They're also apparently adding markdown which is neat, but considering all the recent Google news of them trying to lock down the web, I'd rather they focus on adding an RCS API so other apps can exist...
What if I just want my phone’s text messaging app to only do text messages? What if I don’t want fluff features like voice messages that I didn’t ask for? Is there a simple vanilla text messaging app to take over texts on my phone since Google feels the need to add extra weight to Messages, an otherwise simple feature that all cell phones share?
None will, Google is slowly closed-sourcing the entire platform. Messaging was one of the next steps. Also why apps like Signal won’t be seeing carrier messaging in the future.
Luckily you’re on android and not an iPhone. You can go ahead and install whichever text messaging handling application you would like in its place to use and switch the default app.
I really don’t know why you’re being down voted, this is definitely true. I’m Gen Z, and I definitely got excluded from group chats in high school because I have an Android phone. Even in college it’s a pain to communicate with people outside of engineering/CS/DS majors because they always complain about the green bubble.
I know. I was pointing out one of the nice things that this person can do, since they’re referring specifically to the default android sms handling app, is that android allows you to switch the default to whatever sms app you’d prefer to use. So if you don’t like the direction Google is taking theirs, you can find a different one that better fits with what you prefer.
If you have an iPhone and don’t like the direction apple takes one of their default apps, like sms or phone calling apps, you can’t change the defaults that handle those and other phone functions.
You can replace it with any of thousands of old shitty SMS apps if you want. It’s not iOS.
Most of us want advanced features and privacy. And unfortunately, in order to get those features, you often have to be using the same app/service across devices. Google seems to have finally caught on that constantly changing messaging apps is killing them, so they made an app to be the “default” on Android devices.
I personally use QKSMS, which isn’t perfect, but it’s all I’ve been able to stand since Signal dropped SMS support.
This RCS stuff scares me a bit, because it sounds like it will function over a data connection and not be nearly as universal of a standard as SMS/MMS is. There are already a million such apps and standards if one wants to use data for messaging. Trying to sneak it on top of SMS is very annoying. If I use my SMS app, I want my messages to be sent as such. Getting a surprise data bill shouldn’t be a fear.
RCS does function over a data connection (and WiFi!), however unless you’re sending large files over the wire it’s probably not going to have any effect on your data bill. Text messages are a handful of kilobytes large at worst. SMS/MMS have lots of issues to do with security and capability, and most handsets support it in some form already.
Vert unsurprising that Discord consumes a bunch of data but that’s not really a “messaging app”.
If Signal is consuming too much data, it’s because you’re in too many group chats with photos and videos. You can change the settings so media will only download over Wi-Fi.
nobody thinks discord is e2ee. "private messages" usually means the same thing as "direct messages" -- messages between a defined set of people as opposed to an open group. You know and understand this term, you're just being a dick because you think that's an effective way to convince people to stop using proprietary software without basic features like e2ee. You're wrong.
I do know and understand the difference, which is exactly why I made the correction. I’m not being a dick, I’m trying to correct poor nomenclature. I’m not trying to convince anyone to do anything except make informed decisions. I’d argue that’s the opposite of being a dick. But thanks for weighing in.
You're trying to "correct" the correct usage of vernacular English because you feel like reinventing the language to suit your personal idea of what it should be. English is bigger than you. The phrase "private messaging" has meaning, and it's not up to you to decide what that meaning is.
No one is trying to “sneak” anything. The ideal messaging app has advanced messaging features as the primary and then falls back to SMS if it’s unavailable, and that’s exactly how this works.
If you’re looking for a less advanced and secure app, you can very easily install and use anything else.
Because SMS is inherently feature-lite. But it’s free and unlimited, which is kind of the whole point of using it over a feature-rich app that uses data.
That looks like it’s stopped being developed too. Connect You, a Contacts app originally, is adding SMS support— but right now it kind of sucks, so we probably want to wait a bit for development.
For me, the one feature I want from messages is sending text messages when I don’t have an internet connection. If “having features [I’m not] interested in using” means it breaks the one feature I want (by default & without telling me), seems reasonable to be a bit peeved, no?
The connection between having a feature you don’t want and missing one you do want is entirely in your mind. If you’re going to complain, why not complain about what’s actually bothering you?
Add comment