[RestlessMind]

But those who can afford to pay (either for WhatsApp or for YT Premium) are typically the ones most lucrative for the advertisers. So if I am in charge of such products, what is the incentive for me to invest into these efforts which are only going to add complexity while not making any extra money? What is the compelling reason for offering an Ad-free mode if it is going to be adopted by a tiny fraction?

[Marsymars]

Because as someone who's willing to pay to not have ads, ads are a non-starter for me. If they're forced upon me, I'll switch products, and force anyone I communicate with to switch products to continue communicating with me. (If an individual won't install Signal, I'll drop down to SMS/email for them.)

[bad_user]

In my experience, no, you can’t force alternatives on your friends and family, unless it’s an alternative they already have.

No, they won’t install Signal. If that were a real possibility, you would have done it already. So SMS it is. But I wonder, isn’t SMS more expensive than $1 / year? SMS has had outrageously high rates compared with 3G.

In some parts of the world that’s precisely the reason for WhatsApp’s popularity.

[randomsearch]

My non-tech friends can and have and do install signal, I’m pleased to say! It costs nothing, takes them a few minutes, and there’s no downside for them. I use it all the time.

[Zhenya]

agreed - I politely ask and if they dont I make my case.

SMS is plaintext - full stop.

[Marsymars]

> If that were a real possibility, you would have done it already.

Well, no, because I'm perfectly happy using WhatsApp in its current state.

[Tharkun]

SMS has been free (or very nearly free) for at least ten years over here. Pretty much any phone plan comes with unlimited messages or something like 10k/month, which most users won't reach.