1131
Samsung joins Google in RCS shaming Apple
(www.theverge.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
1131 points (97.0% liked)
Technology
59066 readers
4390 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sorry, this just reads to me as the little kid being angry he can’t join the bigger kids. I really believe that were the shoe and the other foot and were it Google with iMessage, they wouldn’t be so keen to let Apple use it.
Well Google is arguably the big kid here 70% of all cell phones are android phones. Also, Google puts its apps/services on Apple devices. There's no way to rewind time, change a variable or two, and then play it back to see how things change.
That’s framed as if google is this generous corporation that’s all “Peace, love and Agnostic apps” rather than to farm data from a competitor’s users.
Google wants all the users data regardless of the platform they’re on.
Google puts out a lot of free services: Gmail, maps, docs, sheets, voice, etc. It makes sense that they're paying for those services some how.
Broadcast television is free and paid for with commercials. TV targeted the ads with the content of the show. Soap operas are called that because women typically watched them and women in those days bought the household supplies and that's who advertised on those shows.
Google's basically doing the same thing. They just have a different way of targeting the add. It's a pretty open exchange.
Apple put their services on Android devices too. Just not iMessage.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they cite privacy as a reason.
If they were honest, they would cite "creating the illusion of superiority via systematic exclusion which leads to profits"
Why be honest when you can lie and say it’s for someone’s benefit?
There probably are privacy implications, which makes it a good one.
Come on. There isn't anything near parity with the cross platforming of apps. Apple has a few (three of them are music apps) and I believe Google puts all or nearly all their apps on iOS.
When did I say there was parity? I just pointed out they do create Android apps for some of their services.
They’re both acting in the interest of the company and not the user. Apple make money by selling devices. Protecting the services that push you to purchase Apple devices makes sense.
Google are an advertising company and by bringing their services to Apple devices they make money off the users.
Is not altruism, it’s profiteering.
By saying "apple puts their services" it implied to me that you were suggesting that apple actually put much of its inhouse software on Android, which isn't the case. Not in the same way that saying "Google puts its services on iOS" is accurate because a great deal of Google's software is available on iOS.
In our conversation who is saying anything about altruism? What I said was Google releases a lot of, in my opinion, incredibly useful software for free and then pays for it by selling ads. I feel like this is incredibly obvious and for me it's a good deal because I like Google's free services and I'd rather see ads about things I might actually be interested in than things I'm not interested in.
What is the business model that justifies putting iMessage on Google phones, or supporting one of its competitors?
Because if there isn’t one, they can’t do it.
As I said, Google aren’t doing us because they’re your mate, they’re doing it to make money.
Companies are not your friend.
Who here is saying that any company is your friend?
You’ve avoided my question. What is the business driver for Apple to do this?
Apple can do whatever it wants. Currently they want to keep a barrier between Android and Apple users as a strategy for driving iphone sales.
A reason could be just to create a better experience for its users. Currently Apple to Android messages are SMS and MMS, which are unencrypted. Apple could ensure the security of its users' messages by implementing RCS, which has E2E encryption.
But that doesn’t make them money. In fact by making it easier for Apple customers inside the walled garden to switch away, it’ll cost them money.
There’s no way they do it without regulation.
It drives me nuts that I can’t type an iMessage from my PC (Windows phone app is garbage) so I get the frustration.
Sucking that Jobs peen.
You can think what you want, but the fact is that Apple makes money from iMessage in the form of keeping people in its ecosystem and won’t share iMessage unless forced to. Google would do the same thing because they’re both businesses that exist to make money. Apple isn’t my friend, and Google isn’t yours. Google doesn’t want to you to message your friends in an easier manner, they want Apple to lose one of its incentives keeping users on the iPhone. Corporations are not your friend and Google has ulterior motives for saying what they said, and Apple has ulterior motives for rejecting it. I get it, though, Apple bad, Google good. With so much going on in the world, I’m glad you decided to fight for Google. That huge corporation could really use your support. They just need some money. And it does read like Google being mad they can’t play with Apple and keep people locked into iPhone like Apple does (aka little kid being mad he can’t join the big kids).