Bumthunder

Thanks for this, this is useful info.

Have you got any links to substantiate your statements? I haven’t seen anything from a reputable source that explains or even states that Google Messages doesn’t work with Jibe.

Wow, that an interesting interpretation of insults you have. I think most people would interpret being called foolish as an insult but you do you.

Finally, a useful link to an article. I haven’t been paying attention for the last ten years because I’m not as passionate and invested in this subject as you I guess? That’s part of the reason I come to comment threads like this, the condescension and insults come with the territory unfortunately

From the article you posted I think I understand that AT&T enabled a noncompliant RCS client on some of their phones which doesn’t interoperate with the Jibe Mobile system that Google uses? Jibe Mobile being GSMA universal profile compliant:

https://www.gsma.com/membership/m/jibe-mobile-inc/

So calling someone foolish isn’t an insult. Ok then.

Please find ascribe any beliefs to me, I really really don’t have any on this subject. I don’t "enjoy the idea" of anything RCS related. You’re projecting your passion about the subject.

Again, because you don’t seem to get this at all, your statements aren’t facts, they’re just statements from someone called BulletTooth_Tony on the internet. If you post articles backing up your claims then your statements will have some credence. Until then, well, it’s mildly interesting reading someone’s opinions.

Implying my alleged belief is asinine, that was the insult.

Which articles have you provided? In this part of the thread you’ve posted a single article about a client API which I explained isn’t the same as a backend API.

If you can’t provide articles then I guess we’re supposed to accept your beliefs as fact?

Maybe you’re right in everything you say, however without sources it would be asinine to take some random person’s posts on the internet as fact.

Thanks for the entirely unnecessary insult. Nice chat.

I don’t have any beliefs, I’ve posted links with info on the subject. I’ve learnt very little from your responses because you’ve not posted any articles detailing your emphatically made statements. At this point if someone asks me about the RCS spec and I replied that it’s a Google controlled spec and they asked how I knew that for a fact I’d reply that BulletTooth_Tony said so. It’s not a compelling argument.

As for your questions about interoperability, can you point us to some articles with info on the issues? Or are we expected to consider your statements fact.

The article you posted contains info on the client API. I don’t see anywhere in the article that indicates that the client API, used by Android apps, doesn’t use the GSMA server side API to send and receive RCS messages?

I would expect the same architecture is implemented with SMS? A developer writes an SMS app but doesn’t code at the level that actually connects to the carrier SMS servers directly, rather it calls Android APIs that do the low level connectivity. If I was going to write a WebDAV client or a POP3 client I’d rather use a library that does the low level stuff for me.

From your other posts it sounds like carriers have been slow to install their own RCS endpoints on their networks so Google built and commissioned their own backend. Since they control Android too they can ensure (bugs permitting) that the client and the back end work together. However, I don’t see anything to indicate that they diverged from the GSMA RCS specs?

Here’s an article from this year about a GSMA accredited RCS implementation:

https://www.smsapi.com/blog/link-mobility-launches-gsma-compliant-rcs-api-globally/

I haven’t read anything to indicate that the GSMA have washed their hands of the RCS spec and handed over control to Google.

TLDR: client APIs and backend APIs are different.

Rich Communication Suite – Advanced Communications
Services and Client Specification by the GSMA:

https://www.gsma.com/futurenetworks/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RCC.07-v11.0.pdf

Test app included in AOSP 12:

https://android.googlesource.com/platform/packages/services/Telephony/+/master/testapps/TestRcsApp/

Some API info and documents can be found here:

https://www.gsma.com/futurenetworks/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/RCS_API_requirements_v2_2.pdf

My understanding is that Amazon have the rights to The Hobbit and LOTR plus indices. They don’t have rights to The SIlmarillion, Unfinished Tales or any other works though they can get permission to use other maps/events/characters/etc on a case by case basis. This has resulted in them re-imagining aspects and events of the second age.

That said, while I’d love a perfectly accurate retelling of the second age preceded by a synopsis of the creation of Arda what I’ve seen in episode one has been great. Extremely high production values and great acting. I see it as a type of "what if…" production. There’s nothing wrong with it being different, it’s just… different.

I love the lore, the back stories, the maps, etc as much as the next fan but I won’t let deviations from the source detract from my enjoyment just because it’s not "right".

In a parallel universe this series is the original work and the only people who are giving it 1s and 2s are people who’d never enjoy fantasy anyway.