I think you can go even further and say that having different apps for different types of communications is actually a convenience in the context of something like a smartphone. Different apps implicitly cater to a different circle of contacts with distinct levels of privacy, discretion, formality and posterity. If you had to explicitly manage these types of preferences in a single universal app it would be both tedious and error prone. Having separate apps that work is specific ways is just so much simpler to manage, it is convention over configuration.
I hope I'm wrong, but I think you're missing the point here. Users may like having separate tools to help them differentiate between different communication tasks. I don't think that trying to manage a bunch of messaging apps is a pain point for most/all people.
It is because the user ends up having to look at notifications of multiple applications. Those notifications take up space.
Right now they're sorted in a way. For example, the way the lockscreen looks, or the time they've arrived. This doesn't necessarily reflect priority for the user. How to achieve this? I think the correct way is by ML/AI. One way could be looking at which notifications the user tends to open first. Or, for example, look at which correspondence appears to be most used. This could even be combined with other factors such as time of the day, day of the week. E.g. the wife might be less important during 9-5 at a weekday.
Moreover, to reply to your specific point, a user could decide to user Ulum, plus Signal on the side. Or a user could decide decide to run Ulum, MSN Messenger, and ICQ. My point being, an application can abstract some of the protocols but just because it can't do more doesn't mean the user will use that feature. This is entirely up to the user.
Right, everything is entirely up to the user.
If it isn't a pain point already, then by definition you're solving a problem that isn't there.
After unifying messaging, we want to continue to unify other functionalities, to work toward a sort of 'super app'. It starts with messaging and will evolve from there.
What will you do when the underlying networks start to work against you and shut your third-party client out? They don't want you on their network, they don't want people to use your client, they want people on their client, so they get all the metrics and data.
Look, I had a multi-network IM client for a long time, because screen real estate and notification area icon space was limited, and it was nice to have similar-looking dialog boxes for everyone. But those aren't problems on mobile.
I get it, it would be nice to have the app that everyone has installed, but what problem are you solving for average people? Why would they install your thing and not the real thing?
Instagram and Snapchat are out for the first round. The workaround is going to be too great, so those will come in version 2 as we scale our dev efforts. FB Messenger is the one we are going to put our effort into and work around the API. We will have the bare bones to begin, very basic photo and video options. The basic idea for us is to get to a minimal viable product, see if what we are doing makes sense, and then either grow from there or pivot.
There is no doubt at some point we will get a cease and desist, much like Disa did. We are full aware there will be a day when that happens. At that point, we will discontinue their serves and continue using the other ones. The goal for us is to eventually be our own standalone product.
The real problem people are running into is app overload. It isn;t just messaging, but rather apps in general. By unifying messaging first, we can move on to unifying the next thing from there and eventually having one big super app!
Thanks for your questions and feedback, they are honestly super helpful for me to talk through.
Honestly, they don't. In your previous post you went through your scenario of having to check a bunch of apps. You are a developer, not a typical user, so the typical user has way less. Also, all apps have notification icons, so you don't have to open them to figure out if there's anything there, you can take one glance at a screen on your phone, and you know which three had something. Or take a look at the notification area in your phone, which has the same info.
You're building an app for yourself, great! But you have to realize that everyone is not you. :-)
I also appreciate you reading the few post I have put out here. I am on a bit of a tear writing lately as part of a new year resolution to write more and improve my writing. I figured I might as well couple it with my little project.
Anyways, I am fully aware this app won't apply to everyone. The way I look at it is not everyone uses so many social networks that they can't handle posting to all of them right? While this might not seem like a huge problem, Hootsuite solved for it and now they are a unicorn.
I get this is a problem me and a few other people have right now, but I believe it is going to get worse. There will be an app after Snapchat, then after that, and the apps will continue to pile up. As for notification, we have some things in the pipeline to improve over messaging experaince as well.
If I backtrack just a bit, I am actually more of a swiss army knife position who works at a startup. Mainly I do customer service and data analysis though.
Thanks for your input!
This is not a problem the average user is having. Anyone remember the "IM wars"? Most people happily installed all IM programs their friends were on, thus solving the problem. Only a small handful of nerds thought this was intolerable, and installed Adium or Trillian or Miranda or any of the other multi-network instant messengers, and suffered every time an actual network would upgrade or change their protocol.
This time around, people's smartphones are already the unifier. All messaging apps have notifications, so your phone will tell you what everyone is saying across networks, and you just tap to go straight into whatever app the message was in.