It was a killer combination, almost everybody here in Brazil uses it, no matter how young or how old, no matter if it is a rich kid with the latest IPhone or the poor with the cheapest phone. Even the telcos had to bend to WhatsApp strength by offering "unlimited WhatsApp usage" on very limited data plans.
WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
101–110 of 185 posts
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taxis were mostly horrible because of pre-mobile-phone dispatch systems and expectations. That would have gotten fixed with or without Uber, although Uber certainly did push it along. But taxi medallion systems served a number of purposes. One of the big ones is reasonable regulation of taxi and driver quality. Another was keeping supply and demand balanced at a level where people didn't have to cut corners on things…
> One of the big ones is reasonable regulation of taxi and driver quality. I can only imagine that someone who rarely or never travels would say something like this. The main reason I switched to uber is that taxis are universally horrible , both in terms of drivers and vehicles. It's gotten much better since uber forced them to compete, but they still generally suck. So maybe you're right, and that was the reason fo…
> I can only imagine that someone who rarely or never travels would say something like this.
Your imagination is poor. I've lived on 4 continents and am on an extended trip even as I write this.
We're talking about different kinds of regulation. You apparently care about things being shiny; most regulation, though, is about setting a minimum bar.
In the early, high-growth days of something, regulation is rarely useful because everybody's on their best behavior. It becomes more important when things settle down into a relatively steady state. Then, the incentive to shave nickels and dimes can come out elsewhere. E.g., taxis face significant safety inspections and maintenance requirements because when you use a car as a commercial vehicle, you put a lot more miles on it and you are more likely face safety issues.
We don't yet see these problems with UberX because it has only been going for a few years, and because Uber has a strong incentive to keep from becoming an obvious disaster until growth slows and revenue gains come more from exploiting their market position.
> Most Uber drivers I've talked to love the platform
Gosh, might they have some incentive to only say happy things to you? Gosh, might there be some selection bias in your sample? Gosh, might people not talk about their pain and fears to random strangers?
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#103Here are some numbers i can't find. The number of users chatting on yahoo, aim, facebook, msn messenger, and all the random others combined when it was a thing not to care which people were using. At my job in 2011, every single member of my team was on using a different client, i was on ubuntu using Empathy. The point is, chat was already resolved, and it didn't require some sort of "quiet room or distraction free o…
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read the article? They're explicitly not focusing on user growth: "But while Facebook has long prided itself on the way its growth team has turned attracting new members into a science, Koum is equally proud of the fact that WhatsApp has not done so. Instead, all of its attention has gone into making the app as simple as possible to get started with—it doesn’t even require you to create a user name or passwor…
> Did you read the article? They're explicitly not* focusing on user growth:* I also RTFA, and it's hard to understand how someone could think user growth wasn't the focus. — "…all of its attention has gone into making the app as simple as possible to get started with…" [Hint: They did this to improve virality.] — "All along, he adds, the company's goal has been 'getting every single smartphone user on our network an…
As an example, look at Google in the early days. They were mainly focused on making a great, valuable product. Growth was a consequence of that. In contrast, look at all the people that glued gamification, growth hacking, etc, onto mediocre mediocre products. As with things like MLMs, a growth-first focus can get business results, but I think it's a very different mindset than, "Let's make a product people love."
Growth is surely a useful metric for them, and from that quote, it looks like it's a goal. But a goal is different, broader thing than what one focuses on. Compare people who want to be, say, great athletes (and therefore famous) with people who just want to be famous. The former will focus on doing the hard work; the latter will be more inclined to chase self-promotion and attention directly.
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#105WhatsApp's success here in Brazil can be attributed to very few reasons: 1) Worked in every single smartphone (I started using it on a very resource constrained 2010's Nokia running s60) 2) SMS was and still is very expensive here. 3) Zero friction to use: it uses your phone number as your ID and your catalog list as its own. It was a killer combination, almost everybody here in Brazil uses it, no matter how young or…
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#106Here are some numbers i can't find. The number of users chatting on yahoo, aim, facebook, msn messenger, and all the random others combined when it was a thing not to care which people were using. At my job in 2011, every single member of my team was on using a different client, i was on ubuntu using Empathy. The point is, chat was already resolved, and it didn't require some sort of "quiet room or distraction free o…
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#107Here are some numbers i can't find. The number of users chatting on yahoo, aim, facebook, msn messenger, and all the random others combined when it was a thing not to care which people were using. At my job in 2011, every single member of my team was on using a different client, i was on ubuntu using Empathy. The point is, chat was already resolved, and it didn't require some sort of "quiet room or distraction free o…
WhatsApp didn't replace internet chatting. It replaced (or maybe I should say "disrupted") SMS, and perhaps more importantly, MMS. There are two reasons: it's free, and the UX is far superior in that it mimicks how humans, especially groups of humans, communicate.
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#108WhatsApp's success here in Brazil can be attributed to very few reasons: 1) Worked in every single smartphone (I started using it on a very resource constrained 2010's Nokia running s60) 2) SMS was and still is very expensive here. 3) Zero friction to use: it uses your phone number as your ID and your catalog list as its own. It was a killer combination, almost everybody here in Brazil uses it, no matter how young or…
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#109> all of its attention has gone into making the app as simple as possible to get started with And they succeeded. I've been using it for years and the only new feature I remember is end to end encryption, despite they probably added new features. I don't care about status and stories, if they're still there they managed not to make them in the way of people that only want a SMS alternative. This is great design. My o…
Re: WhatsApp Cofounder on How It Reached 1.3B Users Without Losing Its Focus
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
WhatsApp didn't replace internet chatting. It replaced (or maybe I should say "disrupted") SMS, and perhaps more importantly, MMS. There are two reasons: it's free, and the UX is far superior in that it mimicks how humans, especially groups of humans, communicate.
Even though it was not free until some years ago, the price was so ridicolous that people were happy to pay for the service.