Fossify SMS Messenger is a good alternative.
Though I use the default apps since it works perfectly fine and I don't want to install more apps in my phone.
Viewpoint0232 If I may make a suggestion to the GrapheneOS developers... can you not just patch out the warning ("made for an older version") of the Messages and Phone apps? I think otherwise these apps are both okay, not great, but good enough.
I think this alert is due to the apps tagetSdk is 24 and min is 34(android 14)
Dumdum Those terms have no meaning.
W1zardK1ng
It's TEN API "levels" behind? Yikes. Here I expected it to be 1-2 years behind, not closer to 10.
I think this alert is due to the apps tagetSdk is 24 and min is 34(android 14)
No, that's not correct. Messaging is built as part of the OS with the API 34 SDK. It has no reason to support older versions so the minimum was set to 34, which makes sense for all these kinds of components only shipped as part of the OS. The target API level is based on which set of backwards incompatible changes it can deal with. It was never properly ported to supporting newer semantics for notifications and much more so it remained targeting API 24.
The warning is shown based on an API being below what's considered the bare minimum standard for a modern app which is currently 28. Play Store enforces 33 as the minimum for new apps and app updates.
matchboxbananasynergy @GrapheneOS Would contributions to the default AOSP apps forked by GrapheneOS be likely to be considered to be merged?
AOSP apps certainly look old and could have a few improvements, it would be nice to have a modern experience out of the box. I thought to give it a go, but if this is most likely going to be ignored maybe my efforts should be focused somewhere else.
Someone would say "just install other apps". Well yes, but a tightly integrated environment from the start must be beneficial.
My thought would be to start with lower impact apps, such as the Calculator and Clock, so to see how it's received.
Edit: Tagging user
When apple drops RCS, google might open up and include APIs for it. So would it be wise to wait until the new standard goes public for 3rd party's?
That's just my two cents on the matter
OfflinePuffin I do not think google would ever open source RCS
RCS is open and apps can already implement it. The OS also supports RCS.
The Google-specific part is the encryption.
OK so why don't we see third party clients , I have been looking for over a month.
I might have been reading out dated post sorry
Sorry I didn't mean to sound curt there, I have been looking in to RCS apps and the spec for a month now and the closest 3rd party client I can find that is downloadable and supported is
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mei.messages.improved
And that was one on Gsma
Note I do not use this app and do not condone downloading
matchboxbananasynergy The Google-specific part is the encryption.
The problem is that that is the main advantage of RCS (or Google Messages to be exact) over SMS. For me, at least. I really wish they would provide a generic API for E2E-encrypted RCS messages that third-party apps can use, similar to what is available for SMS. But I think they will just lock it down more, as they recently started to lock out rooted devices.
I did some more digging and a little of RTFM and yes RCS is open but its a matter of who your client and server can talk to from what I read.
I won't go in to depth BC I don't want to derail this thread. But if non google android users want to use the open RCS standard outlined by gsma they we would have to create an foundation and build out our implementation ourselves
If I am off my rocker here I apologize,
I like QKMS as an sms client when I had my first pixel, and if I didn't use messages I would recommend it BC of its back up feature
