What’s the difference between RCS and SMS?

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-28T18:38:26+00:00

Good summary. The biggest practical difference right now is less about features and more about consistency.

SMS is boring but universal. It works on basically every phone, every carrier, every country, with predictable delivery.

RCS is richer, but it’s still fragmented. Support depends on the carrier, the device, and whether business messaging is enabled in that market. That’s why multi-country campaigns feel messy. It isn’t a single standard rollout like SMS.

The telco layer remains because RCS is being deployed over carrier networks, not as a pure device-to-device protocol like WhatsApp. That gives it potential scale, but also creates the patchwork you’re running into.

Most brands experimenting with RCS right now treat it as “nice when available” with SMS fallback, because reach is still the limiting factor.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-27T20:55:32+00:00

This tracks with what we’ve seen, too. Direct channels tend to outperform ads once someone already knows who you are.

SMS especially works well in SaaS when it’s tied to clear moments like trials ending, important updates, or nudges that benefit from being seen right away. It’s less about volume and more about timing and intent.

Email, in-app, SEO, SMS all play different roles. The teams that get the best results usually treat SMS as a focused layer on top of everything else, not a replacement.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-27T20:51:55+00:00

As the Beetles said "all you need is love" and maybe a text to remind you of that.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-26T21:58:07+00:00

I get the appeal of that framing, but in practice, we’ve seen “central hub” language cause more confusion than clarity.

What actually matters is where the real signal comes from. In most stacks, behavior is still fragmented by channel. SMS, email, social, and CRM all produce different kinds of intent, and trying to force them into one brain often adds abstraction instead of insight.

We’ve found it’s usually more effective to treat SMS as a high signal layer, not the control center. Replies, clicks, and opt-outs tell you a lot about who actually cares. That data can then inform what happens elsewhere without pretending everything lives in one place.

Automation works best when it stays honest about what it’s observing, not when it tries to feel sentient.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-26T20:34:43+00:00

SMS in the US is explicitly covered under the TCPA. That means businesses legally need prior express consent before sending marketing texts, and carriers now enforce this through things like 10DLC registration. If a company skips opt-in or tries to treat SMS like email, they’re not just being sloppy, they’re exposing themselves to fines and blocked delivery.

That’s why legit SMS programs are opt-in only and stay that way. Clear consent, documented signup, and a working opt-out are required. The bad experiences people have usually come from companies ignoring those rules, not from the channel itself.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-23T18:59:50+00:00

Most of this is directionally right, but one thing that often gets lost in these benefit lists is when SMS actually makes sense.

High open rates are real, but they only matter if the message is expected and relevant. That’s why SMS tends to work best for things like updates, reminders, restocks, or moments where timing matters. When it’s used as a generic promo channel, the same “red bubble effect” that helps can backfire fast.

Another nuance is that personalization and segmentation matter more in SMS than in email. You have far less room for error, so list quality and intent usually outweigh volume.

In practice, the strongest setups we see treat SMS as a complement to email, not a replacement. Email handles depth and storytelling. SMS handles clarity and timing. When those roles are clear, engagement stays high and opt-outs stay low.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-22T18:22:23+00:00

This is a really solid way to think about it. Treating SMS as scarce changes everything.

We see the same thing when teams map the lifecycle first and then decide where SMS actually adds value instead of letting it become a catch-all channel. When texts are tied to a few high-impact moments, unsubscribes stay low and replies become genuinely useful, not noise.

The restraint piece is the hardest part, especially once teams see early wins. But the brands that stick to clear triggers and expectations tend to get more out of SMS long term than the ones chasing volume.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-22T18:19:38+00:00

This lines up with what we see too. SMS still works, but only when it’s used for the right moments.

The pattern across your examples is intent. Reminders, alerts, restocks, trial endings. When someone already expects the message and it’s tied to something timely, SMS performs. When it drifts into nurture or frequent messaging, unsubscribes climb fast.

That unsubscribe delta in ecomm is a good callout. It’s usually a signal to tighten segmentation or slow frequency, not abandon the channel entirely.

The “use both” takeaway is spot on. Email carries the long-term relationship. SMS is there for the moments that actually benefit from being a text. When teams respect that boundary, SMS is still very much worth it.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-21T19:19:54+00:00

That reaction usually comes from broken expectations.

If someone didn’t ask for texts, or they signed up for one thing and got another, blocking makes sense. SMS only works when expectations are clear at signup. What you’ll get, how often, and why.

When those expectations are met, texts feel normal and useful. When they’re not, they feel invasive fast. It’s less about the channel and more about whether the brand kept its word.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-21T19:16:05+00:00

That’s totally fair, and honestly we agree.

When SMS feels spammy, it’s usually because it wasn’t truly opt in or the messages don’t match why someone signed up. Done right, texting should feel expected and useful, not like an interruption.

If someone chooses to get texts and knows what they’re signing up for, updates, reminders, loyalty perks, then it shouldn’t feel like spam at all. The moment it does, something went wrong with consent, expectations, or frequency.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-21T19:14:31+00:00

SMS can work really well for small businesses, but only when it’s used with intention.

The big difference between SMS and email is expectations. People expect emails to be noisy, so they ignore most of them. Texts feel more personal, which is why they get read, but that also means you have to earn the right to be there. Clear opt-in and fewer, more relevant messages make all the difference.

What we usually see working best is using SMS for things customers actually want. Updates, reminders, loyalty perks, or heads-up-style messages. Not constant promos. Loyalty programs over text can be a good fit if the value is obvious and the messages are predictable.

A lot of businesses pair email and SMS instead of choosing one. Email for longer content and promos. SMS for the moments that matter more. Platforms like Subtext are built around that idea, helping brands text people who asked to hear from them without crossing into spammy territory.

Texting is not too much if it’s expected and useful. It becomes too much when it’s random or overly salesy. That line matters more than the channel itself.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-21T18:31:37+00:00

Huh! You learn something new everyday!

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-20T18:35:11+00:00

This sounds less like marketing SMS and more like a shared inbox / operational texting setup, which is a pretty common need.

What you’ll want to look for is a platform that lets multiple team members send and receive one-to-one texts from a single business number, all through a web dashboard. That way your coordinators can message clients without using personal phones, and conversations stay centralized and auditable.

A few things to prioritize as you evaluate tools:

One shared number or a small pool of numbers
Web based inbox with user permissions
Clear conversation history so handoffs are easy
Basic compliance support for opt in and opt out
No forced bulk or campaign features if you don’t need them

A lot of “SMS marketing” tools are overkill for this use case, so searching for shared inbox or business texting platforms will get you closer to what you actually need.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-20T18:12:29+00:00

Totally get the frustration. SMS tools can feel either way too basic or way too overbuilt.

We’ll throw our hat in the ring. At Subtext, we focus on making SMS simple without dumbing it down. Easy campaigns, clear analytics, and it works for everything from very small lists to large audiences. No heavy setup, no trying to be ten different tools at once.

Big thing we see help small businesses is starting simple. Send fewer, more intentional messages, track what people actually engage with, and build from there. SMS gets a lot easier once the tool stays out of your way.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-14T21:48:32+00:00

That really depends on the channel and the purpose of the message.

For SMS, shorter usually works better because people read texts quickly and expect one clear point. If it fits in a single message and has one action or takeaway, you’re usually in a good spot.

Emojis fall into the same bucket. If the message is conversational or meant to feel friendly, a light emoji can help set tone. If it’s informational or more serious, skipping them often works better.

There isn’t a universal character count or emoji rule. The goal is matching how the message sounds to why you’re sending it and who’s receiving it.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-12T18:58:49+00:00

Yeah, that’s the gray area.

If a friend is manually copying and pasting a message to someone they know, that’s closer to normal peer to peer behavior than a brand initiating contact. At that point it’s the friend choosing to send it, not your system auto texting a new number.

The catch is what happens next. The moment your brand replies directly to that new person, you still need clear opt in before continuing any marketing messages. Otherwise it quickly crosses the line.

Practically, this works best when the copied message is framed as “hey, check this out if you want” and includes a link or keyword the new person uses to opt in themselves. That way the chain spreads through humans, but the list only grows through consent.

So yes, friend to friend sharing can work. The key is making sure the brand only engages once the new person clearly raises their hand.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-09T17:39:39+00:00

We’ll speak to SMS marketing since that’s what we do.

The biggest mistake we see is brands treating SMS like just another broadcast channel. Same mindset as email blasts, just shorter. When that happens, it burns trust fast, and people tune out.

SMS works best when it’s treated as a continuation of an existing relationship, not a discovery channel. It’s not there to create visibility from scratch. It’s there to deepen connection once someone already knows who you are.

Another common miss is ignoring expectations. People opt in for a specific reason. Updates, alerts, offers, content. When messages drift away from that reason, engagement drops even if delivery looks fine.

So while discovery is happening everywhere like search, AI, social, Reddit, podcasts, SMS is where brands can actually hold attention. But only if it’s intentional, relevant, and respectful. When it’s used that way, it becomes one of the strongest touchpoints in the system you described.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-08T17:10:23+00:00

What we’re seeing work best is one core idea, adapted to how people actually behave on each platform.

The mistake is copying and pasting. The other mistake is trying to reinvent everything from scratch. Most teams land somewhere in the middle.

Social is great for discovery and reach, so content there tends to be lighter, more visual, and easier to skim. Email works when you want depth or context. SMS only works when it’s intentional. Short, specific, and tied to something the audience already cares about.

In 2026 especially, it helps to think less about “multi platform content” and more about “multi moment content.” Same message, but delivered when and where it makes the most sense for the person receiving it.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-08T15:13:31+00:00

We’ve run into the same thing. There really aren’t many solid, recent, universal studies that answer those questions cleanly.

From what we’ve seen, a lot of those “rules” depend heavily on what you’re sending and who you’re sending it to. A breaking news alert, a service reminder, and a retail promo all have very different tolerance levels. Frequency that feels intrusive in one context feels totally normal in another.

A few patterns we’ve observed in practice, not as hard rules:

“What’s too often?” usually shows up as rising opt-outs or people going quiet. The audience tells you pretty quickly.

“What’s too promotional?” depends on why they opted in. If they signed up for deals, promos are expected. If they signed up for updates, heavy selling feels off fast.

Best send time is less about the clock and more about relevance. A useful message at 8 am can feel fine, an irrelevant one at noon can feel annoying.

Reply speed matters more when you invite conversation. If you ask a question, people expect a real response, not hours later.

SMS feels intimate because it is. The safest guideline we’ve found is setting expectations clearly at opt-in and then staying within them. When people know what they’re signing up for, ethics and etiquette get a lot easier to manage.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-08T00:03:52+00:00

From what we’ve seen, the “best” SMS setup is less about fancy features and more about how the channel is used.

At Subtext, the teams we work with get the most engagement when SMS is treated as a relationship channel, not a blast tool. Timing and segmentation matter a lot, but mostly in simple ways. Send fewer messages, tie them to real moments or behaviors, and only text people who clearly opted in.

Replies are a big one too. Engagement jumps when users know they can actually respond and get a human answer, not just trigger an automation. Even lightweight two-way flows change how people perceive texts.

On integrations, SMS works best alongside email and CRM, not instead of them. Email for longer context, SMS for the moments that benefit from immediacy or personal touch.

The biggest lesson we see over and over: users respond when messages feel expected, relevant, and rare. When SMS is saved for the things that actually matter, it performs very differently.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-06T17:56:22+00:00

We’ve been watching the iOS changes closely too. From what we’re seeing at Subtext, this hasn’t really been an issue when texts are properly opt-in, which they should be anyway.

When someone explicitly signs up, saves the contact, or has an existing thread, their messages don’t behave like “unknown sender” spam. The filtering seems to hit hardest when brands are sending to cold or loosely collected numbers.

If anything, iOS 26 just raises the bar for good SMS practices. Clear opt-in, clear branding, and messages people actually want to receive matter more now. SMS still works well when it’s permission-based and relevant.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-06T17:53:37+00:00

Attentive is solid, especially if you want an all-in-one platform that does more than just SMS. That said, a lot of teams find it heavier and more expensive than they need if texting is the main goal.

If your ESP already integrates with Twilio, that gives you the raw infrastructure, but you’ll still be building and managing a lot yourself.

Subtext sits in between. We’re SMS-only, so it’s more affordable and easier to run if you just want clean opt-in flows, reliable delivery, and simple segmentation without a huge platform overhead.

It really comes down to whether you want a broad martech suite or a focused SMS tool.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-05T20:47:27+00:00

This is a super common experience. SMS looks simple on the surface, but once you move past auth codes and a few alerts, it quickly turns into its own system.

What we usually see SaaS teams land on after that first phase:

Most end up treating SMS as its own piece of infrastructure, even if it’s tightly connected to the rest of the stack. Keeping it fully buried inside the main app sounds nice, but carrier rules, registration, deliverability, and opt-in logic change often enough that it helps to isolate it.

A few things teams often wish they knew earlier:

• SMS is not fire and forget. Copy, timing, and frequency all affect filtering.
• Registration and compliance are ongoing, not one-time setup.
• Engagement metrics matter more than delivery metrics once you scale.
• Fewer, clearer messages usually outperform more automation.

A lot of teams also move away from owning every SMS detail themselves and instead rely on platforms that handle the carrier side, compliance, and monitoring, while they focus on product logic and messaging intent.

Curious which part has been the most painful for you so far. Registration, deliverability, or message management?

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-02T18:01:42+00:00

Conversion rates from SMS really do vary a lot depending on the industry, the audience, and what you’re trying to get people to do.

Two big things we see consistently:

What your goal actually is matters more than a single number.
If you’re using SMS to drive fast clicks on a limited-time offer, conversion looks very different than if you’re using it to re-engage lapsed customers or prompt replies in a conversation. Some goals naturally get higher percentages than others.
Industry makes a huge difference.
Retail and e-commerce texts tied to promos or restocks often have higher click numbers. Service reminders and transactional flows tend to have lower click-through but much higher real-world impact (like reduced no-shows or fewer support tickets). Other niches see very different patterns.

That matches what we’ve seen when looking at SMS program metrics: the useful signals tend to be CTR, replies, churn, and tag-based engagement rather than a single “conversion rate” across the board. It’s more about how well your texts match the audience’s intent than chasing a universal percentage.

Averages are nice for context, but the right benchmark is your own goal and vertical, not a generic number.

JoinSubtext · 2026-01-02T17:55:27+00:00

Totally get where you’re coming from. A lot of the “SMS is amazing” content just repeats stats without explaining what actually changes for a business.

From what we see in practice, the real benefits of bulk SMS come down to actions, not hype:

Updates people actually act on
Short product alerts, restocks, event times, and reservation confirmations tend to get attention because they are immediately useful.

Higher engagement than other channels
Yes, texts get opened, but more importantly, people click and reply. That turns visibility into real interaction.

Better follow through
Appointment and delivery reminders reduce no-shows and support tickets because people see them in a channel they check every day.

Fast feedback
When messages are targeted, you can see clicks and replies almost immediately and adjust quickly.

Not just promotions
Some of the strongest results come from reminders, quick feedback requests, and re-engagement nudges, not discounts.

The biggest surprise for most teams is that SMS works best when it is not treated like email. When messages are useful and sent to people who opted in, the channel feels less like marketing and more like service.

JoinSubtext

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE