Or it's interesting to discuss the fact that Apple deliberately makes SMS message UX and UI worse than iMessage.

Author had zero proof of that and speculated the entire time.

Feel free to downvote me, but everything I said was true. It -was- speculation with zero proof. Prove me wrong downvoters.

To be fair, he could’ve cut to the chase sooner. Since it was a UI UX article, HN readers probably aren’t aware that it’s a contrast between fonts and background, not blue vs green or green vs dark green.

It opens with an image of two green bubbles, one higher contrast than the other. The higher contrast one is labeled "Good" and the lower contrast "Gross".

After a two sentence paragraph expressing how the green/blue technical differentiation has become a social one, it then asks the question "Why is green worse than blue?" The next line: "The answer is color contrast."

What could they have realistically done to cut to the chase sooner in a meaningful way? The only real thing is ditching those two context building sentences. But it's two short sentences, providing relevant context.

Doesn't really feel like a valid criticism IMO.

He could have cut to the chase sooner than the header to paragraph 2?

They could sum it up in the first paragraph and then extrapolate, but like most of these things they stretch it out until the bottom.

HN readers are aware about poor contrast. Eg, your comment (which seems tame) is downvoted and has some lovely light color on light background combo.

What a weirdly snide comment.

I'm not sure if you're imploring us not to read the article because the title sucks.

Or admonishing us for not reading the article, because we've misunderstood it based on the title.

Title is kind of on point too because it is indeed a trick - a dark pattern - which is part of the topic of User Experience which the website uxdesign.cc specializes in. Also, it would have been hard to put the explanation inside title without making it too long.