RCS in iOS 18 Beta
Then, it was time to jump into an RCS-powered future, and by that, I mean flipping a toggle in the Settings app. Seriously, that’s all there is to it right now for beta testers on the most recent build.
From there, it was time to send my first RCS text message on an iPhone, so I figured I’d start with an easy one — a dig about Apple finally getting the message. Then, it was time to test a few RCS basics: the ability to react to messages and send read receipts from Android to iOS. I asked my dad to respond to my first message, and he sent back a thumbs up — both to my original message and my request for a reaction. Both reactions popped up smoothly and immediately, a massive improvement over the generic SMS alert on iOS 17 and older, and far closer to what we see from Apple’s iMessage service between Apple devices.
[…]
Once I finished shaking my head, I realized that both had come through just the same as if they’d been sent from another iPhone. The comic was crystal clear, and the video came out much better than the Patterson-Gimlin resolution I often get when he sends me a clip. It’s a vast improvement over the SMS and MMS struggles both sides have been used to and a sign that Google was probably right all along.
Via Dave Mark:
Note that the only currently supported carriers are Verizon, AT&T, & T-Mobile, though that’s pretty much everyone I know.
Previously:
Update (2024-07-02): Chance Miller:
Curious if your carrier supports RCS on iPhone yet? Here’s how to check.
Update (2024-07-09): Tim Hardwick:
Think of it as SMS 2.0 – a major upgrade to the traditional text messaging we’ve been using for years.
Update (2024-07-18): John Gruber:
Here’s a hot take: last week’s news of a massive AT&T breach revealing the phone call and text messaging records of all AT&T customers for six months in 2022 exemplifies why RCS is a terrible protocol that ought not exist, and why it’s a mistake that Apple is adding support for it to iOS 18 this year.
It’s worth noting that the breach did not include the content or dates of the text messages. Its sounds like the leaked information was less extensive than the iMessage metadata that Apple logs.
But the argument against RCS is strong and simple: it doesn’t support end-to-end encryption. The only new messaging platforms that should gain any traction are those that not only support E2EE, but that require it.
[…]
It’s difficult to mandate E2EE on a platform that already supports unencrypted messaging.
[…]
Carrier-based messaging was best left as a legacy protocol. SMS wasn’t dying, but it was slowly fading away, and should have been left for things like automated “your table is ready” notifications from restaurants. RCS is just going to give carrier-based messaging new legs that it shouldn’t have gotten.
[…]
There is, admittedly, a good argument in favor of RCS. Basically, that phone carrier messaging is now and always will be a universally accessible form of communication. Everyone who is online has a cell phone, and those phones can all send and receive SMS. Because carrier-based messaging isn’t going away, this argument goes, it ought to be made as good as possible, and RCS — despite its deficiencies — is clearly better than SMS. Therefore RCS ought to be supported by all mobile devices, including iOS.
That’s where I’m at. I don’t see carrier messaging going away. And there does not seem to be a path for Apple to open up iMessage or for WhatsApp to become universal. So why not at least make the messy status quo better?
Also, as I’ve said, iMessage has always been unreliable for me, and I personally care more about reliability than encryption. RCS offers a potential path for me to finally have reliable messaging on iOS.
Previously:
Update (2024-07-19): Eric Schwarz:
This is the point that I’d respectfully disagree with Gruber. This idea sets up silos owned by generally unregulated entities—while WhatsApp is extremely popular elsewhere in the world, using it or Facebook Messenger means that you’re willing to have an account and share your contact information with
Update (2024-07-22): Matt Birchler:
I’d prefer people using messaging services that are encrypted, but I don’t think that means that we should cede all messaging communication to private companies, especially when it’s Meta handling those messages.
In my view, RCS is the next evolution of SMS and MMS. Whether it technically may be something new, that doesn’t matter, it’s good that there is a baseline messaging service that anyone can use that is cross-platform and not owned by any one company (despite seemingly many people thinking Google invented and owns RCS).
5 Comments RSS · Twitter · Mastodon
Fun fact I just learned: Google runs the RCS hubs/infrastructure for the three major US carriers.
Google acquired Jibe Mobile back in 2015, which powers Google’s RCS (and is the base layer for their own customizations), and all the big US carriers gave up on their own (sometimes proprietary) RCS implementations and signed up with Jibe Cloud. Not sure how it is in other countries.
Not sure what Google’s long term play is… they could maybe be happy running the cloud infrastructure as a common carrier… but I’m sure it’s awfully tempting to turn that into their own social network/communications/behavioral advertising platform.
Knowing this puts their green blue bubble taunting ads in a different light for me.
As long as the standard is open and can be implemented by anyone, I don't really care who "owns" it. There's no reason we shouldn't have a cross platform messaging system. Only tech people think the current unfederated mess of competing standards is progress.
I use Messages. With some friends Whatsapp. With others Signal. With few Wire. And so on. Another option is certainly welcomed. Until is not forced on to me by Goog.
