Talk:Rich Communication Services

Hi, Is there any spec. documents available on the RCS ? Aurelien. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.253.159.253 (talk) 13:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

See http://www.gsmworld.com/our-work/programmes-and-initiatives/rcs/2415.htm -Ylva —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ylva Hubatsa (talk • contribs) 06:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

On October 21, 2008, IP address 62.213.130.74 edited this article, removing the relative neutrality that it previously had, e.g.: - "meaningless jargon" - "touted as a benefit of IMS" Also, the statement about "much of the capability of RSC is already available from ISPs is technically true, but deliberately misleading, because ISPs (in the sense intended by the comment) do not host Mobile Phones or have Mobile Phone Networks, which is the primary target of RCS. Thus these are editorial viewpoints.

I'll work on this entry if I can get some time. I'm interested if anyone disagrees with this assessment, however, because in at least 30 edits since October, no one has changed this. Benevo (talk) 02:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rich Communication Services. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130129013618/http://www.joynus.com:80/about/ to http://www.joynus.com/about/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:10, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

A majority of the RCS Specifications is spent describing Release 1 - Release 8, RCS-e (enhanced), Joyn, with no sources. All of this has been abandoned by the GSMA in favor of Universal Profile RCS, and no MNOs are adding these old standards.

Major missing topics:

1. RCS Business Messaging (RBM) 2. Summary of MNO participation (RCS Launches) is both confusing and outdated. A much more accurate summary can be found here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14Ns9oV0Dh8_S5M-JHDvJ8sNHR6rpbiq2N6qZlP3g9zQ/ 3. How support varies (Person 2 Person interconnect, Worldwide interconnect, RBM, Device Support, Android app Support) 4. Future development, such as Android OS APIs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocketwidget (talk • contribs) 14:22, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I think this issue has been fixed by several users, including putting all the old specifications into the "Historical Specifications" section, and can be withdrawn. Rocketwidget (talk) 13:15, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd also suggest talking about the "Google Guest" program and the concept of "gold" countries (GSMA term for countries where all major operators support RCS), probably in relation to one another. But I'm not sure where this should go, nor can I find a good source for the concept of a gold country.

• EDITED to add*: I would also add a section on handset compatibility, but where exactly should it be placed? - 213.160.140.100 (talk) 12:16, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

can someone please rewrite "provides phonebook polling (for service discovery)"? if it is important enough to be in the first paragraph it should be made understandable. thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.195.58.239 (talk) 20:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

In "Commercial Deployments", I have replaced the old and outdated intro (from GSMA circa 201Something) with a succinct and accurate summary of Commercial deployments:

Apple maintains a global list of carriers that support Universal Profile RCS messaging in Messages (Apple). (source links to Wireless carrier support and features for iPhone in the United States and Canada - Apple Support) Google Messages supports RCS with these carriers, and additionally supports RCS for all users globally, provided directly by Google Jibe if the carrier does not offer RCS. The GSMA states that Universal Profile support is optional in 4G, but mandatory in 5G networks and devices.

Given this, does it make sense to continue maintaining the old and outdated "RCS Launches" table? Almost all of it is historical launches, many non-Universal Profile, that are now defunct. I think it's just confusing and should just be deleted. Rocketwidget (talk) 15:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Tagging @Sucrehypsy As this user has chatted with me on this topic before Rocketwidget (talk) 16:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I improved the table today. It's much more helpful and readable than it was. I think I might withdraw my proposal for deleting it, as it's combining information beyond just what one or two main citations contain.

That said, my expertise is mostly in the United States and there is still lots of missing and outdated information. I'd appreciate help, especially with the non-US carriers. Rocketwidget (talk) 18:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

The Introduction says "As with MMS, mobile service must be activated." Is this always true? I think I have seen instances where RCS messages were delivered over wifi, with mobile data disabled. 180.150.36.102 (talk) 04:13, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

This was my attempt at fixing the even more misleading "As for MMS, mobile data must be activated" https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rich_Communication_Services&diff=prev&oldid=1242921619 I'm open to suggestions to further improve this. I'm guessing the original intent was, RCS/MMS requires an active phone number, but the original similarly sounded like mobile data status active mattered. It does not. Rocketwidget (talk) 09:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I removed the sentence. I don't think it adds anything, and the paragraph already earlier notes this service is for mobile phones. Wikipedia:Be bold Rocketwidget (talk) 11:15, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Several parts of the article refer to the concept of a global RCS network, implying there's a neutral, federated network between different solution providers and interconnected hubs, much like SMS/MMS, with Jibe used by Google Messages as fallback. In practice, that isn't the case, and every attempt at interconnecting Jibe and other hubs that I know of (like the CCMI in the US and similar initiatives in Europe) have been killed off as MNOs gave in to Google more or less willingly.

This was stated almost literally by Mavenir's CEO on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pardeep-kohli-21339713_2022-was-a-disappointing-year-for-rcs-ecosystem-activity-7021565918166085632-Dmf2/

See also: https://www.fierce-network.com/wireless/mavenir-executes-some-layoffs-related-rcs-disappointment

It is further illustrated by Samsung Messages being discontinued, and incidentally by the iOS support: outside China, the feature is being rolled out only on M(V)NOs running Jibe.

This article is very long and full of outdated and historical information (for good reason, RCS was a total mess for a long time) as pointed out earlier, and in my opinion fails to convey a pretty important point: Google has effectively monopolized the network implementation and infrastructure, as well as the Android client to a very large extent. EnergyThen (talk) 22:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps these negative critiques should replace the 2018-2019 critiques in the Reception section that have become technologically outdated in 2025?

However I don't think the reception should only have negative critiques, since there are many favorable reviews of RCS and Wikipedia should be neutral. Rocketwidget (talk) 13:34, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I've added various clarifications to the article today, and some of them may speak to the issue of the change to Google Jibe dominance. For example:

In the Introduction:

The Google Guest program provides person-to-person (P2P) RCS in Google Messages on Android when a carrier does not provide RCS, provided via the Google Jibe backend. Alternatively, RCS service may be provided by a carrier directly; by 2025, carrier partnerships with Google Jibe for direct service have become common. Providing direct RCS service allows for support of additional clients such as Apple Messages, and enables carriers to make the additional choice of providing RCS Business Messages (RBM).

...

To accelerate adoption, Google transferred the team that was working on Google Allo to work on a wider RCS implementation, then in 2019 it launched the Google Guest program to provide an OTT (over-the-top) RCS solution using Jibe to all Google Android users for Person-to-Person (P2P) traffic without requiring carrier support. Google Guest rolled out globally by 2020. Google Guest is not used for RCS Business Messaging (RBM).

Adoption

In October 2019, the four major U.S. carriers announced an agreement to form the Cross-Carrier Messaging Initiative (CCMI) to jointly implement RCS using a newly developed app. This service was to be compatible with the Universal Profile. However, this carrier-made app was never implemented, and RCS via Google Guest and Google Jibe in Google Messages was rolled out by 2020. By 2021, both T-Mobile (now merged with Sprint) and AT&T signed deals with Google to adopt Google Messages. In 2023, T-Mobile and AT&T agreed to use Google Jibe directly to implement RCS services, and in 2024 Verizon agreed to use Google Jibe directly, an alternative to both self-implemented RCS and Google Guest.

I hope this helps address this issue? Rocketwidget (talk) 20:03, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes this is indeed clearer. I can give a shot at editing the table, as I believe it's a bit backwards currently. How about listing deployments in the first column, not clients? EnergyThen (talk) 00:36, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

I updated the table and renamed the commercial deployments section. I think we should just delete this big table as it's mostly outdated and irrelevant information. EnergyThen (talk) 16:55, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Looks improved to me. My only question is, I believe Google Messages does support backends that are not Google Jibe (not mandatory) like this table implies, and it definitely used to be true that alternative backends were live with Google Messages.

It may be true that in August 2025, 100% of the global carrier backends used by Google Messages (and I suppose, Apple Messages) are Google Jibe, but I can't find a source to confirm it. Rocketwidget (talk) 17:53, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes I believe it was only the case in the US during the CCMI. The app might still be able but there are no more such scenarios: in China for obvious reasons, in Japan because of the ad-hoc +Message client, in Korea because the market for non-domestic Android phones is insignificant.

On the other hand, the Apple client is specifically not tied to Jibe, and works on regional deployments in China and soon in Korea. There's also Jio/Reliance in India but the situation is a bit unclear at the moment and I preferred not to include it in the table for now. EnergyThen (talk) 18:55, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

The disputed neutrality of the Reception section is tagged in the article but has no Talk page subject, so I'll create one now.

For now, I've put in-line Needs Update templates for the 3 critiques with explanations. Basically, the article doesn't convey that, while factually accurate in 2018-2019, the technology and implementation of RCS has changed such that most of the critiques are not factually accurate in 2025.

I'd suggest removing all 3 of these essentially outdated critiques entirely, but I'm not sure if there is consensus to do that. Rocketwidget (talk) 13:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• RCS Business Message sample.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:21, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Marketing & Economic MD.Samiul Azam (talk) 09:35, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

@Help Always MD.Samiul Azam (talk) 09:43, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Related to the intro text:

 The Google Guest program provides person-to-person (P2P) RCS in Google Messages on Android when a carrier does not provide RCS, provided via the Google Jibe backend. (reference 8)

1.) The link in the reference 8 is dead, it loads ageneric front page:

RCS, Operators and Google: an uneasy relationship". Capacity Media. 13 September 2021. Retrieved 5 August 2024.

2.) Global RCS support by Google has been turned off in 2025 for several (european?) countries, effectivelly turning off RCS in that area (or for subscribers of providers in that area; technical people will know bettewr than I). For example countries like: Slovenia, Serbia, Bulgaria.. but according to some reports, it's global

Some links:

https://www.reddit.com/r/GoogleMessages/comments/1mkn4l5/rcs_going_unsupported_for_all_my_friends/

https://www.phonearena.com/news/google-messages-rcs-support-carrier_id173739 Xerces8 (talk) 17:15, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

This follows my previous remark about the confusing concept of a "Global RCS" network used throughout the article. But given that Google has never transparently communicated about it, we can only speculate.

The most recent development coincides with carriers (at least one, AT&T) moving Android subscribers to their own registration mechanism via IMS and updated T&C. However, the ad-hoc Jibe / Google Messages pairing still works in many countries, indicating that MNOs there are willing to formalize their implicit relationship with Google, potentially because that's the only realistic way to support RCS on iOS in the near future.

But again, assuming Google isn't going to openly detail how they're coercing MNOs to Jibe's terms, now that they go what they wanted from Apple, it's a bit hard to elaborate in this article. And most journalistic sources aren't able to go deep either.

I had switched the main table around, to focus on network deployments, and not the various client apps. But my changes were reverted. Honestly, 80% of this article should be deleted or reworded. EnergyThen (talk) 19:51, 20 November 2025 (UTC)