61–70 of 262 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Except that this is a feature of every messaging app. It's not really a response to It wasn't 11 years ago.
Yes, it was. For example, I ran AIM on a BlackBerry. MSN Messenger was around 11 years ago too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The appeal of WhatsApp was free text messages Except that this is a feature of every messaging app. It's not really a response to >> It also has no killer features in comparison to any existing messaging app, nor the defunct MSN.
> Except that this is a feature of every messaging app. It's not really a response to It wasn't 11 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can change the setting for photos not be saved to your camera roll. And in my experience whatsapp has the best connectivity.
Connectivity is what your phone has. It has nothing to do with Whatsapp. Whatsapp does not add anything to your connectivity. Perhaps you mean "server availability/reliability"? The only thing Whatsapp could do, without reaching deeply into the system, is to retry sending messages over and over, until they are sent. If other messengers give up early, then perhaps that could create a false impression of improved conne…
Do you claim WA reaches that deeply into the system on phones?
Not sure whom I poked the wrong way this time, but it would surely be good to have explanation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, it was. For example, I ran AIM on a BlackBerry. MSN Messenger was around 11 years ago too.
Those were not simple, seamless, cross-platform, drop-in replacements to SMS though, which is what OP was referring to by “text messaging.” Sure, clunky systems which had no chance of mass adoption existed before.
The only thing SMS offered was that the other person didn't need to be running anything. WhatsApp didn't offer that, and also didn't improve on the other messengers of the day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve never understood the appeal of WhatsApp: it requires a phone number (so it’s useless or hard to setup abroad, and it’s tied to a very personal data), handle very poorly wifi connection (somehow it seems to only update when connected over 4G) and force me to download pictures and videos to see them, trashing my photo folder in the process. It also has no killer features in comparison to any existing messaging app…
I think you are underestimating the degree to which requires only a phone number is a killer feature: -you download the app and can immediately get started after verifying your phone number (no ID or password required) -you don't need to share any ID or connection details other than just your phone number I spend a lot of time in India, and I think this lack of complexity has contributed significantly to its virality…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve never understood the appeal of WhatsApp: it requires a phone number (so it’s useless or hard to setup abroad, and it’s tied to a very personal data), handle very poorly wifi connection (somehow it seems to only update when connected over 4G) and force me to download pictures and videos to see them, trashing my photo folder in the process. It also has no killer features in comparison to any existing messaging app…
The appeal of WhatsApp is simply that everyone already has it. It's the only messaging platform that can be used to message all your contacts. Network effect, that's it.
In german companies, I see an increasing use of Threema as the "official" messenger. Is that only a german trend?
threema is not open source and it is not free, Signal (better some European fork) without recent baggage would be better option user base is extremely slow, in Slovak media Threema is associated with mafia and murder of journalist, it will be hard to convince people to use same app as mobsters
Earlier quoted context omitted.
threema is not open source and it is not free, Signal (better some European fork) without recent baggage would be better option user base is extremely slow, in Slovak media Threema is associated with mafia and murder of journalist, it will be hard to convince people to use same app as mobsters
People also use money, mobsters do too. They breathe air, mobsters do too. I don't think mobsters using something that is otherwise legal to use is going to stop adoption.
if you hear Threema in Slovaka - mafia and murder are first words which isntantly come to your mind, because nobody else use this app, everyone is already on Whatsapp, Messenger or Viber and nobody ever heard about Threema besides few nerds until media started to publish transcriptions of Threema chats from mafia where they are ordering murder of journalist
you can downvote all you want, that's reality, same as when you hear Ford Pinto
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are underestimating the degree to which requires only a phone number is a killer feature: -you download the app and can immediately get started after verifying your phone number (no ID or password required) -you don't need to share any ID or connection details other than just your phone number I spend a lot of time in India, and I think this lack of complexity has contributed significantly to its virality…
It requires a phone number and a smartphone. Not just a phone number.
It seems to be available on cheap feature phones now anyway: https://www.gizbot.com/mobile/features/fnord-047499.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Except that this is a feature of every messaging app. It's not really a response to It wasn't 11 years ago.
Gtalk came with the original Android 1.0, and you were already signed up with your gmail account when you set up your phone with OOBE.