[acdha]

> I even had a single buddy, age 30, recently get peer pressured into getting an iphone because his sister said "I don't date green bubbles". He took it to heart.

Shallow people are shallow, and it’s hardly like Apple made them that way. People do the same thing about cars, shoes, clothing, alcohol, zip codes, etc. The only upside is that it lets you very quickly identify and avoid them.

In the messaging case, it’s important to remember that Google is currently funding a huge lobbying campaign trying to get governments to restore the market position they gave up a decade ago. SMS messages have been green on iOS since the first iPhone – and shortly after the App Store launched most people were using Google Chat since everyone using Gmail was on it and it even federated with other XMPP services. Google spent the next decade pushing users away with a bunch of poorly conceived and executed attempts to lock users into their proprietary system. Only after those failed did they start picking up RCS, but most of their catch up with iMessage work has been proprietary extensions which help sell carriers on Google’s Jibe cloud service.

I like the idea of open protocols but Google is acting out of self interest and I have no doubt that they’d try to lock things up in a heartbeat if they think they could get away with it.

Let them park for their own PR, and we can talk about more open alternatives.

[hospitalJail]

>Shallow people are shallow, and it’s hardly like Apple made them that way.

Oh yeah its not a Apple thing, its a human thing.

Apple takes advantage of that weakness in humans and reinforces it with their marketing. I personally don't have the ethics to take advantage of people who are class insecure, but Apple stepped up in the tech space.

Anyway, the original point was that Apple gives less freedom and its fine because they sell a social club, not necessarily the ability to compute. If they aren't selling a social club, they are doing a poor job at letting people compute.

[acdha]

> Anyway, the original point was that Apple gives less freedom and it’s fine because they sell a social club, not necessarily the ability to compute.

Yes, that’s the claim but it’s glaring how it’s an emotional position presented as a given but completely unsupported by any evidence and bears a striking resemblance to a competitor’s PR campaign. If this was true, it’d be easy to point to things like ads or marketing material disparaging SMS users – not to mention some effort to extend this outside of the United States where apps like WhatsApp are far more popular.

> If they aren't selling a social club, they are doing a poor job at letting people compute.

Here’s the thing: most people don’t buy phones (or computers) to “compute”. If you look at an Apple ad, it’s full of people doing things like creating photos or videos, sharing moments with their friends, traveling, etc. – that’s what they’re selling and the repeat purchase rate suggests most people feel like they are getting what they were promised.

I get it may help you feel more confident about your Android preferences to concoct these weird theories about iOS buyers being brainwashed or part of some weird social club but you might want to consider why you need to justify your preference this way. Most iOS users are buying something which they find useful and you’d be far more successful in your advocacy if you focused on what tangible benefits normal people are missing out on. What you’re doing sounds insecure, not persuasive.

[hospitalJail]

>apps like WhatsApp are far more popular.

Popular doesnt mean 'in-group'.

>I get it may help you feel more confident about your Android preferences to concoct these weird theories about iOS buyers being brainwashed

No, we learned this during my MBA. Apple is basically 50% of your marketing classes. I'm not sure you want to call academics incorrect here. They were spot on, they knew you'd come to apologize. Your identity is wrapped in Apple. An attack on Apple, is an attack on you.

Meanwhile I hate google and microsoft. I'm agonistic and trying to find anything better. Heck, I even think Linux isnt great for consumers given all the USB issues I've had.

Do Apple fans complain about butterfly keyboards, international high stakes security breaches, and holding your phone wrong? Or do they rush to Apple's defense. Weird you don't see people doing that in Google and Microsoft threads.

[philistine]

Exactly. The power over iMessage is in Apple’s hands. Yet Google, with their RCS push, have not made something open-source were they have less power than Apple.

RCS is controlled by Google just like iMessage.

[hospitalJail]

That isnt factual. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSMA

Google doesnt control RCS. Its a general format. Apple could implement RCS. At most, they are a loud voice. Any phone can adopt it.

This is completely different from a closed imessage that cannot be adopted by others. Not to mention, imessage has been pretty anti-consumer with all their security problems, inability to accept high quality video, etc... None of this is good for the consumer.

What is good for the consumer is that the color of the bubble are different, this is important for status seeking individuals who want to be part of the in-group.

Back to the parent comments, RCS is better if you want a computing device. iMessage is the best if you want to buy your way into an in-group.

[acdha]

Google does control the proprietary extensions to RCS they use to try to catch up to iMessage on security and features. The developers of apps like Signal, etc. have been asking for access for many years but Google chose to exclude them as they try to build their user base. Similarly, most of the carriers in the US haven’t actually implemented it themselves - they’re just paying Google’s Jibe subsidiary to host it for them. This is not open in practice even if there’s a theory where it could eventually be open.

[hospitalJail]

>proprietary extensions to RCS

Oof gross. Do you have any further reading? I couldn't find anything on it.