People use WhatsApp on the computer? From the Windows Store of all places? Must be a tiny percentage, which is why this version is now a basic web wrapper now. Anyway, I’d remind everyone that “using” RAM doesn’t mean “would not function with less RAM.” Many applications just use a lot if it’s available. RAM is not really something you explicitly ration.
"RAM is not really something you explicitly ration." It most certainly is. My old pc ran on 8MB of ram. Modern ones need 16GB for a comfortable experience. They do not do much more than I needed back then. I think it's reasonable to expect a simple chat app to not take up 128 times as much memory as my entire PC had when I was young.
Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
31–40 of 402 posts
Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#32Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#33Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#34Whatsapp screams antitrust. If you look in the dictionary for antitrust, you see Whatsapp
Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#35People use WhatsApp on the computer? From the Windows Store of all places? Must be a tiny percentage, which is why this version is now a basic web wrapper now. Anyway, I’d remind everyone that “using” RAM doesn’t mean “would not function with less RAM.” Many applications just use a lot if it’s available. RAM is not really something you explicitly ration.
Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#36Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#37Their great AI coding agent could not keep the native app working?
Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#38I use WhatsApp web and avoided the apps on desktop. Yet, I really don't understand why WhatsApp would need app especially with the state mentioned here (which is a basic wrapper) There are no calls in the web app, but modern web stack is more than enough to provide all the real functionality needed for it.
If it allowed me to do video calls from a laptop, that could be useful but obviously that can't be a feature they therefore offer.
Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#39You may not like that from a 'native look and feel' point of view, but the question 'what is a native Windows app these days anyway' is very much unanswerable, and you can actually implement stuff like this in a performant and offline-sensitive way.
But, yeah, by the time the resulting GPU worker process balloons up to 400MB, that pretty much goes out of the window. I'm actually sort-of impressed, in that I have no idea how I would even make that happen! But that's why I don't work at a powerhouse like Meta, I guess...
Re: Meta replaces WhatsApp for Windows with web wrapper
#40No 1 GB or installation needed
Why is the desktop app even a thing?