Hacker News Reader

Comment by dmonitor | Hacker News Reader

I don't mind Apple adopting RCS the same way that SMS is implemented. I like that iMessage can add features at whatever pace Apple wants. RCS will at least fix the annoying group message problems that Android/iOS have.

View on HN

Agreed. I don't mind them having their messaging platform. I don't mind it being technically superior to RCS.

I DO have an issue with them intentionally doing a shit job of integrating with a telecommunications standard and then slapping a green bubble on it to get their oblivious users to ostracize people's kids.

Apple doesn't put a green bubble on SMS "to ostracize people's kids". Kids are ostracized just for having a default skin in Fortnite--because kids can be little shitheads. Apple differentiates because what you can do with SMS is different from what you can do with iMessage and that's a clear way to demonstrate it (and also to indicate if there's something weird going on when it changes from iMessage to SMS).

RCS is a suboptimal standard, and while it's good that Apple will support it to try to de-jank mixed-platform group messaging, I'd expect it also to be a different color because RCS in turn introduces its own jank that iMessage doesn't have. So people who want to make up an Apple to get mad at will still have their chance, I guess.

> what you can do is different

Can you talk a bit more about how iMessage is fundamentally diferent than SMS on the functionality level? Is it like "Signal" different or is it like "different" different?

Edit: bonus points if you can offer why iMessage is able to be the skeleton key into your iPhone, as often it and WebKit seem to be behind most of the serious 0-days...

I can edit an iMessage after sending it, I can use threads and it doesn’t require a cell carrier - just an Internet connection. It’s also e2e encrypted and I can optionally let people know I have do not disturb on.

It integrates with sharing my location and I can tell when someone is actually typing

> Can you talk a bit more about how iMessage is fundamentally diferent than SMS on the functionality level

It's different in the same way every messaging app is different from SMS:

* Group chats, with custom group names and icons

* High quality images/videos

* Reactions

* Stickers

* Rich link previews

* Threads

* etc. etc.

> why iMessage is able to be the skeleton key into your iPhone

I don't think a lot (any?) of the vulnerabilities are unique to iMessage. It's more about the fact that SMS/iMessage is a means for someone to send you data that's then parsed/decoded immediately by the system.

Isnt that the reason sandboxes exist? I just feel like these thins happen way less often with Signal and [shudder] Whatsapp...

iMessage is a much juicier potential attack vector. over 50% of the US market (trends towards the richer half, too).

Some carriers charge per SMS - after X SMSs per month. iMessage is completely free.

Kind of important to be able to tell if you are burning up your SMS quota.

Both iMessage and Webkit have to accept requests from unknown sources that can contain a wide variety of content type. some other content types, like EPS are themselves programming languages that could contain infiltration scripts. That is why Apple has dropped EPS support. Similar situation can happen for other kinds of image and video content.

I don't know much about how iMessage communication is implemented but it does offer end to end encryption and supports richer interaction and content than plain SMS does. that was one of the reasons that Apple marked SMS clients with the green bubbles to indicate not to expect the same interaction with them. It was some little shits that turned that into an anti-status symbol.

I just laugh because Signal is way better than all of this and—wouldn't ya know—the default is "blue bubbles". They are the ultimate blue bubble to me because its almost all yours and gives you way more control than anything else like iMessage and its all audited and open for examination (theoretically)

Sorry in which way is Signal better?

Signal can be better in all ways except the one that matters most. Not a single person I communicate with uses it. So it's useless.

You gotta find a way to make it clear you dont consent to be sharing your stuff with anyone but you , case closed. It has all the same toys and whistles so theres just no excuse.

Its a boundary and we all need to get real better at understanding and being respectful thereto.

Only issue is if you want them more than they you, there's a bit of a dance to navigate . If the like Musk, send them to all his endorsementz. At the end of the day, it will have to be a negotiation at play and its more of a toughlove ultimatun purely for the area of which messenging platforms to engage with.

> You gotta find a way to make it clear you dont consent to be sharing your stuff with anyone but you , case closed. It has all the same toys and whistles so theres just no excuse.

"It's not what we all already use."

There's exactly one person I know who uses Signal on a consistent basis. I don't turn on notifications for anything, so I don't see their messages on a consistent basis, but Signal offers me no incentive to use limited social credibility to try to encourage others to use its awkward affordances and non-native interface over either a native interface with reasonable security (iMessage) or a much better non-native interface without (Discord, Slack).

"There's no excuse not to use the one I like" is Linux-on-the-desktopping and is not responsive to how normal human beings actually operate in life and society. You might put picky conditions on your interactions, but most people meet others where they are--because network effects are real and humans matter more than technology.

If you actually use Signal and you have notifs you would not be saying any of this. Signal is beyond smooth in the UI/UX departments and the only difficulty is someone 1)install app 2) open app 3) enter number or username 4) basically done? That's literally every damn app. So tired of this FUD.

Has all the features of anything else without the bullshit and lack of credibillity/hazard to their own users.

If people respect themselves and their data enough, they will find a way. I've had zero problem with my closest friends cuz they trust I don't assign them random bullshit for shiggles. Maybe you need to reevaluate your relationships and the extent to which you place primacy on being able to communicate freely and without crap that works against you (or at least isnt built to work with you rather than rat you out about everything controversial you privately express)

Just don't get it man, maybe they're more the Telegram type. Nothing's more advanced or private than a Telegram for sure. Stop.

There was a point where I did try to use Signal in anger. It petered out almost immediately because nobody I talk to uses it except to turn on disappearing messages, shit-talk somebody else, and then go back to Slack or Discord. Because it does do disappearing messages well! But nobody I know wants to deal with it past that because contrary to your "it's just like everything else", its affordances are at best not distinguishing and certainly not good.

At some point, perhaps it will enter your consideration that talking about things like "people respect[ing] themselves and their data enough" is alienating to anybody who has a job and a mortgage and things they care about more than your minority choice of a messaging platform. Normal people don't care because normal people don't have governments, etc. in their threat models because normal people are boring. If you want to interest normal people, you have to be better than the BATNA--better than non-use. And saying "privacy" or "just get your friends to use it too" is a fail state.

Linux-on-the-desktop failed, too, when the only tool in the box was hectoring. (He said, from a Linux desktop.)

Sounds like you got everything figured out, thanks for chiming in =)

I can picture teens or younger acting snobby about phone choice. Not really clear why, if it’s a financial thing, as it’s been years since iPhones were priced at a premium relative to competitors. But well, they’re kids. However, I’ve experienced critical attitudes from adults well into their 40s when I had an Android phone. Personally I prefer iOS, but to judge someone based on their phone choice seems fairly ridiculous for an adult.

Phone/platform arguments are the worst, I do my best to avoid or extinguish them in whatever politik means is available. People can be such egotistical jerks about this foolishness.

I went through a phase like that and got over it early. As a kid, I thought that Amigas and then Linux were so far superior to Nintendo and Windows that I felt like I was at war with anyone using the other platforms. Later on I realized that this just made me miss out on the joy of using those systems and I would have done better to try to get all of them, rather than fixate on ones I thought were superior.

> Both iMessage and Webkit have to accept requests from unknown sources that can contain a wide variety of content type.

Lockdown mode rejects unknown sources, and doesn't autoplay content types.

So they don't have to any more, it's up to the user.

Its weird how much they deemphasize it and every time there's a zero-day, the solution is to upgrade. Let us add more to the pile while taking away a single point of entry.

Actuvate LockDown, and its all gone. Indefinitely cuz it blocks the original sin. And there's basicaly 0-downsides.

Different like … totally. SMS was part of the very early GSM design work in the mid ‘80s and is built into the network at a fundamental level (this is why the particular character limit etc etc)- it was designed in the GSM/SS7/ telco world and has been used for over thirty years. iMessage was designed and built by Apple as a single operator with virtually total control of the backend and user devices. They achieve similar results in completely different ways, the best analogy I can think of is how octopus’s and jellyfish can see too, but evolved eyes very different to our own.

But they pick an ugly shade of green though.

I currently have an iPhone 15 Pro Max and have also used Android devices in the past. I like to switch each time I get a new phone.

Apple definitely picks an ugly color to make you feel uncomfortable texting with a non iPhone user. They should at least let users choose the color (which will never happen).

All texts were green for years before iMessage (and blue texts) existed, so I highly doubt it was picked to be ugly on purpose.

The green predates the existence of iMessage. That green is the color that was used from the beginning of the iPhone in 2007; iMessage was only added in 2011. iMessage was given a different color than the preexisting one.

Trying to claim that Apple picked an "ugly color to make you feel uncomfortable" is simply false.

The original green bubbles used a different shade but more importantly they used black text. iOS 7 switched to white text and a shade of green that means the contrast for SMS failed Apple's own guidelines. Even for people with decent eye sight it can cause additional eye strain and be perceived as ugly even if the green on its own would be fine.

To be fair the blue they choose is also not ideal, but it is a lot better than the green.

https://medium.com/@krvoller/how-iphone-violates-apples-acce...

iOS 4 : https://i.imgur.com/3LIpvX9.png

iOS 5 (introduction of iMessage) : https://i.imgur.com/v2Wths4.png

iOS 7: https://i.imgur.com/7k8QL3z.png

Yes, it was green before, but it didn't look so vile. Since the redesign of iOS in 7 the difference of green vs blue is a difference in legibility.

They didn't pick it for that:

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/277597847631822848/11...

> They should at least let users choose the color (which will never happen).

You can turn on high contrast mode in Messages settings which gives you a forest green color that's imo pretty nice to look at.

It’s the system “green” color. It’s used anytime there is a UI element that’s supposed to be green, same as system “blue” is used for iMessage and everything else in the OS.

> Apple definitely picks an ugly color to make you feel uncomfortable texting with a non iPhone user.

But what's Apple's motivation? Making me feel uncomfortable reading an Android user's messages does little to influence that Android user into buying an iPhone.

That said, I don't know why Apple thinks the transport protocol (iMessage vs SMS) is so important that users want to see a color indicator for every message.

SMS can also cost money. There are plans that charge per SMS after X amount per month.

It’s important users can tell if they are using SMS so they don’t get a giant phone bill at the end of the month.

White on green is one of the hardest color pairings to read due to how cone cells are distributed in the retina (this image isn't completely representative, in the fovea green gets even higher as a proportion):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_cell#/media/File...

That's RGB lit up contrasted with just G lit up. One of the only worse pairings would be white on yellow, which would be RGB vs RG lit up, with the only distinguishing signal coming through blue, which we have the lowest resolution of.

White on blue is RGB vs B, all the visual difference in RG which we have the highest resolution of.

This is why you generally want different color schemes for light vs dark terminals, if the color saturation is high (saturated blue text on black is bad, saturated blue text on white is fine and vice versa for green and yellow).

> I DO have an issue with them intentionally doing a shit job of integrating with a telecommunications standard and then slapping a green bubble on it to get their oblivious users to ostracize people's kids.

The green bubble is there because in the past, when telcos charged money for individual SMS messages, green meant money. I.e., greenbacks, US dollars.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenback

* https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/263943/meaning-o...

Blue meant no charge for the message, since it went over the data plan and through Apple's servers.

The tribal/clan split of iPhone/no-iPhone came later.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com