There just simply aren't 250 countries.
(At the time of posting, parent was below zero)
If the definition Wolfram cared to use was "Passport issuing state recognised by other passport issuing states" then we might agree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_country_calling_codes has 275 in their complete listing; but then, quite a few aren't "countries"
The UK is a single state, but comprised of at least three countries. England, Wales, Scotland. Northern Ireland would not count as a 'country' I guess, though Ireland itself obviously is.
Early on, when iMessage was a pipe-dream &Gtalk a usability mess victim of Google's "everything must be web" orthodoxy, RIMM could have made a killing selling a robust no-frills honest-to-God messaging app for Android, iOS, Windows Phone & feature phones.What a waste.
I understand what you're trying to say, but MS Office was first released for Mac (1989), then for Windows (1990). MS Word was released for Mac in 1984, later for Windows (1989).
Even before the Mac was released, Microsoft made products for Apple, like Applesoft BASIC and the Microsoft SoftCard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_office#Version_histor...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Word#Origins_and_grow...
Combined with network and lock-in effects, it's a great business on a good enough application and an obvious idea. Which makes it even more impressive.
P.S. I think many tried to do similar things before or after but failed. So I'm not quite sure what make whatsapp stand out. Any ideas? First comer? Better UX? Cheaper? Better cross-platform support? Better marketing?
Despite what seem to be a surprising number of detractors here, lets not forgot that it's a pretty good product - fast, stable, nice enough looking and very reliable.
It's also worth noting that if Google Talk / Messenger weren't such an inconsistent / unreliable mess, I'd never have gone for looking another means of messaging.
So incredibly crazy- More than 100k messages a second.
Its not about being stingy, but more of a mentality where we know a hack/solution/pirated version/alternative will come around. It always does.
I ended up being textually abused by two persons when I first started using WhatsApp few months ago. The old cell numbers of many of my friends were assigned to others when they changed numbers and those were still in my phonebook. My friends forgot to dissociate the numbers from WhatsApp database and when I pinged(didn't pester) them(assuming they are my friends) two of them got pissed off real bad. And I was like - "WTF! This is WhatsApp?". So, WhatsApp assumes that as long as the user hasn't dissociated the numbers that user is still using WhatsApp and is doing with the same phone/account. See bottom
>>"the moment they have to pay, everyone will switch".
I can confirm at least three of my friends have already uninstalled the app after first year. It was eihter money or almost mostly very limited usability. the new player http://hike.in looks very promising. Hope it's not vapour. Especially the feature where it fills a huge hole - the other party doesn't need to have http://hike.in app installed and an internet connection is not a requirement for both the parties.
>>of nobody in person to have "ever paid for any" app
It's not as common place as in western countries(or purchases on that scale) but I sure know a lot in my circle who use paid apps. Really many. Well, I also pay for a lot of apps both on my Galaxy Nexus and Macbook Air but when it comes to buying one of those double digit dollar apps I do stop before buying and think whether I really need this? And is the free alternative isn't good enough? I have never had YES for either of the two questions, except once. I think this is good :-)
bottom: That was the last day I used WhatsApp. KakaoTalk is far better in that way, but except Koreans no else uses the app it seems.
There are good reasons today not to use WhatsApp.
On a comparative note, the product is actually not so good(maybe because of the sacle they are operating on). They have problems with their backend, few of the front end apps are not so good eg blackberry but increasing number of users is an achievement which is the scary part for facebook. I am in Pakistan. This is a place where most people don't use credit cards on the internet, sms packages are dirt cheap like $1/month for unlimited texting, and we have no 3G internet(only EDGE) but still majority of the people use whatsapp. Almost everybody i know uses whatsapp and they have been using for more than a year. One you get hooked on whatsapp people are forced to pay.
Whatsapp has a lot of potential to challenge facebook to a certain extend. They introduced profile pictures a while back, and the 'last seen at' update is like a gold. Ramp up whatsapp with a few BBM like features, extensive photo sharing, and geo location features(anonymously chat with people near you) and they can be a worthwhile competitor.
http://fileperms.org/whatsapp-is-broken-really-broken/
I guess they didn't.
I reported on the IMEI/Android issue by the way: http://samgranger.com/whatsapp-is-using-imei-numbers-as-pass...
Ezio Amodio reported it for iOS & Windows phone shortly afterwards: http://www.ezioamodio.it/?p=29 & http://www.ezioamodio.it/?p=49
Many users out there are stingy as hell. I have actually heard people argue that they don't want an iPhone because you have to pay for whatsapp...
Let's hope that their dominance of the market is enough to incentivize users to pay forever. Oh, and that they do not actually sell out to Facebook.
This demonstrates that this market is not still settled down and can still be disrupted.
The main reasons people is switching to LINE are stickers (huge emoticons that you get for free and with extra paid packages) and they have a desktop client, along with the possibility to run on iPods and iPads, probably Whatsapp's most requested feature.
Howcome Google hasn't bought these guys?
Why would people be OK with constant security risk, but not OK with one time registration step for normal XMPP service? XMPP clients are available for all major desktop and mobile platforms. So it's a really interesting psychological hook that Whatsapp developers catch their users on here, offering a completely inferior solution, with selling it of for the fake attraction. And it's a really nasty thing to do - to play on people's ignorance regarding security.
So why would Facebook want to buy this monstrosity? The only valid reason could be to convert it to proper XMPP, then I'd applaud them, but on the other hand Facebook's own IM service isn't federated, which defeats the purpose. So it doesn't look like it can improve Whatsapp in any way.
And that is just one reason why a Whatsapp/Facebook acquisition would be a surprise. At other times, Koum has been public about his distaste for startups that sell out quickly. “Totally agree with Vinod Khosla,” he wrote in July. “People starting companies for a quick sale are a disgrace to the valley.” (He’s also, btw, noted that getting on TC shouldn’t be a goal in itself. Too true.)
-- Sounds like another loss for the good side.
Thoughts on this guys?
