IMHO, they were able to get to such widespread everyday usage because they such awesome and reliable technology. Much better than what Google have been able to provide with their hangouts app, for instance. Messages are always delivered instantaneously if you are online. If you are offline it stores it locally, and delivers it the moment you are online without messing up the order.
Never had any issues with them. They are really awesome. Congrats to them - IMO it's a great acquisition by Facebook.
In my opinion, this is probably the dumbest acquisition I've ever seen.
I had to join WhatsApp because most of relatives on Facebook moved on to WhatsApp and there are atleast like 6-7 groups on my WhatsApp. Friends, Office colleagues, cousins and other people.
I'm rarely seeing FB updates from my friends these days. Most of it happens on WhatsApp channels.
So its not a surprise FB bought them. Because if they don't they risk losing all users to WhatsApp, at least that's how it is here in India.
We're on pay-as-you-go plans, but usually on nice phones we brought unlocked from our home countries. I'm typing this on my trusty Air, which is tethered through an unlocked iPhone 4S.
I'm also listening to waves crash. We got our first swell in a month yesterday, and non-locals are showing up a day late ... 4 or 5 of them. A crowd. I was the only one out for the good stuff yesterday, and I sucked the marrow out of it, and am instead enjoying sitting on my balcony drinking coffee and vagando here on HN. Ahhh.
Where was I? Oh, yes.
I can confirm the crazy-fast penetration of both smartphones in general (probably way over 90% android), WhatsApp in particular, and the FB/WhatsApp/SMS mix.
So WhatsApp isn't the internet here yet. But it's definitely got brand parity with Facebook around here. Which is pretty amazing considering their relative valuations.
Fb buying them is a deal breaker. None of my "well read" friends are going to trust WhatsApp with those nude photos, short pornos or very very personal information we share.
I don't know. Facebook just looks like a desperate chap.
I'm curious what the future will bring.
But the issue is if everyone else is on a system, the only way to sanely communicate with them is to join that system.
I had to join FB and Orkut for the same reasons.
Until then, I'm marginally lonely on my xmpp clients, though the facebook integration really helps.
The value in Skype, WhatsApp, etc. is the vast amount of work and codebase that goes into punching holes in routers/gateways/NATs to make the internet actually work like it was originally designed.
If anything, I think I've used google hangouts than most of the other IM platforms lately.
Unless you actually mean "receive messages [to your device] when you're offline" and how the hell would that work?
[1] https://prosody.im/doc/modules/mod_offline [2] http://www.process-one.net/docs/ejabberd/guide_en.html#htoc4... [3] http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0160.html
In 1984 you needed to hand a copybook to someone you wished to invigilate. Today you invigilate by billions for $40 per head :)
This is why, IMO, Apple, Google and Facebook are the only companies really in a position to change the messaging game in the US. There is space for newcomers (see: Snapchat), but they're going to have to work hard to spread beyond their initial niche.
Apple is driving iMessage adoption via iOS, albeit mostly only for messaging between iOS devices. Facebook has a solid mobile install base already, but they can't seem to figure out how to convince users to use Facebook messaging. It actually works really well for me, but no one I know actually uses it.
Google seems to be in the process of merging Hangouts and SMS. They're already the same app on Android, but you get to pick the protocol. Their logical endgame is to move all messaging to the Hangouts protocol, and fall back to Google Voice to deliver messages to users who don't have a Hangouts client.
If Google can pull this off I think they're going to absolutely kill it, but they seem to be having a lot of execution problems.
I lived in the US for a while, and I can't really come up with any reason why it should be different there. Only that way more people are on Facebook (and those are also way more active). Still, I can't really explain why texts stuck around even for smartphone users.
When I was shopping for a mobile phone plan for my sister four years ago unlimited SMS were hard to find. Sure, now you get them everywhere, but I don’t think standard smartphone contracts had them four years ago. You had to pay obscenely more (something like double the monthly cost) if you could get unlimited SMS at all. I remember that the high cost of SMS were a real sticking point for my sister.
In my experience smartphone contracts in Germany tended to be much cheaper than in the US but you would also get substantially less for your money. That’s still the case today with included unthrottled data volume.
So maybe that’s one reason why Whatsapp took off. Another one I can think of is that Germany is less of an iOS monoculture than the US. Android is more widespread, so iMessage frequently gets you no benefit at all.
Yes, that is exactly what it means unless there's some research data provided. Obviously it is easier to scale our current surroundings to the whole country, than to really go around and see how things are outside our social circle. Then again, same applies to you too, just because you haven't heard of WhatsApp before doesn't mean it wouldnt be big in the UK. :)
Its popularity has been declining due to Facebook and Android - Facebook on Android works really well lately, most of my acquaintances are on Facebook already and everybody with an Android (which is most of my acquaintances) has either Facebook or Facebook Messenger on it. This is happening because Facebook is the messenger that finally dethroned Yahoo Messenger in my country - really, I'm serious, Yahoo Messenger was still really popular until about 2 years ago. And Android penetration has been phenomenal, due to cheap models being advertised by mobile carriers and sold instead of feature phones.
> Their logical endgame is to move all messaging to the Hangouts protocol, and fall back to Google Voice to deliver messages to users who don't have a Hangouts client.
You're a US citizen and so you might have missed the part where Google Voice is not available outside the US - no alternative can win over SMS, unless it is international.
I actually hate them for trying to take over my SMS messaging and I'm glad that I still have the option of not allowing them to do it on my Android, even though I'm also a regular Hangouts user. What is it with these companies trying to be everything to everybody?
> It just makes it easier to manage SMS and Hangouts conversations side by side through the same app.
No it doesn't, it's actually quite confusing. At some point I sent a message to my wife, without paying attention if it's SMS or not and so I sent it by Hangouts because that's the default, but she's not using her Google account at all and never received the message. And you have to pay attention like every single time.
It's much, much easier to separate services, when they are in fact different. For SMS, I open the SMS app and I send and receive SMS messages. For Hangouts, I open the Hangouts app and I send and receive Hangouts messages. When I'm not sure what protocol to use for somebody, I go to that contact's details and check out the available options. If I have to read new messages, I click on the notification. If I want to reply to a new message, I'm already in the right app. What could be simpler than that?
Trying to combine Hangouts or any other SMS alternative with SMS in the same app is first of all a huge usability fail - unless that service would fallback to SMS in case delivery didn't happen, in which case there's always the question of unexpected billing, because your phone number is going to have to send that SMS and SMS can get quite expensive - so no, it's an epic failure.
I think I will give it a serious thought if it open sources its code base or otherwise it's as good as Viber or Line as an alternative. Same goes with helm.is.
Why can't it just be simple? Get the app and pick a phone number to message. The SMS situation is so bad that it's got a giant flashing neon sign "Disrupt me please" all over it yet none of the big players are stepping up.
There is no such thing. IM is extremely fragmented into local markets, and you will find different solutions being the de-facto solutions at different locations.
For reference, I'm from Europe and outside the Netherlands I have never heard of anyone using Whatsapp. I tried it once, and it found 2 contacts among my 100s. It was instantly deleted as it was of no use to me.
I also remember it causing stability issues with my Android-phone, ensuring I will never ever install it on anything I own ever, for life, unless my primary intent is ruining that device.
What's "hot" here, or at least what I've heard of people using is MSN, Skype, FB Messenger, Hangouts, Twitter(!) and IRC.
ChatOn has some userbase too.
[1] http://blog.textit.in/your-path-to-a-$16b-exit-build-a-j2me-...
- It's not 10c/p per message which if you're talking a lot adds up. - You can send photos and videos and they show up in the stream. MMS isn't actually configured for most people even if it didn't cost 50c a message. - It does group messaging. - Avatars, UI etc
The reason it's popular over apps I think is largely down to savvy use of network effects, particularly that your username is your phone number, so it can scan your phone book and instantly show you who you know that has it. Plus it's available on iPhone, Android, Blackberry and as that article at the top of the main page says, J2ME (news to me but I'm in Europe so not that many feature phones around these days).
I'm from the UK but live in Barcelona and it has 97% penetration here.
Define virtually free? I pay like 10 bucks a month for unlimited SMS, that's hardly virtually free!!! If I didn't they cost like 10 cents a message. That's an insane price for sending or receiving a very very small message that costs the phone companies almost nothing to send. I see it working well for say prepaid plans or barebones plans.
Also, where I live (UK) literally everyone I know who has a smartphone is on Whatsapp. It's completely ubiquitous.
* Works on all phones
* Has persistent chat groups
The funny thing is that in places like USA, you pay exorbitant amounts (~20 USD per month) for text messaging (when the real cost should be almost 0), yet it's still not caught on here - which is kinda sad.
The US at the time had generous calling plans, and people there didn't yet discover the nice social effect of communicating silently (with texting).
Having to remember which messaging system you should use for each person is annoying, so most people just use one.
Additionally, it's not just popular in "the developing world" (whatever that means), but also in many European countries. I haven't seen a map, but I suspect that Whatsapp is very popular nearly everywhere outside the US and China.
I'm way above that, yet I opted for the pay per text plan and paid 20 cents per text. All my friends made fun of me, but I saved a few dollars since iMessage didn't count toward my costs. However, it effected how people without iPhones would naturally choose to interact with me.
Basically, everyone loves iMessage, but no one thinks twice about alternatives. The general assumption seems to be that it's a god given right that you can send a text to a phone number. iMessage did such wonders obscuring that, whereas having to actually download some other app unveils everything.
Even if you are at poverty level and qualify for a free phone (through the Lifelink program, or 'Obamaphone') you still get something like 250 texts included with that
In India, you generally pay per text message - so if you can convince even 3 of your close friends to start using Whatsapp, you save (say) 20% of your phone bill.
Here in US, if you are going to send more than a few texts a month, you are going to be paying 20 USD. So there is no real monetary incentive (initially) for you and two of your friends to switch to Whatsapp.
http://telecomtalk.info/tata-docomo-launches-unlimited-whats...
SMS costs Rs1 per
We also have SMS packs like 100 SMS a month by paying Rs 40 or so. But a DoT rule (which was actually twisted and misinterpreted by telecos) make that plan ineffective on any festive day and on those days you pay for each SMS and the rate is almost double or x3 or sometime x4 of what you would have paid without the SMS pack :-)
That charge will come to each user of the group whenever a message (%160 chars) is sent.
Edit: Moreover, the telecoms do make money on the data plans don't they?
Essentially WhatsApp is free messaging as long as you have a internet connection. And that's pretty cheap these days.
- people (especially preteens) with an iPod Touch or iPad Mini but not a smartphone/texting plan
- people with internationally distributed friends
- Android users who want iMessage functionality (friendly long messages, delivery confirmation, read receipts, sane group conversations, etc)
If I recall correctly, iOS WhatsApp is iPhone only. It won't run on anything that doesn't have a phone number and can't receive SMS or phone calls (necessary for activating the application).
When I first bought WhatsApp, I bought it in iTunes on my Mac. I only had iPod touches and iPads at the time, and it wouldn't sync the application to any of them. I seem to recall that I tried to follow a direct link to the App Store entry from Mobile Safari, and it said that my devices were incompatible.
I had to sideload the WhatsApp.apk on to my Nexus 7 Wi-Fi.
Then you receive your activation code on your phone and tab it in on your tablet.
It works perfectly well.
It's probably paid for itself in just a few days of use.
There are some differences which is possibly because it's the mobile equivalent.
One is that you don't have to add any new contact. If anyone on your phone book has whatsapp, they instantly show up i.e your identity is your phone number.
Two when you join a group if there is a person already in the group whose you know in real life, but don't have the number of, it's easy to get their contact into your phone book.
I was able to reconnect with quite a few of my old high school friends using whatsapp. The interesting thing was that everyone spread around the world. Many are in the US, but several are in UK, some are in the middle east, many in India, a couple in Singapore and the group chat made it possible for everyone to instantly connect without having to "add a friend". Plus, no cost difference to send a message to someone in the UK or India.
Like you said, it's the mobile equivalent but the group chat feature is what makes it really useful esp. if you have friends in multiple countries.