←back to thread

WhatsApp introduces ads in its app

(www.nytimes.com)
713 points greenburger | 1 comments | 16 Jun 25 13:38 UTC | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
perks_12 ◴[16 Jun 25 14:18 UTC] No.44289749[source]▶
WhatsApp has S-tier status here in Germany. If I had access to a proper API I would pay them per message, without them needing to make their UX worse. If anything, if I had to pay per message, I'd be incentivized not to send too many messages, keeping the distractions for the user at a minimum.
replies(5): >>44290144 #>>44290299 #>>44293387 #>>44295448 #>>44296381 #
timeon ◴[16 Jun 25 15:05 UTC] No.44290299[source]▶
> If anything, if I had to pay per message, I'd be incentivized not to send too many messages

Sounds like SMS.

replies(1): >>44293169 #
Kwpolska ◴[16 Jun 25 20:35 UTC] No.44293169[source]▶
Except not limited to 160 characters (70 if you want Unicode) and with rich media capabilities.
replies(1): >>44293262 #
stonogo ◴[16 Jun 25 20:49 UTC] No.44293262[source]▶
So... MMS, then?
replies(2): >>44293767 #>>44294204 #
1. djtango ◴[16 Jun 25 21:56 UTC] No.44293767[source]▶
Why did MMS feel so janky back in the day?

Was it a client thing or a protocol thing?

Whatsapp felt so responsive back in the day. I'd be pinging my family in real time halfway across the globe on mobile in 2009. For Free. That was a killer app...

Why did MMS fail where Whatsapp succeeded?