Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by nafey on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @02:09PM
(#17240406)
I have been hearing a lot of good things about signal... How are their servers paid for though if it's a free service?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by FigmentEngine on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @02:33PM
(#17240660)
"supported by grants and donations" according to their site.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by majidazimi on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @02:52PM
(#17240840)
Why is everyone doing business with a black and white strategy? On one extreme, everything is free and funded by selling user information and on the other extreme, everthing is free but funded by donation. What is wrong with 2$/year model? Everyone (I mean truly everyone) is willing to pay that.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by Jonovono on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @04:46PM
(#17241874)
Messaging apps, like social media services need your friends to be on the platform for it to be useful. If you start putting friction into that process then the services are instantly not useful. Everyone of your friends that doesn't join makes that thing much less useful for you.
You say "everyone" is willing to pay that. I'll tell people about an amazing app that solves their problems they are complaining about and they go and see it's a couple dollars (one time purchase) and still complain and usually don't buy it.
There will never be a popular messaging service or social network that relies on subscriptions (maybe subscriptions for additional features though)
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by alagappanr on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @09:02PM
(#17243581)
Would agree with your sentiment, but Whatsapp itself is an example of a messaging service that relied on their 1$/year model and had around 200 million active users before it went free.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by Jonovono on Wednesday June 06, 2018 @10:17AM
(#17247317)
I wouldn't say they "relied" on it. It was not enforced at all (lots of people used it without paying $1) and they sold out to Facebook. It would have been interesting to see how things played out if they had stayed independent.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by 1024core on Wednesday June 06, 2018 @12:12AM
(#17244311)
They started charging after they had achieved scale.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by soziawa on Wednesday June 06, 2018 @01:46AM
(#17244618)
No, it cost 1$ from the very beginning on iOS.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by mrep on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @03:06PM
(#17240952)
I disagree, some very poor people most likely prefer the ads then parting with 2$. One thing people forget about advertising it is a pretty good at price discriminating. Ads to rich people are worth more than ads to poor people so advertisers can make more money from those with more money to spend while still serving everyone.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by ascorbic on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @03:56PM
(#17241444)
WhatsApp's $1/year charge only applied in certain (rich) countries.
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by theyinwhy on Thursday June 07, 2018 @04:44PM
(#17260088)
Threema is doing something like that: https://threema.ch/en
Re:Behind the Messy, Expensive Split Between Facebook and Wh...
by jjrh on Tuesday June 05, 2018 @04:49PM
(#17241898)
I think the issue is more if you ask for any amount of money it immediately turns people off.
The process of putting in your creditcard number, entering your password for google play/paypal/etc is just enough of a barrier to go 'whatever!'.