This whole initiative is about extending the base-protocol (SMS) which everyone is currently limited by.
While not universally good (carriers are still given too much power, w.r.t. billing, etc), it's main advantage over any other platform currently available is that this is a protocol-standard suggestion.
It's not a walled garden like iMessage or any of those other IM services (which is why no banks or similar use these services, but still use SMS).
This is something completely different, and I honestly wish more tech-startups would think in terms of standardized protocols instead of closed services.
Creating and developing standardized protocols is what once made the internet great and infinitely innovative. Recently the rise of closed services is what has caused this innovation-curve to almost completely drop down to zero.
Basically we need more protocol-development. EOT.
Maybe next time we can draft a standardized protocol which wont give or even include carriers. But for now this is a good start for creating a standard IM platform available for everyone to replace SMS.
Apple should have done this ages ago with iMessage, but didn't. Props to Google for actually putting in the effort this time around!
Or it's just a bandaid on a hobbling, old protocol that we should move past. I think Google errs here in being too concerned about backwards compatibility. That there are so many alternatives (WhatsApp, iMessage, Signal) shows there's demand to move on from SMS. And Google of all companies should know how crappy it is to have to rely on carriers (look at the years-long Android updates debacle).
I hear what you're saying about standards being helpful on the Internet, but SMS is a shitty standard from 1984 that even then was built on compromises and hacks (basically fudging things by using an area of GSM that was never designed for messaging):
* "The GSM is optimized for telephony, since this was identified as its main application. The key idea for SMS was to use this telephone-optimized system, and to transport messages on the signalling paths needed to control the telephone traffic during periods when no signalling traffic existed. In this way, unused resources in the system could be used to transport messages at minimal cost. However, it was necessary to limit the length of the messages to 128 bytes" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS#Initial_concept
I would much prefer if they used WhatsApp, because then it would not be ridiculously insecure.
Was setting up an account in India (Yes Bank, I believe). Banker messaged me on WhatsApp.
WeChat != WhatsApp but it is as close as it gets to the 'Messaging Service as an OS/platform' paradigm as it gets
But that's only if networks don't charge as much as they charge for SMS and I'm not holding my breath.