3 ms·
> The blue/green icon debacle should have been ruled discriminatory. This discrimination is not arbitrary, it is critical functionality. The set of features av
by jandrewrogers 3y ago
> The blue/green icon debacle should have been ruled discriminatory.
This discrimination is not arbitrary, it is critical functionality. The set of features available to blue icons is vastly broader (it goes far beyond messaging) than the features available to green icons. Some of these features cannot be practically replicated to non-Apple platforms.
Blue icons also have a much higher quality of service because they don't rely on telco infrastructure for delivery. Green icon messages frequently get lost or are delivered extremely late.
I use WhatsApp, Signal, and iMessage daily. Apple's iMessage (blue icon version) is the best of the bunch and it isn't particularly close. I don't think this is because there is anything special about iMessage per se, it is more that implementing complex core features across a broad range of unrelated platforms necessarily dumbs things down to the lowest common denominator, which makes for an unnecessarily rubbish experience on many platforms. iMessage goes for depth where other messaging platforms go for breadth.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoYou don't need to distinguish between android and iPhones users to that extent with different colors though. It absolutely was/is discriminatory.
- pxmpxm 3y agoBut you do, for the arguments mentioned. Native iMessage client with native iMessage functionality versus SMS with whatever garbage implementation your carrier decided to go with.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoYou can distinguish between iMessage messages and SMS/RCS messages more subtly than making them a different color and going out of your way to 'other' non-iMessage users.