Google launches a Web client for Android’s SMS app
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Wow, they're only a year behind Signal on this feature! And still without the benefit of client-side encryption.
They really need to cut the ADD about messengers and actually commit to building one that isn't total ass or a knockoff of a Facebook service.
They really need to cut the ADD about messengers and actually commit to building one that isn't total ass or a knockoff of a Facebook service.
Upvote
103
(107
/
-4)
So is this just the same garbage fire that was Allo's web implementation, only now with different branding?
Upvote
75
(77
/
-2)
Dammit, Google, people want a communication app that just works. Honestly, it's like they just don't get the message.
Upvote
120
(122
/
-2)
Not a huge fan of this. I really prefer pushbullet, which gives me some additional features. But I do trust Google with my text data more than pushbullet.
Upvote
8
(11
/
-3)
For Project Fi subscribers your texts just show up as a sidebar in the Gmail web interface. That's such an obvious and natural place for them to be, why doesn't Google just extend that feature to all their users?
Upvote
54
(56
/
-2)
So… Is the deprecation plan already in place? How long is it going to be this time, two months?
Upvote
84
(85
/
-1)
As someone who happily used Hangouts until forced to Google's Messenger for SMS, I remain pissed at Google for not fixing the occasional SMS issues in Hangouts, instead of ditching SMS support.
Upvote
79
(80
/
-1)
In Google's defense, and to play devil's advocate for a company that spits out more messaging clients a year than the industry puts out Android phones, I think they've lost the opportunity to make a new messaging app.
The world is already entrenched in their messaging systems, and pitching another one seems like a hard sell. Android messages arrives, by default, on a huge number of Android phones, and this is probably the easiest way for Google to offer a text via PC that will be instantly available on a huge portion of Android.
Even if they used the (arguably) better potential of Hangouts, they'd likely have far less user penetration. My assumption is that, if it was a Google-controlled message service, you won't be able to chat with others via your PC unless they're also using that service. An SMS controlled one, with all of its downsides, will work with everybody, from iOS to Android. It's probably easier to pick an app that's already on tons and tons of phones and expand it from there. I don't know if there'd be anything fundamentally preventing them from rolling updates into Android Messages that give them a more flexible texting capability, but I could see it happening.
Upvote
46
(52
/
-6)
Um, didn't this all just work about two years ago with Hangouts? It feels like they cannot even get back to the point they were at before they started removing features from Hangouts.
That is one of the few nice perks of using Fi is that I still get Hangouts integration with my SMS messages.
That is one of the few nice perks of using Fi is that I still get Hangouts integration with my SMS messages.
Upvote
59
(60
/
-1)
Is it possible to keep a running tally of who this went live for and which carrier they have?
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
Most likely due to technical limitations. Since they offer the service (using existing carriers) they have the opportunity to implement some special stuff they can't do with phones on other carriers.
Upvote
4
(8
/
-4)
No no no no no no! Google! You are doing it all wrong! It's as if you are trying to poison the well so you won't be relevant in messaging/im again.
Upvote
29
(31
/
-2)
Look at the screenshots; it doesn't mirror your phone screen. It's relaying text messages over data, hence the usage of mobile data.
Upvote
12
(13
/
-1)
Its way more fun to make new things then make existing things work well.
Google has lost me.
Google has lost me.
Upvote
46
(50
/
-4)
Remember when you got your first Android phone and it had Google Talk built in.
Google must have a deep cover mole embedded in it. Only deliberate action could make a company this bad at developing a messaging product. The only question is which company is behind the sabotage.
Google must have a deep cover mole embedded in it. Only deliberate action could make a company this bad at developing a messaging product. The only question is which company is behind the sabotage.
Upvote
53
(54
/
-1)
This sounds the same as whatsapp's web client...and that kinda sucks and was pretty pointless considering I had to have my phone on and with me to use it...in the end typing on a real keyboard and switching on my pc was more hassle than just using my phone.
Upvote
9
(10
/
-1)
This is the closest example we've ever had barring Hangouts of Google improving an existing thing, though. I know we can (and should) criticize them all day for the seven hundred messaging apps they have, but Android messages does already exist, and it's already on millions of phones and likely has a larger userbase than Hangouts.
Hangouts has great features, but Messages has users. It's easier to pick a platform with users and add great features than pick a platform with great features and then add users today, IMO. Now, Hangouts definitely COULD have had both, but that ship has sailed, I think
Upvote
13
(16
/
-3)
I guess you need the "latest" version of Messenger to get this, not the "latest" version that Google Play says I have.
Upvote
22
(23
/
-1)
Isn't that where they put them when you use Hangouts and Voice? Does Fi run their text through one of those or is it a third of the nine services?
I'm on iOS and while I prefer Voice to Hangouts, it seems the former is always a few steps behind the latter. For example, I prefer the interface for Voice but I can only quickreply through Hangouts.
Upvote
5
(6
/
-1)
I agree, I think the only way now for Google to compete is to make SMS 'relevant' again. It's a hard battle, but they had their chance with Hangouts for and blew it. This is their last role of the dice.
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
Google Messages probably doesn't have near as many users as Hangouts does [not necessarily active users]. I know I use the HTC Messages app that came with my phone. I imagine a lot of phones have their own sms client.
Upvote
17
(19
/
-2)
Another one for Pushbullet, it does more, Just Works... I'd say Google should buy them, except they'd mess them up in... 6-12 months ?
Upvote
4
(6
/
-2)
Upvote
17
(18
/
-1)
Upvote
12
(12
/
0)
"the functionality of Messages is much worse than Google Hangouts, the messaging system it's slowly supposed to be replacing."
I'm not sure that's 100% accurate, but it is a confusing mess of services and associated apps.
In my view, "Messages" is more of a stock SMS (/MMS/RCS) app that is designed to be used on a stock device, or to replace (often crappy) carrier-built apps, or other "skinned" apps that get included with random brands of phones. It's an option to use a "standard" app that isn't built by the phone maker, carrier, or some shady app from who knows where. That's really all. I don't think it was ever meant to replace a web-based chat system such as Hangouts, or anything else.
Hangouts CAN still do SMS *if you have Google Voice* (or Fi, I believe) although, they prefer you use the Voice app for that.
So, what they're doing is separating things into areas that work for each service.
For carrier SMS, "messages" makes sense. A "stock" app. Better than your carrier-built one, probably. So, now this beams the data to/from your device to a web portal? Weird, but whatever. Kind of neat, I guess.
Hangouts. Ok, yeah, that one's a little confusing. They don't want you to do SMS with it anymore, though it *can* for Voice / Fi users. It is *primarily* a web chat, which is its base functionality. Taking carrier SMS out makes sense to me, actually, even if it did fluster many people.
Voice speaks for itself. Have a GV number? Use this for voice and SMS. Is that Voice number your primary number? You pretty much HAVE to use it. Is it secondary? That works, too.
Honestly, this has been perfect for me. Yes, I still have SMS messages floating in Hangouts. Need to clear those out, someday. Voice is my primary number, so I use the primary app for that to call and text. I still use Hangouts randomly for some people to chat with, but I don't rely on it for texting anymore. It's nice to have as a backup for voice and SMS functions, but I never found it great at those things.
Project Fi? I'm no expert there. From what I understand, they've left Hangouts as something that can integrate with it outside of "carrier" level things. So, you can do calls and texts with Hangouts, similar to how Voice can talk to it as a "secondary" method of using the services.
Would make more sense to me if they just used Voice for "phone things" like calling & texting and left Hangouts to only be a web chat thing like a Slack/Skype thing with the Skype thing being able to get a phone number associated with it for either conference calling or as a direct-dial.
The rest? I don't know. Didn't know G+ even still existed except as a Geocities-like world of abandoned web things. I'm sure its underlying chat is probably just Hangouts.
So yes, it is a confusing mess right now. I think their separations make sense, and that they'll get more of it sorted out in the next couple years. For now, this is a "neat" thing for their Messages app. Kind of useful, I guess. Not world-changing, but interesting. For those who do not have Voice (or Fi), and can't text via a browser, this kind-of lets people see how that can work. Granted, T-Mobile can also do this, and Verizon has had something similar for some years.
None of it is that great, IMO, compared to fully decoupling the number and porting into Voice. That has honestly been the most liberating thing to not care very much about the carrier and be able to use that number on any device if needed.
I'm not sure that's 100% accurate, but it is a confusing mess of services and associated apps.
In my view, "Messages" is more of a stock SMS (/MMS/RCS) app that is designed to be used on a stock device, or to replace (often crappy) carrier-built apps, or other "skinned" apps that get included with random brands of phones. It's an option to use a "standard" app that isn't built by the phone maker, carrier, or some shady app from who knows where. That's really all. I don't think it was ever meant to replace a web-based chat system such as Hangouts, or anything else.
Hangouts CAN still do SMS *if you have Google Voice* (or Fi, I believe) although, they prefer you use the Voice app for that.
So, what they're doing is separating things into areas that work for each service.
For carrier SMS, "messages" makes sense. A "stock" app. Better than your carrier-built one, probably. So, now this beams the data to/from your device to a web portal? Weird, but whatever. Kind of neat, I guess.
Hangouts. Ok, yeah, that one's a little confusing. They don't want you to do SMS with it anymore, though it *can* for Voice / Fi users. It is *primarily* a web chat, which is its base functionality. Taking carrier SMS out makes sense to me, actually, even if it did fluster many people.
Voice speaks for itself. Have a GV number? Use this for voice and SMS. Is that Voice number your primary number? You pretty much HAVE to use it. Is it secondary? That works, too.
Honestly, this has been perfect for me. Yes, I still have SMS messages floating in Hangouts. Need to clear those out, someday. Voice is my primary number, so I use the primary app for that to call and text. I still use Hangouts randomly for some people to chat with, but I don't rely on it for texting anymore. It's nice to have as a backup for voice and SMS functions, but I never found it great at those things.
Project Fi? I'm no expert there. From what I understand, they've left Hangouts as something that can integrate with it outside of "carrier" level things. So, you can do calls and texts with Hangouts, similar to how Voice can talk to it as a "secondary" method of using the services.
Would make more sense to me if they just used Voice for "phone things" like calling & texting and left Hangouts to only be a web chat thing like a Slack/Skype thing with the Skype thing being able to get a phone number associated with it for either conference calling or as a direct-dial.
The rest? I don't know. Didn't know G+ even still existed except as a Geocities-like world of abandoned web things. I'm sure its underlying chat is probably just Hangouts.
So yes, it is a confusing mess right now. I think their separations make sense, and that they'll get more of it sorted out in the next couple years. For now, this is a "neat" thing for their Messages app. Kind of useful, I guess. Not world-changing, but interesting. For those who do not have Voice (or Fi), and can't text via a browser, this kind-of lets people see how that can work. Granted, T-Mobile can also do this, and Verizon has had something similar for some years.
None of it is that great, IMO, compared to fully decoupling the number and porting into Voice. That has honestly been the most liberating thing to not care very much about the carrier and be able to use that number on any device if needed.
Upvote
-1
(11
/
-12)
What's so hard they can't just copy iMessage??. That works wonderfully at blending SMS and iMessage communication.
Upvote
34
(44
/
-10)
You need a server-side update associated with your phone, so even if you have the absolute latest version of the app, it still might not be available for you.
In other words, Google is yet again squandering any good-will they could possibly have had, by publishing a big splashy "We're finally doing a thing we should have done years ago!" blog post, and then the fine print reads "but it may not work for you, keep checking back on your own whenever you remember it, maybe it'll work eventually."
Upvote
33
(34
/
-1)
The hard part about copying iMessage is that Android users can use a different text-messeging app, so Google can't assume that 100% of all users are on their app. The best they could do is make an app that's easy to use, lets you log in with either a phone number or email address, and works on all devices you have, with fallback to SMS for US users.
The worst they could do...well, just read some of Ron's previous article on this topic. Because they're following the "worst they could do" roadmap pretty consistently.
Upvote
32
(36
/
-4)
I am sure you are right and my comment is not so much coming from logic as it is fatigue. I've been an android and Nexus user from the One to the 6P. I'm not into $800-1000+ phones so that is over. I understand android is a developing OS but a lot of the development seems to be for the sake of development or whim and not for the maturity of the overall system. To make it 100x worse for me, their naming and name changes make me crazy.
Upvote
14
(15
/
-1)
So... vertical integration and dictating the basic messaging app FTW
Upvote
2
(5
/
-3)
I can't wait until the spammers get their software in line to get up and running with this.
Upvote
-4
(3
/
-7)
I have way too many people I message that SMS is usually the best way. I ended up buying a one time subscription to Pulse SMS and it's great. I can text from any device and there is a web client so I don't need to be on my phone all of the time. I had hoped that Google would have developed this feature years ago (I guess they did with hangouts/voice/allo/duo/TheOtherOneIKnowImForgetting) but having it tied to SMS is great, IMO. If Pulse SMS ever gets weird on me, I know there is a free (as in beer) alternative.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Chemical Tribe
Ars Legatus Legionis
Um, this is just a way of doing sms on your desktop, this isn't a new service at all. This isn't Hangouts messaging, this isn't allo who already had this.
Yeah, Google has a lot of messaging apps, but this is just grasping at straws bull shit here.
The reason why it isn't tied to a Google account is because your phone still has to send sms - this is how it works everywhere else.
Yeah, Google has a lot of messaging apps, but this is just grasping at straws bull shit here.
The reason why it isn't tied to a Google account is because your phone still has to send sms - this is how it works everywhere else.
Upvote
8
(10
/
-2)
So... vertical integration and dictating the basic messaging app FTW
It is surprising that after all these years, they're just starting to offer an application that is less feature rich than many other message apps that do the same thing: PushBullet, MightyText, Yappy, and my favorite, Pulse SMS. It's great that cross-platform messaging via our phone will finally be free, but it's still ridiculous that they're so slow to this, are implementing it with server-side updates, and the app lacks most of the features of their competitors.
A company with Google's size and resources should be able to make their default SMS app the default without any cost to its users. They could easily rip off the features of the apps above and be done with them.
Upvote
1
(2
/
-1)
My current SMS app is Samsung's, also called Messages. So when I launch Google's app and it suggests making it the default , it says "Messages will be used as the default messaging app instead of Messages". Very helpful.
Upvote
39
(41
/
-2)
BevansDesign
Ars Scholae Palatinae
They took 10 steps backward and 1 step forward when they abandoned Hangouts for Allo, but this is at least a second step in the right direction. Maybe someday they'll have a system as good as the one they abandoned.
One standard, Google. That's all we want. Everybody knows how to fix this except for you, apparently.
One standard, Google. That's all we want. Everybody knows how to fix this except for you, apparently.
Upvote
17
(18
/
-1)