I find it funny how transparent everyone’s pro apple bias is in threads like this. I’m proud to say fuck apple every chance I get because they say fuck users every chance they get. And yes I know because I have them probably $8000 over the course of 10 years or so. I was all in until the iPhone came out and they returned to the “proprietary is the business model” Apple roots.
They don’t even try to embrace standards except in cases where it makes them money. Their entire mo is to erase the existence of standards if a buck can be made off of it. Apple being such anti consumer monopolistic pieces of shit being uncommonly recognized is pathetic and sad, and the perfect example of corporations being a negative influence on society.
There probably are people who died because they couldn’t charge their phone and couldn’t call an ambulance. And no I don’t care about Apple’s security theater or other talking points. All of it is bullshit
RCS is a proprietary standard, but it is not owned or controlled by Google. They just happen to be one of the first major corporations to embrace and implement the standard.
Google is the only one that allows “End to end” encryption.
Allowing and implementing are not the same things. They implemented encryption in their RCS services. They don’t allow everyone to use their service, but they built and own it so that’s their right, I guess.
And practically speaking google controls the standard, they have over 800 million users out of the total possible 1.2 billion.
Can you elaborate here? How do they control the standard? Specifically, I’m not asking about their implementation of RCS, because of course they control that, but their implementation is not the same thing as the standard itself.
It might not be a monopolistic standard in theory but it is in practice
It’s widely understood that it’s difficult to implement a competent web browser. That’s why there are only a handful of browser choices. This doesn’t make HTTP a monopolistic protocol.
Saying the RCS standard is a monopolistic standard makes zero sense to me, even in practice. We are quite literally discussing another vendor entering the market. If you run a telecom and want to implement RCS, you are able to do so. If you are a phone manufacturer you are free to implement RCS in your software stack. None of this is easy, but it’s possible and so this isn’t a monopoly situation as far as I understand it. Google wanted to compete with iMessage so they built a competitor on a proprietary but open global standard, the standard which is meant to replace SMS and MMS messaging.
A bunch of carriers implemented it originally, but their implementations were all horribly broken, with messages between carriers usually not working, the carrier-installed messaging apps sucking, etc. Eventually they all dropped it and Google picked up the ashes and “fixed it” by making their server the only one instead of having per-carrier servers like SMS/MMS.
I find it funny how transparent everyone’s pro apple bias is in threads like this. I’m proud to say fuck apple every chance I get because they say fuck users every chance they get. And yes I know because I have them probably $8000 over the course of 10 years or so. I was all in until the iPhone came out and they returned to the “proprietary is the business model” Apple roots.
They don’t even try to embrace standards except in cases where it makes them money. Their entire mo is to erase the existence of standards if a buck can be made off of it. Apple being such anti consumer monopolistic pieces of shit being uncommonly recognized is pathetic and sad, and the perfect example of corporations being a negative influence on society.
There probably are people who died because they couldn’t charge their phone and couldn’t call an ambulance. And no I don’t care about Apple’s security theater or other talking points. All of it is bullshit
deleted by creator
RCS is a proprietary standard, but it is not owned or controlled by Google. They just happen to be one of the first major corporations to embrace and implement the standard.
deleted by creator
Allowing and implementing are not the same things. They implemented encryption in their RCS services. They don’t allow everyone to use their service, but they built and own it so that’s their right, I guess.
Can you elaborate here? How do they control the standard? Specifically, I’m not asking about their implementation of RCS, because of course they control that, but their implementation is not the same thing as the standard itself.
It’s widely understood that it’s difficult to implement a competent web browser. That’s why there are only a handful of browser choices. This doesn’t make HTTP a monopolistic protocol.
Saying the RCS standard is a monopolistic standard makes zero sense to me, even in practice. We are quite literally discussing another vendor entering the market. If you run a telecom and want to implement RCS, you are able to do so. If you are a phone manufacturer you are free to implement RCS in your software stack. None of this is easy, but it’s possible and so this isn’t a monopoly situation as far as I understand it. Google wanted to compete with iMessage so they built a competitor on a proprietary but open global standard, the standard which is meant to replace SMS and MMS messaging.
A bunch of carriers implemented it originally, but their implementations were all horribly broken, with messages between carriers usually not working, the carrier-installed messaging apps sucking, etc. Eventually they all dropped it and Google picked up the ashes and “fixed it” by making their server the only one instead of having per-carrier servers like SMS/MMS.
Yeah, this really all feels like the carriers have dropped the ball.