It doesn't convey the same thing because the carriers aren't doing anything. They actively don't really care much about messaging once you go to RCS. It doesn't really impact them in the same way SMS/MMS did. Google and consumers want RCS more than anyone.

quote:
Google doesn't own RCS, they own Jibe

I swear it's like you forgot our whole other conversation where I brought a lot of the shite you are talking about now up in the first place... No shite....

quote:
Google taking over pushed RCS further than the carriers would have.

Correct, it is basically Google's iMessage like I previously stated. RCS would still be on the backburner and more people would have switched to Whatsapp or similar messaging like Europe if Google hadn't stepped in. It's basically Google's baby right now. Carriers don't care about this fight, they even lose an easy revenue stream from SMS/MMS if it is deprecated out of existence.

quote:
None of this would be happening if Apple wasn't exhibiting exclusionary behavior.

A lot wouldn't have happened if Apple didn't integrate iChat into their products. Hell if one of the many of failed Google attempts to mimic iMessage had taken off before they gave up and went to RCS is another what if. God knows what we would be using now for communication, that's a much different landscape. The problem is we aren't attacking the people to fix this problem. Right now it's Google vs Apple, it should be government vs carriers. You want to update the regs, push manufacturers to make complaint devices. You do that through carriers. Much easier than some weird arse social stigma antitrust suit. The question I have is why aren't they going this route? Why are we suing Apple over something that could be done under an easy regulation change?

This post was edited on 4/9/24 at 12:12 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Fat Batman

Gotham City, NJ

Member since Oct 2019

1383 posts

Posted on 4/9/24 at 12:22 pm to Dam Guide

quote:
it should be government vs carriers.

Im having trouble following you're overall point through the trivial details. but to the above, purely from a whats best for the RCS protocol going forward, Im not sure RCS implementation solely in the hands of the carriers would benefit RCS the most. I foresee that leading to massive fragmentation in the experience, at least in the short term. IMO The ones that have to most incentive to innovate on the experience are the tech companies. And it looks like we might already be seeing that with Apples contributions to the Universal Profile, a possible sharing of MLS encryption, etc. Who knows, maybe Jibe goes away as the Universal Profile is further iterated on.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Dam Guide

Member since Sep 2005

15529 posts

Posted on 4/9/24 at 12:46 pm to Fat Batman

quote:
Im having trouble following you're overall point through the trivial details. but to the above, purely from a whats best for the RCS protocol going forward, Im not sure RCS implementation solely in the hands of the carriers would benefit RCS the most. I foresee that leading to massive fragmentation in the experience, at least in the short term. IMO The ones that have to most incentive to innovate on the experience are the tech companies. And it looks like we might already be seeing that with Apples contributions to the Universal Profile, a possible sharing of MLS encryption, etc. Who knows, maybe Jibe goes away as the Universal Profile is further iterated on.

It's not trivial, it is basic codes and regs the carriers dictate directly to manufacturers to meet the regulations they have to abide by, by the government to be able to market and sell phones for that network. AKA things like meeting their frequency needs and such. The government could easily make regulations require interoperability of RCS universal profile. This wouldn't single any company out and would force every producer of phones to meet this need and you could set a compliance driven date like most industries that have to meet a standard before fines and such set in. There are all kinds of compliance driven codes that relate directly to cell phone network, why not just go that route?

We are eventually going there anyway to deprecate SMS/MMS and replace all those codes that relate directly to that.

This post was edited on 4/9/24 at 1:19 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Fat Batman

Gotham City, NJ

Member since Oct 2019

1383 posts

Posted on 4/9/24 at 1:34 pm to Dam Guide

sure but what you're saying and i'm saying doesn't seem mutually exclusive unless your point is you think govt and carriers should be driving the iteration on RCS.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Dam Guide

Member since Sep 2005

15529 posts

Posted on 4/9/24 at 2:00 pm to Fat Batman

quote:
sure but what you're saying and i'm saying doesn't seem mutually exclusive unless your point is you think govt and carriers should be driving the iteration on RCS.

No, they should be driving implementation. Not development.

Think of it like Verizon's switch from CDMA to a GSM network or even phasing out of 3G networks. Carriers would have alerted manufacturers of CDMA devices that those devices would no longer be used for their network and to stop production. They would have been given a compliance grace period and then the network would be phased out. FCC or the carrier could set a date that RCS is the new text standard to operate on the network, all devices must be compliant with RCS universal program by January XX, 20XX.

I believe this is more a failure to regulate, than it is an antitrust. Especially after targeting them after they already announced integration plans. It's just an odd freakin lawsuit.

This post was edited on 4/9/24 at 2:02 pm

Page 1 2 3