Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Releases Messenger Lite For People On Slower Networks and With Old and Basic Android Phones (cnet.com)

Facebook has launched a slimmed-down version of its popular Messenger app in an effort to appeal to its users in countries with slower internet access. The app is called Messenger Lite, and it is also aimed at users who have basic Android smartphones. From a CNET article: Facebook Messenger Lite takes up a much smaller amount of a phone's storage --just 10 megabytes -- than the full-fat app that most users have installed on their phones, and it has been pared back so that it runs nippily over slower than average network speeds. It is the companion app to Facebook Lite, a stripped-down version of the social network, also for old Android phones, launched in 2015. The app's launch is one cog in the wheel of Facebook's strategy to make the social network and the internet as a whole more accessible to users in the developing world. One of Facebook's stated aims is to bring the next 3 billion people online and it has a number of initiatives to that end, including internet.org, Free Basics and its Lite apps.

79 comments

  1. Swing and a miss by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

    Yes, cause that is exactly why grandma doesn't use Facebook.

    On the other hand, I'd wager that the personal information stealing is what really sucks up the bandwidth when using Facebook. Has that part been remedied as well? No?

    1. Re:Swing and a miss by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Yes, cause that is exactly why grandma doesn't use Facebook.

      On the other hand, I'd wager that the personal information stealing is what really sucks up the bandwidth when using Facebook. Has that part been remedied as well? No?

      Speaking of swing and a miss, the concept of stealing information is a foreign one when talking about the worlds largest social media platform.

      That's like looking for honesty during a presidential election debate.

    2. Re:Swing and a miss by gsslay · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The one thing it won't be "Lite" on is the permissions it requires, and the harvesting of all the personal data within the phone that it can lay its grubby hands on. You can be assured that it'll be just as thorough as the full-size app.

    3. Re:Swing and a miss by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      They'll trim features before they stop sucking up all your personal info.

      Selling your information gets them money. Delivering features only adds to their bandwidth and electric bills.

      A useful side effect of capitalism---you may be nothing more than a revenue pump, but at least their motives are simple to understand.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    4. Re:Swing and a miss by johanw · · Score: 1

      Xprivacy will take care of that.

    5. Re:Swing and a miss by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The one thing it won't be "Lite" on is the permissions it requires, and the harvesting of all the personal data within the phone that it can lay its grubby hands on. You can be assured that it'll be just as thorough as the full-size app.

      Should this come as a surprise for an app which functionally requires many of the things you critisize it for? Don't like to go back to sending telegrams.

    6. Re:Swing and a miss by omnichad · · Score: 1

      functionally requires many of the things you critisize it for

      Most people don't use messenger to communicate with contacts that aren't also FB "friends." So most people don't really need to give it access to contacts.

      on Android Marshmallow, it should be possible to revoke a lot of the unneeded permissions - but not having done it, I don't know how well it works. And on first use, you have to manually approve these permissions.

    7. Re:Swing and a miss by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      I've been using disa Messenger on my Android. I receive "Facebook Messenger" messages without giving Facebook permission to everything, and without other Facebook notifications.

      The other option is to go to www.messenger.com and request Desktop site.

    8. Re:Swing and a miss by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Most people don't use messenger to communicate with contacts that aren't also FB "friends." So most people don't really need to give it access to contacts.

      So what are you complaining about exactly? That this app requests permissions for a shady company that already had them, actually more? Yeah go have a look, the Facebook app has far more permissions than the Messenger app.

      Also Contacts is not about being or not being Facebook friends, it's about identifying phone numbers linked to your account for fallback, which is bloody useful when your wifi suddenly drops out or you go from having 4G to f-you in the middle of talking to someone. With just a single click you can dial their phone number instead. As for the permissions, Facebook syncing with contacts is something that has happened long before the messenger app. Heck it was a feature of some vendor's versions of Android phones back when Facebook still had some professional disagreements with Google which prevented contact syncing through their own app. It was also quite neat having their profile picture appear instead of some generic background next to their names.

      This "privacy" hasn't existed since smartphones came out.

    9. Re:Swing and a miss by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Also Contacts is not about being or not being Facebook friends, it's about identifying phone numbers linked to your account for fallback

      That's if you use Messenger for voice. I never have.

      Either way, you don't have to give FB's apps permission to Contacts if you don't want to anymore.

    10. Re:Swing and a miss by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      That's if you use Messenger for voice. I never have.

      Have a cookie. I for one couldn't wait to get rid of the battery draining shit experience known as skype.

      Either way, you don't have to give FB's apps permission to Contacts if you don't want to anymore.

      You also don't have to leave the barn doors open even if all the horses have left.

    11. Re:Swing and a miss by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Have a cookie. I for one couldn't wait to get rid of the battery draining shit experience known as skype.

      You know that phones can make voice calls, right? And it's even cross-platform.

  2. 3 Billion Marks by jenningsthecat · · Score: 4, Informative

    One of Facebook's stated aims is to bring the next 3 billion people online

    One of Facebook's implicit aims is to line up the next 3 billion suckers for privacy invasion, data mining, and targeted advertising. FTFY.

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    1. Re: 3 Billion Marks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope those 3 bn people invade and destroy their datacenters and hang their staff instead...

    2. Re:3 Billion Marks by StayFrosty · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth they are spying on you anyway, even if you don't have an account. Every time you see a like button--whether you click it or not, you are being facebooked. Every time someone tags you in a picture (even though you don't have an account,) you are being facebooked.

      At the end of the day you are better off having an account (even if you don't use it) so you can control your exposure. Also, use a script or ad blocker to prevent those stupid like buttons from running their script in the background.

      --
      "Frequently wrong, never in doubt."
    3. Re:3 Billion Marks by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      Not if you are using uMatrix or uBlock (or both) in default "block 3rd party crap" mode.

    4. Re:3 Billion Marks by StayFrosty · · Score: 1

      Also, use a script or ad blocker to prevent those stupid like buttons from running their scripts in the background.

      I see you never made it past line 1 of the comment...

      --
      "Frequently wrong, never in doubt."
    5. Re:3 Billion Marks by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      next 3 billion suckers

      A sucker would imply that people are being taken advantage of, rather than say being provided messaging, voice chat, video chat, group calling, bulletin board style messaging system attached to a social network.

  3. Why a separate app? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was wrong with Facebook messaging being part of the main FB app, like it used to be?

    1. Re: Why a separate app? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It still is, actually. Every once in awhile, there will be a glitch on my Android phone, and I'll get the old messaging interface in the Facebook app instead of Messenger, when I click the messages button in the app. The functionality is there and it actually still seems to work.

    2. Re:Why a separate app? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When bundled, the spying capabilities are slower and less.

    3. Re: Why a separate app? by sosume · · Score: 1

      When you haven't got it installed, the Facebook app will always nag you that you have unread messages. Which is untrue. Wasn't Microsoft convicted for something similar?

  4. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's time to get a Facebook account now that those of us in the US can use Messenger.

    Oh, happy day!

  5. 10 MB! Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tomas@rasputin:~$ ls -lh /usr/bin/mutt-org
        -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 886K Nov 29 2014 /usr/bin/mutt-org

    'Nuff said.

    1. Re: 10 MB! Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who is nuff

    2. Re: 10 MB! Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and what did he say?

    3. Re: 10 MB! Holy crap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuff is General Failure by another name.

      And he is reading my hard disk.

      Eh! Wait! Why is he reading my hard disk?

  6. This is the app by sucko · · Score: 0

    for people who hate themselves.

    They should push ads for antidepressants.

  7. And will it run? by LubosD · · Score: 1

    I have a high end phone, I was dissatisfied with the Facebook app, so I tried Facebook Lite. And it doesn't even start! All I get to see is the splash screen.

    Very lightweight indeed. If this is the way they're going...

    1. Re:And will it run? by omnichad · · Score: 2

      You've already proven to FB that your phone can run the full app. They have no incentive to let the lite version work. Probably intentionally blocked.

    2. Re:And will it run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I too have a high end phone and the Facebook app does not run. Oh wait I did not install it Sorry!

  8. Just let them use the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about just letting people use the browser to check their facebook messages instead of detecting they're on a mobile device and blocking them from checking their messages to try and force them to install their crappy app? I've found a workaround to do it, but it's cludgy. STOP BLOCKING THE BROWSER FROM CHECKING MESSAGES! Is that so hard Facebook? Nobody wants your crappy app. Not even the lite version.

    1. Re:Just let them use the browser by TFlan91 · · Score: 1

      You forget that with the installation of the App, Facebook gets access to all sorts of goodies on your phone that it wouldn't get using mobile.

    2. Re:Just let them use the browser by phorm · · Score: 1

      What's the workaround? I general just use "Desktop mode" on the mobile but that kinda sucks

    3. Re:Just let them use the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      https://mbasic.facebook.com/messages

    4. Re:Just let them use the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tinfoil for Facebook still handles the messages just fine, and is as good for privacy as any way of accessing Facebook can be.

    5. Re:Just let them use the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was forcing it to use desktop mode. https://www.facebook.com/?m2w
      but you're right, it sucks. It's still better than installing their stupid app though.

    6. Re:Just let them use the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod up!!!

    7. Re:Just let them use the browser by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Nobody wants your crappy app.

      Hmmm, 4 star rating with 33million downloads on the play store. I wish nobody wanted my crappy apps this much.

      The web browser was replaced because it was frigging slow, clunky, didn't have access to video cameras which gimped the feature set, couldn't send notifications which makes it a worthless messaging app, and was all around an arse to open.

      If you don't want to play then don't play. But nearly all messaging programs out there require the use of an app.

    8. Re:Just let them use the browser by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      I speak for myself, but there's no one on Facebook that I really care to talk to on a "Hay I see you're online checking your updates, but let's chat chat chat about nothing" basis. Not having it on my mobile browser has improved my mobile Facebook experience.

    9. Re:Just let them use the browser by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      https://mbasic.facebook.com/messages

      Cool. I've been using the Disa App

    10. Re:Just let them use the browser by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      Regular Facebook can be browsed with this very light version... what a joke, at the bottom it says "Install Facebook on your *Phone model* and browse faster". I haven't seen Facebook load this fast in years.

    11. Re:Just let them use the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's because I complained in a feedback form about not being able to use the browser for messages, but I can use any mobile browser for messages.

  9. Voice calls are coming by ninthbit · · Score: 1

    One thing Messenger Lite won't be able to do is make voice calls, in this first version at least. As a huge growth area for Facebook -- 300 million people use Messenger for voice calling -- it is a feature Chudnovsky is "definitely" looking at adding eventually. "People want to use the same kind of services they use everywhere else, but it definitely requires different types of tech."

    If you could do voice calls over your data network, wouldn't you just use the full version of the app instead of the lite?

    I also love that it's only available to

    people in Kenya, Tunisia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Venezuela, and is set to come to other countries later.

    So if you hate the full version sucking your battery dry too bad, you can't use the better one.

    1. Re:Voice calls are coming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why is this attractive to any user? No cell phone plan anywhere offers unlimited data with limited voice minutes.

    2. Re: Voice calls are coming by morcego · · Score: 1

      You are right. If only people would invent a way to use celulars outside the data plan.
      I think I'll work on it. I even have a name already. I'll call it WiFi.

      --
      morcego
    3. Re:Voice calls are coming by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      That's actually a fairly common combination in the prepaid market. Example: T-Mobile has an unlimited data and texts with 100 minutes talk for $30/month plan.

      I assume the thinking is that it makes people who think they rarely use the phone as a phone think they're getting a great deal.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  10. I have a great idea by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Usually I sell them, this one is free: I found a way how you could make it so that it needs 0 extra MBs.

    Let people access their messages with the browsers they have already installed, it doesn't get more lightweight than that!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:I have a great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or better yet, with Tinfoil for Facebook. You get the benefit of using their communication network without them getting any info about your other web browsing.

    2. Re:I have a great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can somewhat do it already albeit clumsily. Just set your browser tab to request the desktop site/version and then load facebook.com.

    3. Re:I have a great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No that is most certainly not more lightweight. You are proposing loading an entire browser, then downloading the content and UI each time the user tries to use it. A dedicated app can certainly be lighter weight in memory usage and data usage than what you propose. RAM usage and data usage are significant concerns in these markets and not just disk storage footprint.

    4. Re:I have a great idea by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yeah it also doesn't make for a very useful messaging platform. The whole point of an app is instant delivery. It's the reason people didn't use messenger as much in the past, the browser was clunky garbage, still is.

    5. Re:I have a great idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chrome notifications gives you instant delivery. Maybe you should use a phone before you comment on how you think they work.

    6. Re:I have a great idea by omnichad · · Score: 1

      downloading the content and UI each time the user tries to use it.

      Have you ever heard of 304 Not Modified?

      It would take a lot of usage to trump the 80MB+ download size of the FB app - and that's without Messenger. And then add in the updates to the app regularly that also must be downloaded. I don't think the mobile web site has auto-play of videos set, but the app does if you don't change the default.

  11. Nipply or nimbly? by mt2mb4me · · Score: 1

    Does it have to touch my nipple to send nipply messages? or does it alert me by playing with my nipples? Either way, I am in.

    1. Re:Nipply or nimbly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only run nippily on cold days... it's an exciting new paradigm that synergizes my lateral markets with vertical coverage.

    2. Re:Nipply or nimbly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know that good nipply coverage helps to keep my coverage vertical.

  12. Fat by Vlijmen+Fileer · · Score: 1

    "Great".
    Now rename the original app to "Facebook Messenger Monstrously Oversized", the new app to "Facebook Messenger".
    Now rename the original Facebook app to "Facebook Monstrously Oversized", the light app to "Facebook"
    Now re-integrate "Facebook Messenger" with "Facebook".
    Things are now again as they were and should be.
    But it still can be better
    Ditch the whole thing and tell people to use the mobile web version, which will be seriously maintained from now on.
    Incompetent F***book swine. My phone was never meant to solely run your bulky, obese shit apps.

  13. Why exclude some from surveillance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sure, makes perfect sense: You want to surveil and log the conversations of as many people as you can, so release a version that works better on older phones. Then you can poke your little brown noses into more people's business! Your NSA/CIA/FBI masters will reward you, Failbook.

    WHY ARE YOU STILL USING FACEBOOK???

  14. Browser? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Every phone should have a browser. Why the hell don't these companies stop with the apps and create web apps for mobile browsers?

  15. You can already message on Fb Lite by iampiti · · Score: 1

    ...although I guess the separate app has more features. If not it would be pointless.
    I chose to use the Lite version since the "fat" Facebook app was over 100 MB and I'm always running out of space on the apps partition.

  16. Android? What about iOS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not all iPhone users have the latest device either. Some of us get hand-me-down phones. I'm still on iPhone 4, for example. And I have a perfectly good iPhone 3GS in a drawer that could be used for Facebook Messenger Lite too.

  17. Released in Kenya, Tunisia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka by trawg · · Score: 4, Informative

    I immediately wanted to install this to replace the behemoth that is the real Messenger; after diving through the various links (because why would you bother to link the source?), I found this:

    Messenger Lite is starting to roll out to people in Kenya, Tunisia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Venezuela. Look for Messenger Lite in other countries in the coming months.

    So I suspect it might not come to "western" regions; I've seen this before with some of the 'basic' versions of apps.

    FWIW I have a Nexus 4, maybe 3 years old, which now feels like a cheap, basic smartphone. Most of those big fat apps like FB Messenger run like an absolute dog. I am not sure why; I think it's a combination of the IO speed of the disk starting to suck plus the fact that I have full encryption on (IIRC the Nexus 5+ series have dedicated hardware that deals more gracefully with full encryption on the device).

    1. Re:Released in Kenya, Tunisia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka by Sky+Cry · · Score: 1

      It probably is the encryption. I've had a lot of performance problems with my HTC One M6 - the whole would just freeze for seemingly no reason every now and then, and it would even crash on MTP file transfer regularly. In fact, it was getting worse and worse every day. All of it was fixed by resetting back to the unencrypted storage. Encryption comes with a huge price.

  18. Lite == single-speed? by bmimatt · · Score: 2

    I'm thinking, Facebook Massager Lite will make many lonely women happy, even if it is single-speed as the name suggests.

  19. 10 megabytes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What kind of garbage is that, why did android application size creep so much, even basic stuff now wastes like 15mb.
    I don't think I've updated any application in 3 years because of that, and I've had to revert to the original version of the play store because newer version don't even show apk size.

  20. Re:Browser by ledow · · Score: 2

    Because a browser app can't run in the background, run on startup, suck your contacts lists off your phone, force you to provide your location as soon as you load it, etc. etc. etc.

    Browsers have security. Apps have free reign. Now question why you would want to run Facebook as an app rather than (as I do) access it in "Desktop Site" mode inside the Chrome I already have (which gives you message access but is a pain in the butt to navigate).

  21. Why 10 MB? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have an Othello/Reversi program on my phone, the AI beats me about half the time on one of the harder (but not hardest) settings, and it's nowhere near 10MB. There are hundreds of useful Android apps that are around 100-300 KB, the "lite" version of Facebook using 20x more than an IRC Client (AndChat-535K) is ridiculous.

  22. Freudian slip? by Nkwe · · Score: 1

    ...and it has been pared back so that it runs nippily over slower than average network speeds. It is the companion app to Facebook Lite, a stripped-down version of the social network...

    Really?

  23. Brainwashed by jabberw0k · · Score: 1

    Isn't it quite a marketing coup to get folks to think of these devices as a non-threatening "telephone" when they are actually treacherous hand-held computers utterly controlled by someone else?

  24. Thanks, Zuck! by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    I'll be sure to avoid this like the Plague, just like your more full-featured surveillance platform.

  25. just 10 megabytes by CptLoRes · · Score: 2

    I still remember when the entire OS including apps would have taken less then that..

  26. Shouldn't need a Lite version by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    Maybe it wouldn't be necessary to create a "Lite" version if their main app combo (messenger + facebook apps) didn't take 3/4 of a friggin GIGABYTE.

    I can't even fathom what kind of nimrods Zuckerberg hires, but it is certainly strong evidence against his position that self-taught developers are just as good those from degree-awarding institutions.

  27. Great for BB10 devices by williamyf · · Score: 1

    I have a BBQ10 (long story short, I NEED the physical keyboard, is not a matter of preference).

    Even though I kinda-sorta still get security updates for the BaseOS, FaceBook (and WhatsApp) abandoned the platform, and left behind ha mobile website wraped as an app.

    Since BB10 runs android, and since this is planned for older android, as soon as 10.3.3 lands, I will sideload the APKs, and let you know how this behaves. Ditto for FaceBook lite, and WhatsApp.

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
  28. Tinfoil by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 1

    Really? The current version of Tinfoil crashes when opening the messages link in Facebook. Some guy launched a workaround to avoid crashes. In its latest 2.0 version it is a fork of Tinfoil, but it is not in F-Droid.

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu
    1. Re:Tinfoil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not able to update Tinfoil past 1.1.8, which is still working great. Hooray for Gingerbread!

  29. Facebook Messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All my Facebook messages disappeared from my computer. I did not delete or archive any. The collection is 5 yrs. of data that I need. When I googled Facebook I read a zillion complaints from people with the same issue and no resolve by Facebook. I've sent e-mails, messages to Facebook, no response. I tried another computer, a different browser & downloaded my facebook backup for messages. I'm told my messages are on one of their serves and they don't know why this is happening. I contacted the people who have sent me messages & they say my messages are still there at their end. Any suggestions?

  30. Simple solution by Zanadou · · Score: 1

    So, how does this beat just simply saving "m.facebook.com" as a bookmark shortcut icon?