back to article But... you work in IT... Why aren't we RICH?

“Monetizing is not the goal; growing is.” And with that explanation for his company’s decision to put another £11.5bn of someone else’s money through the shredder, Mark Zuckerberg fired the starting gun for the race to the next dot-com crash. Facebook’s acquisition of WhatsApp was not ludicrous, however. Nor was it genius, nor …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. dogged

    sell it quick to HP before you get found out.

    Fixed that for you.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I realise that's a little dig at Autonomy, but you really should read about Mike Lynch, he's a very clever bloke and him leaving Autonomy was just ridiculous given he was the one that built it up.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Richard_Lynch

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Totally agree about WTFapp

    As a Skype user & free inclusive SMS texts, can't see the point.

    The only reason I can see why in USA is that mobile users have to pay to receive a text (on some networks).

    Bummer of a poilicy if someone sends you a text in error.

    Have a good weekend!

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

      On the other hand if you live in a country where competition between telecos is non-existent (e.g. Spain), you have no bundled SMS so Whatsitsface is popular.

      The telecos have decided to strike back by only selling smartphones, making data bundles mandatory for smartphones, and charging a metric shitload for a data bundle. The end result is that people probably end up paying more to send messages with WhatsApp than they did sending SMSes before.

      1. Dom 3

        Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

        I have a Vodafone Spain SIM and a GiffGaff UK one. When in Spain it costs roughly twice as much to send a text to a Spanish mobile - even another Vodafone - using the Spanish SIM than it does using the UK SIM.

    2. Peter Simpson 1
      Childcatcher

      Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

      ... in USA is that mobile users have to pay to receive a text...

      If you don't have a texting plan, you have to pay to send SMS as well. So they collect twice, and the cost, once a nominal 0.05 has risen to 0.25 (for sender and receiver), but, as I said, it all depends on what your plan includes.

      // in my next life, I'm running a d*mn telco: build the infrastructure, then just sit back and watch the cash roll in!

      1. David Cantrell

        Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

        Don't build the infrastructure! For a long time you could make pots of cash by just running a switch and flogging number translation services for businesses that thought they needed an 0845 number. These days, run an MVNO.

    3. Goldmember

      Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

      There's a very obvious use for it, actually, and I'm surprised no one seems to have picked up on it. I use it often, as I have a good mate in Belgium, a good mate in Germany, and I live in the UK. We only get to see each other once or twice a year, and it used to be the case that sending a text to one of them cost me 20p, as texts to cross country networks are certainly not included in my contract allowance. Even mms messages sent to other UK mobiles used to cost me money (which is why I only ever sent 2 in my whole mobile-owning life. One of them to test it even worked).

      Now, sending pictures, videos and messages through WTFapp is free, either through WiFi or mobile data.

      And before you say "just use Skype blah blah blah", a text is much easier to get away with when sending a dirty joke you just heard throughout the working day.

      Whether that use is worth £11.5bn is another matter.

      1. tony2heads

        Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

        Yes, with children on a different continent SMS gets expensive

        However it is basically an IRC, so hardly innovative.

      2. Mage Silver badge

        "just use Skype blah blah blah", a text is much easier .."

        I'm baffled.

        I mostly (99.9% of time) use Skype only for text.

    4. Seanie Ryan

      Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

      "Using WhatTheFuck won’t save me a penny so I’m intrigued as to how they intend monetising it."

      Completely agree here. Keep getting people asking me am i on Viber or Whatsapp ( actually pretty much all viber , haven't been asked about whatsapp in over a year)

      My usual response, is that i have a phone number, accepts calls and texts, have a Skype account, email address (more than 1) and more minutes and texts included in my bundle per month than I know what to so with. And with iMessage, my text usage has more than halved.

      So why the hell would I want to give people ANOTHER method of contacting me?? Its less crap in my inboxes I want, not more. less questions from free loading "friends" about whats the best X or Y (the usual thing, "you are into computers, you must know whats the best camera/printer/scanner/<insert any device run on voltage>")

      try charge any of those "billion" users 1 cent, it will quickly drop to n very very small percent of users.

      there is a change coming... mark my words... logmein started it by stopping the free service... soon it'll spread

      ma, get my gun

      1. Goldmember

        Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

        "try charge any of those "billion" users 1 cent, it will quickly drop to n very very small percent of users."

        Actually you do have to pay for it after a while. It isn't much (I think I paid £2 or £3 for 3 years or something) but it's not free forever

        1. cbars Silver badge

          Re: Totally agree about WTFapp

          The best thing about WhatsApp is the group messaging. The Picture/Audio/Video messaging is easy and the App is considerably faster than Skype to open up and text with. But the main reason I recommend it to anyone is the group chat.

          I have groups for Holidays, Family etc and you don't have to muck about repeating yourself or other people, everyone is on the same page.

          Not so great if you have a group with some chatty friends in it and your phone vibrates every 10-20 seconds.... but that isn't WhatsApp's fault

          And needless to say, now Facebook has bought it, I've turned off autoupdate. Facebook have finally got hold of my mobile number, but I'll be damned if I'll let them install any more 'features' automagically

    5. Charles Manning

      So why did you stop wearing bell-bottoms and platform shoes then?

      They still work as clothing items, but they're not trendy any more so you threw them out an bought whatever the other kids buy.

      WTF is popular because it's popular. Gotta be in with the cool kids (or whatever the new cool word for cool is).

  3. Pete 2 Silver badge

    It's the reviews, not the tech, that matters

    > After all, the industry is choc-a-bloc with shit technology ...

    Yes. shit technology - and even shittier apps - that gets glowing reviews from journalists who only ever read the publicity material, have neither the will, ability nor time to actually - you know - use it and will give a product a 3-star (out of 5) rating for merely delivering a cardboard box. If there's a product inside you'll get 4 stars and if the little blue (annoying bright blue BTW) light comes on when ON is pressed, the full ***** rating is yours. As for comparing products' meaningless, irrelevant and utterly unsupportable or unmeasurable parameters, speeds, capacities and qualities - don't get me started.

    Have a product that appears to perform the first few, most basic, functions and you're pretty much guaranteed to make the Editor's choice and if the device looks sleek and shiny as all "futuristic" technology should, get ready to appear on the front cover (or landing page) for the next month.

    Reviewers almost never have a critical word to say about products - for fear that tomorrow's mailbag won't contain any more swag. One suspects that the 95% of the world that is in technical terms: crud, never makes it to the review section at all - so we are never warned about those products, but probably see them getting a "glowing" 3-star review in a different publication, along with a sycophantic description of all the features and techy-specs listed on the side of the (still unopened) box.

    1. BillG
      Angel

      Re: It's the reviews, not the tech, that matters

      Reviewers almost never have a critical word to say about products - for fear that tomorrow's mailbag won't contain any more swag

      That's not the entire story. Reviewers almost never have a critical word to say about products because if the product actually does become the next wonder hit, they can also brag to all of creation that they predicted it.

      What I was told is that it's almost impossible to predict what will be the next big hit, because the people that control the room-fulls of money needed to fund these companies will admit that they themselves don't even know why Facebook and Twitter are so popular.

      The basic business model this that, you can get bought out if one of two things are true:

      a) Get lots of people to register for your service, or

      b) Get lots of journalists or bloggers to say it's cool.

      The Underwear Gnomes will be getting funding any day now...

    2. Alistair Dabbs

      Re: It's the reviews, not the tech, that matters

      Not sure that three stars counts as a glowing review. From a reviewer's perspective, there exist products that don't work properly or are poorly implemented or break down easily. It stands to reason, then, that if a product actually works, it merits more than one or two stars.

  4. J.G.Harston Silver badge

    You work in IT, why aren't you rich?

    I seem to get asked that almost weekly, and ask myself as well. It's only the minimum wage that's stopping my pay from dropping any further, and it's only the fact that Being Alive Costs Money that's stopping me refusing to work.

  5. ukgnome

    But Mr Dabbs

    We may not be cash rich, but surely we are all warm friendly glowy types.

    oh soddit I want the money!

  6. Anonymous Custard Silver badge
    Alert

    My eyes!

    a visually rich web interface that required customers to install a T1 line merely to see what a £230 woolly jumper looked like

    If they looked like the jumper in the image below the original line, then we could praise having a slow link...

    It's also a little frightening that if you exchange the words "lastminute.com" for "MtGox" in most of that article, it's equally relevant and accurate.

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    ... and more of a twat than he’d expected

    No, I'm sure he didn't think that Alistair...

    So if you’re looking to become a dot-com fatcat, this is what you do: create any old startup and sell it quick to a rich fuckwit before you get found out.

    Brilliant... I wish I'd thought of that... you did apply for the patent on that idea, didn't you?

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    First is to make up a childish name, like 'boo', 'twitter', 'bing', 'google' etc.

    Then, get the trendies to use your site. Sell useless stuff at high prices, or have a service which will never turn a profit. Get the trendies talking about it, as if it is some 'in' secret.

    Then, fire out PRs, wait until the investors buy you, sell out, retire to a mansion in the Bahamas before investors realise they've been sold a pig in a poke.

    1. dogged

      Got it. You me and Dabbsy can do "Spong!"

      Basically, it autotunes your text messages so you can annoy people by having singing messages arrive in their inbox and shitting on their data allowance.

      Da yoof will love it.

      I'll do the app, you do the website, Dabbs can do publicity. I hear he's met some journalists.

      1. SuperNintendoChalmers

        The scary thing is that I could see that app succeeding. Offer different styles of auto tune, perhaps as a microtransaction. Spong rap battles with friends over text. Hell you/we could even integrate it with WhatsThePoint to catch onto the current investor frenzy.

        1. Thecowking

          I actually want in on that.

          My contribution, Spong can pitch shift your voice message past 21KHz so oldies can't hear it and overlay it on the song bit.

          1. dogged

            Typing a Spong! message will be called "Spinging".

            1. Pete 2 Silver badge

              > Typing a Spong! message will be called "Spinging".

              and getting finance will be sponging?

              1. Zimmer
                Coat

                ..also..

                ..minces raw or cooked meat, as long as you haven't lost the Dooflab for fitting it to the table..

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                and getting finance will be sponging?

                Yes, but to make it uber-trendy, you need to say is with a hard G, as in bonging.

            2. Bill B

              >Typing a Spong! message will be called "spinging"

              Sexting with Spong will be called 'Spooging'

      2. Terry 6 Silver badge

        "Da yoof will love it."

        That's the point missing in the article.

        What do most ( maybe all) of these apps have in common?

        It's that the kids adopt it, and keep with it until the grown ups try to make money out of it, by which time they've lost interest and moved on to a new thing that we aren't going to even be aware of until someone tries to make money out of it, by which time......

        And my kids *were* using Whatsup but I suspect that its time is just about running out.

        1. solo

          "..keep with it until the grown ups try to make money out of it, by which time they've lost interest.."

          Actually, they keep with it until.. they've lost interest.. meanwhile they keep auctioning whatever they get to know about their interest. May be, someday, we'll find big lockers of bit-coins at home of F**erb**g or at WhatsThatPlaceCalled.

      3. anatak

        existed ??

        I remember somewhere in the previous decenia or maybe millenia that there was this email service that replaced all your words with sound bites from songs. I guess the IP crowd killed that idea as I can not find it anymore.

        for example

        I will see you tonight. (I will: sung by Mariah Carrey, I will always love you) (see: sung by the Bee Gee's, lady's man) (tonight sung by Outasight lyrcs, tonight is the night)

    2. Steve 13

      You've included google in a list of companies which "never turn a profit"...

      1. dogged

        To be fair, they make zero money from their products. They make billions by selling you.

  9. dwrjones87

    I use it for the more often than you'd think occasions where there is WiFi but no mobile signal and to send pictures without having to pay extortionate MMS charges, and that's what most people I know use it for (about 1/2 to 2/3 of my contacts have it)

  10. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Frankee Llonnygog
      Trollface

      Re: Lastminute.com

      It was entirely pointless. Without Last Minute, we would never have had the benefit of Baroness Soho bringing "digital by default" to UK government

  11. The Dark Lord

    Friday Funny

    Thanks for the chuckles, that was a great piece.

    The only people I know who use WhatsApp use it as some kind of "stealth" messaging technology to speak to people they shouldn't be speaking to about things that wives/husbands/partners/parents may be upset to discover. So that's right up the swanny then! Way to use the world's media to kill your USP!

  12. Alister

    Alistair, I'm the same a you, I'd never heard of Whats App, no-one I know uses it, and the only reason I became aware of it was that I've been receiving some particularly persistent spam claiming to be from them for a couple of months, and the name caught my eye, as we use a piece of software called What's Up, and the similarity made me look twice.

    Until the big hoohah about it, I'd no idea what it was for, though...

  13. Steve 13

    Too Old

    Dude, I guess you're just too old.

    Oh, and don't forget that the plural of anedote isn't data.

    For what it's worth though, pretty much everyone I know uses it, and I'm not that young that we're talking about kids. University lecturers, solicitors, health professionals, and quite a few IT professionals.

    And since you ask, what it does that text doesn't is group conversations. It's just instant messaging, it's nothing new, but it's convenient, on the phone and you can set up arbitrary group conversations, great for arranging stuff.

    Not worth what they paid for it of course, but not as pointless as you seem to implying.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. sam bo

      Re: Too Old

      "Dude, I guess you're just too old." Dead giveaway of da Yoof .

      "Oh, and don't forget that the plural of anedote isn't data."

      And the plural of antidote isn't data. Either is the plural of anecdote.

      As far as I know the only thing data is the plural of is datum.

      Glad to hear you found a use for it.

      1. Steve 13

        Re: Too Old

        Yeah, at 36 I'm definitely a yoof, yawn.

        Ooh, and good spot on the typo, that's given your reply much kudos.

        Still, the plural of anecdote is not data, to correct my typo. Which if you didn't get it, means that no matter how many mates you ask, you have not collected any data. In which case the opinion is not based on any data.

    3. Steven Raith

      Re: Too Old

      "For what it's worth though, pretty much everyone I know uses it, and I'm not that young that we're talking about kids. University lecturers, solicitors, health professionals, and quite a few IT professionals."

      Yeah. Well, I'm cool as fuck, and no-one I know uses it. And because no-one I know uses it, that means no-one cool as fuck is using it, which makes you a square.

      We're all sending messages to each other by writing them on cheese and ham toasties and posting them through DPD.

      Get with the times, homes, etc.

      Steven R

      PS: WhatsApp will die with everything else ad-sponsored (which it will be, if it's not already) when the true value of targetted ads is revealed to be a Quarter Of Fuck All. I look forward to that day. Hands up who clicks on ads in anything...

      I rest my case.

      PPS: in groundbreaking, breathtaking research, Old Speckled Hen makes Raith SWEARY. News at 11....

      1. Steve 13

        Re: Too Old

        That's okay, I didn't claim that it or I were cool.

        You're welcome to your coolness and cheesy messages.

        1. Steven Raith

          Re: Too Old

          Cheese and ham, dude.

          Get with the program. Peace out!

    4. This post has been deleted by its author

  14. 0laf Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    WhatShatt, it's used by the yoof old boy therefore worth billions. It's only the yoof that count right now don't you know that?

    Not used by anyone who actually draws a salary; in this country anyway. Pretty much like every Daily Mail evil app of the day.

  15. Hnk0

    That's pretty poor. OK WhatsApp may have been vastly over valued, but you clearly have no idea what it does so you're not exactly in a great position to criticize. Maybe do some more research than just asking your mates next time?

    FYI, it does texting "for free", including multimedia (photo, audio, video), and has a great "group" function. Not forgetting the fact it works cross borders. Ever tried to text a video clip to someone in the UAE? Oh sure you can email but there it is part of a conversation with a group etc.

    Where things are going wrong is that part of the appeal was that it was NOT FarceBook, but there you go.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      > Maybe do some more research than just asking your mates next time?

      It might well be a useful piece of software, but interestingly like Alastair, neither I nor any of my software house colleagues have heard of this application prior to the Facebook acquisition.

      We obviously are not yoofy enough.

      1. Hnk0

        It isn't the fact that he hasn't heard of it until now that grates with me, that happens. I am sure there are apps out there used by hundreds of million of people that I am completely unaware of.

        It is the fact that, after hearing about it, he made no attempt whatsoever to inform himself, despite supposedly being a journalist, and then writes about it waving his ignorance about as if it was something to be proud of.

        Ignorance is forgivable, no one can know everything. Wilful ignorance just pisses me off.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: supposedly being a journalist,

          I rather think STFW is not supposed to be journalism, but more a sort of amusing rant at the world. The (very possibly feigned) wilful ignorance is rather part of the angle, as far as I can tell.

  16. Dr_N

    Line et al

    "Stealth" comms is definitely where it is at.

    The problem with Skype (when I used it) was that other people seemed to pester you a lot to talk/video with them.

    "Line" is good for international free calls/text/video-calls. (Over wifi when roaming.) I was using TuMe but Telefonica nixed that last year.

    Otherwise as Mr Dabbs says, texts and voice are bundled (inc for international) so just use the phone.

    And while where at it, can we please have video calls over 3G functionality back in phones now the networks include them in the "free" minutes? Ta.

  17. Zog_but_not_the_first
    Holmes

    Who'll ride?

    Black tulips anyone?

  18. filterpuppy

    "I mean, WhatsItFor – what’s it for? It sends text messages for free! Well, so does my phone, it’s part of the package. Using WhatTheFuck won’t save me a penny so I’m intrigued as to how they intend monetising it."

    Pro-tip: You're not where the money is.

    Amusing read but flawed logic on so many levels. Get to grips with the bigger picture outside of the sphere that is directly relevant to you, and then reassess the investment potential.

    1. Levente Szileszky

      Mmm'suuure... another classic case of "I think I'm so smart that I actually know everything those rich fuckwits know but don't ask because I cannot explain it" aka trying to sound smatr only makes you sound really stupid, y'know

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So easy for WhatsApp to lose all its value in a single stroke

    Three things are needed:

    1) Built-in iPhone messaging standard (iMessage - already in place)

    2) Built-in Android messaging standard

    3) Google and Apple deciding to route messages between them rather than having them go via SMS

    Has Google tried to create an Android messaging standard? I wonder if the lack of it is due to the carriers still exercising some customization control over the Android load on many phones. Or maybe Samsung is trying to create SMessage, everyone is trying to follow, and Android messaging is a fragmented market as a result?

    1. ratfox

      Re: So easy for WhatsApp to lose all its value in a single stroke

      Google has taken a step away from an existing standard (XMPP) because it could not support every single feature they wanted to put in Hangouts, which they would like everybody to use. Works on iPhones, on Desktops, etc. Unfortunately, for the moment, everybody is more interested in creating their own little app and inviting everybody to join than to try to interoperate. The one who becomes the default for talking to your friends will win.

      We have a five-horse race: Apple with iMessage, who can boast with all its fanboys, but has the disadvantage of being strictly reserved to iThing users, so if you have other friends, you'll need another app anyway. Then Google with Hangouts, which comes with most Androids, and has also the advantage that all people with a Gmail account are signed in already, even if they don't know. Now Facebook with Whatsapp, who can integrate it and push it to all the Facebook users. There's also Wechat, which is everywhere in China, and that's a lot of people. And Viber ("They're big in Japan"). Oh, yeah, BBM; and Microsoft probably has something but few people care.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: So easy for WhatsApp to lose all its value in a single stroke

        Facebook already had Messenger, now they've got two parallel systems, the one people only use inside Facebook which they've tried and failed to get them to use outside it, and the one they just purchased for a ludicrous sum that some people will eventually flee once Facebook tries to monetize it by slinging ads, or forcing people to use a Facebook login who don't have one and don't want one.

        Apple has nothing to lose by trying to set up gateways to forward messages to non-iMessage users. After all, it does this anyway with SMS, so they lose nothing if they established a gateway between iMessage and Google Hangouts. The carriers lose, but if Apple cared about hurting the carriers feelings they never would have created iMessage - think how much potential revenue that has cost them already. Of course, had Apple not created it, some iPhone users would have ended up using something like Hangouts or WhatsApp.

        I suppose that last may indicate that Apple isn't the reason such a gateway doesn't exist. There are surely some iPhone users using WhatsApp or Hangouts, because not all their friends have iPhones. If they worked with Apple to get their messages simply forwarded to those networks, iPhone owners would never open the Hangout or WhatsApp app, they'd just use the iOS Message app and not know/care how the message got there (unless maybe Apple would add a couple more colors to go with the green SMS and blue iMessage so you know how your text was transmitted)

      2. PJI

        Re: So easy for WhatsApp to lose a all its value in a single stroke

        >> nd has also the advantage that all people with a Gmail account are signed in already, even if they don't know.

        Or, to put it another way, the DISadvantage ….

        I and many I know are avoiding things Google+ and its like as we do not see this all-embracing, uninvited, automatic entry in the Google sales DB as an Advantage.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Skype launched "GroupMe"...

        But nobody noticed.

        Anyway I found Skype almost OK for calls to plain phones when abroad. It is true sometimes it has issues, but most of the time it works ok, especially if the call is not a business call.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I've had whatsapp for 3 or 4 years (is that possible?)

    when I first saw it I thought to myself "why didn't I think of that".

  21. TwoWolves

    About Spain

    My wife is Spanish. All her relatives and friends out there strong-armed her into installing it as Spanish telcos charge a lot for texts and international calls. It's the same across much of Europe.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "What’s important is how big you appear to be"

    "You work in IT, so how come we’re not rich? After all, the industry is choc-a-bloc with shit technology built from childish code cobbled together by Jolt-addled students that turned them into accidental millionaires. How hard can it be?"

    This is the perfect article showing the hype of tech! So when is the 'Wolf' of Silicon Valley movie coming out?

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    my 0,02€

    germany, 37 y/o male in IT.

    more than 50% of my contacts do have whatsapp installed.

    according to the app i've sent and received more than 20.000 messages over the last 3 years.

    why didn't i use sms?

    - cost. texts inside germany are free with my contract, but texts to my friends all over the world cost money. and have you tried using mms to send pictures to other parts of the world? expensive and complicated.

    - group chats

    - nice interface, history, backup

    this doesn't explain the 20.000, but a long-distance-relationship with someone working in catering does.

  24. sysconfig

    What Facebook really gains....

    ...is access to phone numbers, because WhatsApp uses your phone number to identify you. So next up on Facebook's ignorance towards healthy privacy policies: "You didn't enter your phone number in your Facebook profile. We fixed that for you. You can opt out of this service, including public visibility which is initially activated, as soon as we completed that feature. You're welcome."

    1. P. Lee

      Re: What Facebook really gains....

      It aids OTT services. This means facebook can pull an iMessage. You can get messages to anyone - online or offline, but it's cheaper if your friends join you on fb and stay logged in.

      Not sure its worth that much though. I'd have thought google and apple have that sector sewn up by owning the devices and if google doesn't have all the android devices, they can step in and take it any time they want.

  25. Kilkrazy

    The sad thing is Michael Wolff's "Burn Rate", published 1997, lays out the whole dotcom smoke and mirrors business from the inside perspective, and we are still watching the same stuff happening today.

  26. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    WhatsApp is for the texting-compulsive type of person

    I see who among my acquaintances uses Whatsapp. It's the type of person who developed a texing-compulsive personality. Those who feel they have to text whomever in their address book every silly thing they come across. I call them "the spammer who don't know to be".

    One of the bigger Whatsapp user I know is a colleague who always arrive at the office talking on the phone. I guess she starts when se leaves home, and talks on the phone all the time until she arrives at the office, probably with people she left five minutes before. Then, when at her desk she starts to text over and over (of course she can't keep on talking on the phone).. This is the kind of person who needs a perpetual contact with her circle. She can't detach. Like teenagers with their friends. That's the kind of user those apps target. Depending on your environment, you can see more or less of them.

  27. Captain Scarlet
    Facepalm

    Why arent you a millionaire

    I don't see how people see this, they think everyone in IT is rolling in it when actually because most users are cheap its very hard to earn anything in the ICT sector.

  28. Sheep!

    I had never heard of it until the Facebook announcement so i took to Facebook to ask if any of my friends used it and a suprising amount did, most of them seemed to like it, but no one could tell me why they used it instead of Skype and they were all surprised to learn that the app slurped their phone book.

  29. Joel 1

    It's for photos and videos

    What we use it for, is for sending/receiving videos and pictures (especially now I have a grandson). The danger with iMessage is that you accidentally move away from wifi and it goes as an expensive MMS (not included with bundled SMS) - doubly a problem if you are abroad. The advantage over Skype is that Skype requires the other person to be logged on to Skype and to accept the inbound picture.

    The other area it worked well in was in forwarding on a picture - it didn't need to re-upload it, saving data volumes.

    However, now it's been bought by Facebook, I will be deleting my account and taking up with Telegram which is pretty much a drop in replacement with the added bonus of encryption options.

  30. FromTheRoot

    Just wait....

    Until WhatsApp requires a FaceBook login!!! I see it as buying out the biggest direct competitor to the messenger app. Anything they can do in the meanwhile is a bonus.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like