3 ms·
I personally am unconvinced that the barrier to voice messaging is the interface. I think it is deeper than that. It is psychological. People are not (yet) comf
by devnonymous 10y ago
I personally am unconvinced that the barrier to voice messaging is the interface. I think it is deeper than that. It is psychological. People are not (yet) comfortable speaking into inanimate objects that do not respond back instantly. I imagine that most people still feel silly speaking 'into' or 'at' an object and waiting. People don't type with their voice for the same reason they ask 'can you hear me' in a video conference or say 'hello' and wait for a response at an automatic gates, door bells that need people at the other end to respond or open, at drive in counters... etc.
That said, I completely agree with the WhatsApp bit. It is changing the way people interact...and it is surprising that it hasn't been as popular in the US.
- ttam 10y ago> I think it is deeper than that. It is psychological. People are not (yet) comfortable speaking into inanimate objects that do not respond back instantly. I imagine that most people still feel silly speaking 'into' or 'at' an object and waiting. by "People" I assume you mean "Westerners". Go to China and be amazed at the amount of "People" using the voice messaging in WeChat I wonder if it pre-dates WhatsApp's voice messaging and it might've been a source of inspiration?
- junto 10y agoIt is also just habit. My aging father can't use the keyboard very well, but he has dictated letters as a lawyer for will over 30 years. I used to hear him sometimes as a child, and it was extremely fluid. It is just practice.
- drivingmenuts 10y agoWell, we already have text messaging - it comes with the phone, so we don't need to install another app to do pretty much the same thing. If WhatsApp was a default install, people would probably use it without thinking or caring about it, if it was named in a way that sounded anything remotely like it's purpose.