3 ms·

This is praising WeChat for having a built-in web browser that supports single sign-on and credit card autofill.

by dstaley 10y ago

a_c 10y ago
I find it difficult to understand how these things are revolutionising. Perhaps it has something to do with the culture background of the users?
- adventured 10y ago
  There's nothing revolutionary about it at all. It appears the author needed something to hype for an article and or doesn't understand what they're writing about very well.
- pcr0 10y ago
  This video from NYT explains it what makes WeChat revolutionary as a platform: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAesMQ6VtK8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAesMQ6VtK8 tl;dw The revolution alludes to the fact that one app is taking over everything from social networking, mobile payments, food, ticket sales, ride-hailing, financial products, bill payments, and much more.
  - acchow 10y ago
    I watched the video. I still don't get it. Why would I want one app and company to own all of that? I don't even want one phone manufacturer/platform to own my messaging - I much prefer platform-agnostic Whatsapp over iPhone-only iMessage. Already the smartphone platform I use can do all of social networking, mobile payments, food, ticket sales, ride-hailing, bill payments, etc on ONE device. I just don't see what there is to be gained by pulling all this down into one app? Switching between apps via APIs is already automatic and rather fast, and will only get better over time. The NYT video makes a lot of mention of "you haven't left the app". Why do I care? As long as I haven't left my phone why do I care what app I'm in? Having APIs for apps on a device to talk to each other allows for competition and variety - won't it obviously win out?
    - simonh 10y ago
      >Why would I want one app and company to own all of that? This isn't about whether you, one person, wants this. It's about the nearly a billion people that already live in it. Good for you that you prefer an open app ecosystem, I'm sure there are other people that feel the same way. But in China that approach has pretty much already lost.
    - aethertron 10y ago
      >Why would I want one app and company to own all of that? Because one entity can control they way it's all integrated, they can bring UI consistency and convenience by enforcing some degree of feature de-duplication. E.g. Single sign-on, and a shared e-wallet. >Having APIs for apps on a device to talk to each other allows for competition and variety - won't it obviously win out? Nope, there's no guarantee. There are benefits to both approaches. Different people have different priorities, normies don't care this much about freedom. If this is the future you want, you need to fight for it.
      - acchow 10y ago
        I don't actually care which future will be realized, I just want the better experience. I just don't see how a one-company-does-all can possibly win out over a free market of competition between companies and developers on an open platform. On the other hand, if WeChat eventually opens up its "app" to other developers and companies, then it will effectively become the operating system and platform. At which point (1) this is "isomorphic" our current system and offers exactly zero advantages (we are just changing where we place the label "operating system") (2) it will be competing with iOS and Android, not with other apps (3) they will have to release a phone that runs the WeChat OS
    - pmontra 10y ago
      I don't want that too but look at how many people are giving all their messages and posts to Facebook (pics with Instagram too). It's at least two apps but it could be one single app, and they are experimenting with payment inside Messenger. Bots are small apps that don't require installation. So, Facebook as the WeChat of the west?
- eragoins 10y ago
  By "culture background" do you mean non-technical users in general?
fma 10y ago
I don't think the article is praising the solution, but rather the impact of the solution. It's going to take away money and control from the App Store and put money in WeChat's account. The real takeaway is "That's a long-term threat to iOS and Android, as well as any company that makes phones to run them"
- LiweiZ 10y ago
  I think more specifically, the sentence before: "As it becomes more powerful and self-contained, Chinese phone consumers will stop asking what phone and operating system they should buy, and start contemplating what phone best runs WeChat."
LiweiZ 10y ago
With a huge high-frequency userbase. Also, there are identity, trust, ready-to-go pay and enough information and offerings from sellers. For a user, easy to use is how many barriers s/he has to deal with. Many of the barriers are not only reduced by better technologies and products. Don't get me wrong. I personally expect better-tech-leads-the-way.
nurettin 10y ago
I would be more impressed if they could deploy actual activities into their app and not browser based solutions.

This is praising WeChat for having a built-in web browser that supports single sign-on and credit card autofill.

by dstaley 10y ago

This is praising WeChat for having a built-in web browser that supports single sign-on and credit card autofill.

a_c 10y ago

I find it difficult to understand how these things are revolutionising. Perhaps it has something to do with the culture background of the users?

adventured 10y ago
There's nothing revolutionary about it at all. It appears the author needed something to hype for an article and or doesn't understand what they're writing about very well.
pcr0 10y ago
This video from NYT explains it what makes WeChat revolutionary as a platform: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAesMQ6VtK8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAesMQ6VtK8 tl;dw The revolution alludes to the fact that one app is taking over everything from social networking, mobile payments, food, ticket sales, ride-hailing, financial products, bill payments, and much more.
- acchow 10y ago
  I watched the video. I still don't get it. Why would I want one app and company to own all of that? I don't even want one phone manufacturer/platform to own my messaging - I much prefer platform-agnostic Whatsapp over iPhone-only iMessage. Already the smartphone platform I use can do all of social networking, mobile payments, food, ticket sales, ride-hailing, bill payments, etc on ONE device. I just don't see what there is to be gained by pulling all this down into one app? Switching between apps via APIs is already automatic and rather fast, and will only get better over time. The NYT video makes a lot of mention of "you haven't left the app". Why do I care? As long as I haven't left my phone why do I care what app I'm in? Having APIs for apps on a device to talk to each other allows for competition and variety - won't it obviously win out?
  - simonh 10y ago
    >Why would I want one app and company to own all of that? This isn't about whether you, one person, wants this. It's about the nearly a billion people that already live in it. Good for you that you prefer an open app ecosystem, I'm sure there are other people that feel the same way. But in China that approach has pretty much already lost.
  - aethertron 10y ago
    >Why would I want one app and company to own all of that? Because one entity can control they way it's all integrated, they can bring UI consistency and convenience by enforcing some degree of feature de-duplication. E.g. Single sign-on, and a shared e-wallet. >Having APIs for apps on a device to talk to each other allows for competition and variety - won't it obviously win out? Nope, there's no guarantee. There are benefits to both approaches. Different people have different priorities, normies don't care this much about freedom. If this is the future you want, you need to fight for it.
    - acchow 10y ago
      I don't actually care which future will be realized, I just want the better experience. I just don't see how a one-company-does-all can possibly win out over a free market of competition between companies and developers on an open platform. On the other hand, if WeChat eventually opens up its "app" to other developers and companies, then it will effectively become the operating system and platform. At which point (1) this is "isomorphic" our current system and offers exactly zero advantages (we are just changing where we place the label "operating system") (2) it will be competing with iOS and Android, not with other apps (3) they will have to release a phone that runs the WeChat OS
  - pmontra 10y ago
    I don't want that too but look at how many people are giving all their messages and posts to Facebook (pics with Instagram too). It's at least two apps but it could be one single app, and they are experimenting with payment inside Messenger. Bots are small apps that don't require installation. So, Facebook as the WeChat of the west?
eragoins 10y ago
By "culture background" do you mean non-technical users in general?

fma 10y ago

I don't think the article is praising the solution, but rather the impact of the solution. It's going to take away money and control from the App Store and put money in WeChat's account. The real takeaway is "That's a long-term threat to iOS and Android, as well as any company that makes phones to run them"

LiweiZ 10y ago
I think more specifically, the sentence before: "As it becomes more powerful and self-contained, Chinese phone consumers will stop asking what phone and operating system they should buy, and start contemplating what phone best runs WeChat."

LiweiZ 10y ago

With a huge high-frequency userbase. Also, there are identity, trust, ready-to-go pay and enough information and offerings from sellers. For a user, easy to use is how many barriers s/he has to deal with. Many of the barriers are not only reduced by better technologies and products. Don't get me wrong. I personally expect better-tech-leads-the-way.

nurettin 10y ago

I would be more impressed if they could deploy actual activities into their app and not browser based solutions.