Android
DROID DOES
Welcome to the droidymcdroidface-iest, Lemmyest (Lemmiest), test, bestest, phoniest, pluckiest, snarkiest, and spiciest Android community on Lemmy (Do not respond)! Here you can participate in amazing discussions and events relating to all things Android.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules
1. All posts must be relevant to Android devices/operating system.
2. Posts cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
3. No spam, self promotion, or upvote farming. Sources engaging in these behavior will be added to the Blacklist.
4. Non-whitelisted bots will be banned.
5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.
6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.
7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.
8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.
Community Resources:
We are Android girls*,
In our Lemmy.world.
The back is plastic,
It's fantastic.
*Well, not just girls: people of all gender identities are welcomed here.
Our Partner Communities:
view the rest of the comments
You're the only one whining. People use SMS in the US because it's free and completely interoperable with every other phone. If you send someone an SMS you know with great certainty that it will be received. Bragging about everyone using Meta to communicate is not the dunk you think it is.
Not to get too bogged down in this debate or anything, but this European is surprised you say that SMS is reliable. One of the great motivators to use web-based messaging apps is because SMS is so notoriously unreliable, with messages occasionally not receiving or sending. Has SMS reliablity been improved much in recent years? Or is web-based messaging less reliable in your experience?
Genuinely curious btw, I'm not in the same party as the troll elsewhere in this thread.
I cannot recollect EVER having problems sending SMS, which is not something I can say for any other text messaging platform. Maybe that's just me. However that's irrelevant, as the point that I was making is that EVERYONE has SMS. You don't have to ask anyone "Hey do you have the SMS app?" You just ask for their number and fire off a message and Bob's your Uncle. If you want to send them a WhatsApp message and they don't have WhatsApp, it is a 100% guarantee they will not receive your message.
Ah, I see. Your point isn't necessarily reliability but availability. It's an interesting perspective to hear that the US appears to be so behind (at least from a European perspective of course) when it comes to messaging apps. As far as SMS reliablity goes, I have occasionally had messages not send, or have messages come in delayed considerably. Or stuff like 2-factor auth texts not coming in, requesting a new one and then suddenly receiving 3 at a time. Not deal-breaking or anything, just the occasional annoyance.
I don't think WhatsApp allows you to send a message to someone who doesn't have the app. So WhatsApp would just inform you. Although I don't recall the last time someone did not have either WhatsApp or Signal installed. But again, that appears to be far more common in the US?
Do you ever miss the extra features that web messaging brings, like in-chat polls, voice messages, etc...? I'm not sure how much of that RCS supports (because almost nobody uses that here). To me it seems like the convenience of web messaging outweighs the "does person x have app y" question, but that's probably because I never really have to ask myself that question.
I also just realised that you state that everyone has SMS messaging. There are phone plans available here that don't offer SMS messaging anymore. You can still receive them, but sending them either doesn't work or costs a high premium (obviously this disadvantage is offset by a lower price for the rest of the plan). I wouldn't be entirely surprised if SMS eventually just gets phased out.
It's both. If it's not always available, it's not reliable.
I don't think we are, at all. Sure some other countries have a unified messaging platform, but all of them are corporate-owned, controlled, monitored, and not federated. In that regard it's barely a step up. Ideally we would have something like email (but of fucking course not email, because its atrocious) that doesn't require any corporation or centralization involved, where we could run our own or choose which entity we want to host our data, and would be interoperable across entities. Anything short of that I wouldn't consider much of an advancement (except Signal).
The only people that I talk to on Signal are the ones that I've been able to force to use it. If they send me messages on FB, IG, SMS or whatev, I just wont reply to them. I think there are quite a few more that use WA but I don't know because I refuse.
Nice to have but not necessary and not worth it.
Much like iMessage, Google Messages is the messaging app that comes pre-installed on most Android phones, so people who have those phones use them. There aren't many but there are some. RCS is pretty dreadful, currently. iMessage is by far and away the most popular chat platform here, and is largely responsible for Apple's local dominance in the smartphone market. Especially among teens it is WILDLY popular. Apple is moving to add interoperability with RCS soon (thanks EU).
I've never heard of such a thing.
Not around here, for sure.
I mostly say it because SMS is so ancient. Not encrypted, messages are storied by the carrier and can be requested by the government, etc... In that sense, even a corporate-controlled messaging system that offers E2EE would be a step up. After all, SMS is pretty corporate-controlled too, just different ones. But again, this is very much a European perspective, I can see why in the US this might be different.
Ah true, iPhones are much more popular in the US. Quite interesting actually how that happened, iPhones aren't all that popular here at all and Android phones dominate the market. I wonder why Apple hasn't managed to copy their dominance here as well?
Looks like Tello, Cricket, MobileX, US Mobile and T-Mobile can offer it at least. Apparently it's often marketed as a Tablet plan, which I suppose makes sense, but it seems a lot of carriers allow you to disable SMS in their web portals these days. I thought it'd be more niche in the US but it seems a more common option than I thought.
It's been interesting to hear from you about your perspective on this, thanks!
Yes, I understand all of that. I just refuse to ask anyone or be complicit in using a corporate-controlled chat platform. I'll ask them to either use Signal or use my Matrix server.
Well I've never owned or used a tablet so I can't comment on that but I don't think people are putting them in their phones.
Thats called jabber and it's existed for 25 years.
Yes, I know, there are dozens of potential choices, but no one wants to use them.
In the US at least reliability hasn't been an issue in 15 plus years at least...
I personally occasionally experience delayed sending/receiving of messages, or messages suddenly coming in in bulk. Only very rarely do messages not come in at all thankfully, but mostly the occasional delays in sending/receiving I think led to the reputation of poor reliablity for SMS. But it makes sense that the US would try to keep those issues to a minimum if so many people still use it, whereas in Europe perhaps it's less of a priority?
I'd still rather use meta tho (which end to end encrypts the content) than unencrypted plaintext shit that goes straight to the government.
Yes that's all well and good if the person you're trying message uses WhatsApp...
The fact you think Meta won't hand over your data is sad. If you think they can't save your "encrypted" messages you're delusional. Their business model is selling user's data. You can take it to the bank they have a backdoor built in.
The fact that youre illiterate and you're hallucinating stuff i never said, is sad. I will address your concern however.
If you think that they are actually not encrypting the message content, then you're a conspiracy theorist. They have thousands of other ways to track the user and give metadata to law enforcement. There is no need for them to lie about protecting the messages, as none of the regular users care about that. They had more than enough users of Messenger even before it was E2EE.
Yep, you're dumb.
What a smart thing to say 🥱
No, I'm actually very amused by Americans' unwillingness to install a proper messenger and whine about green and blue bubbles.
The only messengers I mentioned by name were Signal and Telegram. You must me have confused with someone else.
The only people who whine about that are children and Europeans.
No one is doing that. You must have this thread confused with another one.
While I agree that Signal is an excellent choice, almost no one uses it, which is exactly why its an insufficient replacement for SMS. It's been pointed out in several threads that WhatsApp is basically a societal expectation in Europe so I assume that's what your referring to.
Telegram is the only option that's even worse than Meta.
All those stubborn Americans do that, whether they spell it out all the time out not.
Not with the attitude to refuse to install 3rd party messengers in the first place.
In different regions around the world, different messengers are the norm (for example Line in Japan). Only Americans are zealous defenders of archaic SMS.
Lolno.
Okay so you admit you were just fabricating this argument?
It doesn't matter what your attitude is.
Do you live in Japan?
Once again, you're fabricating arguments. No one is defending SMS. But it's the only method that gets the job done 100% of the time, regardless of what apps are installed on your phone.
Bruh it doesn't even have E2EE...
No, because it's a real argument.
Completely irrelevant where I live. I made a random example from around the world that shows how non-US societies don't cling to SMS.
That's how defending SMS looks like. SMS, the true work horse. 🙄
Neither has SMS which you and your American friends defend so hard.
It is a real argument no one here was having...
It's not, when we're discussing what platform you're referring to. Given that you're refusing to disclose that platform as well as the country you live in, I'll take that as confirmation that my assumption was correct.
You're moving the goalposts. We were discussing Telegram vs. WA.
I don't know why you keep trying to push this Strawman. Is WhatsApp better than SMS? Sure, if the person you're trying to communicate with is actually using it.... If they're not, it doesn't matter which one is better in theory because only one of them is actually going to accomplish the goal you're looking for. Most of us don't care to have a conversation with everyone we contact about what chat apps each other are using or prefer, we just want to communicate, and SMS achieves that goal without a pfaff. You don't have this conversation because you assume everyone is using WA, and like I mentioned in my original reply, the fact that you all use Meta for communication is not a flex.
Actually, I just replied to Eheran's comment do didn't know either Google Messages nor Samsung Messages. It's you people who feel the urge to discuss my short reply further and further which I entertained because I was a bit bored anyway. I actually only mentioned Signal and Telegram (and later Line) by name but stayed on topic of SMS/RCS all the time. You making up discussions and moving goalposts yourself is on you.
Actually, none of that has anything to do with what we were discussing? Just as a reminder, since you seem to be lost:
Me: "Telegram is the only option that’s even worse than Meta"
You: "Lolno."
Me: "it doesn't even have E2EE"
You: "Neither has SMS"
This is called a "whataboutism" because no one was discussing SMS in that particular context. Try to keep up.