
Introducing WhatsApp's Desktop App - andersonmat
https://blog.whatsapp.com/10000621/Introducing-WhatsApps-desktop-app
======
tostitos1979
Why is Facebook/WhatsApp doing the tether to the phone crap? I have a few
seniors in the family who have no need of a cellphone (stay at home most of
the time). Everyone else in the family uses WhatsApp and these poor people are
left out of the look. It is completely stupid as far as I can see. What is the
phone requirement buying them?

~~~
ignoramous
Remember that there is no sign up, and that your mobile (phone number once
registered via SMS OTP) is the only client their servers can trust.

Imagine a scenario where you were to get rid of the phone number and had
sessions open on the desktop and the web. WhatsApp servers have no way of
knowing where the phone number went or if it will be online ever again or if
you continue to own the phone number, or someone else owns it. They need to
route the msgs through that phone/number combination all the time, because
it's the single source of truth.

Its security and privacy that's preventing them from providing the feature
you're asking for.

If they detach individual user's identity from a phone number, may be then
they can be a true cross platform (web, phone, desktop) messaging app.

~~~
tostitos1979
This doesn't make a whole lot of sense because people give up their phone
numbers from time to time. I did this myself. My understanding is that someone
who claims my number cannot access my past data. But if it is "stateless" then
a phone number doesn't have to be the only identifier. They can also use
email. Heck .. here is an algorithm ... use phone number 555XXXXXXX .. take a
person's email address and hash it to XXXXXXX. Done!

~~~
mattlutze
I guess if the point is for them not to store your messages on their servers
once those messages have been delivered, how is WhatsApp to know whether to
send a message to the session logged in from your phone, or to the desktop app
with a different session, or to your work computer where you forgot to log
out?

Being able to sync across all your devices requires they start storing all of
your communications centrally, which defeats the whole information security
model.

~~~
jsudhams
Can't it be device to device , once you get to new device you mark that device
as add and as soon as u login it can sync.

But i found whatsapp is next to mp3 in my and my friends phone so it is not
easy from bandwidth perspective

~~~
JonnyaiR
This way, you might not have the full conversation on each device - e.g. you
write "a" to alice on your phone, turn it off, turn your pc on and receive
"what do you mean?" from alice - the conversation is otherwise empty. That's
not a good UX. You'd have to store the chat history somehow - and thus loose
the privacy aspect of not storing it.

------
jeffjose
No linux version. I was almost convinced that this was going to be another
Electron app (after slack went that route)

~~~
tim333
I recommend Franz ([http://meetfranz.com/](http://meetfranz.com/)). Does
Whatsapp, works on Linux, mac, pc. Supports Slack, WeChat, HipChat, Facebook
Messenger, Telegram, Google Hangouts, GroupMe and Skype.

~~~
NiekvdMaas
This is just a wrapper for web clients of the "protocols" they support. So
WhatsApp is web.whatsapp.com in a tab, Skype is web.skype.com, etc.

~~~
magazinelala
Way to undermine the hard work of talented developers. Is that envy? You
should see all the features its offer before calling it just a "wrapper".

~~~
59nadir
I think you're reading a bit too much into his comment. It's true that the
phrasing can seem dismissive, but I don't think it's meant as such to that
extreme of a degree.

It being a collection of wrappers is either true or not and is not necessarily
a value judgment, but a technical detail.

------
aiNohY6g
1/ phone tethering is the price to pay for end-to-end encryption: the support
of multiple devices is not compatible with perfect forward secrecy, as the
former require the asynchronous push of messages to all devices while PFS
requires synchronicity (at least some kind of, as explained in their white
paper here:
[https://lobste.rs/s/sx2f0r/whatsapp_encryption_overview_tech...](https://lobste.rs/s/sx2f0r/whatsapp_encryption_overview_technical_white_paper)

2/ if you don't like the Desktop App (or are using Linux), you can use
[https://web.whatsapp.com/](https://web.whatsapp.com/) and/or the Chrome
extension WhatsChrome
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/whatschrome/bgkodf...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/whatschrome/bgkodfmeijboinjdegggmkbkjfiagaan)

~~~
notinreallife
What did they use to make the desktop app, I wonder. Maybe _electron 1.0_?!?

~~~
kocsenc
They did use electron. Confirmed by viewing
`/Applications/WhatsApp.app/Contents/Frameworks/Electron*`

------
blackoil
This is not an independent app. It is still tethered to the phone, and can't
work without it :(

~~~
kawera
Their servers do not store unencrypted messages so they need to come from the
phone.

~~~
jng
I guess they could do an "untethered" desktop version but they don't really
want to. Solve syncing of history etc but it's doable. But they just love
living in your pocket. It's all about owning you, and that's easier if they
stay with you all the time.

~~~
sanjeetsuhag
I feel the same way. Just build an independent app already. Telegram did it
well. What's stopping WhatsApp ?

~~~
NetStrikeForce
As kawera said two comments above yours:

Their servers do not store unencrypted messages so they need to come from the
phone.

\----

That's why some people criticise Telegram: Their messages have to be stored
unencrypted for their setup to work.

~~~
kawera
Exactly. Telegram's "Secret Conversations" are encrypted end-to-end but then
they aren't synced (or even supported on desktop).

~~~
newjersey
My workaround for this is to create a group chat. I only talk to two people on
Signal but I've asked both of them to message in the group chat that I've
made. Now, I can answer chat messages on my nexus 5, nexus 6, and nexus 7. (I
built the apk from source for the Nexus 7. I wouldn't recommend this if you
actually want secrecy. I'm not doing anything confidential so I am not too
worried about targeted attempts.)

------
Longhanks
I hate Websites selling themselves as "Desktop apps". I'd much rather have a
native interface, me and my battery would say thank you for that.

------
Julio-Guerra
It seems to be nothing more than
[https://web.whatsapp.com/](https://web.whatsapp.com/) in a web view. So I
can't really see interest.

~~~
micheljansen
I previously created my own "native" app from this by wrapping
[https://web.whatsapp.com](https://web.whatsapp.com) in an Electron wrapper so
that I could have WhatsApp live separate from the browser, with it's own Dock
icon.

Some ways in which the official app is better: * The official app extends to
the edges of the window, whereas the web app has a "window on a background"
design, which takes up more space. * The official app has keyboard shortcuts.
* The official app has better notifications.

~~~
robmcm
We used to do this with Fluid.app in the naughties.

~~~
provemewrong
I'm doing this currently with Chrome Apps.

------
haphazardeous
Since when it became fashionable to use a wrapper of your web site? "Because
the app runs natively on your desktop, you'll have support for native desktop
notifications, better keyboard shortcuts, and more." I think Firefox is
perfectly capable of doing any of those. I just hate it someone comes up and
says 'Look we built a native app' I'm sorry but no you haven't! If I wanted to
use your web page I can do that I don't need you to wrap it and ship it as a
native app. Disappointed.

~~~
haphazardeous
This app is so native neither CMD + W nor CMD + SHIFT + W closes the Whatsapp
window - yay!

~~~
dingo_bat
Alt+F4 works perfectly.

~~~
haphazardeous
You're using Windows, I believe?

~~~
dingo_bat
Yup.

------
shoggs
This just seems to be exactly like the Whatsapp Web running in the browser. I
don't understand what benefit comes from the native client.

~~~
Tiktaalik
With a desktop app you can easily and quickly command-tab to it if you want to
use it. In contrast with a web app it's often awkward and time consuming to
find the window/tab of the web app you're running amongst your other browser
windows/tabs.

~~~
takno
Chrome has that sorted already on android, where you can run up a site with a
home screen link, different icon and separate listing in the task list. Given
the work they've recently put in on full screen mode on desktop it looks like
they're maybe a couple of versions away from having something similar on
desktop

~~~
tuxracer
Actually they're removing it on Android even :(

~~~
nsgi
Really? Thought support for that feature was increasing with the web app
manifests. Do you have a source?

------
Strom
Windows 8 minimum? Is this an UWP app or what's the reasoning here?

Edit: I downloaded and successfully launched this on Windows 7. It seems like
a standard Electron app. Now I wonder if the Windows 8 requirement is purely
for tech support reasons, or if there's some specific feature that would fail
on Windows 7.

~~~
Touche
Microsoft doesn't support Windows 7 any more, why should WhatsApp?

~~~
Strom
You are misinformed. Microsoft even supports Vista, not to mention 7. [1] In
addition, if XP support deadline extensions are anything to go by, then these
Windows 7 end-of-support dates will get moved several times until they stick.
Beyond that, Windows 7 remains by far the most popular Windows version,
exceeding the combined market share of Windows 8, Windows 8.1 & Windows 10.
[2][3]

Unrelated to market share & OS updates, there's the technical question. There
aren't many Win32 APIs which are present in Windows 8, but not Windows 7. Thus
it's not that likely that Windows 7 wouldn't be supported by a Win32 app
(which this is), unless they go out of their way to make it so.

[1] [http://windows.microsoft.com/en-
us/windows/lifecycle](http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/lifecycle)

[2]
[http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp](http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp)

[3] [https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-
share...](https://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-
share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0)

~~~
Touche
> You are misinformed.

According to Wikipedia I'm not:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7#Support_lifecycle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7#Support_lifecycle)

"Mainstream support for 7 ended on January 13, 2015."

I think it's reasonable that businesses don't support an OS version beyond the
OS's provider's own "mainstream support".

> Thus it's not that likely that Windows 7 wouldn't be supported by a Win32
> app (which this is), unless they go out of their way to make it so.

Possibly, but listing support on their website means they support it, and why
should they do that if, again, Microsoft itself does not?

~~~
philtar
Literally 5 words later:

Extended support will end on January 14, 2020

------
joeyspn
Why is the app closing completely if I press 'x'? wouldn't be much better to
stay in background mode like Slack does (well and many other chat clients)?
It's annoying...

I'll keep using my custom wrapper with NW.js (apparently this uses electron)
until this behaviour is implemented...

~~~
pablovidal85
For mac users there's ChitChat[0], it behaves as expected. In fact I'm not
switching to the official WhatsApp desktop release until this issue is
properly fixed.

[0]
[https://github.com/stonesam92/ChitChat](https://github.com/stonesam92/ChitChat)

~~~
bartvk
ChitChat is great but is not _exactly_ like a mac app. You can't drag it from
desktop to desktop. No big thing though.

------
jrbapna
I was excited when I saw the headline but the phone teathering is a deal
breaker.

I removed whatsapp from my phone precisely because it took up too much space,
with all the photos and videos being shared daily. It's a shame really.. a
desktop app would've been a great alternative

~~~
idlemind
An app without tethering would be great, I agree.

But to save space on your phone, it's easy to turn off automatic storage of
media, on iOS this is under Settings > Chats > Save Incoming Media. I've had
it turned off for a long time to stop my camera roll filling with meme pics.

~~~
jrbapna
Thanks

------
aluhut
Well, at least it's not a Chrome Add-On. Still useless for me because of the
tether to phone point.

Now please Signal. Give me something we can all work with.

------
ascorbic
When I saw this I was excited that maybe I could finally switch from Telegram.
But no, it's tethered. I don't want to have to always make sure my phone is
charged and with signal. I really don't get it. I get they can't do it the
telegram way, by storing plaintext on the server. However I don't get why they
can't do it like iMessage and encrypt the messages with each registered
device's key. Perhaps moxie can explain why they can't do this.

~~~
xerophyte12932
This is what I love about fb messenger over whatsapp. You can use it on your
pc even without your cellphone. This dependency on the mobile makes no sense
at all. It kills half the usecase.

------
pmlnr
How about introducing open protocols instead?

~~~
Freak_NL
Vastly preferable of course, but that is not in the best interest of Facebook,
so why would they? The goodwill (marketing) generated by doing so has to
outweigh the loss of control (and income). It appears it doesn't, or they
would have done it.

The only other reason to adapt open standards and an open protocol would be
government pressure and legislation in the US or the EU.

------
Propen
What's different compared to using nativefier on web.whatsapp.com? I've been
using that for a while now

~~~
flanbiscuit
My guess is that they took web.whatsapp.com and wrapped it in an Electron app
and added a couple native desktop features. Not a lot of effort to do this on
their end so I guess it's just another added value to the product. I'll
continue just to use the website, I personally see no need for this.

------
everyone
An old friend of mine suggested I try out Viber or Whatsapp to contact her. I
had a look at them, but they want full access to all the contacts on your
phone, its all or nothing, you cant use either to communicate with select
people. So I elected not to use them. Just gonna use email.

------
_wmd
Is anyone qualified to comment on what this will do with my OS X address book
and similar data should I open it?

edit: on the plus side, looks like it's just their web app repackaged using
Electron. Still not sure what all these helpers are for though

~~~
yaegers
Since it "just" mirrors your phone it shouldn't access your OSX address book.

But since most people use iCloud to sync that address book with their Mac and
their phone its moot. If you open WhatsApp on your phone, it will take a trip
through your contacts and upload everything to their servers. Which, I still
maintain, is stupid and unnecessary and the numer one reason why I never
bothered with WhatsApp.

It's an IM client. So let me put my numer in and that's it. If I want to use
it, I probably already know the people that also use it. So if they in turn
also hae uploaded their number, I could search for it and add it. Have them
confirm out connection and chat away. There is no need to grab all my
contacts' information without their consent.

------
jeena
Meh, no Linux support, so I'll still be using Viber even though my siblings in
Germany and Switzerland always try to get me to install WhatsApp instead,
appearantly it is super big there. Here in Sweden noone ever asked me to
install it.

~~~
mattlutze
It sounds on its face that it works the same as, or similar to, the
web.whatsapp.com webapp. Runs locally in your browser. It talks to your phone
(over websockets, I think?) if the computer/phone are on the same wifi
network, and then the chats fire out/in through the phone as normal.

That should work just fine for you, I'd imagine.

------
dewey
Even if it's "just a wrapper" the native notifications are worth it for me. I
really wish iMessage would have a web view like WhatsApp that you can just
open on another computer though. Even if it's not a Mac.

------
syn_33
Still tethered to a phone... i'll just keep using this
[https://github.com/Aluxian/WhatsApp-
Desktop](https://github.com/Aluxian/WhatsApp-Desktop)

~~~
sanjeetsuhag
Of course its still tethered. Does the app you linked bypass the tethering ? I
fail to see the benefits offered by the app you linked over the official
client.

------
xerophyte12932
So what is the benefit of this over the Web version? Same UI, both need the
internet, both have desktop notifications, both need your cellphone to be
connected to the internet. Not to mention, no linux version

------
Tiktaalik
Nice. Maybe with this I can convince my friends to move over to WhatsApp from
Google Hangouts. The lack of desktop app support for Hangouts has been driving
me nuts.

~~~
tsycho
You could just open hangouts.google.com in a browser window, why do you need a
native app?

Also, Hangouts would not need phone tethering

~~~
Tiktaalik
It's incredibly frustrating to find the one tab/window you have open to
hangouts when you have dozens of windows/tabs open.

------
joe_fishfish
... And there's STILL no official iPad version.

------
colordrops
This is nearly identical to the WeChat desktop app. Looks like Whatsapp did
some "innovation arbitrage".

------
miseg
If I leave my job, can I "log out" of the app on my work machine without
access to that machine?

~~~
rgallagher27
Yes, you can log out of any web/desktop client from the mobile app

------
ksec
Why does it not Support Windows 7? Isn't that like 70% of Windows Market?

------
a_imho
the page is broken on Debian 8 / Iceweasel with ABE. Is it an outdated setup?
Many times I feel people are fixing what is not broken to end up with
something inferior.

------
tfranco
Is this a rip off from ChitChat?

[https://github.com/stonesam92/ChitChat](https://github.com/stonesam92/ChitChat)

~~~
molmalo
Well, the very first thing in the readme for that project says:

"A Mac app wrapper around WhatsApp's web client, WhatsApp Web.
[https://web.whatsapp.com/"](https://web.whatsapp.com/")

~~~
sidneys
Which the official App also is.

