12 ms·

WhatsApp launches Status, an encrypted Snapchat Stories clone

138 points by mcjiggerlog 10y ago

mcjiggerlog 10y ago
I've been using Whatsapp since 2010 and this is the first time I've considered dropping it; all I want is an easy to use chat client. What the hell were they thinking? I'm no expert but I would guess that >50% of their userbase does not want this feature at all. My grandma uses Whatsapp! I think this could be the beginning of the end for Whatsapp's ubiquity. It's such a shame as Whatsapp has such insane market penetration here (UK/Spain) that it is going to be a huge mess to try to switch to an alternative. I literally haven't received an SMS from a friend in years.
- AznHisoka 10y ago
  What is wrong with regular SMS? i guess i can understand whatsapp popularity in developing countries where SMS is expensive...
  - newlog 10y ago
    SMS are not only being charged in developing countries. lol e.g. Spain has symmetric 300Mb (home) connections for ~50€/month but SMS are still being charged.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - yoho139 10y ago
    I can't go between my phone and a web browser (relatively) seamlessly with SMS.
    - eganist 10y ago
      Google Voice solved that one pretty easily for me, but point taken.
      - eertami 10y ago
        It's also worth mentioning that the countries where WhatsApp is most heavily used do not have Google Voice.
      - reitanqild 10y ago
        Some day we will start downvoting people who reminds us again and again that we are missing out on Google Voice - but not today. /jk
  - vinay427 10y ago
    Not the OP, but here are just a few things that immediately sprang to my mind: * Group MMS messages are a nightmare so people in my demographic often use GroupMe to facilitate them * I'm not even sure if attaching images and other media on MMS messages is supposed to work consistently. I usually end up with an image that has been severely degraded in quality * No read notifications, which can be useful if you goose to enable them on WhatsApp, Signal, etc. * Poor security, I would assume that SMS is far easier for law enforcement to illegally bug * Conversing with people who are in different countries as SMS typically invokes outrageous charges, and my mobile provider includes 2G data in most countries * Can't use SMS on a computer unless through something like Google Voice, which isn't a pure SMS solution * Message history backups are much better documented on WhatsApp/Signal, so that I've never bothered to figure out how to restore SMS history after I get a new phone or install a new ROM on my phone (Android)
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
    Communicating across borders which is now usually included in unlimited SMS plans.
    - k-mcgrady 10y ago
      Too late to edit. Should be *not usually included.
  - mcjiggerlog 10y ago
    Main benefits of whatsapp (or similar): * Free international communication * Read/typing receipts * Faster and more reliable * Sending of media * Group chats that actually work * Seamless usage across desktop/mobile Going back to SMS is like going back to the dark ages after getting used to a proper web-based chat client. As far as I can tell pretty much the only place where technical users still use SMS is the US.
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      > Seamless usage across desktop/mobile This isn't true for Whatsapp and was my main technical reason for leaving Whatsapp for Telegram. (I have another post in this thread that explains my reasoning WRT security.)
      - mcjiggerlog 10y ago
        Definitely works better on Telegram, agreed.
        joshbaptiste 10y ago
        The problem is my mom, and non-technical friends are NOT on Telegram, so Whatsapp it is for the foreseeable future.
        reitanqild 10y ago
        I got my in-laws over to Telegram and we migrated a large group that included lot of retired people over earlier this year ... but my family is stubborn like myself and refuse to change. Practical advice or anyone who decides to try: - recommend it to friends at your age first. - emphasize ease of use, not security (also I wouldn't even feel comfortable telling people that Telegram is more secure) - both can be used free of charge so I am fine with communicating with my stubborn siblings on Whatsapp and everyone else on other platforms.
    - jjuel 10y ago
      This is why I wish I could get my wife to switch to Signal with me. But she doesn't want to check two different apps for the same thing. Everyone else she would chat with would be using just SMS/iMessage. I really really wish apps like this would pick up more traction here in the States.
  - koolba 10y ago
    Couple things: - Paying for domestic text messages - Paying for international text messages - Being able to add / remove participants from a conversation - Paying for roaming charges (SMS v.s. chat app over wifi)
- CommanderData 10y ago
  WhatsApp can be more than just a messaging alterative. So far they've added small features incrementally and it would seem have been successful with this approach. This features genuinely adds to the user experience and its nice to have a way of sharing statuses with most if not all of my contact list as opposed to a select few that use snap chat. My only gripe is the privacy concerns, I can't help but feel Facebook will combine all data one day and most worryingly in retrospect.
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
    >> "This features genuinely adds to the user experience and its nice to have a way of sharing statuses with most if not all of my contact list as opposed to a select few that use snap chat." This feature is now in TWO Facebook owned apps (WhatsApp + Instagram) and I recently read that they're also bringing it to Facebook (currently testing with some users). So now I have three identical products from the same company. It doesn't make sense to update the story in each app. Some friends will update one over the other and now I have three stories to check. That's the opposite of adding to the user experience in my opinion. Give them a bit more time and I'll have three identical Facebook apps just with different icons on my phone.
    - kirkdouglas 10y ago
      Facebook Messenger also has similar feature.
- shade23 10y ago
  Based on the Legal policy update a while ago[1].They should be planning to do much more than social features. I (personally) expect something like the We Chat model. [1]:https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/#terms-of-service https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/#terms-of-service
- jamra 10y ago
  My wife and her friends use WhatsApp for community and event organization. I look at this as more of a response to user demand than overstepping by Facebook.
- kifki 10y ago
  Here in Italy Telegram is slowly gaining traction. Even the municipality in my city uses it (for traffic notices and other warnings), very useful. Bonus points: bots, Gif search and stickers!
- st3v3r 10y ago
  Seriously? I'm pretty sure they have a better grasp on who their userbase is, and what they want than a random internet commenter.
untog 10y ago
This individual feature isn't so bad, but I still dislike the precedent - WhatsApp is an amazingly fast, efficient app right now. It'll be a shame to see it descend into the usual junk as they pack in feature after feature no one really asked for. My parents use WhatsApp on generations-old phones - it performs great and it's simple enough to understand. Why can't we keep the more complex stuff over on Snapchat? Or Instagram. Or Facebook Messenger. Or...
- foepys 10y ago
  I guess WhatsApp will replace Facebook Messenger in a few years. Why should Facebook waste their time on developing two different apps that do nearly the same? Also, WhatsApp's userbase seems to consist of a lot of people that don't use Facebook anymore and Facebook wants them back.
  - mcintyre1994 10y ago
    Ugh I hope not, Messenger is exactly what I don't want WhatsApp to become.
    - vvvv 10y ago
      I'm trying to stay away from Messenger but it does have one significant advantage over WhatsApp - it can be used on multiple devices seamlessly, which is useful when I have a work phone and my personal phone.
      - Kadin 10y ago
        Almost impossible to square that requirement with strong end to end encryption. You can figure out ways to do it, but it's pretty kludgy (messages addressed to you have to be encrypted with the keys of each device you've authorized) and you can't scroll back prior to when a device was authorized and its key was communicated to other participants, which users might not find convenient. But it's why I don't use Whatsapp as well, personally. I prefer the cross-device seamlessness of Hangouts (and FB Messenger) to E2E crypto.
vuyani 10y ago
This is a big F U to snapchat after they refused zuckerbergs offer
- nacs 10y ago
  They already did that by integrating a stories feature into Instagram that was a copy of the SnapChat one. This is just another move into their territory.
pdog 10y ago
Hopefully this pressures Snap to offer end-to-end encryption within their app. WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted by default[1][2][3]. It's embarassing that a major app like Snapchat—built around ephemerality and privacy and often handling sensitive data—still doesn't have any form of end-to-end encryption. [1]: https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/en/general/28030015 https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/en/general/28030015 [2]: https://www.whatsapp.com/security/ https://www.whatsapp.com/security/ [3]: https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepaper.pdf https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepap...
- ReverseCold 10y ago
  Snapchat isn't supposed to be private, it's supposed to feel private.
  - Groxx 10y ago
    I don't see how those two conflict with each other.
- Zaheer 10y ago
  Average users don't care about end-to-end encryption. Majority of people on HN probably do but majority of people on HN are not majority Snapchat users.
  - pdog 10y ago
    Engineers and software developers care about encryption, and if Snap wants to hire the best of them, they'd better care too.
    - mrep 10y ago
      1. The encryption method for the company whom I work for is extremely low on my preference for who I want to work for to the point that it is practically negligible. I'd bet a lot of money that most software developers feel the same way. 2. Snap does not need nor is it worth the cost for them to pay for the "best" developers. Their technological implementations and scale at which they work with can give credence to that.
gagabity 10y ago
I hope they don't ruin WhatsApp they have already turned Messenger into a bloated pile of something and I have noticed my Instagram is a lot slower after the "stories" feature.
funkyy 10y ago
One day, there will be a tech giant, that will let us disable all new, amazing, revolutionary, bloated features instead of forcing us to use them. One day...
smpetrey 10y ago
So Facebook is on all out war to destroy $SNAP huh?
kirkdouglas 10y ago
Time to move to Signal I guess. Seems like they will turn WhatsApp into bloated mess like Facebook Messenger currently is.
- slig 10y ago
  The hard thing to do is to make other people change to or install your new IM as well.
- notheguyouthink 10y ago
  I'm always surprised people use WhatsApp at all. It consistently puts messages out of order or doesn't include them all together. Granted, this is mostly me using it from the web ui, but it happens almost once a session. edit: I'm not knocking it specifically, just saying i'm surprised it's so popular - for me it has common issues with basic functionality (above).
  - ufo 10y ago
    Here in brazil, people use whatsapp because of the MASSIVE network effect.
- cschmittiey 10y ago
  For what it's worth, Facebook's Messenger Lite app is really light on bloat, although it's not officially available in the US.
  - Groxx 10y ago
    Interesting - hadn't heard of that one: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.mlite&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.m... >This app is incompatible with all of your devices. :'( Why do they feel this is a useful thing to do?
    - voltagex_ 10y ago
      Not available in Australia either - I guess there's always apkmirror.
qznc 10y ago
I would prefer if they would add useful features instead of just addictive ones. For example, polling like Threema. https://threema.ch/en/blog/posts/threema-poll-feature https://threema.ch/en/blog/posts/threema-poll-feature
- reitanqild 10y ago
  Let me add: - bots - hashtags - simple working multi device setup - an option to not feed your and your friends social connections to Facebook
  - mullen 10y ago
    - Payments of some kind
- balladeer 10y ago
  Someone like the pinboard.in owner (founder?) could give make such an app/service (and hopefully keep it open based on some open standard) and keep it paid and simple right from the beginning. Probably the reason I like pinboard as much as I liked it in the beginning is that it didn't push changes down my throat that I never asked for and were obscenely absurd (e.g. pocket, firefox, and now whatsapp)
  - qznc 10y ago
    The point is not to create a service, there already is [0]. The point is to decrease friction by integrating it. [0] http://doodle.com/ http://doodle.com/
jhildings 10y ago
Quite a bad name, considering there is already an IM client called status for Ethereum https://status.im/ https://status.im/
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
77yy77yy 10y ago
One word: Telegram.
- mcjiggerlog 10y ago
  I've installed it today following this update and was surprised to find I actually have quite a few contacts on it already. Looks very nice. Will try and get my core contacts to switch over.
- thepiwo 10y ago
  I generally love Telegram, but what bothers me is that they don't end-to-end encrypt my messages. Sure they do in the "private"-mode but this is not really usable to me, as there is no desktop client and my messages are often not arriving as reliable as the normal ones...
- balladeer 10y ago
  Really? I loved it in the beginning. Then it started to do everything. Like really everything and the list is going endless. And for some reason all my telegram groups are so unbearably verbose that I don't keep it on my mobile anymore. Maybe because they had a desktop app right from the beginning that people found it really easy to type - a lot.
asadlionpk 10y ago
Facebook, to me, has reached it's peak. It's waiting to be disrupted.
PleaseHelpMe 10y ago
Facebook really wants to kill Snapchat
morcutt 10y ago
I wonder how this will play out. When Instagram Stories were introduced my friends mostly migrated to using Instagram Stories and my engagement on Snap went down.
reitanqild 10y ago
Time for the weekly reminder that if you don't have reason to believe that powerful adversaries are after you then you can use Telegram. If you feel just fine publishing on twitter or HN under you real name I guess you qualify. Bragging about E2E encryption while feeding the Facebook data monster IMO is a bit like bragging about how you transport your slaves in armored vehicles: Yes, they are safer against robberies. No, [given my current threat model] I'd still prefer driving something less secure that isn't abusing my every action [and every action of everyone I communicate with] for the profit of Facebook. Edit: clarifications, in square brackets and below It seems no doubt that Whatsapp is safer against an 3rd party adversary. My points are only that - I consider Facebook an adversary at this point, - I don't belive they bought Whatsapp and removed the fees because of the goodness in Mark Zuckerbergs heart, - I don't believe they would update their privacy policy if they somehow thought they could get away with what they are planning to do under the old privacy policy.
- phailhaus 10y ago
  Can you use Telegram to talk to friends on Whatsapp or Messenger?
  - leesalminen 10y ago
    Wouldn't that defeat the point?
    - phailhaus 10y ago
      Then the advice to "just use Telegram" is useless. It cannot replace the chat services we rail against because it's literally asking people to ditch their friends.
      - reitanqild 10y ago
        No, we are asking friends to try a better messenger. Either I am a very good salesman or it isn't really hard. I have participated in getting hundreds of people to ditch Whatsapp for Telegram (family + a few local groups I am member of). I just started by using it to communicated woth my wife, then with close friends, then recommending it as enthusiastically as I used to recommend Whatsapp. When "everyone" find they are using Telegram foreverything but a few groups then they will start bugging the rest of the members and suddenly even big groups switch.
thanatropism 10y ago
I'm kind of hoping this comes to my phone really soon. Three reasons: * I miss having status lines as a visible message to the world. I know this isn't exactly the same thing and that Whatsapp/Gtalk/etc. have those, but they have been de-emphasized, so saying "man, I'm excited about $this" isn't likely to reach my friends. * I'm always conflicted between using Facebook for "thoughtful" stuff (that won't embarass me in six months' time) and just posting from random whimsical observations ("I saw a pretty butterfly!") and moods/feelings. My Facebook network is too wide now, too. * I did install Snapchat to check it out, but it's just not for my demographic. Younger people take to the internet to complement and boost their meatspace life; we 30-somethings gradually drift apart from friends but want to keep some semblance (or even illusion) of a friend base that is alive. Overall, I've been using Facebook as a degenerated blogging/syndication platform, but miss the social features of a social platform. Hey, when is the update getting to international iPhone App Stores? I want to try it!
t1o5 10y ago
Remember eBay's bright yellow to white background transition ? WhatsApp owned by Facebook which also owns FB Messenger, its only a matter of time for this transition.
ploggingdev 10y ago
I used to wonder how Facebook planned to monetize WhatsApp, I am beginning to find the answer : > Status could also open up new advertising opportunities for WhatsApp. If it followed Snap and Instagram’s lead, it could insert full-screen ads in-between friends’ Statuses. I really liked WhatsApp's business model before the aquisition : user's pay a small annual fee to use the app. What was cool to see was that the network effects were so strong that people who had never paid for an app or subscription service paid for WhatsApp. If they kept the service paid I doubt it would have reached the 1 billion users mark so quickly, but just humour me here : with 1 billion users they would have atleast 1 billion dollars in ARR. That would have been cool. They could have focused on what they do best : provide a no BS end to end encrypted messenger which respects the user's privacy. (Yes, I am aware of Signal and I use it). I am curious to see how Facebook balances the need to monetize vs to the need to maintain WhatsApp's reputation as a service that respects users' privacy.
- AJRF 10y ago
  "1 billion users they would have atleast 1 billion dollars in ARR" You meant at most. Apple takes ~30%, Google take ~15%
  - arstaetro 10y ago
    "You meant at most. Apple takes ~30%, Google take ~15%" .. Google takes 30% source: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/112622?hl=en https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...
- mcintyre1994 10y ago
  Did they ever actually charge people? Were me and all my family in a weird A/B test bucket that constantly gets our subscription renewed without paying? I never paid, I just occasionally got told I didn't need to yet, and my family were the same - I never understood it.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    Happened to me in the beginning but I think I actually paid twice near the end and I was so happy because I was supporting a sustainable, privacy-respecting company. (I used to love it and be a walking billboard for it, which is possibly why I dislike it so strongly now.)
CodeSheikh 10y ago
This is (mighty) Facebook trying to convey a strong point across to Snapchat by throwing knock out punches from all sides (ephemeral stories in Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp).
ClassyJacket 10y ago
I dislike the trend of all apps having to be Snapchat. It adds bloat, and even if well coded and running on a powerful phone, it adds bloat to the interface. Not every app has to be a jack-of-all-trades. I've particularly found it frustrating how Facebook Messenger is no longer a clean list of conversations sorted by most recent. Now I have to scroll through games, rooms, their Snapchat clone, online now, suggested friends, etc. just to get back to my friend I talked to yesterday. On the other hand, Snapchat is an awful piece of software, and some competition to prod them into fixing it would be useful.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago
  > Facebook Messenger is no longer a clean list of conversations sorted by most recent That's what I see. The only new modules were "Active Now" and "Favourites", both of which I've hidden.
  - ClassyJacket 10y ago
    I also have Shared Days, suggested rooms, groups, and probably some others that I have to hide every week. Shared Days cannot be hidden at all.
- freyr 10y ago
  Facebook seems bent on taking the wind out of Snapchat's sales before their IPO, even if it means adding bloat to their apps. At the moment, Snap is their only serious competitor.
ClassyJacket 10y ago
I dislike the trend of all apps having to be Snapchat. It adds bloat, and even if well coded and running on a powerful phone, it adds bloat to the interface. Not every app has to be a jack-of-all-trades. I've particularly found it frustrating how Facebook Messenger is no longer a clean list of conversations sorted by most recent. Now I have to scroll through games, rooms, their Snapchat clone, online now, suggested friends, etc. just to get back to my friend I talked to yesterday. On the other hand, Snapchat is an awful piece of software, and some competition to prod them into fixing it would be useful.
darkknight265 10y ago
Snapchat is weak in the very markets that Whatsapp is strong. Snap's argument for why is that their bandwidth heavy product does not do well in developing countries. This is a direct challenge to that reasoning -- is it the infrastructure (phone/bandwidth) that is holding people back or the lack of a network effect? As infrastructure improves, Whatsapp is making the bet that users will prefer to use these features on an app that is already their primary social network. I'm skeptical of the paternalistic arguments on HN that people don't really want these features -- perhaps the reason Whatsapp users don't use Snapchat is that their social graph hasn't moved to it, not that they don't want to share 'stories'.
keythrow 10y ago
And SNAP's IPO is coming up!
cerved 10y ago
Stories in Messenger, Instagram and Facebook was clearly not enough.
msoad 10y ago
I think it's very easy for Facebook to add stories to each of their apps. It's a single code base I believe! Stories are now in: - Instagram - Messenger - WhatsApp - Facebook (soon, I've seen the beta) They are going after $SNAP in each and every warfront!
- artosispylon 10y ago
  How are stories in Messenger?
  - skeletonjelly 10y ago
    It's called "My Day"
mderazon 10y ago
I wait for the day I would be able to send money between friends via WhatsApp. It's so ubiquitous that it can have really serious impact on economy by making cash obsolete
RRRA 10y ago
Why can't we have (FOSS) nice things that are e2e encrypted and not conglomerate owned...
- jimmies 10y ago
  We clearly do, it's called Signal, it's just not as convenient for you to use. Which is pretty much everything FOSS.
kerhackernews 10y ago
So facebook has both Instagram and WhatsApp doing similar things?
romanovtexas 10y ago
"Status could also open up new advertising opportunities for WhatsApp. If it followed Snap and Instagram’s lead, it could insert full-screen ads in-between friends’ Statuses." If this is implemented, it'd be a shame, coming from a company that posted this - https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads
balladeer 10y ago
I remember installing this app after reading this blog post - https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads? https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads?. How times and policies both change and how users change, or they get conditioned maybe - slowly over time. Those were my "no compromise on privacy" days. Now I am kinda fine with it. Just that I find myself using SMS probably the first time in half decade and more than ever (use Signal on Android for SMS). Also I was successful in bringing around 20 friends on Signal, 3 on Wire which feels like supporting fragmentation on a personal level. I wish these new privacy conscious apps could talk to each other.

138 points by mcjiggerlog 10y ago

I've been using Whatsapp since 2010 and this is the first time I've considered dropping it; all I want is an easy to use chat client. What the hell were they thinking? I'm no expert but I would guess that >50% of their userbase does not want this feature at all. My grandma uses Whatsapp! I think this could be the beginning of the end for Whatsapp's ubiquity. It's such a shame as Whatsapp has such insane market penetration here (UK/Spain) that it is going to be a huge mess to try to switch to an alternative. I literally haven't received an SMS from a friend in years.

AznHisoka 10y ago
What is wrong with regular SMS? i guess i can understand whatsapp popularity in developing countries where SMS is expensive...
- newlog 10y ago
  SMS are not only being charged in developing countries. lol e.g. Spain has symmetric 300Mb (home) connections for ~50€/month but SMS are still being charged.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- yoho139 10y ago
  I can't go between my phone and a web browser (relatively) seamlessly with SMS.
  - eganist 10y ago
    Google Voice solved that one pretty easily for me, but point taken.
    - eertami 10y ago
      It's also worth mentioning that the countries where WhatsApp is most heavily used do not have Google Voice.
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      Some day we will start downvoting people who reminds us again and again that we are missing out on Google Voice - but not today. /jk
- vinay427 10y ago
  Not the OP, but here are just a few things that immediately sprang to my mind: * Group MMS messages are a nightmare so people in my demographic often use GroupMe to facilitate them * I'm not even sure if attaching images and other media on MMS messages is supposed to work consistently. I usually end up with an image that has been severely degraded in quality * No read notifications, which can be useful if you goose to enable them on WhatsApp, Signal, etc. * Poor security, I would assume that SMS is far easier for law enforcement to illegally bug * Conversing with people who are in different countries as SMS typically invokes outrageous charges, and my mobile provider includes 2G data in most countries * Can't use SMS on a computer unless through something like Google Voice, which isn't a pure SMS solution * Message history backups are much better documented on WhatsApp/Signal, so that I've never bothered to figure out how to restore SMS history after I get a new phone or install a new ROM on my phone (Android)
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- k-mcgrady 10y ago
  Communicating across borders which is now usually included in unlimited SMS plans.
  - k-mcgrady 10y ago
    Too late to edit. Should be *not usually included.
- mcjiggerlog 10y ago
  Main benefits of whatsapp (or similar): * Free international communication * Read/typing receipts * Faster and more reliable * Sending of media * Group chats that actually work * Seamless usage across desktop/mobile Going back to SMS is like going back to the dark ages after getting used to a proper web-based chat client. As far as I can tell pretty much the only place where technical users still use SMS is the US.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    > Seamless usage across desktop/mobile This isn't true for Whatsapp and was my main technical reason for leaving Whatsapp for Telegram. (I have another post in this thread that explains my reasoning WRT security.)
    - mcjiggerlog 10y ago
      Definitely works better on Telegram, agreed.
      - joshbaptiste 10y ago
        The problem is my mom, and non-technical friends are NOT on Telegram, so Whatsapp it is for the foreseeable future.
        reitanqild 10y ago
        I got my in-laws over to Telegram and we migrated a large group that included lot of retired people over earlier this year ... but my family is stubborn like myself and refuse to change. Practical advice or anyone who decides to try: - recommend it to friends at your age first. - emphasize ease of use, not security (also I wouldn't even feel comfortable telling people that Telegram is more secure) - both can be used free of charge so I am fine with communicating with my stubborn siblings on Whatsapp and everyone else on other platforms.
  - jjuel 10y ago
    This is why I wish I could get my wife to switch to Signal with me. But she doesn't want to check two different apps for the same thing. Everyone else she would chat with would be using just SMS/iMessage. I really really wish apps like this would pick up more traction here in the States.
- koolba 10y ago
  Couple things: - Paying for domestic text messages - Paying for international text messages - Being able to add / remove participants from a conversation - Paying for roaming charges (SMS v.s. chat app over wifi)
CommanderData 10y ago
WhatsApp can be more than just a messaging alterative. So far they've added small features incrementally and it would seem have been successful with this approach. This features genuinely adds to the user experience and its nice to have a way of sharing statuses with most if not all of my contact list as opposed to a select few that use snap chat. My only gripe is the privacy concerns, I can't help but feel Facebook will combine all data one day and most worryingly in retrospect.
- k-mcgrady 10y ago
  >> "This features genuinely adds to the user experience and its nice to have a way of sharing statuses with most if not all of my contact list as opposed to a select few that use snap chat." This feature is now in TWO Facebook owned apps (WhatsApp + Instagram) and I recently read that they're also bringing it to Facebook (currently testing with some users). So now I have three identical products from the same company. It doesn't make sense to update the story in each app. Some friends will update one over the other and now I have three stories to check. That's the opposite of adding to the user experience in my opinion. Give them a bit more time and I'll have three identical Facebook apps just with different icons on my phone.
  - kirkdouglas 10y ago
    Facebook Messenger also has similar feature.
shade23 10y ago
Based on the Legal policy update a while ago[1].They should be planning to do much more than social features. I (personally) expect something like the We Chat model. [1]:https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/#terms-of-service https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/#terms-of-service
jamra 10y ago
My wife and her friends use WhatsApp for community and event organization. I look at this as more of a response to user demand than overstepping by Facebook.
kifki 10y ago
Here in Italy Telegram is slowly gaining traction. Even the municipality in my city uses it (for traffic notices and other warnings), very useful. Bonus points: bots, Gif search and stickers!
st3v3r 10y ago
Seriously? I'm pretty sure they have a better grasp on who their userbase is, and what they want than a random internet commenter.

untog 10y ago

This individual feature isn't so bad, but I still dislike the precedent - WhatsApp is an amazingly fast, efficient app right now. It'll be a shame to see it descend into the usual junk as they pack in feature after feature no one really asked for. My parents use WhatsApp on generations-old phones - it performs great and it's simple enough to understand. Why can't we keep the more complex stuff over on Snapchat? Or Instagram. Or Facebook Messenger. Or...

foepys 10y ago
I guess WhatsApp will replace Facebook Messenger in a few years. Why should Facebook waste their time on developing two different apps that do nearly the same? Also, WhatsApp's userbase seems to consist of a lot of people that don't use Facebook anymore and Facebook wants them back.
- mcintyre1994 10y ago
  Ugh I hope not, Messenger is exactly what I don't want WhatsApp to become.
  - vvvv 10y ago
    I'm trying to stay away from Messenger but it does have one significant advantage over WhatsApp - it can be used on multiple devices seamlessly, which is useful when I have a work phone and my personal phone.
    - Kadin 10y ago
      Almost impossible to square that requirement with strong end to end encryption. You can figure out ways to do it, but it's pretty kludgy (messages addressed to you have to be encrypted with the keys of each device you've authorized) and you can't scroll back prior to when a device was authorized and its key was communicated to other participants, which users might not find convenient. But it's why I don't use Whatsapp as well, personally. I prefer the cross-device seamlessness of Hangouts (and FB Messenger) to E2E crypto.

vuyani 10y ago

This is a big F U to snapchat after they refused zuckerbergs offer

nacs 10y ago
They already did that by integrating a stories feature into Instagram that was a copy of the SnapChat one. This is just another move into their territory.

pdog 10y ago

Hopefully this pressures Snap to offer end-to-end encryption within their app. WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted by default[1][2][3]. It's embarassing that a major app like Snapchat—built around ephemerality and privacy and often handling sensitive data—still doesn't have any form of end-to-end encryption. [1]: https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/en/general/28030015 https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/en/general/28030015 [2]: https://www.whatsapp.com/security/ https://www.whatsapp.com/security/ [3]: https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepaper.pdf https://www.whatsapp.com/security/WhatsApp-Security-Whitepap...

ReverseCold 10y ago
Snapchat isn't supposed to be private, it's supposed to feel private.
- Groxx 10y ago
  I don't see how those two conflict with each other.
Zaheer 10y ago
Average users don't care about end-to-end encryption. Majority of people on HN probably do but majority of people on HN are not majority Snapchat users.
- pdog 10y ago
  Engineers and software developers care about encryption, and if Snap wants to hire the best of them, they'd better care too.
  - mrep 10y ago
    1. The encryption method for the company whom I work for is extremely low on my preference for who I want to work for to the point that it is practically negligible. I'd bet a lot of money that most software developers feel the same way. 2. Snap does not need nor is it worth the cost for them to pay for the "best" developers. Their technological implementations and scale at which they work with can give credence to that.

gagabity 10y ago

I hope they don't ruin WhatsApp they have already turned Messenger into a bloated pile of something and I have noticed my Instagram is a lot slower after the "stories" feature.

funkyy 10y ago

One day, there will be a tech giant, that will let us disable all new, amazing, revolutionary, bloated features instead of forcing us to use them. One day...

smpetrey 10y ago

So Facebook is on all out war to destroy $SNAP huh?

kirkdouglas 10y ago

Time to move to Signal I guess. Seems like they will turn WhatsApp into bloated mess like Facebook Messenger currently is.

slig 10y ago
The hard thing to do is to make other people change to or install your new IM as well.
notheguyouthink 10y ago
I'm always surprised people use WhatsApp at all. It consistently puts messages out of order or doesn't include them all together. Granted, this is mostly me using it from the web ui, but it happens almost once a session. edit: I'm not knocking it specifically, just saying i'm surprised it's so popular - for me it has common issues with basic functionality (above).
- ufo 10y ago
  Here in brazil, people use whatsapp because of the MASSIVE network effect.
cschmittiey 10y ago
For what it's worth, Facebook's Messenger Lite app is really light on bloat, although it's not officially available in the US.
- Groxx 10y ago
  Interesting - hadn't heard of that one: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.mlite&hl=en https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.m... >This app is incompatible with all of your devices. :'( Why do they feel this is a useful thing to do?
  - voltagex_ 10y ago
    Not available in Australia either - I guess there's always apkmirror.

qznc 10y ago

I would prefer if they would add useful features instead of just addictive ones. For example, polling like Threema. https://threema.ch/en/blog/posts/threema-poll-feature https://threema.ch/en/blog/posts/threema-poll-feature

reitanqild 10y ago
Let me add: - bots - hashtags - simple working multi device setup - an option to not feed your and your friends social connections to Facebook
- mullen 10y ago
  - Payments of some kind
balladeer 10y ago
Someone like the pinboard.in owner (founder?) could give make such an app/service (and hopefully keep it open based on some open standard) and keep it paid and simple right from the beginning. Probably the reason I like pinboard as much as I liked it in the beginning is that it didn't push changes down my throat that I never asked for and were obscenely absurd (e.g. pocket, firefox, and now whatsapp)
- qznc 10y ago
  The point is not to create a service, there already is [0]. The point is to decrease friction by integrating it. [0] http://doodle.com/ http://doodle.com/

jhildings 10y ago

Quite a bad name, considering there is already an IM client called status for Ethereum https://status.im/ https://status.im/

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

77yy77yy 10y ago

One word: Telegram.

mcjiggerlog 10y ago
I've installed it today following this update and was surprised to find I actually have quite a few contacts on it already. Looks very nice. Will try and get my core contacts to switch over.
thepiwo 10y ago
I generally love Telegram, but what bothers me is that they don't end-to-end encrypt my messages. Sure they do in the "private"-mode but this is not really usable to me, as there is no desktop client and my messages are often not arriving as reliable as the normal ones...
balladeer 10y ago
Really? I loved it in the beginning. Then it started to do everything. Like really everything and the list is going endless. And for some reason all my telegram groups are so unbearably verbose that I don't keep it on my mobile anymore. Maybe because they had a desktop app right from the beginning that people found it really easy to type - a lot.

asadlionpk 10y ago

Facebook, to me, has reached it's peak. It's waiting to be disrupted.

PleaseHelpMe 10y ago

Facebook really wants to kill Snapchat

morcutt 10y ago

I wonder how this will play out. When Instagram Stories were introduced my friends mostly migrated to using Instagram Stories and my engagement on Snap went down.

reitanqild 10y ago

Time for the weekly reminder that if you don't have reason to believe that powerful adversaries are after you then you can use Telegram. If you feel just fine publishing on twitter or HN under you real name I guess you qualify. Bragging about E2E encryption while feeding the Facebook data monster IMO is a bit like bragging about how you transport your slaves in armored vehicles: Yes, they are safer against robberies. No, [given my current threat model] I'd still prefer driving something less secure that isn't abusing my every action [and every action of everyone I communicate with] for the profit of Facebook. Edit: clarifications, in square brackets and below It seems no doubt that Whatsapp is safer against an 3rd party adversary. My points are only that - I consider Facebook an adversary at this point, - I don't belive they bought Whatsapp and removed the fees because of the goodness in Mark Zuckerbergs heart, - I don't believe they would update their privacy policy if they somehow thought they could get away with what they are planning to do under the old privacy policy.

phailhaus 10y ago
Can you use Telegram to talk to friends on Whatsapp or Messenger?
- leesalminen 10y ago
  Wouldn't that defeat the point?
  - phailhaus 10y ago
    Then the advice to "just use Telegram" is useless. It cannot replace the chat services we rail against because it's literally asking people to ditch their friends.
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      No, we are asking friends to try a better messenger. Either I am a very good salesman or it isn't really hard. I have participated in getting hundreds of people to ditch Whatsapp for Telegram (family + a few local groups I am member of). I just started by using it to communicated woth my wife, then with close friends, then recommending it as enthusiastically as I used to recommend Whatsapp. When "everyone" find they are using Telegram foreverything but a few groups then they will start bugging the rest of the members and suddenly even big groups switch.

thanatropism 10y ago

I'm kind of hoping this comes to my phone really soon. Three reasons: * I miss having status lines as a visible message to the world. I know this isn't exactly the same thing and that Whatsapp/Gtalk/etc. have those, but they have been de-emphasized, so saying "man, I'm excited about $this" isn't likely to reach my friends. * I'm always conflicted between using Facebook for "thoughtful" stuff (that won't embarass me in six months' time) and just posting from random whimsical observations ("I saw a pretty butterfly!") and moods/feelings. My Facebook network is too wide now, too. * I did install Snapchat to check it out, but it's just not for my demographic. Younger people take to the internet to complement and boost their meatspace life; we 30-somethings gradually drift apart from friends but want to keep some semblance (or even illusion) of a friend base that is alive. Overall, I've been using Facebook as a degenerated blogging/syndication platform, but miss the social features of a social platform. Hey, when is the update getting to international iPhone App Stores? I want to try it!

t1o5 10y ago

Remember eBay's bright yellow to white background transition ? WhatsApp owned by Facebook which also owns FB Messenger, its only a matter of time for this transition.

ploggingdev 10y ago

I used to wonder how Facebook planned to monetize WhatsApp, I am beginning to find the answer : > Status could also open up new advertising opportunities for WhatsApp. If it followed Snap and Instagram’s lead, it could insert full-screen ads in-between friends’ Statuses. I really liked WhatsApp's business model before the aquisition : user's pay a small annual fee to use the app. What was cool to see was that the network effects were so strong that people who had never paid for an app or subscription service paid for WhatsApp. If they kept the service paid I doubt it would have reached the 1 billion users mark so quickly, but just humour me here : with 1 billion users they would have atleast 1 billion dollars in ARR. That would have been cool. They could have focused on what they do best : provide a no BS end to end encrypted messenger which respects the user's privacy. (Yes, I am aware of Signal and I use it). I am curious to see how Facebook balances the need to monetize vs to the need to maintain WhatsApp's reputation as a service that respects users' privacy.

AJRF 10y ago
"1 billion users they would have atleast 1 billion dollars in ARR" You meant at most. Apple takes ~30%, Google take ~15%
- arstaetro 10y ago
  "You meant at most. Apple takes ~30%, Google take ~15%" .. Google takes 30% source: https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/112622?hl=en https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...
mcintyre1994 10y ago
Did they ever actually charge people? Were me and all my family in a weird A/B test bucket that constantly gets our subscription renewed without paying? I never paid, I just occasionally got told I didn't need to yet, and my family were the same - I never understood it.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  Happened to me in the beginning but I think I actually paid twice near the end and I was so happy because I was supporting a sustainable, privacy-respecting company. (I used to love it and be a walking billboard for it, which is possibly why I dislike it so strongly now.)

CodeSheikh 10y ago

This is (mighty) Facebook trying to convey a strong point across to Snapchat by throwing knock out punches from all sides (ephemeral stories in Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp).

ClassyJacket 10y ago

I dislike the trend of all apps having to be Snapchat. It adds bloat, and even if well coded and running on a powerful phone, it adds bloat to the interface. Not every app has to be a jack-of-all-trades. I've particularly found it frustrating how Facebook Messenger is no longer a clean list of conversations sorted by most recent. Now I have to scroll through games, rooms, their Snapchat clone, online now, suggested friends, etc. just to get back to my friend I talked to yesterday. On the other hand, Snapchat is an awful piece of software, and some competition to prod them into fixing it would be useful.

JumpCrisscross 10y ago
> Facebook Messenger is no longer a clean list of conversations sorted by most recent That's what I see. The only new modules were "Active Now" and "Favourites", both of which I've hidden.
- ClassyJacket 10y ago
  I also have Shared Days, suggested rooms, groups, and probably some others that I have to hide every week. Shared Days cannot be hidden at all.
freyr 10y ago
Facebook seems bent on taking the wind out of Snapchat's sales before their IPO, even if it means adding bloat to their apps. At the moment, Snap is their only serious competitor.

ClassyJacket 10y ago

darkknight265 10y ago

Snapchat is weak in the very markets that Whatsapp is strong. Snap's argument for why is that their bandwidth heavy product does not do well in developing countries. This is a direct challenge to that reasoning -- is it the infrastructure (phone/bandwidth) that is holding people back or the lack of a network effect? As infrastructure improves, Whatsapp is making the bet that users will prefer to use these features on an app that is already their primary social network. I'm skeptical of the paternalistic arguments on HN that people don't really want these features -- perhaps the reason Whatsapp users don't use Snapchat is that their social graph hasn't moved to it, not that they don't want to share 'stories'.

keythrow 10y ago

And SNAP's IPO is coming up!

cerved 10y ago

Stories in Messenger, Instagram and Facebook was clearly not enough.

msoad 10y ago

I think it's very easy for Facebook to add stories to each of their apps. It's a single code base I believe! Stories are now in: - Instagram - Messenger - WhatsApp - Facebook (soon, I've seen the beta) They are going after $SNAP in each and every warfront!

artosispylon 10y ago
How are stories in Messenger?
- skeletonjelly 10y ago
  It's called "My Day"

mderazon 10y ago

I wait for the day I would be able to send money between friends via WhatsApp. It's so ubiquitous that it can have really serious impact on economy by making cash obsolete

RRRA 10y ago

Why can't we have (FOSS) nice things that are e2e encrypted and not conglomerate owned...

jimmies 10y ago
We clearly do, it's called Signal, it's just not as convenient for you to use. Which is pretty much everything FOSS.

kerhackernews 10y ago

So facebook has both Instagram and WhatsApp doing similar things?

romanovtexas 10y ago

"Status could also open up new advertising opportunities for WhatsApp. If it followed Snap and Instagram’s lead, it could insert full-screen ads in-between friends’ Statuses." If this is implemented, it'd be a shame, coming from a company that posted this - https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads

balladeer 10y ago

I remember installing this app after reading this blog post - https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads? https://blog.whatsapp.com/245/Why-we-dont-sell-ads?. How times and policies both change and how users change, or they get conditioned maybe - slowly over time. Those were my "no compromise on privacy" days. Now I am kinda fine with it. Just that I find myself using SMS probably the first time in half decade and more than ever (use Signal on Android for SMS). Also I was successful in bringing around 20 friends on Signal, 3 on Wire which feels like supporting fragmentation on a personal level. I wish these new privacy conscious apps could talk to each other.