Why I Still Haven’t Used RCS Messaging on My iPhone (and What Would Change My Mind)

Rich Communication Services (RCS) aims to bridge the gap between traditional SMS and modern chat apps. But a few key reasons keep me from embracing my iPhone.

It is Redundant in iOS

One of the selling points of RCS is that it bridges the gap between iPhone and Android users by enabling richer communication features directly within the default messaging app. Unlike iMessage, which only works between Apple devices, RCS can enhance the texting experience for Android users with advantages such as better media sharing, typing indicators, and read receipts, all without having to of a third-party app. On paper, that sounds promising.

But here’s the reality: apps like WhatsApp, Signal and Telegram already solve this problem much better than RCS. These apps are free, widely available, and offer much more than RCS ever could. Whether it’s end-to-end encryption, group video calling, or cross-platform support that doesn’t depend on carrier implementation, these apps make texting and media sharing easy with non-iOS users.

Take WhatsApp, for example. It’s as simple as downloading the app and syncing your contacts – don’t worry about whether your carrier supports a specific standard or whether the other person’s device is RCS compatible. When the solution already exists and works perfectly, RCS feels that it is trying to reinvent the wheel.

Its encryption is conditional

Another glaring flaw of RCS is its lack of universality end-to-end encryption. While Google has taken steps to introduce encryption for RCS chats, it is not always available in all carriers or regions. In contrast, platforms like WhatsApp and Signal offer end-to-end encryption as a standard feature, ensuring that only you and the person you communicated with can read the messages.

When privacy is a priority, RCS does not fail. Even with encryption enabled in some cases, it is dependent on both users having compatible devices, supported carriers and updated software. If a link in that chain is missing, your conversations revert to SMS-level security, which is essentially no security at all.

Compare this with Signal’s uncompromising security modelwhere encryption is always guaranteed. Every message, call, or media file is encrypted – no exceptions. Even iMessage, despite its limitations across platforms, ensures encryption within the Apple ecosystem.

If I’m going to trust a messaging system, security should be non-negotiable. RCS simply does not provide the same level of insurance as the alternatives already available.

Over-Reliance on Carriers

Another disadvantage of RCS is its heavy reliance on carriers for implementation and support. On the contrary instant messaging app operating independently of mobile networks, RCS requires carriers to adopt the protocol, configure their systems and maintain compatibility. This reliance introduces unnecessary complexity and inconsistency.

The rollout of RCS has been anything but smooth. Some carriers fully support it, while others do not. Even when RCS is available, features such as encryption or high-quality media sharing may vary depending on your carrier’s implementation. This patchwork approach creates a fragmented experience, exactly the opposite of what modern communication tools should aim for.

If RCS had been built with the same universal accessibility and independence as other instant messaging apps, it might be worth using. But as it stands, its reliance on the carrier undermines its potential and adds another layer of inconsistency to an already fragmented system.

Feels like an Unneeded Return SMS

RCS may be marketed as the next evolution of SMS, but it feels like a step backwards disguised as progress. Sure, it adds modern features like high-quality image sharing and typing indicators, but these are things we’ve had for years with instant messaging apps. Why try to revive the SMS when it is already surpassed by better solutions?

SMS is an outdated technology. It served its purpose in the early days of mobile communication, but messaging has evolved far beyond plain text and basic media attachments. RCS, for all its improvements, still operates within the framework of carriers and phone numbers, which feels restrictive today.

Compare this to apps like Telegram or Messenger, where your account isn’t tied to a single device or carrier. You can exchange without interruption of devices, synchronize your messages, and enjoy features such as stickers, polls and advanced group management. RCS can’t compete with that level of flexibility. He is stuck trying to strengthen a system that is already abandoned.

Instead of breathing new life into SMS, RCS feels like an attempt to keep carrier-based messaging relevant in an era where apps have already won the battle. It’s hard to get excited about “modern SMS” when we’ve been living with much better alternatives for years.

That I would change my mind

RCS has potential, but needs to overcome several flaws before considering adopting it. First of all, security is a dealbreaker. Universal end-to-end encryption—guaranteed for every message, regardless of carrier, device or region—is essential. Without it, RCS can’t compete with the privacy standards set by apps like Signal or even iMessage.

Another major improvement would be seamless cross-platform integration. Right now, RCS feels fragmented, with its functionality varying depending on whether the recipient has RCS enabled or if their carrier supports it. For RCS to win me over, it must work effortlessly, like WhatsApp or iMessage. You don’t have to wonder if my messages are going through as expected.

RCS also needs to shed its dependence on carriers. This reliance creates unnecessary delays and inconsistencies, making the service feel outdated in a world where messaging apps operate independently of phone plans. A centralized, carrier-agnostic system makes RCS much more attractive and reliable.

Beyond these foundational fixes, RCS has to go beyond playing catch-up. Now, it mimics the features of existing apps without offering anything new. To stand out, you must introduce capabilities that go above and beyond. If he wants to replace SMS, he must jump in front of the competition, not just try to match them.

Finally, the experience on iOS should be seamless. If Apple fully embraced RCS and integrated it properly into the Messages app, it might be worth reconsidering. It shouldn’t feel like a clunky add-on or a downgrade from iMessage. For RCS to be successful, it must feel natural and friendly as Apple’s ecosystem requires it.

Until RCS can address these gaps, it’s hard to see it as a viable alternative to the robust messaging options already available. The concept is promising, but still has a long way to go to meet modern expectations.