That can’t be said of iMessage.
Edit: I sometimes get a chuckle when they say "Look at this cool picture I took", and then receive the picture some days later when the conversation thread has moved on. I guess they'd have stayed in thr coverage area for long enough for the entire image to upload.
Sometimes sms failover creates further problems because when travelling you’re more likely to have intermittent wifi than intermittent sms access.
I hoped that Signal's use of HTTP was as a fallback in case a direct connection could not be established to use a more "compact" protocol, but I possibly don't remember correctly what I've read...
WhatsApp was built with low-bandwidth/high-latency/high-packet-loss in mind well before Meta acquired them.
I suppose we can give them vague amounts of credit for not making those use cases worse since the acquisition.
It used to work just fine on 1kbps.
Now it is pretty much unusable over dialup or GPRS.
For example, messaging a contact with multiple devices connected means that your phone has to encrypt your message to each of their clients independently.
You should try WhatsApp - there really are not many messenger choices when you have unreliable 2G(!) connectivity. For all the faults of Meta, WhatsApp seems to be the only company that cares about people with bandwidth measured in kbps, sometimes fractions thereof.