3 ms·
The comparison to Amazon is about the remotely deleting part, not the why part. I have a problem with anything on my device being deleted without my consent.
by ikeboy 11y ago
The comparison to Amazon is about the remotely deleting part, not the why part. I have a problem with anything on my device being deleted without my consent.
- robbiemitchell 11y agoYou used the word "sent" earlier and the phrase "on my device" now. But it seems the app isn't transferring the message to you, only presenting it -- like a website. (Does the message exist outside the app?) Not being pedantic for the sake of it, just pointing out the language you are using is from a position of ownership -- you receiving and owning a message sent to you, and it is then being deleted -- while the app seems to be retaining all rights with the sender, who merely uses the app to present a message to you, and can revoke viewing privileges at any time.
- ikeboy 11y agoOnce it can be viewed offline, the sender shouldn't be able to delete it.
- lotso 11y agoI think this is a valuable feature for users of the product. Some users like this feature. If you don't, just use another product. Not everything needs to be a philosophical debate.
- ikeboy 11y agoI don't think the feature is well known. What percent of Viber users could tell you that messages can be deleted without their consent?
- lotso 11y agoI think that's irrelevant. It's part of the product, is an intentional feature that has value, and is not even an uncommon feature (exists on Instagram DMs.