[bauerd]

It's part of a constantly evolving ecosystem. It's a stable product because reliability engineers make it so and software engineers get the integrations right.

[lifeformed]

But a messaging program like Signal is fairly similar in scope, but only has like a couple dozen of devs, compared to Messenger's thousands(?).

[fragmede]

Signal could definitely use a bunch more devs, if only to fix all the UX bugs I hit on a daily basis.

[ubercore]

You haven't used messenger much then, if you're comparing the complexity of the two.

[lifeformed]

I guess I don't understand which are the features Messenger has that Signal doesn't that requires a billion dollars a year to maintain.

[nish__]

I don't use it. What am I missing?

[aylmao]

It still doesn't take a team that large.

When I was at Facebook they decided to re-write Messenger in C. There were people who thought it was a waste of time. There were people who thought it was a great idea. It was a lot of work, took a while, and I wouldn't be suprised if by now it's been re-written to something else.

It's not that hard to make up work, and there's people whose whole job is pretty much just that.

[MichaelZuo]

There is no way messenger features or functionality is changing that much year over year.

It’s almost entirely bloat.