You're making a huge assumption that the young mainstream picked iOS over Android was because of function over form.

You can't discount that their products are very fashionable (Apple markets well, they look great, everyone else has one).

1) Discount someone from making an opinion based on an assumption.

2) Then in the next sentence. Make an opinion based on an assumption.

It's not just an assumption that Apple has a strong fashion /brand appeal ...

Note how sentence 2 does not claim it to be the reason, but offers it as a potential reason.

Conversely, it can't be discounted that the fashion might follow functionality. Apples has a lot more experience than Google at creating comprehensively great user experiences.

Google's signature successes, Search and Mail, have wildly different success criteria for user satisfaction than an operating system. Apple's signature successes all have operating systems and then there is the iPod which is a bit different.

The iPhone is differentiated by much more than Apple's marketing. Everybody markets their product.

Kids can also be extremely mean and some will jump all over “green text” kids. Apple certainly doesn’t help by closing their API. Not that they should have to open it but it’s not like they have a really affordable option anymore so the pressure on low income kids and subsequently their parents is pretty strong.

If keeping the API closed causes bullying, then yes, Apple absolutely should have to open it.

Then why is iOS not generally successful outside US?

I am not sure why you don’t consider it successful. Here in London iOS is the default. Android-wise I only see two categories of users: power-users that chose Android for functional or ideological reasons, and budget-constrained users that cant afford or don’t see the value in an iOS device. Both those groups seem to be the minority, just looking around for people on their phones in public places yields a majority of iPhones.

Pretty much all of continental Europe (including wealthy countries such as Germany) have iPhone market share at less than 20%; the UK is the outlier there.

France is also an exception then from what I remember pre-2015 (unless things changed dramatically since then).

Android is pretty huge in Europe. London could be an exception. Surprising even Chinese brands became popular lately with own physical stores in Western European capitals.

I think there is a patriotism component in iPhone US prevalence.

At least here in Brazil it comes down to cost. Iphones are extremely expensive, and restricted to the luxufy segment.

Have you ever actually used a stock Android device? The experience is much much cleaner than iOS. I use an Android phone and an iPad Pro every day, and I am honestly put off browsing the web in the iPad because the experience is just feels 'off'.

Disclaimer is that I live in Europe and nobody here uses iMessage. Its mostly FB Messenger or WhatsApp.

> The experience is much much cleaner than iOS.

In what way?

Here are a few IMO: - Less or no unremovable apps introduced by carrier/phone manufacturer - UI parallel to current Android stock trend rather than manufacturer's vision - Updates easier to attain since the manufacturer hurdle is less or non-existent

All of these are true for iOS and have been since its inception.

Note that outside the US the numbers are very different, if not for other reason than most people not being able to afford or willing to pay the iPhone premium.

I honestly can't understand why Google hasn't been able to replicate the success of iMessage. It can't be /that/ hard to figure out if the person on the other side is using an Android with a compatible Messaging app version and then switch over to an internet-handled chat.

> I honestly can't understand why Google hasn't been able to replicate the success of iMessage.

I mean a better question at this point is perhaps why Apple engineering hasn't been able to implement RCS.

RCS is designed to be controlled by the carriers. You know what else is controlled by carriers and has gone to shit as far as spam and security is concerned? SMS.

We actually have to thank the “walled garden” for the lack of spam on iMessage.

While I’d like Apple to also support RCS, I still want iMessage to remain the default for communicating with iOS users.

Why should Apple implement RCS?

All the backend is controlled by Google. All the risks, none of the gains.

No it isn't.

RCS its a open cellular standard thats being deployed worldwide. Google does offer a backend for carriers to use (when you want to push your cloud offerings and have tons of engineers with nothing else to do just like AWS) but it's not required and carriers are rolling their own. The protocol itself is meant for inter-carrier communication and phones.

> I honestly can't understand why Google hasn't been able to replicate the success of iMessage

It's not because Google is doing a bad job, it's because Apple is doing a _great_ job.

Apple's framing of iOS as a luxury brand is why the "blue vs. green bubbles" type of sentiment has real impact within younger social circles.

That has nothing to do with why Apple owners prefer blue bubbles. It’s because SMS is unreliable and restrictive. You can’t share files, some carriers truncate messages and send them as multiple messages, media formats are limited, group chats don’t work right, typing indicator doesn’t work, read receipts don’t work, etc. Green bubble does not mean lower status, it means a significantly degraded experience.

Some kids may act like those with green bubbles are not part of the in group, but this is done in jest. Kids do that with everything. My generation did it with video game consoles and sports teams. You had Sega people and Nintendo people. Nike vs Adidas. It wasn’t about status.

Isn't there a clear solution in just using a non-sms app available to both Android and iPhone, like Messenger or WhatsApp?

from an iphone users perspective there is no problem that requires a solution. Since iMessage is installed by the default, and there is no need for another app. And with iOS being pretty dominant in the US, no other app is going to get the traction it needs on iOS to be a successful cross platform communications.

Looks like Android has about 45% of the market in the United States. I actually thought it was higher.

http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-stat...

I think the incompatibility is a bigger deal than you think it is. There is a need for a proper messaging app.

Imessage comes with ios and is the same as the app you use for sms.

Signal does it just fine - I can only assume that Google is distracted or just doesn't care.

Google talk/hangouts chat still works and does this. Although you are also correct in that case as Google is distracted and doesn't care about Google talk.

And of course fragmentation-- Even if Talk, Signal, Whatsapp and Telegram all support discovery and upgrade, the network effects (or lack of them) kills it in practice.

Probably that they consider it wouldn't generate revenue.

Google could create the greatest messaging app on the planet, but the carriers have more control on Android. They would just not install it on their phones by default. Which means it would not get the traction needed to succeed. Heck most US carriers don't even install one of googles current messaging apps, they install their own customized one.

They do, works in a very similar way

Android has always been a stop-gap for Google. Fuchsia is going to be the first real competitor to iOS.

By the time Fuschia actually ships as a complete OS, perhaps the industry will have moved on to a new hardware form factor and smartphones will be considered a legacy product. Sort of like how Android was originally designed as an OS for compact cameras and then later pivoted to smartphones.

This is exactly why Fuchsia is a capabilities based OS, designed to run on any device.

https://misterbugbuster.com/2018/04/19/fuchsia-os-a-modular-...

Historically attempts to create a modular, universal OS that runs on any hardware haven't ended well. Such projects tend to collapse under their own weight due to scope creep and the resulting software is usually too poorly optimized for any particular hardware to make a compelling product.

Like Linux?

What is it about Fuschia that will improve the messaging situation?

I fail to see the relevance of comparing an opinion from 20 years ago to a product that didn’t even exist. Besides the fact that Google is literally 10x beyond any software company that existed in the 90s in terms of resources both human and financial. Nothing is possible until it is.

> I fail to see the relevance of comparing an opinion from 20 years ago to a product that didn’t even exist

And why not? The mythical man-month is getting on 50 years old now and still relevant.

> Google is literally 10x beyond any software company that existed in the 90s in terms of resources both human and financial

That is fair. (And, as per a recent HN post, most should strive not to do what google does, since most don't have to crawl the entire web.)

That'd be a terrible strategy. Why not build a message app and then port it over to Fuchsia?

Its going to be an up hill battle for Fuchsia