On 2023-02-17 19:20, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> The link I have is in Spanish, but I'll translate it using DeepL.
> Someone else can find an English language link.
>
> <https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/vodafone-finiquita-mensajes-chat-rcs-10475>
>
> Vodafone ends RCS chat messages and MMS that enhanced SMS with pictures
> and video

Now I notice a different news item contradicting the above.

Paint me baffled.

Again the article is Spanish, so I'll do an automated translation with
DeepL.

<https://www.xatakamovil.com/vodafone/vodafone-se-alia-google-impulso-a-mensajes-rcs-pixel-europa>

*Vodafone and Google collaborate: RCS and Pixel messaging boost in Europe*

Updated 23 February 2023, 09:37
jose-ricca Pepu Ricca

Vodafone today announced a close collaboration with Google that covers
several aspects. The red teleco will push RCS messaging, a technology
that replaces the old SMS with more possibilities than SMS, such as
sending photos and videos. In addition, the Pixel and Android TV will
become more important within the company.

As we can see in the official announcement, the measures taken to align
these two companies in the technology sector include the three aspects
mentioned above. Similarly, Google will benefit from 5G connectivity and
the fibre optic network deployed by Vodafone.

It is clear that there is strength in numbers, or so the two companies
must have thought in order to strengthen each other and give a small
boost to several of their products.

On the one hand, Vodafone announces that its customers will now be able
to enjoy RCS messaging thanks to Google Jibe Cloud, providing an
enhanced experience. Google Messages will be the default application for
Android phones sold through the operator. According to the statement,
this messaging system is used in the enterprise world by more than 500
million users, which is almost nothing [irony]

In addition, the agreement brings a new addition to the portfolio of
handsets sold by the company. The Pixel 7 will be available from
Vodafone. As confirmed by Hiroshi Lockheimer, Google's Senior Vice
President of Platforms and Ecosystems, they are joining forces to bring
users "exciting Android smartphones", i.e. their own Google Pixel.

The partnership, in addition to the Pixel 7, will also add the Pixel
Watch to Vodafone's line-up. Google's smartwatch will be compatible with
the OneNumber service to use it freely without relying on a mobile
phone. The Mountain View company's wireless headphones, the Pixel Buds,
enter the equation.

Finally, the third section of this close union emphasises Android TV.
From now on, the set-top boxes that the operator provides for its TV
services will use Android TV. Thus, customers will be able to download
applications through the Google Play Store at the same time as accessing
Vodafone TV content.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Am 23.02.23 um 12:57 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
> On 2023-02-17 19:20, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>> The link I have is in Spanish, but I'll translate it using DeepL.
>> Someone else can find an English language link.
>>
>> <https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/vodafone-finiquita-mensajes-chat-rcs-10475>
>>
>> Vodafone ends RCS chat messages and MMS that enhanced SMS with pictures
>> and video
>
> Now I notice a different news item contradicting the above.
>
> Paint me baffled.
>
> Again the article is Spanish, so I'll do an automated translation with
> DeepL.
>
> <https://www.xatakamovil.com/vodafone/vodafone-se-alia-google-impulso-a-mensajes-rcs-pixel-europa>
>
> *Vodafone and Google collaborate: RCS and Pixel messaging boost in Europe*
>
> Updated 23 February 2023, 09:37
> jose-ricca Pepu Ricca
>
> Vodafone today announced a close collaboration with Google that covers
> several aspects. The red teleco will push RCS messaging, a technology
> that replaces the old SMS with more possibilities than SMS, such as
> sending photos and videos. In addition, the Pixel and Android TV will
> become more important within the company.

Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.

The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
inferior technology.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On 2023-02-21 16:34, sms wrote:
> On 2/21/2023 2:27 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I grepped for the word "cable" in there, and did not find it :-?
>
> It's in the user manual
> <https://downloads.monoprice.com/files/manuals/43251_Manual_210427.pdf>
> on page 9:
>
> "If your audio device does not have Bluetooth® or if you prefer to not
> use Bluetooth, you can plug the headphones directly into the audio
> output of your device.
>
> 1. Plug one end of the included 3.5mm Audio Cable into the 3.5mm Audio
> Jack on the headphones, then plug the other end into the headphones jack
> on your phone or another 3.5mm audio source.
>
> 2. Use the audio playback controls on your connected device to control
> playback. The controls on the headphones do not function without a
> Bluetooth connection."
>
> I also see that the price went up $20 since yesterday! Wish that the
> charging port was USB-C instead of Micro-USB.

Ok.

I will have to go shopping one day.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2023-02-21 14:58, nospam wrote:
> In article <k5jvucFsbmpU5@mid.individual.net>, Carlos E. R.
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> I have a pair of "normal" BT headphones, and they experience cuts. On
>>>> the 50? range. Sometimes for a full 30".
>>>
>>> then they're not normal.
>>
>> All BT speakers or headphones I have tried on all tablets and phones I
>> have tried experienced cuts.
>
> how far away?

One meter.

>
> i don't know what you've tried, but they shouldn't cut unless they're
> outside the range of bluetooth itself, which is *much* more than is
> needed when a phone is in a pocket or even the next room.
>
> i've used bluetooth headphones without issue when the phone was on
> another floor (through walls & floor/ceiling). only when i was two
> floors away did it *start* to drop.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2023-02-23 14:09, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 23.02.23 um 12:57 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
>> On 2023-02-17 19:20, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>
>>> The link I have is in Spanish, but I'll translate it using DeepL.
>>> Someone else can find an English language link.
>>>
>>> <https://bandaancha.eu/articulos/vodafone-finiquita-mensajes-chat-rcs-10475>
>>>
>>> Vodafone ends RCS chat messages and MMS that enhanced SMS with pictures
>>> and video
>>
>> Now I notice a different news item contradicting the above.
>>
>> Paint me baffled.
>>
>> Again the article is Spanish, so I'll do an automated translation with
>> DeepL.
>>
>> <https://www.xatakamovil.com/vodafone/vodafone-se-alia-google-impulso-a-mensajes-rcs-pixel-europa>
>>
>> *Vodafone and Google collaborate: RCS and Pixel messaging boost in Europe*
>>
>> Updated 23 February 2023, 09:37
>> jose-ricca Pepu Ricca
>>
>> Vodafone today announced a close collaboration with Google that covers
>> several aspects. The red teleco will push RCS messaging, a technology
>> that replaces the old SMS with more possibilities than SMS, such as
>> sending photos and videos. In addition, the Pixel and Android TV will
>> become more important within the company.
>
> Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
> share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
> this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
>
> The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
> inferior technology.
>

It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
phone comes with it.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article <s6rkcjx3iq.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> > Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
> > share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
> > this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
> >
> > The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
> > inferior technology.
> >
>
> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
> phone comes with it.

limiting to phones makes it *not* universal.

other messaging options work on *any* device, whether it's a phone,
tablet, laptop or desktop computer. even a raspberry pi can work.

In article <r8rkcjx3iq.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> >>>> I have a pair of "normal" BT headphones, and they experience cuts. On
> >>>> the 50? range. Sometimes for a full 30".
> >>>
> >>> then they're not normal.
> >>
> >> All BT speakers or headphones I have tried on all tablets and phones I
> >> have tried experienced cuts.
> >
> > how far away?
>
> One meter.

something is very wrong. at that distance, it should *not* drop out at
all.

nospam wrote:

> limiting to phones makes it *not* universal.
>
> other messaging options work on *any* device, whether it's a phone,
> tablet, laptop or desktop computer. even a raspberry pi can work.

My Android messaging app already works on *any* device also nospam.

On 2023-02-23 20:36, nospam wrote:
> In article <s6rkcjx3iq.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
>>> share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
>>> this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
>>>
>>> The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
>>> inferior technology.
>>>
>>
>> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
>> phone comes with it.
>
> limiting to phones makes it *not* universal.
>
> other messaging options work on *any* device, whether it's a phone,
> tablet, laptop or desktop computer. even a raspberry pi can work.

I don't know if it is limited to phones. I did not said so.

I just googled "sending RCS from computer" and found hits. There is a
google messages web client, for starters.

<https://www.androidpolice.com/use-google-messages-laptop-desktop/>

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article <8dtkcjxgls.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> >>> Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
> >>> share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
> >>> this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
> >>>
> >>> The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
> >>> inferior technology.
> >>>
> >>
> >> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
> >> phone comes with it.
> >
> > limiting to phones makes it *not* universal.
> >
> > other messaging options work on *any* device, whether it's a phone,
> > tablet, laptop or desktop computer. even a raspberry pi can work.
>
> I don't know if it is limited to phones. I did not said so.

it's carrier controlled and requires a phone number, so yes it is.

<https://www.androidauthority.com/rcs-google-3090142/>
RCS is also completely reliant on your phone number being active
when you send or receive messages. This makes it intricately linked
to your carrier bill (h/t Ron Amadeo for bringing this into the
discussion). If you happen to miss a payment or have an issue with
your carrier, or if you live in a country where number portability is
difficult or inexistent, your line goes down and so does your ability
to use SMS and RCS. This is unlike IP-based chat services where you
can connect back at any point in the future, get all of your pending
messages, and continue where you left off.

In article <tt8glk$34188$1@paganini.bofh.team>, Andy Burnelli
<nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

> > limiting to phones makes it *not* universal.
> >
> > other messaging options work on *any* device, whether it's a phone,
> > tablet, laptop or desktop computer. even a raspberry pi can work.
>
> My Android messaging app already works on *any* device also nospam.

as usual, you snipped to alter context.

the discussion is about rcs, which is carrier controlled and requires a
phone number. sending rcs via a computer requires a linked phone.

other messaging apps do not have that requirement. simple concept.

<https://www.androidauthority.com/rcs-google-3090142/>
RCS is also completely reliant on your phone number being active
when you send or receive messages. This makes it intricately linked
to your carrier bill (h/t Ron Amadeo for bringing this into the
discussion). If you happen to miss a payment or have an issue with
your carrier, or if you live in a country where number portability is
difficult or inexistent, your line goes down and so does your ability
to use SMS and RCS. This is unlike IP-based chat services where you
can connect back at any point in the future, get all of your pending
messages, and continue where you left off.

Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2023-02-23 14:09, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> > Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
> > share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
> > this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
> >
> > The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
> > inferior technology.
>
> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
> phone comes with it.

Except if it's an iPhone, or a dumbphone, or if your carrier doesn't support
it, or if you change carrier to one that doesn't, or...

It's actually worse, because you trade the lack of universality that can be
fixed by installing the appropriate messaging app, to one which depends on
your phone brand or carrier, which are things that are much harder to
change.

I think what you mean is the app falls back to SMS if the recipient doesn't
support RCS. But that's not unique to RCS, and when any app falls back you
get a degraded experience. Which, given the patchiness of RCS support, is
not unlikely.

Theo

Am 23.02.23 um 20:25 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
> On 2023-02-23 14:09, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
>> share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
>> this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
>>
>> The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
>> inferior technology.
>>
>
> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
> phone comes with it.

That is not correct. RCS has to be supported by the service-provider as
well as the handset manufacturers. Apple does not support RCS.

The functionality is ways behind well known messaging apps/services like
WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Threema and others like iMessage and some
others.

What could be the unique selling proposition of RCS? I used it already:
I do not see any.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

nospam wrote:

>> My Android messaging app already works on *any* device also nospam.
>
> as usual, you snipped to alter context.
If you're too stupid to know I _always_ snip the quotes, on _all_ forums,
then just keep saying that - since it's indicative of your rather low IQ.

A normal person snips what they're not responding to.
I snip quotes on _every_ Usenet and web forum I participate in, nospam.

It's rude NOT to snip quotes and only quote what you're responding to.
If you're too stupid to realize that, then it's how I know you're stupid.

> the discussion is about rcs, which is carrier controlled and requires a
> phone number. sending rcs via a computer requires a linked phone.

I was talking about your comment that some messaging apps work on *any*
platform, where Android messaging apps work on *any* platform.

If that's too difficult a concept for you to comprehend, then, again, it's
how I know you have a low IQ, nospam (and an agenda to tout iOS products).

> other messaging apps do not have that requirement. simple concept.

You're an idiot if you don't understand that the penalty you pay for that
"simple concept" is that it _requires_ logging into the Apple mothership.

It's no longer shocking how _ignorant_ you are of how iOS really works.

The fact you don't _know_ this is how I know that you're stupid nospam.

On 2023-02-23 21:35, nospam wrote:
> In article <8dtkcjxgls.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>> Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
>>>>> share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
>>>>> this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
>>>>> inferior technology.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
>>>> phone comes with it.
>>>
>>> limiting to phones makes it *not* universal.
>>>
>>> other messaging options work on *any* device, whether it's a phone,
>>> tablet, laptop or desktop computer. even a raspberry pi can work.
>>
>> I don't know if it is limited to phones. I did not said so.
>
> it's carrier controlled and requires a phone number, so yes it is.

Big deal! :-D

So what?

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2023-02-23 21:49, Theo wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2023-02-23 14:09, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
>>> share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
>>> this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
>>>
>>> The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
>>> inferior technology.
>>
>> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
>> phone comes with it.
>
> Except if it's an iPhone, or a dumbphone, or if your carrier doesn't support
> it, or if you change carrier to one that doesn't, or...

Then you have plain SMS, transparently.

>
> It's actually worse, because you trade the lack of universality that can be
> fixed by installing the appropriate messaging app, to one which depends on
> your phone brand or carrier, which are things that are much harder to
> change.

And the app will be installed on every (smart) phone by default. All
android phones, obviously :-)

>
> I think what you mean is the app falls back to SMS if the recipient doesn't
> support RCS. But that's not unique to RCS, and when any app falls back you
> get a degraded experience. Which, given the patchiness of RCS support, is
> not unlikely.
>
> Theo

--
Cheers, Carlos.

nospam wrote:

>> I don't know if it is limited to phones. I did not said so.
>
> it's carrier controlled and requires a phone number, so yes it is.

Idiot.

For the _adults_ on this Android newsgroup, _every_ messaging app requires
a unique way to determine who you are, so whether it's your phone number or
a unique login account is immaterial in terms of that simple basic fact.

It's clear that nospam does not comprehend that fact, but adults should.

Either you hand all your privacy to Apple (in the case of nospam), or, you
hand it to the carrier - but either way - you need a unique way to connect.

BTW, here's me, at this very moment, typing up my texts on Android from the
PC, where, with Android, there are so many ways to do that it's not funny.
<https://i.postimg.cc/pr13NYWW/android-on-windows.jpg> android on Windows

On 2023-02-23 22:28, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 23.02.23 um 20:25 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
>> On 2023-02-23 14:09, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Given the big picture the probability that RCS will increase market
>>> share in the global messaging market is almost zero. The other parts of
>>> this above described agreement make more sense in my humble opinion.
>>>
>>> The market of messaging is distributed and there is no place for
>>> inferior technology.
>>>
>>
>> It is not that inferior. And it has an advantage: universality. Every
>> phone comes with it.
>
> That is not correct. RCS has to be supported by the service-provider as
> well as the handset manufacturers. Apple does not support RCS.

Big deal. It is a walled garden, enter, at your own risk >:-p

>
> The functionality is ways behind well known messaging apps/services like
> WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Threema and others like iMessage and some
> others.
>
> What could be the unique selling proposition of RCS? I used it already:
> I do not see any.

As I said, that it allows people both sides of the pond to communicate
for free, considering that "over there" they use mostly SMS/MMS.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

In article <rl2lcjx3k1.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> >
> > it's carrier controlled and requires a phone number, so yes it is.
>
> Big deal! :-D

it is a big deal

> So what?

the so what is not everyone has a phone number, and they can change, as
was explained in the link i posted.

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> it's carrier controlled and requires a phone number, so yes it is.
>
> Big deal! :-D
>
> So what?

I agree with anyone who has a logically sensible opinion, where I agree
with Carlos that either you hand your privacy to the mothership, as you
must do in the case of Apple, or you hand it to the carrier, as you must do
in the case of your phone number.

*What nospam doesn't comprehend is that rather basic simple observation*

It's no longer shocking how little nospam knows of how iOS actually works.

Am 23.02.23 um 22:38 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
> On 2023-02-23 22:28, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> What could be the unique selling proposition of RCS? I used it already:
>> I do not see any.
>
> As I said, that it allows people both sides of the pond to communicate
> for free, considering that "over there" they use mostly SMS/MMS.

They use iMessage and Facebook Messenger.
Text-messages are also dead in the US.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

nospam wrote:

>>> it's carrier controlled and requires a phone number, so yes it is.
>>
>> Big deal! :-D
>
> it is a big deal

Every messaging app needs a _unique_ way for people to contact you.

It's either a unique account where they can track what you do.
Or it's a unique phone number where they can track what you do.

>> So what?
>
> the so what is not everyone has a phone number, and they can change, as
> was explained in the link i posted.

It's not clear whether nospam is aware of the basics that _every_ messaging
app requires "something" unique about you in order for the thing to work.

As far as I know, it's generally your phone number or a unique account.

Theo wrote:

> I think what you mean is the app falls back to SMS if the recipient doesn't
> support RCS. But that's not unique to RCS, and when any app falls back you
> get a degraded experience. Which, given the patchiness of RCS support, is
> not unlikely.

Hi Theo,
You seem to understand RCS where I admit that I only understand why Google
is desperate for RCS but I don't yet understand why people would care.

*Do you know why anyone would want RCS?*

What does RCS give that, for example, my messaging app doesn't already do?
*Pulse SMS* (Phone/Tablet/Web) by Maple Media, In-app purchases
free, adfree, reqgsf, 4.7star,78.5K reviews,1M+Downloads
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=xyz.klinker.messenger>

Carlos E.R. wrote:

>> That is not correct. RCS has to be supported by the service-provider as
>> well as the handset manufacturers. Apple does not support RCS.
>
> Big deal. It is a walled garden, enter, at your own risk >:-p

I agree with any sensible logical opinion, where I agree with Carlos that
you can decide to be locked up inside the walled garden but if you do, then
you are simply trading your phone number for a required Apple account.

Big deal.

It's not clear that nospam is aware that there is an account required.

>> The functionality is ways behind well known messaging apps/services like
>> WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Threema and others like iMessage and some
>> others.

All of those suffer from the fact they require an account, although for
WhatsApp, which I recently installed, the "phone number" _is_ the account.

>> What could be the unique selling proposition of RCS? I used it already:
>> I do not see any.
>
> As I said, that it allows people both sides of the pond to communicate
> for free, considering that "over there" they use mostly SMS/MMS.

I have to admit that I don't understand yet why anyone pines for RCS.
It's my fault though. I don't understand what I'm missing, I guess.

I'm sure nospam will tell me though... :)

On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 14:36:27 -0500, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> > how far away?
>>
>> One meter.
>
> something is very wrong. at that distance, it should *not*
> drop out at all.

Drop outs can occur when the input stage of the receiver is
overloaded by strong radio signals, for example close to a GSM
antenna mast or non-compliant WiFi.
--
Kees Nuyt