And it is also partially owned by Softbank.
Would that indiciate that Korean software companies are only able to penetrate one economy at a time?
That would be a very weird, but interesting thing to investigate.
So I am simply surprised. My knowledge must be incredibly out of date.
And I don't think it takes conspiracy theories to explain it, maybe users don't like platforms that isn't dominated by similar users of their primary language, or maybe there are something else that prevent app experiences optimized for two distinct cultures at the same time.
With some amusing exceptions: doctors are exclusively on WhatsApp; older (60+) people are often only on WhatsApp (and pre-Microsoft Skype before that).
Having traveled extensively in these places, I always theorized it was due to UX behavior aligning well with the local languages. While the countries WhatsApp dominates speak different languages, they all use the Latin alphabet. In Russia and APJC there are many non-Latin alphabets used and those languages may also use different directions for writing/reading than Romance and Germanic languages.
Dumb reasoning. Their apps are targeted at Korean life on purpose. Their app being good or bad is irrelevant.
The reason American apps penetrate the world usually is because America is a superpower that has almost colonised the web.
The internet wasn't some terra nullius that America took over.
>(you are using the word to invoke implications of historical atrocities, etc.)
No, I'm using it to invoke it's actual definition and the meaning it holds. Not everyone is an American political weirdo.
I live in the USA and EU, and the reason that I prefer a Samsung display in almost all cases is because it is the best product. Korea has not colonized us, but the product is often superior, so that is why I buy it.
Why is it that Korean software cannot do the same? I find it very interesting, and I mean to ask this in a very neutral/curious way.
No way, LG displays are better.
(In case it's not obvious, there's a joke here.)
That's not the same for most internet apps.
They can do the same, they don't want to nor need to.
Apps on the other hand strongly reflect the philosophy of usage, control, privacy etc, and the design aesthetic of their creators. Different countries/cultures have radically different philosophies, and old countries have aesthetics that go back thousands of years. Using apps from the creators of a different culture almost certainly causes significant friction with your own culture's philosophy and aesthetics.
To give a related example. I don't know Korea, but many in the English speaking world are marginally know of Japanese TV shows - you know with the crazy antics. Imagine that you were forced to consume only that form of TV, and how jarring that would be compared to your own philosophical and aesthetic inclinations. The same with Apps.
Love how the word "colonise" is thrown out without any thought.
Please tell us one example where America enacted a hostile takeover of a Korean site, and extracted its resources solely for the benefit of American interests.
>Please tell us one example where America enacted a hostile takeover of a Korean site
I don't think you understand what the word colonise means nor what my comment means...
The Korean government explicitly chooses companies for these things. And those companies, Chaebols like Samsung, choose the laws.
If these Korean apps were so good, you would expect them to penetrate foreign markets. But they don't.
https://www.techdirt.com/2023/12/06/dumb-telecom-industry-ba...
Just like how British car companies collapsed when foreign competition entered the market on equal footing, these companies will disintegrate if forced to compete.
https://www.latimes.com/world/la-xpm-2010-dec-01-la-fg-south...