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.

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?

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 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?

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?

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)

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.

On 2023-11-16 21:16, Dave Royal wrote:
> 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/

That's a different thing to say.

--
Cheers,
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.

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!

>> 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.

On 2023-11-16 23:07, Your Name wrote:
> 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!

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.

On 17 Nov 2023 11:07:19 +1300 Your Name wrote:
>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!

Google use the Signal e2ee protocol according to this:
<https://www.gstatic.com/messages/papers/messages_e2ee.pdf>
<https://signal.org/docs/>
--
(Remove numerics from email address)

On 2023-11-16, Andrew <andrew@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

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.

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?

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.

Am 16.11.23 um 22:24 schrieb 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?

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)

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.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

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.

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.

"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.

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.

On 2023-11-17 00:11, Andrew wrote:
> 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.

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.

On 2023-11-17 00:06, 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)?
>
> 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?

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).

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

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.

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <andrew@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.

--
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

On 2023-11-17, Andrew <andrew@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.

--
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