on the GSMA not to do so.

We'll see.

Theo

[Andrew]

Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:36:59 GMT :

>> Apple has already said that they won't be integrating it into their
>> home-grown messenger app.
>
> I haven't seen any indication from Apple that RCS messages won't be
> supported in the Apple Messages app.

Did you read the opening post?
The OP's cite shows Apple said RCS would exist separate from iMessage.

> Go ahead and provide your source for this, please.

Maybe next time read the cites people provided before saying that Apple
didn't say that RCS will exist separate from iMessage.

Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023
Message-ID: <uj5r4n$2g4e$1...@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>

"RCS will simply supplant SMS and MMS and exist separately from iMessage
when available."

Later on the article reiterates "This is not Apple opening up iMessage to

other platforms. Instead, it's the company adopting RCS separately from
iMessage."

Let me give you a bit of advice. When you challenge someone to repeat what
was already cited you should at least click on the URLs already cited.

I shouldn't have to repeat to you what you didn't bother to read.

> Also, that's not a "downside to iMessage".

You didn't understand what I said since Apple said RCS would exist
separately from iMessage. The question is what does "exist" mean and what
does "separately" mean to Apple.

>> As of now, there can only be one messenger app
>
> That's simply not true.

This is my mistake for not being crystal clear because many people are like
you are in that they don't realize there can only be one default text
messenger on any phone, whether that's an iPhone or an Android phone.

> There are many messaging apps available for
> iPhones, including WhatsApp, Signal, Facebook Messenger, and lots of
> others. Whoever fed you this line of nonsense doesn't know what they are
> talking about and shouldn't be trusted on the topic.

See above. You need to learn how default text messaging works.

On the Android phones you can switch to change to a different default text
messenger but it takes a while for all the messages to switch over so it's
not a process people do more than once or twice in the device lifetime.

>> so a potential downside is Apple may need to open up their walled
>> garden to multiple messenger apps.
>
> There have been multiple alternative messaging apps available for iPhone
> for decades. That's not a downside for iMessage.

You don't understand the default text messenger concept probably because
you've never used any other default text messenger than the iMessage app.

Even on Android where you can change your one default text messenger to
another app, it takes a while to swap over all the existing messages so
people don't do it all that often in the lifetime of the device.

It's like walking on coals. You can do it. But it hurts.

Anyway, you seem to be bent on claiming Apple didn't say that RCS will
exist separate from iMessage so you can go on thinking that if you want.

Apple has been asked to clarify in every one of the twenty or thirty
articles I've read on the topic so we're not going to know for a while
because every article said Apple will not clarify any further than that.

We can only guess until Apple clarifies what "RCS exists" means to Apple.

[Andrew]

Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:43:37 GMT :

>> I think Apple will implement it but in a way that you might not like.
>
> You're saying that based on your gross ignorance on the subject.

You didn't read any of the cites and then you say that I am who is ignorant
that every cite says Apple said RCS will exist separately from iMessage?

>> they're being forced to adopt RCS standards
>
> You have no evidence this isn't being done willingly.

You have to be the only person in the universe who would say such a thing.

Everyone but you knows what Tim Cook's response was "buy your mother an
iPhone" and everyone but you is aware Apple had no intention of supporting
RCS until they saw they were going to be forced against their will.

>> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
>> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default messenger)?
>
> That's exactly what is happening. Apple will be adding RCS support to
> the default Apple Messages app, which is what most people in the United
> States use anyway.

You seem to know so much about the implementation that nobody else but
Apple knows, and yet you don't know what Apple said in all the cites.

>> Will the user need to manually switch messengers to access RCS chats?
>
> Nppe. See above.

You haven't read a single cite and yet you know all about it. Amazing.

>> If that's the implementation, do you think that will be an
>> improvement?
>
> People outside of the United States who already use alternative
> messaging apps and services will continue to do so. Those people don't
> typically use SMS anyway, so RCS won't be used by them. And for the few
> that do use SMS, they are already used to those messages appearing in
> Apple's Messages app. Also, when a message comes in it's displayed in a
> notification on the screen regardless of what app is running at the
> time, so tapping it opens whatever app it's from. This "concern" of
> yours is a big nothing burger.

You don't understand anything about text messaging if you think it's the
same thing as WhatsApp and yet you claim to know everything about Apple's
implementation, even as all the cites said Apple won't clarify what they
mean by RCS existing separately from iMessages.

Here's just one take on what "RCS existing separately from iMessage" means.
"Apple could have simply made iMessage compatible with RCS, which would
have ended this drama once and for all. But instead, RCS will work
alongside SMS and MMS in the iPhone's Messages app as an option for users
who text with non-iPhone users."
https://www.thurrott.com/mobile/293199/hell-freezes-over-apple-to-support-rcs-on-iphone

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2023-11-17 17:36, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 04:01:48 GMT :

...

>> As of now, there can only be one messenger app
>
> That's simply not true. There are many messaging apps available for
> iPhones, including WhatsApp, Signal, Facebook Messenger, and lots of
> others. Whoever fed you this line of nonsense doesn't know what they are
> talking about and shouldn't be trusted on the topic.🤣

In this context, "messenger app" is the app that does SMS/MMS.

...

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Andrew]

Carlos E. R. wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 13:43:53 +0100 :

>> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
>> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default messenger)?
>
> There is another item to consider: The EU will probably force all
> message system to coordinate somehow and send/receive messages from/to
> other message systems, somehow.

Thank you for bringing up that additional item to consider which is that
this RCS letter of the law may affect not only Apple but Meta & others too.

> This includes the Apple imessage app. It will probably be forced to
> interact with WhatsApp, for instance.

Based on the twenty or thirty articles I've read on this, it seems Apple
may have decided not to explain yet how it will "interact" with other
messengers - nor even how it will interact with iMessage other than every
cite saying that Apple said RCS will "exist separately" from iMessage.

You can be sure Apple executives know what "exists separately" means
(even if the rest of us will just have to wait until iOS 18 to find out).

> Will Apple restrict this to EU only?

All we know is Apple said in every article I could find that RCS will
"exist separately" from iMessage. They didn't say anything about the EU.

What does it mean to "exist separately" & still follow the EU guidelines?

[Andrew]

Carlos E. R. wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 18:51:14 +0100 :

> In this context, "messenger app" is the app that does SMS/MMS.

Thank you for helping him better understand the concept of a default text
messenger, because multiple times he equated the concept with the likes of
WhatsApp (as did some of the others) which means they don't understand
the concept (probably because they've only used one text messenger).

On Android, you can switch the default text messenger but it's not like
switching the default browser is in that all the text messages and group
chats and scheduled messages and pinned conversations and private
conversations (the list of options is a long one) has to be transferred
over from the old default text messenger to the new default text messenger.

It's like walking over glowing coals. You can do it. But a misstep hurts.
If you turn back at the end, you have to walk over those same coals again.

I've done it only a few times in many years of owning Android phones.
Usually it's easiest done at the very beginning when you have a new phone.

I think those who are repeatedly but erroneously equating the default text
messenger with any old Internet messaging app don't understand the concept.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2023-11-17 19:01, Andrew wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 13:43:53 +0100 :
>
>>> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
>>> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default messenger)?
>>
>> There is another item to consider: The EU will probably force all
>> message system to coordinate somehow and send/receive messages from/to
>> other message systems, somehow.
>
> Thank you for bringing up that additional item to consider which is that
> this RCS letter of the law may affect not only Apple but Meta & others too.
>
>> This includes the Apple imessage app. It will probably be forced to
>> interact with WhatsApp, for instance.
>
> Based on the twenty or thirty articles I've read on this, it seems Apple
> may have decided not to explain yet how it will "interact" with other
> messengers - nor even how it will interact with iMessage other than every
> cite saying that Apple said RCS will "exist separately" from iMessage.
>
> You can be sure Apple executives know what "exists separately" means
> (even if the rest of us will just have to wait until iOS 18 to find out).

Maybe they will wait to see what the EU will say, and then decide what
to actually do. That way thy avoid saying something and then having to
double back depending on what the EU says. It is what I would do, but
hey, I do not work for Apple :-)

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Alan Browne]

I'm not making a big deal out of it, I'm bringing up the features and
differences in the systems to answer Andrew's question - which you
snipped out.

But still: you are ignoring how Apple's iCloud services are implemented
and indeed it's because of its implementation that it does so many
things seamlessly that you can't get across Android except in limited
cases and examples.

[Alan Browne]

On 2023-11-17 12:10, Andrew wrote:
> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:36:59 GMT :
>
>>> Apple has already said that they won't be integrating it into their
>>> home-grown messenger app.
>>
>> I haven't seen any indication from Apple that RCS messages won't be
>> supported in the Apple Messages app.
>
> Did you read the opening post?
> The OP's cite shows Apple said RCS would exist separate from iMessage.

All that matters is what Apple have stated, which from what I've seen
is: """“This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the
best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users.” """

This is the usual careful messaging from Apple and I decode it to mean
RCS will be integrated into the iMessage _app_ while not employing the
iMessage messaging system. ie: it uses the "phone" system - just as it
uses SMS/MMS over the phone system for RCS.

And (because: Apple), when a non phone device sends (or receives) an RCS
it will be via the iPhone (or iPads with cell transceivers).

[Patrick]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 14:19:39 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
> But still: you are ignoring how Apple's iCloud services are implemented
> and indeed it's because of its implementation that it does so many
> things seamlessly that you can't get across Android except in limited
> cases and examples.

Big deal.
The walled garden is an Internet server you are logged into all the time.

No matter who makes your operating system (Apple, Google or Microsoft) when
you log into the same Internet server from two separate devices, one in
each hand, then you can do things between those two different devices.

You don't understand that what you're doing isn't actually going from one
device in your left hand to the other device that is in your right hand.

Instead it's going from the one device in your left hand to the Internet
server and then from that Internet server back to the other device.

Nothing in what you've said shows that you understand that is what it is.
Any Internet server can do that if you're willing to always be logged in.

[Alan Browne]

With E2EE it doesn't matter what a body in the middle wants you to do.
The only thing they can attempt to do is block encrypted traffic. And
learn (again) that such is not practical in the real world absent a
dictatorship.

[Alan Browne]

On 2023-11-17 14:32, Patrick wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 14:19:39 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
>> But still: you are ignoring how Apple's iCloud services are
>> implemented and indeed it's because of its implementation that it does
>> so many things seamlessly that you can't get across Android except in
>> limited cases and examples.
>
> Big deal.
> The walled garden is an Internet server you are logged into all the time.
>
> No matter who makes your operating system (Apple, Google or Microsoft)
> when you log into the same Internet server from two separate devices,
> one in each hand, then you can do things between those two different
> devices.
>
> You don't understand that what you're doing isn't actually going from
> one device in your left hand to the other device that is in your right
> hand.

In some cases it is exactly that, however. No internet involved at all
- therefore no connection to the iCloud server.

> Instead it's going from the one device in your left hand to the Internet
> server and then from that Internet server back to the other device.

Not at all. Things like handoff (and many more) function in the absence
of the internet or cell connection. The devices had to have been logged
into iCloud to validate ownership of the devices, but once there they
can independently "talk to each other" as long as they belong to the
same account.

> Nothing in what you've said shows that you understand that is what it is.
> Any Internet server can do that if you're willing to always be logged in.

Again you misconstrue the purpose of the login. While it is for the
server purpose as well it is also to assure that one person's devices
are authorized to talk to one another even if neither is currently
capable of talking to the iCloud servers.

[Andrew]

Alan Browne wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 14:29:00 -0500 :

>> The OP's cite shows Apple said RCS would exist separate from iMessage.
>
> All that matters is what Apple have stated, which from what I've seen
> is: """´This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the
> best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users.¡ """
>
> This is the usual careful messaging from Apple and I decode it to mean
> RCS will be integrated into the iMessage _app_ while not employing the
> iMessage messaging system. ie: it uses the "phone" system - just as it
> uses SMS/MMS over the phone system for RCS.
>
> And (because: Apple), when a non phone device sends (or receives) an RCS
> it will be via the iPhone (or iPads with cell transceivers).

I will agree with you that this is extremely careful wording which has been
vetted likely by dozens of high-level executives, lawyers & marketing.

Apple is very good at implying things that they know aren't true and Apple
is getting used to being forced to comply with consumer friendly EU laws.

Apple has supplied every media outlet they could with those carefully
vetted words & no media outlet says they have more information than that.

We all will have to wait to see what it means when Apple says that RCS will
"exist separately" from the iMessage app & still meet consumer expectation.

[Alan Browne]

You're looking for sinister where Apple are just making sure they and
their product clients have exclusive use of Apple lanes.

Why I state that it most likely means that as SMS/MMS are handled by
Message(app) on Apple devices currently, so will RCS - that is via the
phone network and not enjoy the "privilege" of using the iMessage
messaging system or other iCloud components.

Further (and they said such very plainly) they will not open iMessage to
3rd parties (beyond the existing and evolving API's).

So Apple reserve their lane and access the other lanes at will.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:

> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:36:59 GMT :
>
>>> Apple has already said that they won't be integrating it into their
>>> home-grown messenger app.
>>
>> I haven't seen any indication from Apple that RCS messages won't be
>> supported in the Apple Messages app.
>
> Did you read the opening post?

I read the entire article. Did *you* read it? Because Apple absolutely
did not say it won't be integrated in the Apple Messages app. You seem
to not know the difference between iMessage, the messaging service, and
Messages, the messaging app. Those are two different things. With that
in mind, try reading what Apple said in their statement again, and maybe
you'll retract your silly statement that "Apple said they won't be
integrating RCS into their home-grown messaging app". I say maybe,
because I fully expect you to instead double down on the dumb like a
troll. But by all means, do surprise me.

> The OP's cite shows Apple said RCS would exist separate from iMessage.
>
>> Go ahead and provide your source for this, please.
>
> Maybe next time read the cites people provided before saying that Apple
> didn't say that RCS will exist separate from iMessage.

I read it more carefully and understood it better than you did, clearly.
Your confusion regarding the difference between Apple's iMessage service
and the Messages app is what drove this conversation.

> Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023
> Message-ID: <uj5r4n$2g4e$1...@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
>
> "RCS will simply supplant SMS and MMS and exist separately from iMessage
> when available."

Great! Now do the Messages app (which isn't called iMessage) and show
where Apple said RCS won't be in the Message app. I'll wait.

> Later on the article reiterates "This is not Apple opening up iMessage to
> other platforms. Instead, it's the company adopting RCS separately from
> iMessage."

Yes, and that will be done in the Apple Messages app.

> Let me give you a bit of advice. When you challenge someone to repeat what
> was already cited you should at least click on the URLs already cited.

Ironic. You clearly didn't understand what you read. Your exact words:

"Apple has already said that they won't be integrating it into their

home-grown messenger app." Wrong.

> I shouldn't have to repeat to you what you didn't bother to read.

I shouldn't have to dumb down something that everyone but you
comprehends, but here we are.

>> Also, that's not a "downside to iMessage".
>
> You didn't understand what I said

I understood perfectly. "Apple has already said that they won't be
integrating it into their home-grown messenger app" can only mean one
thing, and it's incorrect, because Apple absolutely did not say that.

> Apple said RCS would exist separately from iMessage. The question is
> what does "exist" mean and what does "separately" mean to Apple.

It clearly means that like SMS, RCS will not use the iMessage service,
but it will be available in the Apple Messages app just the same.

>>> As of now, there can only be one messenger app

Nonsense. There are many messaging apps available for iOS.

>> That's simply not true.
>
> This is my mistake for not being crystal clear because many people are like
> you are in that they don't realize there can only be one default text
> messenger on any phone, whether that's an iPhone or an Android phone.

Big deal. There will continue to be one default messaging app: Apple's
Messages app. And it will support SMS/RCS and iMessage.

>> There are many messaging apps available for iPhones, including
>> WhatsApp, Signal, Facebook Messenger, and lots of others. Whoever fed
>> you this line of nonsense doesn't know what they are talking about
>> and shouldn't be trusted on the topic.
>
> See above. You need to learn how default text messaging works.

Bitch, please. I know exactly how default text messaging works. SMS
messages come into the Apple Messages app. The only thing changing her
is that RCS messages will also be there.

>>> so a potential downside is Apple may need to open up their walled
>>> garden to multiple messenger apps.
>>
>> There have been multiple alternative messaging apps available for iPhone
>> for decades. That's not a downside for iMessage.
>
> You don't understand the default text messenger concept

The fact that you think that's some complicated concept is telling. It's
not. Children understand the concept of default apps. What you are
missing is iMessage is not the Messages app - two different things.

> probably because you've never used any other default text messenger
> than the iMessage app.

Wrong. I've used all of the above mainstream operating systems, buddy
boy. And again, Apple did not say RCS wouldn't be supported in the
default Messages app. You completely confused iMessage with Messages,
and they are two different things. You've made a fool of yourself.

> Even on Android where you can change your one default text messenger to
> another app, it takes a while to swap over all the existing messages so
> people don't do it all that often in the lifetime of the device.
>
> It's like walking on coals. You can do it. But it hurts.

Irrelevant. Apple did not say RCS won't be supported in the Messages
app, so there's no need to switch to another app for RCS messages.
That's how SMS message work today, and there is no indication it will be
different for RCS.

> Anyway, you seem to be bent on claiming Apple didn't say that RCS will
> exist separate from iMessage so you can go on thinking that if you want.

Nope, what I am claiming is that Apple didn't say RCS won't be supported
in the default messaging app. That's something you said, and it's wrong.

> We can only guess until Apple clarifies what "RCS exists" means to Apple.

Keep wondering if you must.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
> On 2023-11-17 12:10, Andrew wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:36:59 GMT :
>>
>>>> Apple has already said that they won't be integrating it into their
>>>> home-grown messenger app.
>>>
>>> I haven't seen any indication from Apple that RCS messages won't be
>>> supported in the Apple Messages app.
>>
>> Did you read the opening post?
>> The OP's cite shows Apple said RCS would exist separate from iMessage.
>
> All that matters is what Apple have stated, which from what I've seen
> is: """“This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the
> best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users.” """
>
> This is the usual careful messaging from Apple and I decode it to mean
> RCS will be integrated into the iMessage _app_

The app is not called "iMessage" - never has been. Apple was referring
to the iMessage service - not an app.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:

> Alan Browne wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 14:29:00 -0500 :
>
>>> The OP's cite shows Apple said RCS would exist separate from iMessage.
>>
>> All that matters is what Apple have stated, which from what I've seen
>> is: """´This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the
>> best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users.¡ """
>>
>> This is the usual careful messaging from Apple and I decode it to mean
>> RCS will be integrated into the iMessage _app_ while not employing the
>> iMessage messaging system. ie: it uses the "phone" system - just as it
>> uses SMS/MMS over the phone system for RCS.
>>
>> And (because: Apple), when a non phone device sends (or receives) an RCS
>> it will be via the iPhone (or iPads with cell transceivers).
>
> I will agree with you that this is extremely careful wording which has been
> vetted likely by dozens of high-level executives, lawyers & marketing.
>
> Apple is very good at implying things that they know aren't true

You are such an idiot.

iMessage is not an app. It's a service.

The app isn't called iMessage. Never has been.

[sms]

On 11/16/2023 11:39 AM, Andrew wrote:

<snip>

> What do those cautionary warnings from Apple tell you about implementation?

Nothing.

Obviously they did extensive market research and decided that offering
RCS would not negatively affect iPhone sales..

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:

> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:43:37 GMT :
>
>>> I think Apple will implement it but in a way that you might not
>>> like.
>>
>> You're saying that based on your gross ignorance on the subject.
>
> You didn't read any of the cites and then you say that I am who is
> ignorant that every cite says Apple said RCS will exist separately
> from iMessage?

You don't understand the difference between iMessage, the service, and
Messages, the app?

>>> they're being forced to adopt RCS standards
>>
>> You have no evidence this isn't being done willingly.
>
> You have to be the only person in the universe who would say such a
> thing.

Nope. Apple moved from Lightning to USB-C on most of its products
gradually over the span of a few years and moved the iPhone to it before
any law came into effect, all while idiots claimed "Apple was
forced!1!!", and this is exactly the same.

> Apple had no intention of supporting RCS until

Pretend all you want, but you don't know Apple's intentions.

>>> What if Apple allows 3rd-party RCS messaging apps but still only one
>>> default messenger (just as Android only allows one default
>>> messenger)?
>>
>> That's exactly what is happening. Apple will be adding RCS support to
>> the default Apple Messages app, which is what most people in the
>> United States use anyway.
>
> You seem to know so much about the implementation that nobody else but
> Apple knows, and yet you don't know what Apple said in all the cites.

Wrong. Unlike you, I know the difference between iMessage and Messages.

>>> Will the user need to manually switch messengers to access RCS
>>> chats?
>>
>> Nppe. See above.
>
> You haven't read a single cite and yet you know all about it. Amazing.

You haven't understood a single site, yet you claim to know for sure
Apple won't be supporting RCS in the default messaging app. Amazing.

>>> If that's the implementation, do you think that will be an
>>> improvement?
>>
>> People outside of the United States who already use alternative
>> messaging apps and services will continue to do so. Those people
>> don't typically use SMS anyway, so RCS won't be used by them. And for
>> the few that do use SMS, they are already used to those messages
>> appearing in Apple's Messages app. Also, when a message comes in it's
>> displayed in a notification on the screen regardless of what app is
>> running at the time, so tapping it opens whatever app it's from. This
>> "concern" of yours is a big nothing burger.
>
> You don't understand anything about text messaging

Projection. You don't understand the difference between iMessage and
Messages.

> you claim to know everything about Apple's implementation

I made *one* claim: that Apple did *not* say RCS won't be supported in
the default messaging app. And I am 100% correct on that.

> Apple won't clarify what they mean by RCS existing separately from
> iMessages.

Because it's obvious to anyone who knows the difference between iMessage
and Messages. SMS exists separately from iMessage but is supported by
the Messages app - the same will apply to RCS, obviously. You just don't
get it, because: troll.

> "Apple could have simply made iMessage compatible with RCS, which
> would have ended this drama once and for all. But instead, RCS will
> work alongside SMS and MMS in the iPhone's Messages app as an option
> for users who text with non-iPhone users."

But you said Apple stated that RCS won't be supported by the default
messaging app. Wrong.

[Jolly Roger]

Yes, and? There is *no* indication RCS won't be supported in the default
Apple Messages app.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2023-11-18 00:47, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:
>> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:36:59 GMT :


>>>> As of now, there can only be one messenger app
>
> Nonsense. There are many messaging apps available for iOS.

All installed simultaneously, all handling SMS/MMS?

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <and...@spam.net> wrote:

> Carlos E. R. wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 18:51:14 +0100 :
>
>> In this context, "messenger app" is the app that does SMS/MMS.
>
> Thank you for helping him better understand the concept of a default
> text messenger, because multiple times he equated the concept with the
> likes of WhatsApp

It's a matter of record that you didn't add the word "default" until
*after* people responded to your bullshit claim that "there can be only
one messaging app". And it doesn't matter anyway, since there is *zero*
evidence that Apple's default messaging app won't support RCS. You got
all confused thinking iMessage is an app when it's not. Someone should
help *you* learn the difference between an app and a service.

[Patrick]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 15:06:41 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
>> Nothing in what you've said shows that you understand that is what it is.
>> Any Internet server can do that if you're willing to always be logged in.
>
> Again you misconstrue the purpose of the login. While it is for the
> server purpose as well it is also to assure that one person's devices
> are authorized to talk to one another even if neither is currently
> capable of talking to the iCloud servers.

Do you realize Android devices "securely talk to" a Windows PC WITHOUT
needing the account that you need for Apple, eg using adb over Wi-Fi.

Why are you putting up with the requirement for an account that is not
controlled by you but by Apple when you could do it all without that?

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, Carlos E. R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

The only reason Arlen is mentioning this in the first place is because
he read that Apple won't be supporting RCS in iMessage and stupidly
thought that meant Apple wouldn't be supporting RCS in the default
Messages app.

Say some more.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-17, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 11/16/2023 11:39 AM, Andrew wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> What do those cautionary warnings from Apple tell you about
>> implementation?
>
> Nothing.
>
> Obviously they did extensive market research and decided that offering
> RCS would not negatively affect iPhone sales..

Of course it won't - just like supporting SMS/MMS didn't negatively
affect sales.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2023-11-18, Patrick <pat...@oleary.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 15:06:41 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>
>>> Nothing in what you've said shows that you understand that is what
>>> it is. Any Internet server can do that if you're willing to always
>>> be logged in.
>>
>> Again you misconstrue the purpose of the login. While it is for the
>> server purpose as well it is also to assure that one person's
>> devices are authorized to talk to one another even if neither is
>> currently capable of talking to the iCloud servers.
>
> Do you realize Android devices "securely talk to" a Windows PC WITHOUT
> needing the account that you need for Apple

Nope. AirDrop lets you transfer anything you want from an iPhone to a
Mac without any Wifi connection, without any internet connection, and
without any Apple server connection.

You'd know this if you weren't a lazy Apple-hating troll.

[Andy Burns]

Jolly Roger wrote:

> There is no indication RCS won't be supported in the default
> Apple Messages app.

I'm going to ignore the rest of this thread now, see you all next year
when we actually find out ...

[Andrew]

Alan Browne wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 18:22:46 -0500 :

> You're looking for sinister where Apple are just making sure they and
> their product clients have exclusive use of Apple lanes.
>
> Why I state that it most likely means that as SMS/MMS are handled by
> Message(app) on Apple devices currently, so will RCS - that is via the
> phone network and not enjoy the "privilege" of using the iMessage
> messaging system or other iCloud components.
>
> Further (and they said such very plainly) they will not open iMessage to
> 3rd parties (beyond the existing and evolving API's).
>
> So Apple reserve their lane and access the other lanes at will.

Both your arguments make more sense to me now that I've looked back at
every word Apple carefully said, so I will agree for now with you (pending
finding out later next year what Apple releases in the iOS 18 beta).

The only part I object to is you think Apple is doing this out of their
desire to help their customer but Tim Cook has said many times he'd never
do it so I have to believe Apple is doing this only because they have to.

I think you've convinced me though that there will be two channels of
sorts, one with iMessage through Apple servers and the other through the
carrier (which is probably how it always should have been done).

You understood that inherently from the start better than I did. Thanks.

And I agree they said "very plainly" that they won't open up their
ecosystem to text-messaging competition so you're right about that too.

Thanks for helping me better understand.

[Alan Browne]

On 2023-11-17 18:48, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2023-11-17, Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com> wrote:
>> On 2023-11-17 12:10, Andrew wrote:
>>> Jolly Roger wrote on 17 Nov 2023 16:36:59 GMT :
>>>
>>>>> Apple has already said that they won't be integrating it into their
>>>>> home-grown messenger app.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't seen any indication from Apple that RCS messages won't be
>>>> supported in the Apple Messages app.
>>>
>>> Did you read the opening post?
>>> The OP's cite shows Apple said RCS would exist separate from iMessage.
>>
>> All that matters is what Apple have stated, which from what I've seen
>> is: """“This will work alongside iMessage, which will continue to be the
>> best and most secure messaging experience for Apple users.” """
>>
>> This is the usual careful messaging from Apple and I decode it to mean
>> RCS will be integrated into the iMessage _app_
>
> The app is not called "iMessage" - never has been. Apple was referring
> to the iMessage service - not an app.

True - I slipped up there.

[Alan Browne]

The underpinnings of Apple's security model are all contained by a
single vendor for the hardware, software, firmware, servers, with iron
clad encryption all around. This is both a blessing and a necessity as
one can "authorize" access to device A from device B in a variety of
scenarios (lost device password for example).

And the account is controlled by me. I can log out of it on all devices
with a single action on any (or almost any) device. Can also delete my
Apple ID/Account (with a little more effort).

OTOH, if I own a PC under Windows + PC under Linux + phone under Android
+ tablet under Android ... getting all to play together seamlessly - and
maintain the seamlessness over time is neither obvious, easy or guaranteed.

[Alan Browne]

On 2023-11-18 04:58, Andrew wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote on Fri, 17 Nov 2023 18:22:46 -0500 :
>
>> You're looking for sinister where Apple are just making sure they and
>> their product clients have exclusive use of Apple lanes.
>>
>> Why I state that it most likely means that as SMS/MMS are handled by
>> Message(app) on Apple devices currently, so will RCS - that is via the
>> phone network and not enjoy the "privilege" of using the iMessage
>> messaging system or other iCloud components.
>>
>> Further (and they said such very plainly) they will not open iMessage to
>> 3rd parties (beyond the existing and evolving API's).
>>
>> So Apple reserve their lane and access the other lanes at will.
>
> Both your arguments make more sense to me now that I've looked back at
> every word Apple carefully said, so I will agree for now with you (pending
> finding out later next year what Apple releases in the iOS 18 beta).
>
> The only part I object to is you think Apple is doing this out of their
> desire to help their customer but Tim Cook has said many times he'd never
> do it so I have to believe Apple is doing this only because they have to.

Where did he say that? (I'm too lazy to search).

But. Even if he did say that, he is a fiercely intelligent individual
and as such can change his mind - and only after making sure Apple's
best interests are covered. (This includes: the company, customers and
shareholders).

> I think you've convinced me though that there will be two channels of
> sorts, one with iMessage through Apple servers and the other through the
> carrier (which is probably how it always should have been done).
>
> You understood that inherently from the start better than I did. Thanks.
>
> And I agree they said "very plainly" that they won't open up their
> ecosystem to text-messaging competition so you're right about that too.
>
> Thanks for helping me better understand.

You're very welcome.

[Theo]

Exactly, and that's a good reason why governments (and potentially telcos in
the GSMA under pressure from governments) don't want E2EE in RCS. That may
make standardising E2EE in RCS a political matter, rather than a technical
one.

Telcos are under strong government regulation, and in many countries the
telcos have strong government connections. That means they may not see E2EE
a benefit the way Apple and Google do. They know that standardising E2EE in
RCS would encourage its proliferation, and maybe they don't want that.

Theo