Apple is Bringing RCS To the iPhone in iOS 18 (theverge.com) 113
Apple has announced that its Messages app will support RCS in iOS 18. From a report: The new standard will replace SMS as the default communication protocol between Android and iOS devices. The move comes after years of taunting, cajoling, and finally, some regulatory scrutiny from the EU. Right now, when people on iOS and Android message each other, the service falls back to SMS -- photos and videos are sent at a lower quality, messages are shortened, and importantly, conversations are not end-to-end encrypted like they are in iMessage. Messages from Android phones show up as green bubbles in iMessage chats and chaos ensues.
can i turn it off (Score:5, Funny)
I still want to turn RCS off, and continue to let Android users know their platform sucks ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok that made me chuckle
Re: can i turn it off (Score:1)
Given you're the middle segment of a centipad and all, what happens to the person in front of you? Do they just fart it back?
Also turn it off (Score:2)
Every time there is new protocol, communication channel, or such questions come to mind:
- Is it more secure than the existing way?
- Are there legal protections from interception by the government, third parties, service providers?
- Are there legal protections from signals intelligence of who sent, who received, date, time, message length, type of message, number of attachments, attachment types? Note how the message contents are not read...
- Are there legal protections against government, service providers,
Re: Also turn it off (Score:1)
I honestly can't speak to the legal implications of centipads. I do know that it is considered malfeasance for a surgeon to do such a thing, but then again, Archie Bunker gave informed consent when he signed the Apple EULA shrink-wrap agreement.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't worry, Apple is implementing RCS. Most android users don't actually use RCS because their carriers are too lazy to implement it and Google has no interest in such a crappy protocol.
Re:can i turn it off (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that's what I said. Apple is implementing RCS. They are not implementing the thing Google bought, because they didn't have enough chat protocols already, that they call RCS.
Re: (Score:1)
Weird that Apple would choose not to protect its customer's privacy in that way.
The carriers don't necessarily need to do anything to support E2EE. Google's implementation works over RCS Universal Profile, it just needs a key server for public keys to be exchanged. If you are using an Android device and have a Google account, it uses Google's servers. Apple could run their own server, independent of what the carriers do.
The only difference with someone like Google running the key server, as opposed to the c
Re:can i turn it off (Score:4, Informative)
Weird that Apple would choose not to protect its customer's privacy in that way.
What? Apple's iMessage has E2EE. Standard RCS does not. Everyone on the Android side is screaming how Apple is not following a standard; what they fail to mention is Google RCS is not standard. Google has not made their extensions of RCS as part of any standard. Yet you blame Apple for that.
The carriers don't necessarily need to do anything to support E2EE. Google's implementation works over RCS Universal Profile, it just needs a key server for public keys to be exchanged. If you are using an Android device and have a Google account, it uses Google's servers. Apple could run their own server, independent of what the carriers do.
Again, E2EE is not part of the RCS standard. Google has made their proprietary extensions to it. That's fine but they keep describing it as a standard when it is not. Maybe Google's implementation could be the standard but as of today it is not. Again you are blaming Apple for not implementing something that their competitor created that is not a standard.
The only difference with someone like Google running the key server, as opposed to the carrier running it, is that it is tied to a Google account rather than your phone number.
Again, not part of the standard RCS protocol.
The protocol is fully open. It's the Signal one.
No. Signal is fully open. Google's implementation of the Signal protocol is not fully open. There is no interoperability between Signal and Google RCS. And again, RCS using Signal as the protocol is not protocol is not endorsed or supported by the GMSA.
Re: (Score:1)
It's like saying that TCP isn't E2EE. RCS is just a transport layer, the message content is arbitrary. There are some defined types for things like images, but there is nothing to stop you sending a message that is a public key or request to initiate encrypted chat.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like saying that TCP isn't E2EE. RCS is just a transport layer, the message content is arbitrary.
You are the one complaining that Apple is not implementing E2EE and you are in full denial that it is not part of any specification. Please show me the actual specifications that Apple should follow to implement Google's E2EE system that was published by the GSMA. I'll wait.
There are some defined types for things like images, but there is nothing to stop you sending a message that is a public key or request to initiate encrypted chat.
Nothing except Google change any part of their system at any time. That's what happens when you don't have a standard. You are aware encryption systems generally follow standards, right?
Re: (Score:1)
From TFA
It’s become the standard messaging protocol on Android phones as US wireless carriers fully adopted it over the past five years
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
According to Slashdot what they really want is blue bubbles, which Apple has already said they're not getting because RCS doesn't include end to end encryption.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just blue vs green bubbles, it's green bubbles that don't adhere to Apple's own accessibility color-contrast guidelines so it's deliberately harder to read [medium.com].
Re: can i turn it off (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's one of the few areas where it's still considered OK to "other" people.
By "other" people, you mean iMessage tells customers if their message was sent using iMessage by changing a background color? One of the benefits of iMessage is encryption. Did you forget that SMS is the backup/failover mode for iMessage? If messages fail to send via iMessage, Apple lets users resend but it could be through SMS which in unencrypted. Any messages sent via SMS are green . . . because it was not sent via iMessage.
. It's also the only context where it's ok to say that things that are all the same color are better than things that are a different color.
But Apple is not saying that. You are attributing that to Apple.
I'm sure I'm not the only one here who has been kicked out of a group chat for not being the right color. It's like Cupertino wants the early 60s back.
And I have never
Re: (Score:2)
1) you need better friends
2) you're overthinking.
iMessage bubble colour tells you if the connection is encrypted. It's like the little lock icon in your browser address bar. Although, now that you mention it, Google definitely "others" websites that don't have ssl certificates by not letting you look at them.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a partial list of providers that support RCS on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Looks like most of the US ones do. For some reason the UK networks are not on there, but they all seem to support RCS and I've been using it for years now.
Re: (Score:2)
Google started making the default on Android their own Google-RCS servers when carriers were slow to implement it. So the average Android phone probably does not use RCS but rather Google's extended version.
Some of the ones on that list don't implement actual RCS either, they use Google's. AT&T is the only one I looked up and yup, GRCS since 2023.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is why it's a shitty choice for a messaging standard. It's just SMS again except with absolutely no technical reason for all the stupidity.
SMS shenanigans are exactly why most of the world uses cross platform chat apps and doesn't care about SMS, RCS or who makes their friends' phones.
Re: (Score:1)
I use SMS and MMS. The worst thing about texting with an iOS user are reactions to texts. What is wrong with these people?
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. What's wrong with people who can't be arsed to type "ok" or "lol" and have to send a "reaction" instead?
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. What's wrong with people who can't be arsed to type "ok" or "lol" and have to send a "reaction" instead?
There's nothing wrong with them. They don't see anything weird on their side. It just looks like a normal reaction feature. They don't *have*to* use it, but it's there and in common usage elsewhere and with others on the same platform. Just crappy interop behavior.
I won't go as far as to say that Google should be implementing a workaround (ex. parse the SMS text to identify reactions and treat them as such), but I'm surprised they haven't done that. It would also allow them to send reactions over SMS from a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a Google problem.
Re: (Score:2)
> Turns out its easier to respond with a thumbs-up than typing ok
No it isnt. Number of screen taps I need to locate and insert a thunbs up: 5 plus a scroll
Number of screen taps to reply ok: 3
Re: (Score:3)
To hell with that. I wanted to keep iMessage, with its features that RCS does not have that, intact and not switch over at all. And I'm pretty sure the functionality won't come back from switching RCS off, even if Apple makes that possible. Really, IDGAF about Android one way or the other. I try to keep a "if they don't bother me, I won't bother with them" outlook there. But this downgrade is going to suck major ass.
Re: (Score:3)
this.
I want to be able to know that it went through only apple engineered software before being encrypted, and on hardware that apple is confidant is not compromised and able to be read or written (so no rooted iPhones, either).
If it isn't that, give me a clear visual clue.
It's not a matter of seeing apple as benevolent or wonderful; it's that, unlike the rest of the industry, they see privacy as something that they can sell, and put their engineering behind it. If that comes from avarice or even evil, so
Re: (Score:1)
Android user here. I'm glad you like your piles of dongles and adapters and your >$1K phone price. No thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, we can change our bubbles to any color we want
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I would never buy a flagship Android phone. I'm perfectly happy with my $200 Moto G 2021, which can run any apps I want and will probably last another couple of years. I get all the local, in-person support I need from the AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile store (depending on what carrier I'm with at the time). If my phone breaks, I just buy a new one, and my total bill doesn't reach $1,000 until I've replaced it 5 times, which for me will be 15-20 years. And because I buy my phones unlocked, I can get a pay-
Re: (Score:2)
but android still lags
Re: (Score:1)
Android lags in precisely what way?
Android was first to:
- Introduce foldable phones
- Fully support RCS
- Deliver AI assistants (Copilot, Gemini)
- Deliver AI photo editing (Google Pixel)
- Introduce high-quality GPS navigation (Google Navigation, Waze)
- Introduce real-time audio and text language translation (Google Translate)
- Introduce larger screen sizes (phablets)
- Introduce styluses for those who want them
In what area has Android lagged, exactly?
Oh yes, Android did lag behind Apple in removing headphone j
Re: (Score:2)
The Samsung A35 has an MSRP of $400 will get four years of OS updates and five years of security updates. At least in the USA, there are more than twice as many ubreakifix (Samsung's official repair provider) locations as there are Apple retail outlets.
What do I win?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Guess what, everybody else's devices use USB-C! And Apple refused to get on board until the EU forced them to. That's not what I picture when I think of a company that does things its customers want.
And you didn't mention the $1K+ price tag. My Moto G cost me $200 unlocked, and it is plenty capable of running all the apps I need or want to run.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember people in India being barraged by RCS based ads, almost making their devices usable. To me, RCS is like when spammers realized notifications worked to push scammy/scummy ads, and it took a cycle of development before Google allowed a hush feature for that.
What does RCS give anyway? It doesn't give E2EE, which even 10 years ago, there was an Android app called TextSecure which could do both texting and a universal, iMessage like texting... and even encrypted the SMS messages to ensure security.
Re: RCS is for advertising (Score:1)
https://www.phonearena.com/new... [phonearena.com]
https://9to5mac.com/2023/12/27... [9to5mac.com]
https://www.wired.com/story/ap... [wired.com]
Re: (Score:2)
> even 10 years ago, there was an Android app called TextSecure which could do both texting and a universal, iMessage like texting
Which was renamed SIgnal, merged with RedPhone and then dropped SMS support later on much to the annoyance of long time users like myself who was using a good secure app for SMS vs the built in one on the phone. Never once had a Signal contact, not once, but it was a great alternative SMS app.
I dropped Signal when they dropped SMS.
> It doesn't give E2EE
Most peopel dont ne
RCS Bubbles in Green (Score:4, Funny)
I hope Apple puts RCS messages in green and that Android users continue to bitch about it - proving once and for all what they really care about is the bubble color.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:RCS Bubbles in Green (Score:5, Funny)
Weird, because it's always the Apple users doing all the bitching.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Posting AC because I modded, but the white on green text colors are legitimately less readable for a lot of actual human beings. In my role as a computer-knowing person, I've been asked to fix colors in imessage a few times for precisely that reason. This is outright hostility by Apple and it isn't just an imessage/rcs thing; it also applies to anyone else trying to send an SMS to an iOS user, including people on feature phones or messaging from VoIP gateways.
For people asking what benefit exists for prope
Re: (Score:1)
> the white on green text colors are legitimately less
> readable for a lot of actual human beings
Well, maybe instead of whinging about it; you could try not being lazy and just take a whole fifteen seconds, if that, to turn on increased contrast mode.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As a real life example, I found that local photos taken on a different iOS device are not exposed through USB/Thunderbolt connections to a desktop computer running any OS, even when that device is authorized by the mobile device. They just don't show up. They are also not visible in the broken half-assed file management tool iOS has, even if they are demonstrably visible on the device in the photos application and specifically on a device that is specifically not signed in to iCloud.
I have seen this several
Re: (Score:2)
Posting AC because I modded, but the white on green text colors are legitimately less readable for a lot of actual human beings.
Okay, okay... we'll switch it to red.
Re: (Score:1)
Why should Apple care about its non-customers?
Re: RCS Bubbles in Green (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
white on green text colors are legitimately less readable for a lot of actual human beings.
Really? Because it's usually the green we can see detail in and blues are what suffer. Or did apple just pick a bad shade of green?
Re: (Score:2)
I forget which ones, but about 30 years ago, one of the major national newsites, when used on a browser they hadn't tested (Mozilla?), ended up in blue text on a black background, with links changing to purple if they'd already been read!
I had to select the page worth of text to get it to flip to something less painful to choose articles. (OK, so that's what I get for not using lynx, but . . .)[for that matter, I eventually *did* configure lynx to launch a new xterm which would execute lynx on the address i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sending nothing is inappropriate. The user took action, the expectation is their action will be executed. Failing to execute because the receiving side requires client side work to add features to fully implement that feature would make users on both sides flip out and cause tremendous communications issues.
"How come you didn't respond to my ILU message???"
"Baby! I did!"
"No, you didn't there's nothing on my phone, I got it right here, you're a liar, don't gas light me!"
"...."
Re: (Score:2)
Failing to execute because the receiving side requires client side work to add features to fully implement that feature
Google has worked around the problem Apple created/reinforces. Then, Apple changed things up. I'm not claiming Apple did it solely to break Google's work around. I will, however, say that Apple makes a point of sticking to their proprietary standards as long as they can. I get it. It's to increase user lock-in, or to give more of a reason to switch to them. I just want to be clear that Apple is the problem, in this instance. They're not, however, the only company that causes these kinds of problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, they are in green. Because RCS messages are not encrypted.
Sure, there's a proprietary Google extension that will encrypt RCS messages, but it's not standard. And of course, the reason reason RCS is supported - China demands it - will not want end to end encrypted RCS.
Yes the only reason iOS will support RCS is China. China is demanding all
Re: (Score:2)
The EU would probably have something to say about that.
Re: (Score:1)
How sad the world is when we have reached the point where the govt dictates the color of a message bubble on a phone screen.
Even sadder that the populace accepts the abuse of govt power.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I think it's a good thing when governments intervene to prevent monopolies developing. Competition is good for consumers.
Re: (Score:1)
Right. A bubble colour is critical!!
RCS? (Score:2, Funny)
The...Revision Control System finally available on iOS, eh? ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't trust this newfangled stuff. I'm sticking with SCCS.
Re: (Score:2)
% cp * ./backups/
You've all done it, don't deny it!
Re: (Score:2)
This post is clearly subversion from the conversation and is raising the Mercurial of the room. git out of here before it gets darcs.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of meanings for RCS (Score:2)
Including Revision Control System
But I assume the one we are talking about is Rich Communication Services
So its not for poor people, who may not have unlimited data.
(I gave up Apple in 1988 and I don't care what color the text bubble is)
Re:Lots of meanings for RCS (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Or Reactor Coolant System — what you'll need for your phone with all the on-device AI in the new version of iOS. :-D
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No need for hydrazine. There's enough spin to be able to use the phone as a reaction wheel.
Re: (Score:2)
Ever since LTE, calls, texts, and data all use the same connection.
Carriers will be very happy to treat RCS as a basic feature because the alternative is having users use voice calls, which is much higher bandwidth.
For text-only messages, having unlimited data or not is not going to be meaningful anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux ruined KVM.
Re: (Score:2)
EU is right (Score:1)
I feel like absolutely nobody has any legs to stand on here as this has become beyond stupid, it's obvious the EU is on the correct path here because there's like $3T of corporate weight and they're acting like children.
This isn't a technology problem both companies know how to make the system work together. Make everyone agree on at least a single modern interopable messaging system or everyone can go back to SMS and shut up at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe we should just keep things as they are, With SMS as the universal standard and let companies create whatever new apps and new features they want parallel to, or on top of, it so long as SMS (the actual standard) remains available as the universal fallback. That makes more sense to me than forcing Apple to downgrade from iMessage to RCS and take features away from iPhone users just because Android users are jealous that Google couldn't be bothered to implement said features themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
There's no technical reason users on either platform have to downgrade anything, what features are we talking about that should not be included in a standard at this point? The whole point is a new universal standard which apparently everybody wants because we just keep blaming either side on this, it's kinda silly. E2EE should not be a vendor lock in point, I think leaving SMS around is a real security issue.
If I was shown a technical reason this could not happen that wasn't solved by some sort of workin
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for starters, RCS is not a universal standard. Each carrier has their own veraion of RCS. And Google has their intrepretation on top of that. RCS itself does not, for example, include E2EE. That's entirely Google's doing and not part of the published standard. And even with Google's add-ons, it's still missing features that iMessage supported. I'm going to be particularly pissed to lose the ApplePay Cash add-on once the switch is made in September, for example. Yeah, my friends and I *could* sw
Re: (Score:2)
I never said "RCS" at any point. All those concerns are valid and yet again, you or noone has yet poointed out a *technical* reason any of these problems cannot be resolved right? It's all just corporate dick waving is my point. This is all standard messaging stuff.
Metphorically lock them in a room and don't come out until you figured out how to make a standard you both and everyone can follow. The entire fucking internet runs on standards everyone can access and now this, this is just fucking impossible
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. Google can pay to license iMessage from Apple and deploy it on their own infrastructure. Problem solved.
Ok, that was a bit tongue-and-cheek, but the essential problem here is nobody wants to absorb the cost of an advanced messaging system. The carriers took a long time to agree to a very limited RCS and have been dragging their feet to fully implement it. I’m sure that’s at least partly because they know users will not likely stomach going back to per-message text fees, especially for n
Re: (Score:2)
True at this point I imagine Google would if Apple had made such an offer (maybe they have, I have not read it though or if they did if its a reasonable cost), feels like everyone would want effectively an iMessage API
You are correct about the carriers and I think they have to be dragged kicking and screaming into something modern, nobody seems to like RCS or it's become deprecated before it's even hit the ground so maybe we need some sort of messaging working group like every other protocol on the internet
Re: (Score:2)
No, we need the government to decide critically important issues like how text message interoperability work between 2 companies and what power plug a company uses on their phones. Can you imagine how much improved society will be once we have matching text colors and power plugs?
Re: (Score:2)
We've been talking about a replacement to SMS for years and years, pretty widely accepted SMS is very old and has glaring security holes, it only hangs around because it is a standard anyone can subscribe to.
If the world needs a modern replacement for that and the companies cannot sort it out amongst themselves then someone has to step in. I think we've given Google and Apple and the phone carriers enough time, maybe the threat of legislative action will get them to just agree on something.
I am really just
Re: (Score:2)
It's definitely corporate bullshit. 100% agree.
Where I disagree is that a universal standard for texting is the government's business to mandate.
I could go along with the idea of the government telling both they must come up with -something- and some basic requirements like encryption. But I strongly object to government picking specific technology winners and losers.
What should really happen is what normally does: an industry body comprised of representatives from across the relevant fields and industrie
Re: (Score:2)
What should really happen is what normally does: an industry body comprised of representatives from across the relevant fields and industries creates a standard. Once that's in place I'd be ok if the government then said, "Ok, you all need to support that standard for interoperability" but still allows them to do whatever between their own devices.
To be clear is is exactly what I suggesting, a standard that is comprised of an industry working group (Like the W3C, USB-IF, IETF). If a company want's to transition their protocol as the basis for such a standard that's perfectly fine with the understanding you no longer have direct control over it. I see no reason this can't be done in such a way that it still let's individual companies implement their own applications for their customers like web browsers do already, they can still claim they have "th
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I misinterpreted. I thought you were in favor of government directly mandating a specific solution. "Never mind!" Heh.
Re: (Score:3)
Nobody is downgrading anything. iMessage is going to support RCS the way it supports SMS now, as a fallback for people who don't have iMessage.
Re: (Score:2)
Why should the govt mandate that? Are Android users going to pay for iMessage, or are they just going to be freeloading on Apple’s servers?
huge win (Score:1)
wow, oh my gosh, i almost cant believe it. this is SUCH a HUGE win for society.
did they use Apple Intelligence or forced (Score:2)
Text formatting (Score:2)
Does RCS support the text formatting that Apple have just introduced in the messages app? Or is this another way to unknowingly annoy Android users with text markup like the way Tapback (reactions) is currently handled?
https://www.macrumors.com/2024... [macrumors.com]
RCS? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Great, bring it on (Score:2)
RCS, finally a sane replacement for SMS that doesnt require you to be locked into a walled garden (an app).
Re: (Score:2)
Has any guy ever ditched a woman because she had the wrong phone or star sign or wasn't 6 feet?