←back to thread

Apple Invites

(www.apple.com)
651 points openchampagne | 4 comments | 04 Feb 25 16:21 UTC | HN request time: 0.679s | source
Show context
jbentley1 ◴[04 Feb 25 16:43 UTC] No.42934803[source]▶
Unless they add some basic functionality to include Android users, this is the evilest use of their walled garden yet.
replies(9): >>42934850 #>>42934862 #>>42934863 #>>42934957 #>>42934961 #>>42935724 #>>42937587 #>>42938577 #>>42938715 #
mvieira38 ◴[04 Feb 25 21:07 UTC] No.42938715[source]▶
Imagine being a teen with an Android in the Apple Invite age, the bullying will go crazy
replies(3): >>42938861 #>>42950063 #>>42959494 #
ghaff ◴[04 Feb 25 21:17 UTC] No.42938861[source]▶
The whole green bubble thing has got to be one of the stupidest status symbol things I've seen in a long time. Though I have no doubt there are many of them. If anything, it's maybe a good life lesson that many supposed status symbols are breathtakingly stupid to care about.
replies(2): >>42939622 #>>42940668 #
1. mrguyorama ◴[04 Feb 25 22:07 UTC] No.42939622[source]▶
>some supposed status symbols are breathtakingly stupid to care about.

All status symbols are stupid, that's part of the point. That has never mattered. It doesn't matter how stupid a symbol is, it can still have tangible effects on you and your life.

Humans are social animals first and foremost, and are not rational in any way. Tribalism is literally the point.

replies(2): >>42939750 #>>42940805 #
2. ghaff ◴[04 Feb 25 22:16 UTC] No.42939750[source]▶
You're not entirely wrong but also not my nor Apple's problem. Things like universities can be status symbols but they're mostly not entirely status symbols. Plenty of other things like that too.

But if it's not bubble color, it will be the type of sneakers kids wear or whatever else is the fashion of the moment.

3. bombcar ◴[04 Feb 25 23:29 UTC] No.42940805[source]▶
It's not the bubble color; it's that (early) iMessage groups were much better than SMS groups, and so if you added a greenie it resulted in a worse experience.

That's not so much the case anymore, from what I understand (even the "reactions") work decently well, now.

replies(1): >>42940880 #
4. ghaff ◴[04 Feb 25 23:34 UTC] No.42940880[source]▶
Possibly. My use of texting groups is relatively recent.