Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OS X 10.10.3 and iOS 8.3 Beta 2 Updates Introduce New Emoji, Skin Tone Modifiers

As a white guy, I've never had an issue with creamy colored emoticons. ;) I have noticed here at MRs, our emoticons cover the spectrum of the rainbow...well done! :D
 
OS X 10.10.3 and iOS 8.3 Beta 2 Updates Introduce New Emoji, Skin Tone Modifiers

redheeler said:
I can't possibly be the only one wondering why there still isn't a Public Beta of 10.10.3 this late after the developer release.
Click to expand...


Because it's not late yet. With Yosemite public beta last summer, the first Public beta was released when Developer beta was on beta 4.

Wouldn't expect 10.10.3 public beta until developer beta is beta 3, at earliest.
 
Lol. Looks like it backfired.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2967241/Asians-angered-Apple-s-racist-yellow-emoji-Firm-comes-fire-use-characters-six-different-skin-tones.html
 
moderately said:
Only to posters like you. You are able to overlook race when the figures are 'white' but if they are brown you have an issue.
Click to expand...

Nope. If Apple was an African company or something and the faces were only black that would still not be bringing race into it. IMO a better option would have been to make them all a colour that does not look like any race, as emotions are there to display an emotion. It's bizzare how even things like this need to be divided up by race these days. It seems to represent division more than inclusion.
 
sunking101 said:
Yes but this is minorities complaining about something Apple did to be more PC. It isn't a right of centre article is it?
Click to expand...

When Atlanta changed the names of their train lines to colors, some Asians were offended that one of the lines was "yellow", and happened to be one that ran through a predominantly Asian area. So, they had to change it to "gold".

I don't take the people who get upset about that type of thing too seriously.
 
Heltik said:
I think the issue for many is the issue of why we buy Apple products. Sir Jonathan Ive can describe this better than me:

"Simplicity is not the absence of clutter, that's a consequence of simplicity. Simplicity is somehow essentially describing the purpose and place of an object and product. The absence of clutter is just a clutter-free product. That's not simple.
"The quest for simplicity has to pervade every part of the process. It really is fundamental."

What Apple seems to be doing here is reducing simplicity and adding clutter when they didn't need to. They are called Emoticons, not RacialEmoticons. Having a black face or a white face does not convey the emotion any better. It's getting away from design purity and simplicity under a false banner of inclusion and racial equality.
Click to expand...

Interesting hypothesis. But you seem to be forgetting one thing. Apple has always had the option for letters such as å, é, î, ñ, and ö. This is done by holding on the letter you want, and choosing from the alternate options. This is the exact same method used for choosing an alternate skin tone emoji. If you didn't have a problem with alternate letters, why is the alternate emoji suddenly "clutter"?

Apple's take-no-prisoners charge towards ultimate simplicity is one of the reasons I have been considering dropping them altogether. I've already found other solutions for many apps due to their incessant need to remove features. More simplicity does not mean more usability.
 
sbailey4 said:
Can you explain how black or white or chinese is an "emotion"?
Click to expand...

No. Because that wasn't the point of the comment or my quote to the comment.

You can't cherrypick one part of the statement and ask me to explain it. You have to take the entire discussion into context.

He said:

We now have to think if a smiley is 'suitable' for a particular recipient. It's stupid.
"Hey you sent me a yellow smiley and I'm black. I'm offended that you didn't take the time to select the black smiley" etc.
Click to expand...

Then I said:

Digital Skunk said:
Usually an emoticon expresses the emotion of the sender.

Hence the reason for a more diverse set.
Click to expand...

Ergo, a white man wanting to express his emotions would send a white emoticon. They could of course send any race or color they want, but the recipient won't get offended because it has nothing to do with them.

noodlemanc said:
It's bizzare how even things like this need to be divided up by race these days. It seems to represent division more than inclusion.
Click to expand...

Only the dominant race has that perspective. What people really want is inclusion and acceptance, not inclusion and suppression.

No one in the LGBT community is asking people to stop classifying them by their sexual preference. They are asking for inclusion and acceptance.

Many minorities are asking for the same thing. It has nothing to do with division.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
samiwas said:
Interesting hypothesis. But you seem to be forgetting one thing. Apple has always had the option for letters such as å, é, î, ñ, and ö. This is done by holding on the letter you want, and choosing from the alternate options. This is the exact same method used for choosing an alternate skin tone emoji. If you didn't have a problem with alternate letters, why is the alternate emoji suddenly "clutter"?

Apple's take-no-prisoners charge towards ultimate simplicity is one of the reasons I have been considering dropping them altogether. I've already found other solutions for many apps due to their incessant need to remove features. More simplicity does not mean more usability.
Click to expand...

I guess it comes down to what you want to convey. Whilst I may have a genuine need for alternative characters in communication, I see no need to convey the colour of my skin in a comment in which I'm expressing emotion, but to each their own. I can see your rationale, even if I don't agree with the raison d'être (see what I did there :) ) for your philosophical stance.

----------
Don't panic said:
i think it would have been better if all emoticons (emoji, whatever) would have been left race-neutral.

however, once the move to have one race stereotype included, it makes perfect sense to extend it to be more inclusive.

how people use them or perceive them is a different issue, and has to do with the people themselves, not with the option provided
Click to expand...

If I make a bad move, it makes more sense to reverse it than extend it.
 
Heltik said:
I guess it comes down to what you want to convey. Whilst I may have a genuine need for alternative characters in communication, I see no need to convey the colour of my skin in a comment in which I'm expressing emotion, but to each their own. I can see your rationale, even if I don't agree with the raison d'être (see what I did there :) ) for your philosophical stance.

----------



If I make a bad move, it makes more sense to reverse it than extend it.
Click to expand...

eh, you may be right, but people apparently like the vast selection, so they were never going to take them away. hence the expansion.
 
Heltik said:
I guess it comes down to what you want to convey. Whilst I may have a genuine need for alternative characters in communication, I see no need to convey the colour of my skin in a comment ...
Click to expand...

That's cool.

I see no need to pierce or tattoo my body, but I've noticed that a lot of other people demonstrate a different set of needs than I do. If I viewed the world by my needs alone, I'd assume that there wasn't any reason for tattoos or body piercing.
 
citizenzen said:
That's cool.

I see no need to pierce or tattoo my body, but I've noticed that a lot of other people demonstrate a different set of needs than I do. If I viewed the world by my needs alone, I'd assume that there wasn't any reason for tattoos or body piercing.
Click to expand...

I can see your point, and I respect it, but I don't believe your analogy is valid in these circumstances.
 
Heltik said:
I can see your point, and I respect it, but I don't believe your analogy is valid in these circumstances.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that people never like analogies when the analogies don't agree with the argument they are trying to make.

Funny how that works.
 
Heltik said:
I can see your point, and I respect it, but I don't believe your analogy is valid in these circumstances.
Click to expand...

It does. Perfectly in fact.

citizenzen said:
I've noticed that people never like analogies when the analogies don't agree with the argument they are trying to make.

Funny how that works.
Click to expand...

This is also the case when dealing with actual truths. You can replace "analogy" with "truth" and the statement becomes so much more profound.
 
samiwas said:
Well, you see, some people aren't boring business stiffs who only write in standard language, somehow thinking it makes them elite. Some people like to send messages to their friends and wives and siblings and have a little fun with them.

I might send a text to my wife saying "What should we do tonight?" and I'll get the response "######". And it makes me laugh. A little more entertaining than "Well, dear husband, I believe we shall go out for some pizza and a beer, then maybe go home and get frisky".
Click to expand...

OK, so they're aimed at very defensive, judgemental people, is that it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back