Google Hangouts does read messages really well in groups. There are little portraits showing how far someone has read.
Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
31–40 of 46 posts
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#32Google Hangouts does read messages really well in groups. There are little portraits showing how far someone has read.
true. I like the ideas behind hangouts (and they have the best emoji). but it is just so painfully slow and unreliable with notifications for me...
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#33What I really want is a desktop version of WhatsApp. I have a lot of conversations on there and typing on a piece of glass is just never as efficient as typing on a laptop. I haven't been able to find a desktop client that isn't blatantly laden with spam or viruses. I might take a stab at building one myself. I'd be curious if anyone has already reverse-engineered their backend API.
my guess would be that every whatsapp account is associated with only one phone number, and you might have to introduce a separate layer of identification.
personally, i like having one reliable messenger on one device.
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#34What is it about WhatsApp that made so many people adapt it over all the alternatives, I cannot understand it.
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#35What is it about WhatsApp that made so many people adapt it over all the alternatives, I cannot understand it.
IMO, simplicity, speed and reliability.
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#36What I really want is a desktop version of WhatsApp. I have a lot of conversations on there and typing on a piece of glass is just never as efficient as typing on a laptop. I haven't been able to find a desktop client that isn't blatantly laden with spam or viruses. I might take a stab at building one myself. I'd be curious if anyone has already reverse-engineered their backend API.
This is the main reason me and my friends use Telegram. It has a web client.
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always assumed that the first checkmark indicates "delivered" and the second one "read", since right after you post it it shows a clock-symbol. also interesting, that i assume with current network speeds sent=delivered.
How about the first checkmark indicates delivery and the second "read". do you guys care about the "it left the phone" state?
Personally "It left the phone" state is very important to me, esp., when I am travelling and network connectivity is intermittent.
Also "Message Read" is a very ambiguous state according to me - If the content of a message is read from the notification drop down, but user never opened whatsapp to read it - is it read, or not ?
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#38What I really want is a desktop version of WhatsApp. I have a lot of conversations on there and typing on a piece of glass is just never as efficient as typing on a laptop. I haven't been able to find a desktop client that isn't blatantly laden with spam or viruses. I might take a stab at building one myself. I'd be curious if anyone has already reverse-engineered their backend API.
There is already an instant chat solution with both desktop and mobile clients: Skype. Whatsapp is useless to me, and, I suspect, most people in the US. Out of ~1200 contacts in my phone, 11 are currently registered with Whatsapp. I suspect a desktop client would be useful in Europe, India, etc. but be prepared to spend some real money on internationalization.
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#39What I really want is a desktop version of WhatsApp. I have a lot of conversations on there and typing on a piece of glass is just never as efficient as typing on a laptop. I haven't been able to find a desktop client that isn't blatantly laden with spam or viruses. I might take a stab at building one myself. I'd be curious if anyone has already reverse-engineered their backend API.
There is already an instant chat solution with both desktop and mobile clients: Skype. Whatsapp is useless to me, and, I suspect, most people in the US. Out of ~1200 contacts in my phone, 11 are currently registered with Whatsapp. I suspect a desktop client would be useful in Europe, India, etc. but be prepared to spend some real money on internationalization.
I have a lot of international friends.
Re: Show HN: Improving WhatsApp
#40What I really want is a desktop version of WhatsApp. I have a lot of conversations on there and typing on a piece of glass is just never as efficient as typing on a laptop. I haven't been able to find a desktop client that isn't blatantly laden with spam or viruses. I might take a stab at building one myself. I'd be curious if anyone has already reverse-engineered their backend API.
There is already an instant chat solution with both desktop and mobile clients: Skype. Whatsapp is useless to me, and, I suspect, most people in the US. Out of ~1200 contacts in my phone, 11 are currently registered with Whatsapp. I suspect a desktop client would be useful in Europe, India, etc. but be prepared to spend some real money on internationalization.
WhatsApp is not useless, it's pretty freaking huge.
One year ago WhatsApp had 400 million active users.
Skype has 663 million registered users, out of which 280 million are active monthly users.