No. I’m sorry. You can’t just say it and make it true. Please show me how Google owns RCS or prevents other developers from implementing it within their own apps.
I’m convinced you’re incorrect. SMTP is an open transport protocol defined in RFC 2821 by the IETF. Anything that is an IP “open protocol” would be defined by IETF as an RFC. No one owns it. No license is required to operate an SMTP server. Same with other common protocols like SIP. It sets qualifications/requirements for what it is so anyone can use it.
RCS is a proprietary standard owned by the GSMA. It seems there is some support for developers that want to use RCS but it’s through an API. Meaning your use is licensed and at a cost. Also, you can’t really see what it’s doing. You’re just using an API. Your access can be revoked. So is it an open standard? No.
I did my own research and I plan to try these APIs because I have used other messaging services like twilio for paging applications. But here are some other geeks arguing about it:
The specification exists. It’s not free as in beer. This is really beside the point. Google implemented an RCS messaging client. Your cellular carriers implement the RCS endpoints the clients use.
What have you explained? That RCS is not stewarded by the IETF? That’s not the crux of the issue. My original claim was that RCS was more open than iMessage and that RCS is not owned or controlled by Google. Tell me where I’m wrong, and back it up with good sources. Or not. Whatever you’re feeling like.
I don’t have the technical knowledge to explain how what works, but there are no FOSS or 3rd party RCS apps for a reason and you can find various posts on social media from devs trying to implement or even reverse engineer RCS and failing
No. I’m sorry. You can’t just say it and make it true. Please show me how Google owns RCS or prevents other developers from implementing it within their own apps.
I’m convinced you’re incorrect. SMTP is an open transport protocol defined in RFC 2821 by the IETF. Anything that is an IP “open protocol” would be defined by IETF as an RFC. No one owns it. No license is required to operate an SMTP server. Same with other common protocols like SIP. It sets qualifications/requirements for what it is so anyone can use it.
RCS is a proprietary standard owned by the GSMA. It seems there is some support for developers that want to use RCS but it’s through an API. Meaning your use is licensed and at a cost. Also, you can’t really see what it’s doing. You’re just using an API. Your access can be revoked. So is it an open standard? No.
I did my own research and I plan to try these APIs because I have used other messaging services like twilio for paging applications. But here are some other geeks arguing about it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/wm18td/stop_telling_people_that_rcs_is_an_open_standard/
https://www.gsma.com/futurenetworks/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RCC.07-v11.0.pdf
The specification exists. It’s not free as in beer. This is really beside the point. Google implemented an RCS messaging client. Your cellular carriers implement the RCS endpoints the clients use.
Well others including I have explained it to you. It’s not open. And your comparison (SMTP) shows your lack of knowledge on the subject.
What have you explained? That RCS is not stewarded by the IETF? That’s not the crux of the issue. My original claim was that RCS was more open than iMessage and that RCS is not owned or controlled by Google. Tell me where I’m wrong, and back it up with good sources. Or not. Whatever you’re feeling like.
I don’t have the technical knowledge to explain how what works, but there are no FOSS or 3rd party RCS apps for a reason and you can find various posts on social media from devs trying to implement or even reverse engineer RCS and failing