MMS is limited in this regard, and the capabilities w/r compatibility vary between carriers. For instance, I've noticed that a HEVC video with a reasonable filesize I try to send to someone on another Galaxy on the same carrier gets transcoded to x264 with high degration of quality. Even making sure the original HEVC is below the filesize of what ends up being sent and with a HEVC-compatible receiving device the behavior is the same. Carriers don't need to dynamically keep track of device capabilities, so this is the result of broad compatibility bring the focus, instead of optimal capability. Kind of like how sending a video to a 'feature phone' may result in their receiving a link with minimal metadata (maybe the file name, type, and size).
Apple does most everything in a walled-garden approach. So, their services wrap or supplant more universal standards. It's part of what users find attractive about their products. Their services are a layer atop or apart of the cellular network infrastructure, so they can pursue an enhanced user experience as a result.
Just use whatsapp or similar and chide the Apple Users in your life that insist on being special.
Anti-Apple Rant Follows:
Personally, this is why I do not purchase or use Apple Products. I had a 1st generation iPod Nano. When I read the hardware was capable of playing video I installed bootstrapping firmware that let me leverage the hardware to my satisfaction. This opened my eyes to their business model. I find their approach to be a wasteful application of development and engineering efforts that contributes mostly to the artificial distinctions that drive their profits instead of truly innovating. As much as I don't condone it, I acknowledge they likely wouldn't exist as a company otherwise. To me, their competition as a minority format or alternative detracts from progress-at-large in tech. Their browser was not standard, their micro architecture on computers was not standard, their file formats... You guessed it - not standard. Standardization facilitates ease of progress. But putting forth a standard for ratification and broad use doesn't rake in profits. They use x86 chips now, because engineering performant CPUs is increasingly expensive when they are the sole customer for the design and fabrication. So they folded and use the same as PCs; with no true hardware distinction their efforts instead go to engineering artificial defeat-device elements to continue the charade of being special. They make a market or a distinction in a budding market, don't open it up, and sit on it while they wall it up and convince their users that the logo on what they sell is, by some law of nature, guaranteeing superiority. They use the same CPUs as everyone else now, firewire was overtaken, and media purchase/use/consumption is ubiquitous in consumer habits that have no dependency on Apple existing. If they cannot innovate forward for themselves they impede and enhance user switching costs to drive customer loyalty out of fear. Otherwise they become irrelevant or are forced to compete on a playground they don't control. This is like the neighborhood brat taking the ball home if they don't get special treatment.
With the only distinction being the OS and hardware design, the curtain in front of the wizard is sheer: Designs fall out of IP Protection and clones of their designs show up in PCs all the time. So beside being first to market, all else being the same, Apple would have no distinction in any given generation of product unless they continually innovate. Further to this point, they pour great effort to engineer barriers to keep their OS from being used on generic hardware. Uber-fans will say they need to control the specs to consistently achieve the end result. This is not completely true. If MacOS could be freely placed on the dirt-cheap laptops at big box stores that the masses churn though in cyclical consumerisitic purchases, they would have poorly performing devices and poor user experiences in that segment just like everyone else. So they don't operate there to preserve brand image. It's psychological. So it's a false argument to say their devices just work better. Put the same money for a fine Mac toward a PC and that PC will run performance circles around the Mac while still being inexpensive to upgrade for a much longer life of use. But if someone doesn't meet the consumer there, at budget pricing, we increase the digital divide. Their model is elitist and will prove to eventually be unsustainable. If Apple exists in 20-30 years they will be making custom UI Wrappers and fancy expensive devices that serve no true distinction even moreso than today. They know this, and have turned to using specialty programing frameworks, because software is of the few points of distinction they can still conjure.
Further evidence of this trend is that you don't hear anyone ignorantly claiming "Macs don't get viruses" anymore. Their running on the PowerPC Architecture wasn't even the reason for this being loosely and fleetingly true: It's because the limited market share Apple held/holds made it economically prohibitive to engineer malicious programming. With iEverything, and their pay and cloud systems the tight walled-garden integration they leverage as their proficiency eventually nixed that. When Adobe introduced gpu acceleration with CS3, Macs didn't get that for some time- so how was a platform known for being "better" with creative design any better then? Software is software, design is design, and Apple isn't bulletproof because of their approach. "The Fappening", anyone? Their approach has, in ways, actually eroded security for general computer users. Their tight-knit integration with iCloud has hastened the deprecation of SMS for 2fa. If someone's apple account is hacked everything inside the wall is vulnerable, but kind of designed in ignorance of this shortcoming, the garden bears fruit for an attacker. It's a lot easier to gain access to someone's Apple Account through social engineering or poor user security practices to intercept SMS 2fa than to spoof a cell tower or use SIM/porting hacks.
Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk