Carrier Is a “better SMS/MMS” even needed?

[Unregistered 4U]

I read the threads regarding RCS and Google’s truly hilarious efforts to put “pressure” on Apple. And, they bring up a question that’s bigger than Google that I was wondering about. How much NEED is there for an upgrade for SMS/MMS? Outside the US, I’d imagine the only usage of SMS at a wide scale is businesses that need to send the lowest common denominator information to customers. Information that, by its nature, doesn’t NEED to be encrypted. Or read receipted. Or text notificationed. And, this is primarily because non-business users who have the option (they’re not chatting with someone with a dumb phone) don’t want to pay the SMS fees. As a result, they’re already using something else (Like WhatsApp).

The US is different in that using SMS versus something else is largely NOT a financial choice (as they’re both free for most). SMS is embraced as a go-between for iOS and Android, not because it’s the best option, it’s not (doesn’t provide read receipts, doesn’t show ‘user typing’, etc.) it’s because it’s free and anyone can receive it. My feeling is that if SMS was still a pay by use cost for most customers in the US, it’s very likely that US customers would also have already moved to WhatsApp (or some other solution) just like most of the world. That would leave the US SMS usage being relegated to the same kind of business and government uses which, generally wouldn’t require encryption, read receipts, typing notifications, etc.

When I think of it this way, it’s pretty clear why carriers haven’t done (and likely won’t do) anything to bring any improvements to SMS/MMS. They’re not going to make a capital investment (and their shareholders would likely frown on a capital investment) without defining what the return would be on that investment. And, there wouldn’t be very much return here at all because those using the system for low priority messaging wouldn’t pay to use the upgraded features RCS provides over SMS/MMS and regular customers have already made their preferences clear… In the US, anything other than free is very likely a non-starter and outside the US, folks would continue to use WhatsApp (or WhatEverElse).

What am I leaving out here? Is there a business justification that, in the future, MIGHT bring all the carriers together or are they all focused on 5G/6G, speed and coverage improvements and are quite done with SMS/MMS where it currently stands?

For those US users currently texting for free and using multiple apps. If the US carriers got together and created a way for you to have SMS/MMS as a fallback to -some cross platform encrypted solution that works alongside SMS/MMS- and let’s go WAY out and say that they made a way for WhatsApp and Telegram to get in on it… All your messages in one place. Would having all your messages in one application be worth, say, 7 cents per message?

Hi Mom -7 cents
Hey -7 cents
How are you doing? -7 cents
I -7 cents
Sorry, I meant to say I’x dfoihng inre -7 cents
Darn it! -7 cents
I meant to say I’m doing fine -7 cents
Stupid phone. How are you? -7 cents

For this kind of a haul, I’d bet the carriers would be really happy to get working on that tomorrow, especially if, in their new plans, messages that CAN go over RCS MUST go over RCS (and be charged) . I don’t think there’s enough customers that would be willing to pay for it, though (and that’s even assuming that they could have a magical API that would let WhatsApp and others chat.) Without that, if you’re only talking phone to phone so you’d still need those other apps to talk on those, would this phone to phone messaging WITH the read receipts, etc. , be worth something in the range of 7 cents per message to you? If not, then that’s why SMS/MMS wi

 

[velocityg4]

I'm not sure about my phrasing. I'd like my messages to be treated more like data than temporary messages. What I mean is easily syncing between my devices. With a standard and open source protocol.

Basically, I want to be able to use a server of my choice. If overly worried about privacy. Where I can keep all my devices in sync.

I don't want to have to worry about using Apple or Google products. I want to be able to have them sync between any platform (Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, &c). Be able to move them to another server. Have them update to read status when viewed on one device to all others.

Apple's Messages is sort of there. At least the messages sync, for the most part. But read status doesn't sync. You're also limited to the Messages app and whatever platform it supports. Google has a browser version of this for their messenger. It's not quite as good. But I want better syncing and dropping the proprietary part.

Make it more like how IMAP mail behaves. Where everything syncs and I can use a wide range of clients. Just register my number with the server and messages get pushed to it from my phone provider. Then from the server to any device I login to it with.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I'm not sure about my phrasing. I'd like my messages to be treated more like data than temporary messages. What I mean is easily syncing between my devices. With a standard and open source protocol.

Basically, I want to be able to use a server of my choice. If overly worried about privacy. Where I can keep all my devices in sync.

I don't want to have to worry about using Apple or Google products. I want to be able to have them sync between any platform (Windows, Mac, iOS, Android, Linux, &c). Be able to move them to another server. Have them update to read status when viewed on one device to all others.

Apple's Messages is sort of there. At least the messages sync, for the most part. But read status doesn't sync. You're also limited to the Messages app and whatever platform it supports. Google has a browser version of this for their messenger. It's not quite as good. But I want better syncing and dropping the proprietary part.

Make it more like how IMAP mail behaves. Where everything syncs and I can use a wide range of clients. Just register my number with the server and messages get pushed to it from my phone provider. Then from the server to any device I login to it with.

You’re right in that, at the center of all this, are carriers that have segregated this wee little bit of data off from everything else such that they are able to make a profit from it. And, they haven’t offered a consumer facing way for folks to obtain SMS/MMS messages other than through them. So, currently, even if one was able to get all the OTT providers to cooperate, the carriers would still be using separate methods.

 

[eyoungren]

My understanding is that the major US carriers have already agreed to the RCS standard and have already implemented it.

My carrier, T-Mobile, sends RCS by default - if I am using an Android phone. It's Apple that hasn't implemented the standard, hence an RCS message defaults to SMS/MMS.

Penalizing customers for using SMS/MMS would probably just make a lot of people upset because you're only being penalized when sending a message to an iOS device from an Android device or vice versa.

Finally, as much as Google wants to blame Apple for being a holdout, let's remember that it's Google that opened up Android so anyone could create an OS based off it. Google's been through 13 versions of a messaging platform and killed each one off. They can't make up their minds. So, it's Google that created this problem.

And now they want Apple to bail them out? Please…

 

[jav6454]

I still need more info on what the actual benefits for RCS are.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

My understanding is that the major US carriers have already agreed to the RCS standard and have already implemented it.

Saying that carriers have agreed to the RCS standard, though, is NOT the same as saying the carriers have agreed to SMS/MMS. Because, all the carriers that say they support SMS/MMS can send messages to all the others that also support SMS/MMS.

And this goes back to the topic of the thread, is there even a business case for something better than SMS/MMS to exist? Maybe years ago, but now, most people are using the non-carrier text messaging solutions. Norm it feels more like a nice to have, limited to the US.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I still need more info on what the actual benefits for RCS are.

Google says that RCS improves texting from Android to iPhone (and ONLY from Android to iPhone, any other phone is still using SMS/MMS, so are businesses and governments) by allowing more data to be used for higher quality photos and videos, resolve issues with group chats, end-to-end encryption, read receipts AND typing indicators.

The problem is that WhatsApp ALSO allows more data for higher quality photos and videos, resolves issues with group chat, end-to-end encryption, read receipts and typing indicators. Has been available for quite awhile and, as a result, has an enormous number of people using it to send messages. T-mobile will say 700 million RCS messages are sent across their network a day. For WhatsApp, that number is 100 billion. (Google likes to say that Apple needs to ‘fix’ texting. WhatsApp would say, “It’s already fixed”)

The “grand idea” of RCS is that it would allow for more feature rich (i.e. that list above) communications between Android devices and iPhones. The reality falls far short of that AND I would put forth that, based on the realities right now, there’s just no valid business case for RCS or any other “better than SMS/MMS” replacement.

 

[Shirasaki]

SMS only need one reason to exist: accessing information between contacts when signal reception is poor and data connection is unreliable. We may never truly reach 100% low-cost coverage, meaning something extremely low end that is supported by every phone regardless of operating system, firmware etc. SMS fills that role. RCS, however fancy it might be, fundamentally rely on data, which at most, is a competing standard with iMessage, but nothing more. I’m not sure how RCS would solve the poor signal information sharing problem, if Google even design RCS with that scenario in mind in the first place.

US might be different, but in Australia, SMS is like the most basic form of communication on phones, fulfilling a role to enable connection between people even in poor data connection (at least that’s my experience). I don’t see SMS being replaced anytime soon, especially by any new standard that relies on internet to work.

Before anyone saying that, satellite SMS is expensive, device range is limited (not to mention they must be special designed for the purpose, unless Apple brings it to iPhone somehow later), and communications are also limited because of bandwidth.

 

[zakarhino]

Google says that RCS improves texting from Android to iPhone (and ONLY from Android to iPhone, any other phone is still using SMS/MMS, so are businesses and governments) by allowing more data to be used for higher quality photos and videos, resolve issues with group chats, end-to-end encryption, read receipts AND typing indicators.

The problem is that WhatsApp ALSO allows more data for higher quality photos and videos, resolves issues with group chat, end-to-end encryption, read receipts and typing indicators. Has been available for quite awhile and, as a result, has an enormous number of people using it to send messages. T-mobile will say 700 million RCS messages are sent across their network a day. For WhatsApp, that number is 100 billion. (Google likes to say that Apple needs to ‘fix’ texting. WhatsApp would say, “It’s already fixed”)

The “grand idea” of RCS is that it would allow for more feature rich (i.e. that list above) communications between Android devices and iPhones. The reality falls far short of that AND I would put forth that, based on the realities right now, there’s just no valid business case for RCS or any other “better than SMS/MMS” replacement.

You listed many of the benefits (but forgot also reacting to a message like you can in iMessage is natively supported with RCS). It also improves iPhone to Android communication (not just Android to iPhone like you said) and importantly group conversations that have a mix of iphones and androids.

The thing you're missing about RCS is that it is a new STANDARD that doesn't require downloading an app like WhatsApp in the first place. most Messages conversations that are not iMessage are because the other person uses android. for group conversations one android user can disrupt many of the useful features of iMessage, many of which features are shared by RCS. if iphone and android support RCS it would mean virtually all conversations I have with people in my messaging app would be encrypted (assuming everyone updates their phone which is an inevitability) and simultaneously have many of the benefits of iMessage without introducing third party app nonsense.

the bottom line is it's a complete no brainer for Apple to support RCS if they were making decisions optimized around improving the lives of their own iPhone customers. the only possible reason why they wouldn't is because it threatens iMessage in some way. asking everyone to download different third party apps or to switch entire operating systems to an iPhone is not reasonable but implementing RCS is. any attempt to excuse apple's decision to ignore RCS is completely driven by simping for the company. google's ask is not unreasonable.

with RCS: I can have near iMessage quality conversations and group chats with a mix of different device types. no further installation of facebook spyware or convincing normies to use fringe apps like signal is necessary.

without RCS: I can have an extremely outdated SMS experience unless I make sure everyone uses an iPhone or everyone uses the same app I do. i have to download spyware third party apps like whatsapp or messenger.

it's as simple as that really. messaging standards like RCS are great because they are exclusively concerned with the messaging protocol and do not necessitate all the telemetry spyware that an app would also bundle in.

 

[eyoungren]

And this goes back to the topic of the thread, is there even a business case for something better than SMS/MMS to exist?

????? Yes.

It's called RCS.

Advanced Messaging

Learn about T-Mobile and Google's partnership to enable T-Mobile customers with Rich Communication Services while texting Android users on other networks.

www.t-mobile.com

 

[Unregistered 4U]

US might be different, but in Australia, SMS is like the most basic form of communication on phones, fulfilling a role to enable connection between people even in poor data connection (at least that’s my experience). I don’t see SMS being replaced anytime soon, especially by any new standard that relies on internet to work.

You’re right, in the US it’s the same. What are the costs for SMS in Austraila? Are the majority of carriers including unlimited SMS texts in their plans there as well?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

????? Yes.

It's called RCS.

Advanced Messaging

Learn about T-Mobile and Google's partnership to enable T-Mobile customers with Rich Communication Services while texting Android users on other networks.

www.t-mobile.com

Does RCS exist, yes. Many technologies that are not widely used, exist. And, the reason why is usually down to whether or not companies can make money from it. Linux is “free” but many companies have figured out a way to make money from it, so it blossomed. RCS, not so much.

SMS/MMS was a feature that GSM networks had which some number of users would switch networks for (or make the choice of network based on its availability. In this case, non-GSM networks kludged a solution that worked the same as GSM networks and now it’s a worldwide way of communication that makes the carriers a good deal of money.

Even if the troubled/failed RCS implementation didn’t exist, if there was another technology that made real what RCS promises, with the US (and maybe other regions?) texting for “free”, businesses and governments not paying to have “read receipts” and “better group chats” (it’s just a text blast to a known customer) and many outside the US already using WhatsApp, that’s a LOT of effort to go to, to see no increase to a company’s bottom line. RCS was initially released in 2008… 12 years later, the lack of a business case for the carriers to implement it means it doesn’t have a wide reach. The reason why it hasn’t caught on, in my opinion, is that, in today’s world, there’s no reason for it to exist. It has been usurped by other, better, solutions.

 

[Shirasaki]

You’re right, in the US it’s the same. What are the costs for SMS in Austraila? Are the majority of carriers including unlimited SMS texts in their plans there as well?

My knowledge may be limited, but for what I know, nowadays most if not all plans for big telco includes domestic sms texting (and phone call) for free. Charge is usually for different data cap.

 

[eyoungren]

Does RCS exist, yes. Many technologies that are not widely used, exist. And, the reason why is usually down to whether or not companies can make money from it. Linux is “free” but many companies have figured out a way to make money from it, so it blossomed. RCS, not so much.

SMS/MMS was a feature that GSM networks had which some number of users would switch networks for (or make the choice of network based on its availability. In this case, non-GSM networks kludged a solution that worked the same as GSM networks and now it’s a worldwide way of communication that makes the carriers a good deal of money.

Even if the troubled/failed RCS implementation didn’t exist, if there was another technology that made real what RCS promises, with the US (and maybe other regions?) texting for “free”, businesses and governments not paying to have “read receipts” and “better group chats” (it’s just a text blast to a known customer) and many outside the US already using WhatsApp, that’s a LOT of effort to go to, to see no increase to a company’s bottom line. RCS was initially released in 2008… 12 years later, the lack of a business case for the carriers to implement it means it doesn’t have a wide reach. The reason why it hasn’t caught on, in my opinion, is that, in today’s world, there’s no reason for it to exist. It has been usurped by other, better, solutions.

OK. Perhaps I am not understanding you, so I'm going to say this.

I cannot speak for AT&T or Verizon, but I have read that they have implemented RCS. That said, my carrier T-Mobile is using RCS by default.

You send a text message on a T-Mobile Android phone it's RCS. Not SMS or MMS, it's RCS. Only if that message is going to an iPhone user does it become SMS/MMS.

So what I'm hearing from you is that T-Mobile USA is not using the RCS messaging that they are actually using.

Which doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It also improves iPhone to Android communication (not just Android to iPhone like you said) and importantly group conversations that have a mix of iphones and androids.

I should have said “between”. What I wrote made it seem like a one way benefit.

The thing you're missing about RCS is that it is a new STANDARD that doesn't require downloading an app like WhatsApp in the first place.

The instructions I’ve seen for getting Google RCS on Android does say that the user has to download Google Messages. So, while nothing has to be done for a new phone out of the box to get SMS or MMS, for many new phones to have RCS, it appears that a download is required, like WhatsApp.

the bottom line is it's a complete no brainer for Apple to support RCS if they were making decisions optimized around improving the lives of their own iPhone customers. the only possible reason why they wouldn't is because it threatens iMessage in some way.

That’s not the BOTTOM line, though. The line below that is that carriers have not adopted RCS the same as they have SMS/MMS. If the iPhone didn’t support SMS/MMS, the carriers likely wouldn’t even let it on their networks. Not supporting RCS… really doesn’t concern them much at all it appears.

And, both SMS and WhatsApp threaten iMessage is VERY real ways. iMessage usage outside the US is a drop compared to WhatsApp, it’s NOWHERE close so, it’s not that. Actually, right now, Google could release a Google RCS enabled app for the iPhone and threaten iMessage in the same way WhatsApp does. They haven’t. Will they?

with RCS: I can have near iMessage quality conversations and group chats with a mix of different device types. no further installation of facebook spyware or convincing normies to use fringe apps like signal is necessary.

With the perceived ideal of RCS, you mean. In practice, it does nothing even remotely approaching this. (The CCMI, which MIGHT have provided this for US customers fell apart last year.) Or, maybe iPhone users might be able to see what it does if Google released a Google RCS app.

I can see why some, primarily in the US, WANT to see something like this exist. Do the carriers feel that the effort would be worth it JUST for US customers? Currently, it appears that they do not. And, as long as the carriers don’t see the need for it, they’re not going to push for it. That’s the real bottom line.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Only if that message is going to an iPhone user does it become SMS/MMS.

And, if it’s going to any of the millions of Android phones that don’t support RCS. And, if it’s going to dumb phones which also don’t support RCS.

So what I'm hearing from you is that T-Mobile USA is not using the RCS messaging that they are actually using.

Which doesn't make any sense to me.

T-Mobile is “doing” RCS but nowhere near the same way they’re doing SMS or MMS. SMS or MMS are supported on all phones that T-Mobile sells. RCS is NOT supported on ALL phones that T-Mobile sells. In their press release, they even say “Today, almost every Android phone sold by T-Mobile comes standard with RCS Universal Profile 1.0 features built into the phone’s native messaging app.” There is likely a reason why T-Mobile doesn’t support RCS on all their phones, and I’d guess it’s because they don’t think it’s worth the effort to do.

 

[eyoungren]

There is likely a reason why T-Mobile doesn’t support RCS on all their phones, and I’d guess it’s because they don’t think it’s worth the effort to do.

I would think it's because older phones don't support the new protocol and there's not an easy way to make them do so. It's only recently that RCS was implemented.

But every new phone T-Mob sells will support this an over time, those phones that don't will slide off the network as people replace them with new phones.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I would think it's because older phones don't support the new protocol and there's not an easy way to make them do so. It's only recently that RCS was implemented.

But every new phone T-Mob sells will support this an over time, those phones that don't will slide off the network as people replace them with new phones.

RCS is 12 years old, though. And, every new Android phone, may support it over time, but, because they’re using Google RCS, they can’t support the iPhone and they can’t support their dumb phones like the Cat S22 Flip, Sonim XP3 Plus Non-Camera flip phone, Sonim XP3 Plus flip phone with a camera, and the Schok Flip phone, either.

The world outside the US is fine with SMS as a fallback, and most of the US is good with SMS, too. Very few value interoperability at a level greater than SMS, even in the US, though. Which is why it doesn’t appear that a “better than SMS/MMS” is needed.

 

[Kent W]

Why go for a 12 years old RCS protocol with Signal open source encryption added on top of the old RCS and then try to get a bunch of different operators to upgrade? And why try to battle with Apple about it?

Why make it so complicated? Use open source fully encrypted Signal instead. On Android Signal can also be set as standard app for SMS/MMS as a fall back. On iOS Apple doesn't allow third party apps like Signal to handle SMS/MMS. You can still use Signal messaging though.

All on fully encrypted open source Signal instead.😉

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Why go for a 12 years old RCS protocol with Signal open source encryption added on top of the old RCS and then try to get a bunch of different operators to upgrade? And why try to battle with Apple about it?

Why make it so complicated? Use open source fully encrypted Signal instead. On Android Signal can also be set as standard app for SMS/MMS as a fall back. On iOS Apple doesn't allow third party apps like Signal to handle SMS/MMS. You can still use Signal messaging though.

All on fully encrypted open source Signal instead.😉

Just another reason why MMS/SMS is enough JUST the way it is and no need for anything better than that.

 

[Azathoth123]

I think that the issues are much simpler. Green bubbles aren’t cool among young people.

Keep in mind Google has tried maybe a dozen attempts at messaging and just lost interest. Also, Apple is not a company that embraces ancient standards and devices, as we well know. When Apple embraces a 12 year old ‘not a standard’ and not uniformly implemented, give me a call at the old folks home.

Google: Make us blue, green is not cool.We can waste billions on failed messaging initiatives but we must be cool.
Apple: What about Apple Watches, Macs, and iPads that don’t have phone numbers?
Google: Make us blue, Apple, we don’t care about your other products because we failed at those too.
Apple: With a 12-year old ‘protocol’ that isn’t a standard and offers few improvements to SMS for Apple device users? That group chats aren’t end-to-end encrypted?
Google: Yes
Apple: Want to pay for Apple servers and infrastructure to serve encrypted end-to-end RCS communications?
Google: No, we want to be blue and we want you to do it for us with no effort or expense on our part.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I think that the issues are much simpler. Green bubbles aren’t cool among young people.

Keep in mind Google has tried maybe a dozen attempts at messaging and just lost interest. Also, Apple is not a company that embraces ancient standards and devices, as we well know. When Apple embraces a 12 year old ‘not a standard’ and not uniformly implemented, give me a call at the old folks home.

Google: Make us blue, green is not cool.We can waste billions on failed messaging initiatives but we must be cool.
Apple: What about Apple Watches, Macs, and iPads that don’t have phone numbers?
Google: Make us blue, Apple, we don’t care about your other products because we failed at those too.
Apple: With a 12-year old ‘protocol’ that isn’t a standard and offers few improvements to SMS for Apple device users? That group chats aren’t end-to-end encrypted?
Google: Yes
Apple: Want to pay for Apple servers and infrastructure to serve encrypted end-to-end RCS communications?
Google: No, we want to be blue and we want you to do it for us with no effort or expense on our part.

I think we do need to clarify that this is mainly a problem in the US where, due to having “Free” texting since the advent of the iPhone they’re actually still using SMS. Everywhere else doesn’t see or doesn’t care because they’re using OTT messaging. The entirety of the “problem” as Google sees it is only an issue in one country. Resolving that problem would, also, only resolve it for those few users in the US bothered by it. And the question is, based on a problem THAT small, is it even worth the effort to fix? I say no, and the carriers appear to agree.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Tim Cook Shoots Down Idea of iOS Adopting RCS Messages: 'Buy Your Mom an iPhone'

Apple CEO Tim Cook has shot down the idea of iOS adopting RCS messaging, a format that would make it significantly easier for iPhone and Android...

www.macrumors.com

From the article:

despite repeated calls from the industry for the company to do so. "I don't hear our users asking that we put a lot of energy in on that at this point,"

Which is good point. Focus on what the larger number of users want, not what the industry wants you to do. Trying to chase after industry needs pulls focus from the people that want to spend money on the platform.

The lack of RCS support on iOS makes it more difficult for iOS and Android users to communicate, forcing them to in some cases use third-party messaging platforms such as WhatsApp or Telegram.

It doesn’t make it difficult for them to “communicate”. Text, as in this post, is a very POWERFUL way to communicate. It makes the “nice to have’s” difficult, but being “forced” to download an app that does-what-you-need-it-to-do is not particularly painful, it’s the world we live in now.

There are huge numbers of folks (and I have no idea what devices they’re using) that provide their images and videos for me to see and hear via Instagram or whatever other photo sharing service people post their images/videos to. It’s a problem for which the solution already exists

The reporter who asked the question pushed Cook on his response, saying he and his mother find it difficult to send photos and videos to each other because she uses an Android device while they use an iPhone. "Buy your mom an iPhone," Cook told the reporter who posed the situation.

If there comes a time where there is a real need (that needs to be fulfilled) for something better than SMS to exist, that technology will be created and all relevant parties will support it. As it is, SMS is good enough for everyone save for a small number of Americans that simply MUST use their instant messaging as their social media fix.