Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Android Communications Google Network The Internet Wireless Networking

Android Messages Will Now Let You Send Texts From Your Computer (www.blog.google) 107

Posted by BeauHD from the cross-platform-support dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Google is beginning to roll out desktop browser support for Android Messages, allowing people to use their PC for sending messages and viewing those that have been received on their Android smartphone. Google says the feature is starting to go out to users today and continuing for the rest of the week. Text, images, and stickers are all supported on the web version.

To get started, the Android Messages website has you scan a QR code using the Android Messages mobile app, which creates a link between the two. In today's blog post, Google also goes over numerous other recent improvements to Android Messenger including built-in GIF search, support for smart replies on more carriers, inline link previews, and easy copy/paste for two-factor authentication messages.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Android Messages Will Now Let You Send Texts From Your Computer More

Android Messages Will Now Let You Send Texts From Your Computer

Comments Filter:

  • How exciting (Score:3)

    by OrangeTide ( 124937 ) on Monday June 18, 2018 @06:41PM (#56806054) Homepage Journal

    Although I seem to recall I could send messages in the early days of the Internet. ICQ, Zephyr, Jabber, OSCAR, YMSG, ...

    • Re: How exciting (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Which of those were SMS?

      Also, some phones have this via toolset and have had it for decade or more. Though, admittedly, you needed a BT connection to your phone or a physical cable.

      • Which of those were SMS?

        There was a number of open SMS gateways, completely free, unauthenticated and anonymous. Give me at least three reasons they are no more...

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by mjwx ( 966435 )

          Which of those were SMS?

          There was a number of open SMS gateways, completely free, unauthenticated and anonymous. Give me at least three reasons they are no more...

          1. In most countries the sender pays for the SMS.
          2. In most countries the sender pays for the SMS.
          3. In most countries the sender pays for the SMS.

          Now I know that technically is only one point, but I thought it was big enough to be mentioned thrice.

          The difference is now that most SMS services are now data based, rather than telephone based as they were in ye olde GSM spec.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by gnick ( 1211984 )

          There was a number of open SMS gateways, completely free, unauthenticated and anonymous.

          I just sent a text from https://voice.google.com/ [google.com] and it worked fine. Not anonymous, but free SMS. I'm certain I'm missing something here.

          • That text messages sent to you Google Voice number can be received in Hangouts which is already cross-platform. But a while back, they stopped letting Hangouts receive carrier SMS messages to force you to use their new messaging app. Now you can once again read and respond to SMS with your carrier number on your computer. Whatever is old is new again.

      • SMS just fucking sucks though, since you're tied to cellular networks, SMS is not data and all that shit.

    • And in more recent times, I remember Pushbullet on Android being able to send / receive SMS until that service got shut down.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      WIth SMSes? Only AIM had that. I wished AIM was still around to use it since it was free. :(

    • icq, yahoo and aol all had text messages, so does skype

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by bigpat ( 158134 )

      Although I seem to recall I could send messages in the early days of the Internet. ICQ, Zephyr, Jabber, OSCAR, YMSG, ...

      It is really a shame that the IETF didn't get ahead of the curve and simply make the subject optional and specify a more SMS like use case and user interface to go along with email.

      Having to specify a subject and having apps that primarily display messages by subject really has really hurt email. Most of the time you don't need a subject line and it is redundant with the first line of the message. Otherwise the use case is exactly the same and email is universally addressable using the user@domain address

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by bigpat ( 158134 )

        Actually technically RFC 2822 says that the subject is optional... so it is really on the app side that we should have made the subject line optional (or even hidden) in the UI.

        https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf... [ietf.org]

      • It happened to gain popularity because cell phone providers made it easier than email

        You really think so? When SMS became popular, many folk still weren't regularly using email and most of those who did have addresses wouldn't have push email access on their phone.

        What made SMS popular was that it's nearly instantaneous and, particularly at a time when people paid for phone calls or had a limited bundle of minutes, it was generally low-cost.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by bigpat ( 158134 )

          What made SMS popular was that it's nearly instantaneous and, particularly at a time when people paid for phone calls or had a limited bundle of minutes, it was generally low-cost.

          My experience was the opposite... I paid $0.20 per text message until about 2008 on TMobile and actively discouraged people from texting me, but everyone had email. I was a bit late to SMS for that reason, but still most mobile plans had SMS limits until the mid aughts.

          I could at least read emails for free on my phone with data. Email was and still is more convenient as a free multiplatform communications system. Really the only thing SMS has going for it over email is the twitteresque simplicity... because of limits on subjects and de facto character limits. But the cost was really a barrier for SMS until all plans became unlimited SMS. And still is a barrier in the literal sense that you have to have a paid plan to have SMS versus anyone can get a free email account from multiple providers.

    • When ICQ was new, I wouldn't use it because of the privacy implications: someone would know every time I was connected to the Internet! How quaint.

      • With dial-up internet that sort of broadcast of your connection state to your contacts was pretty valuable for those of us not saddled with undue paranoia.

  • Anyone want to take bets on how long it takes for the security flaw to show its ugly head that will allow anyone to read your SMS messages?

    • I'll take that bet. Apple has been doing this for 5 years with iMessages. The only issue they have had was with people signing into their accounts on friends or relatives machines. You can't blame them for people not understanding though. From a technical perspective, this is pretty secure.

      • I was just going to say that this feature (SMS/imessage from notebook computer) is a strong draw keeping me in the MacOS/iOS ecosystem. Pushing me out is the new Apple computer hardware plus other hardware not updated for very long.

  • Email anyone.. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Why not just use email?

    • I think a sort email extension thing would be the best and easiest option to enable cross-platform text messaging across platforms, including sending images/files.

  • With google voice hooked up to a phone number, you can make and receive calls, as well as sms directly from google hangouts on any compatible computer system.

    There has always been an issue with MMS, but from reading the summary, this looks like an announcement of capabilities that have existed for years already.

    Am I missing something?

    • Well they're too stupid to know that all anyone wants is a web client for sending messages that will use a preferably open standard and then fall back on SMS if necessary. Between Voice and Hangouts and Talk they almost had something, but then they went with Allo and just about killed that off already.

      This isn't hard. I'm honestly surprised they're so terrible at it.

      • Apple, Google and Microsoft should sit down and make one standard that works cross-platform. Trying to tie down users to a platform using apps is one thing, but text messaging should be as platform-independant as email.

        And no, SMS is not cross-platform since it won't work on non-cellular devices (laptops, desktops, etc).

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • My cellphone has a Verizon number and GV number - and both work interchangeably. I don't think there is any issue with using exclusively GV - I do that when traveling internationally to many countries... Works great! GV messages stay in the Voice app, VZ messages stay in the VZ app.

        • VZ messages stay in the VZ app.

          In vanilla android, carrier SMS messages default to being routed to the Messages app. Given how terrible most carrier apps are, I'm surprised you haven't tried it at least temporarily.

          GV messages can be read in the GV app, but the Hangouts app offers a much better UI for GV messages and voicemail.

          • I keep them separate - the "carrier phone" stuff is personal, the "Google Voice" stuff is work. It works for me...:)

            • They are already currently separate. You used to be able to opt to get both numbers to go to Hangouts, but only until Messages was launched. Still, the UI of Hangouts and Messages beat carrier app and GV for sure.

      • Your missing the point of google voice. It is a single number that can be used for any phone. Make it the primary, and never worry about giving out a new number again. also works with land lines, which also gives you the ability to have sms with land lines.
      • Sprint dropped Google Voice integration at the start of this month (your Sprint phone number used to be your Google Voice number). I've been suffering withdrawal symptoms ever since. It was so convenient being able to answer texts on my phone, or do it from my tablet if my phone was on its charger, or do it from my laptop if I needed to type a lengthy response. It'll be nice to get some of this capability back.

    • > There has always been an issue with MMS

      As a GV user of MMS, I ask, what issue with MMS?

    • Posted the same thing, glad someone else knows this

  • would they? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fluffernutter ( 1411889 ) on Monday June 18, 2018 @07:19PM (#56806242)
    Google wouldn't use this to scan all your texts with non-consenting people........... would they?

    • How is this any different from GMail scanning all your emails from non-consenting people?

    • Google wouldn't use this to scan all your texts with non-consenting people........... would they?

      How is this relevant? Either they are already doing it on the phone or they won't do it on the PC. There is absolutely no privacy change here.

      • Whether or not they have it stored on their servers it's exactly the same situation?

        Give me a break. If they are encrypting it on the phone and decrypting it on the browser, fine, I'll try it. Otherwise, forget it - more Google "features" that give them a conduit for NSL demands.

        • Wow. Really? Encryption on a phone protects you? You do realise that Android Messages shows your SMS history on the computer screen right?

          You are talking about the relative security risks of a company that has full control over their website which you are using, vs a company that has full control over your phone which you are using. If Google wants to collect your messages you are at no additional risk using their website. If its the NSA you're worried about why the hell are you using a Google phone! The on

  • Welcome back to 1975! (Score:3)

    by Brama ( 80257 ) on Monday June 18, 2018 @07:21PM (#56806252) Homepage

    When we could send messages cross platform BY DEFAULT, and no one considered this a "feature".

    • When we could send messages cross platform BY DEFAULT, and no one considered this a "feature".

      In 1975? Just how many people were you emailing (something that didn't become standard until the mid 90s), and how many people were you SMSing (something that didn't become standard in until the 80s)?

      Having only one platform (writing a letter) does not a cross-platform make.

  • For SMS ("texts"), this has worked for a long time. Seems this "great new thing" is a bit behind the times...

  • NOT. I had a palm pilot that could do this over a decade ago.

  • Um, couldn't we always? (Score:3)

    by marcle ( 1575627 ) on Monday June 18, 2018 @08:00PM (#56806396)

    It's easy to send a text from a desktop PC, using any email client.Simply look up the SMS gateway email address, readily available online if you know the recipient's carrier, or you can use their phone# to find their carrier. Every carrier has an SMS/email gateway, and the specific phone number is itself the address. This is all easily found using any search engine. Et voila! Once again, some highly touted "app" simply provides a slick interface to something that was already dirt simple, and thereby collects even more of your personal info, while trying to strengthen your ties to their particular ecosystem.

    • Sending texts is only one piece of the functionality of text messaging.

      Being able to send texts from your computer isn't very useful, if you can't see replies on your computer.

      Another feature missing from your solution is being able to sync stored messages between your phone and your computer.

      Sorry, your solution doesn't work for me.

  • I guess Pulse SMS [klinkerapps.com] proved there was a market for mobile-desktop SMS linkage by Android-Windows users. I've been using that app for several months because it could text from my computer AND sync between the two. Essentially this also acts as an infinite archive of all my text communications as well. (Assuming a diligently backed up system of the records created.) It's nice to be able to 10-finger type SMS from a keyboard and retain text threads across multiple platforms

    • I tried one of those apps a few years ago. I liked it, but I didn't trust the app maker to respect the privacy of my messages. For all I knew, they could sell the company to any old sleezebag who wanted to send spam to me.

      You might argue that it's no different with Google. Well, it is. For one thing, Google already knows everything about me, including my texting, so what's the difference using Google software to sync to my computer? Also, Google isn't going away, and every one of their moves is scrutinized

  • Google voice already does this (Score:3)

    by pgmrdlm ( 1642279 ) on Monday June 18, 2018 @11:11PM (#56807114) Journal
    I use google voice as my primary phone number. That is also where I do all of my text messaging. You can log into google voice for all kinds of things off a PC browser other than settings. I text from it all the time because it is easier not to fat finger messages, also can pull up articles for cut and paste. Hell, I tell all women I know to use google voice. You can use a phone number with a different area code. Unlimited blocking. You can mark a phone number as spam, and guess what. They get a message that this number is no longer in service. I don't worry about giving my google voice number out. You piss me off, you are marked as spam. That, you can't track me by my area code. And no, this does NOT include police/911. Thankfully I found this out when they were trying to find me during a last heart attack when I was riding a bike. No matter how often you change phones, or phone numbers. You can always have google voice forward to it.

    • And no, this does NOT include police/911.

      Emergency calls use your carrier number anyway, I'm fairly certain.

  • Wherego ICQ, Zephyr, Jabber, OSCAR, YMSG? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    There was one problem with ICQ, Zephyr, Jabber, OSCAR, YMSG, etc from the perspective of the telcos. They listen on a TCP/IP connection to achieve the instantaneous delivery. When deploying to national scale its too much, especially in earlier days when gear on poles was weaker. Because SMS is stateless, notification of a message can be a single bit on the pole. The bit becomes the notification a SMS message is available for delivery.

  • If they would allow for API integration with MMS support. For reading and sending SMS, that would be a BIG hit for us.

  • Whatsapp web is desktop browser support for Whatsapp. I don't see any more need for desktop message support.

    • WhatsApp Web is great, and WA is so much better than SMS. You can send much larger messages, and it handles large attachments. I sent a friend a 30MB PDF via WA, and I get photos/videos daily from various friends across the country in a big group chat. The only downside of WA is that Facebook bought them, and up to that point FB didn't have any of my info.

  • This is a genuine question here, but who actually widely uses SMS? The last few countries I've lived in, (and current country as well) have almost practically standardised on some form of 3rd party messaging systems. WeChat, WhatsApp, hell I used to send more Facebook Messages than I did text messages.

    In my current country complete strangers will WhatsApp you in a reply to online adverts for example. It is just a given that no one uses SMS, and when I check my message history for SMS I see 4 senders:
    - Vodap

  • Jolla/Sailfish OS (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fph il quozientatore ( 971015 ) on Tuesday June 19, 2018 @07:37AM (#56808456)
    Jolla/Sailfish OS user here. I can SSH into my phone from the PC and send an SMS, for bonus nerd points: https://together.jolla.com/que... [jolla.com]

  • Now that malware can just by infecting someone's computer send SMS text messages using someone's phone......

  • KDEConnect (Score:3)

    by c0d3g33k ( 102699 ) on Tuesday June 19, 2018 @09:22AM (#56808882)

    An alternative for Linux users is KDEConnect (may work on Mac/Windows with some effort, but not supported). Not quite the same and requires an application installed on the desktop computer rather than working over the web, but offers more functionality and definitely more privacy.

    A short features list from the github (https://github.com/KDE/kdeconnect-kde) page:

      - Shared clipboard: copy and paste between your phone and your computer (or any other device).
      - Notification sync: Read and reply to your Android notifications from the desktop.
      - Share files and URLs instantly from one device to another.
      - Multimedia remote control: Use your phone as a remote for Linux media players.
      - Virtual touchpad: Use your phone screen as your computer's touchpad and keyboard.

    This operates over your existing WiFi network using TLS encryption.

    The SMS support is still a work in progress, but currently you can receive notifications on your desktop of incoming text messages and reply to them. Can't initiate yet, but that's coming.

    https://community.kde.org/KDEC... [kde.org]

  • I'd love a way to actually send texts from my computer rather than a way to tell my phone to originate a text message. I spend most of my workday in a lab with internet access, but no signal to my phone. If that's what google is doing, good for them! I'd sign up, even if they charged a fee similar to the service I use now.

    But I suspect google hasn't come up with anything new here. Why do I need to scan a QR with my phone? Why is my phone even involved? Because I'm not sending texts from my computer;

    • Why do I need to scan a QR with my phone? Why is my phone even involved? Because I'm not sending texts from my computer; I'm sending them from my phone.

      That's right. I don't think it's possible (or at least reliable) to spoof SMS - it has to originate from the carrier network. If you leave your phone at home with signal, it would probably work just fine.

  • last thing we need is more SPAM

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close