WhatsApp To End Support For BlackBerry, Nokia, and Other Older Operating Systems (whatsapp.com) 188
nerdyalien writes: While everybody is immersed in the Apple vs. FBI case, WhatsApp has posted a blog entry that could potentially alter the mobile landscape as we know it today. By the end of 2016, WhatsApp will no longer support many older mobile operating systems from BlackBerry, Nokia, Android and Windows Phone. Moving forward, WhatsApp will only support the latest and greatest iPhone, Android and Windows Phone platforms. With over 1 billion active users, and the backing of Facebook, is WhatsApp finally reducing the mobile landscape to a three-horse race ?
3 horse? (Score:5, Insightful)
With over 1 billion active users, and the backing of Facebook, is WhatsApp finally reducing the mobile landscape to a three-horse race ?
Seriously Windows phone is less than 3%. The only thing keeping it in the vicinity of relevant is the money that Microsoft spends marketing it.
Re: (Score:2)
And even BlackBerry has dropped Blackberry OS in favor of their flavor of Android.
Re: (Score:2)
There are literally dozens of articles on the topic if you bothered to look for yourself. Here [cnet.com] is one of many. I don't know if they will ditch their OS completely but I suspect they will.
A quick question... (Score:2)
Never heard of it before...
Re: (Score:2)
I hope you choke on your smugness while trying to explain to your children that you are completely out of touch with the real world.
Re: A quick question... (Score:2)
They didn't the memo on Google either, apparently.
Re: (Score:2)
What smugness?
What did I saw or ask that came off as smug?
Re:3 horse? (Score:5, Insightful)
I know that I couldn't care less how many other people use Windows Phone. I use it because it's a better product.
Re: (Score:3)
Seriously Windows phone is less than 3%. The only thing keeping it in the vicinity of relevant is the money that Microsoft spends marketing it.
I know that I couldn't care less how many other people use Windows Phone. I use it because it's a better product.
Sure, I use Linux because it is a better desktop OS than Windows, but I wouldn't call its less than 2% market share a "horse race" with Windows.
Re:3 horse? (Score:4, Funny)
Sure, I use Linux because it is a better desktop OS than Windows, but I wouldn't call its less than 2% market share a "horse race" with Windows.
In other words, Linux is just as irrelevant on the desktop as Windows is on mobile? Them's fighting words - well nerd rage words - here, I'll get the popcorn.
It's already a 3-horse race (Score:2)
Even if you regard that third horse as barely in the race (which it is, it's already more of a two-horse race as you point out):
Regarding the question, "is WhatsApp finally reducing the mobile landscape to a three-horse race ?" - No, they aren't. Because that would require it to be more than a three-horse race currently. It isn't. It's barely even more than a two-horse race.
Re:3 horse? (Score:4, Interesting)
The world is not homogenous. In many areas, Windows Phone's market share is far higher than its global average. A lot of those areas are also areas of very high WhatsApp usage, so it makes sense that the company would want to keep that market.
When I was in India for a couple weeks last year, I saw more Windows phones than iPhones (according to an admittedly old article [indiatimes.com] - 2013 - iOS has only a 2.3% market share in India, Android has 91%, Windows Phone has 5.4%). Based on what I saw last year, Windows Phone and iOS has probably both made gains there - if you have more recent statistics, it'd be interesting to see them - but Windows Phone more than iOS. Another example where WP market share exceeds its global average (even though, unlike India, it's still only in third place) is Europe last year: 10.1% across UK, France, Spain, Germany, and Italy [neowin.net].
In the case of Europe, some of that is probably brand loyalty to Nokia, even though they were already owned by Microsoft at that point (although if that were the case, I'd expect northern Europe - especially Finland - to feature in the list). In the case of India, it's simpler: low-end Windows phones are nearly as cheap as low-end Android phones (you can get a Windows phone, new, contract-free, and SIM-unlocked, for $50 even in the US if you know where to look, or a bit less if you don't mind previous-generation hardware) but are much more functional. A Lumia 520 - one of the lowest of the low when it comes to Windows Phone devices - is still supported and can be upgraded to Windows 10 Mobile. This on a handset that launched as a minimum-specs WP8.0 device in 2013 and available on Amazon.com for $40 new. An equivalent Android phone would have been lucky to get the first major OS upgrade (8.0 to 8.1, for Windows Phone), or even be hardware-compatible with the second.
Re: (Score:2)
With over 1 billion active users, and the backing of Facebook, is WhatsApp finally reducing the mobile landscape to a three-horse race ?
Seriously Windows phone is less than 3%. The only thing keeping it in the vicinity of relevant is the money that Microsoft spends marketing it.
While that's true, if Whatsapp supports Windows 10 Mobile, that enables them to have an app for Windows 10 w/ minimal coding changes.
But I'm fine w/ them dropping Windows Phone support of earlier versions
Re:3 horse? (Score:4, Interesting)
If your security people haven't banned Windows Phone from your network it means they aren't scanning it properly. Most likely just looking at O/S level problems and assuming that because more problems are known on Android that means it's actually worse.
The security model on Windows Phone is actually more secure than Android. You can't write an app that will stay running in the background "forever" and your apps can't cross over to mess with other apps. So were I a security guy, I'd be more likely to approve a Windows Phone on my network than an Android phone. And with the smaller market share there are a whole lot less people even trying to attack the platform which makes it that much better (though it isn't really a security measure).
Windows Phone versus Android (Score:3)
Not that I'm an Android developer, nor do I have any experience with WP, but I had the impression that Android apps can only run in the background as a service, and any app that wants to do so uninterruptedly will need to announce itself in the notification bar. So, they can run in the background forever, bu
Re: (Score:3)
Also, I'd like my smartphone to be more like a PC (what, no daemons?) not less
Re: (Score:2)
But what Whatsapp is doing is something that Microsoft will heartily approve - them dropping support for older versions of the platform, and supporting only Windows 10 Mobile. Which helps migrate to Windows 10.
Verizon owners of phones like the Lumia Icon, or the Lumia 735 who need Whatsapp will be SOL unless Verizon qualifies the Windows 10 upgrade ASAP
That's a new one (Score:2)
Is the submitter claiming that WhatsApp retroactively killed Blackberry's market share with its decision to end support for the Blackberry platform now?
Re: (Score:2)
No.
(Glad I could help.)
Blackberry has moved to Android already (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
They have one Android handset and continue to sell devices with BB10 and BBOS. They have customers that continue to demand BBOS and BB10.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Existing Blackberry customers will see the Priv for what it is - end of life for BB10.
Consumer yes. But don't underestimate that number of handsets that BlackBerry provides in the military, government, finance and healthcare industries. They have many customers that are only with them because of their secure mobile OS.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Like "universal inbox"? Meh, never liked that idea.
Re: (Score:2)
WhatsApp? (Score:2)
Re:WhatsApp? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You've either not seen it, or you're trolling. Why don't you try it first? I really don't want to go back to text messages when I have whatsapp.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Another "messaging" app that somehow messages differently than regular text messages? Somehow, I doubt that their target market of dim-witted 10 year old kids is going to decide which phone OS's continue into the future.
In a lot of markets (EG South America) WhatsApp is used by the majority of mobile users due to the pricing of text messages vs pure data because most people in the world don't have unlimited text messages in their plans. So I think you need to revise your opinion of the WhatsApp target market to reflect that other people face situations different than your own and as such have different motivations to use things like WhatsApp.
Re: (Score:3)
Another "messaging" app that somehow messages differently than regular text messages? Somehow, I doubt that their target market of dim-witted 10 year old kids is going to decide which phone OS's continue into the future.
In a lot of markets (EG South America) WhatsApp is used by the majority of mobile users due to the pricing of text messages vs pure data because most people in the world don't have unlimited text messages in their plans. So I think you need to revise your opinion of the WhatsApp target market to reflect that other people face situations different than your own and as such have different motivations to use things like WhatsApp.
It is also great in locations where there is wifi but no or spotty cell service. I rode around on a mexican-flagged ship for a couple weeks in the Gulf of Mexico. Whatsapp was extremely popular with the crew. The wifi was unreliable and slow, but text and voice messages on WhatsApp went through fine most of the time. It fills a need, so therefore people use it.
Many of these services are somewhat regional. As another example, Line is very popular in Asia and some other regions, but almost unheard of i
Re: (Score:2)
The shit-faces such as the GP don't know or care about anyone not in the their little bubble. I use WhatsApp to communicate with family, all of whom live overseas. I have practically unlimited data (20GB/month, never used more than a couple), and unlimited free SMS, but not internationally. WhatsApp is a better messaging app than the native SMS app anyway. I can send images and video without any problems. In contrast, MMS is a pain to set up and it's not always compatible across carriers.
Re: (Score:2)
Another "messaging" app that somehow messages differently than regular text messages?
"Regular" text messages suck because they are linked to a cell phone number. Better messaging solutions can work on any platform (including an internet-connected PC or tablet) and do not rely on having to reply on a crappy cell phone keyboard while I sit 10 hours / day in front of a full PC keyboard.
Whatsapp suck too because it is still linked to a phone number.
Re: (Score:2)
Even better message services don't store the message on a single server ready to harvest for any hacker or 3-letter criminal organisation.
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully you will choke to death on your smugness.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it is different than regular text messages, in that it allows photos, videos, messages longer than 160 characters etc. Oh and voice calling (VoIP). It's basically like iMessage + FaceTime, but not restricted to iOS only. Most people I know use their 'native' messaging (iMessage or Android equivalents) first, but fall back to WhatsApp to message those with a different type of phone.
LOL (Score:3)
WhatsApp doesn't need to do anything. Reality has already reduced mobile to a two-horse race.
Bigger than you think (Score:5, Interesting)
WhatsApp's claim to fame originally was its ability to run on virtually anything, including the J2ME phones popular in the US and Europe in the mid-2000s. Those phones at least were still prevalent in many African and middle-eastern countries just a couple of years ago.
Have these markets also developed such that they are basically Android or iOS now?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Bigger than you think (Score:5, Informative)
you Merkins are so removed from reality...
when were you last in africa? battery life is the #1 deciding factor for a phone, most people have sporadic access to sporadic power. apart from middle class, people don't respond to text messages via text messages but by ringing the sender once or twice for yes/no. i've seen this being quite elaborate - pauses, longer+shorter rings, etc. the biggest banks in africa are partnering with mobile phone operators because there was risk M-Pesa (and its various localised versions) would become the de-facto currency of the continent. people simply pay each other by transferring call credit. there is very little use for smartphones outside of richer circles in bigger cities (with supporting infrastructure).
Re: (Score:2)
Morse code reinvented. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
In my youth as a latch-key kid in the eighties before caller ID, my parents used a code when calling us: ring three times, hang up, wait 20 seconds, and call again. If we didn't hear that ring pattern, we weren't to pick up the phone when home alone.
Re:Bigger than you think (Score:4, Interesting)
you Merkins are so removed from reality...
I'm speaking from having just spent the past month in Central America, riding the hot and cramped local buses and seeing people using almost exclusively Android smartphones (still some dumbphones). Is that what you call "so far removed from reality"? Regarding Africa, like I said, there will always be hold outs for whatever reason (battery life, simplicity, durability), but what you describe isn't really relevant to the topic, which is WhatsApp no longer being supported on older devices. Those people using missed calls for replies aren't even using the data connection on their phone, so they're not exactly going to be affected by WhatsApp not being supported on them, are they?
Re: (Score:2)
WhatsApp's claim to fame originally was its ability to run on virtually anything, including the J2ME phones popular in the US and Europe in the mid-2000s.
I'm not so sure about that. ICQ had a J2ME client before Whatsapp. The unique feature it had at the time was how easy it was to set up - it used the phone number and IMEI to authenticate, no user name or password to remember, and the contacts in the phone book automatically become Whatsapp contacts.
Re:Bigger than you think (Score:4, Informative)
No. At least certainly not a "modern" Android phone. You can still buy an Android 2.1 phone, for instance. This is a bunch of Silicon Valley people unable to see that their own experience and situation is rare.
they aren't going "latest, greatest" (Score:5, Informative)
They didn't say that, they are actually supporting older versions, just not REALLY old versions
Re: (Score:2)
Virtual +1 informative.
Re: (Score:2)
So this will be annoying to those running Android =2.2 but hardly relevant in the great scheme.
Just What Exactly is Whats App doing... (Score:4, Interesting)
... that is so complex that a simple messaging app can't support older versions of an OS? All it does is send text and picture data which AFAIK was supported by phones 10 years ago before smart phones even came on the market. So WTF excuse can they come up with that sounds genuine?
"they don't offer the kind of capabilities we need to expand our app's features in the future."
Oh riiiight. So they can't be bothered to continue current support even though it means NO EFFORT on their part. They just want everyone to see the New Shiny when it comes out. Idiots.
Re:Just What Exactly is Whats App doing... (Score:5, Insightful)
End to end encryption with the Axolotl protocol.
Re: (Score:2)
No, that can only work if you use shitty encryption like Telegram. Central servers that store the messages are a big no-no for decent e2e encryption.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh riiiight. So they can't be bothered to continue current support even though it means NO EFFORT on their part.
You've just contradicted yourself in the same sentence. Support == effort. If you had done any client-side development you'd know that this stuff isn't free, and eventually you need to stem the tide of variation.
Re: (Score:2)
WhatsApp does not show ads.
Tail wagging the dog? (Score:3)
With over 1 billion active users, and the backing of Facebook, is WhatsApp finally reducing the mobile landscape to a three-horse race ?
This summary is entirely backwards. The mobile market is already a 2 horse race (with Windows phone only still on the track because of the insane money Microsoft has poured into it). WhatsApp is only responding to that fact, not driving it. There is no point in them supporting outdated products with < 1% of the market and no future. WhatsApp support (or lack thereof now) will have absolutely zero impact on the market.
peril impervious denominator goggles (Score:2, Interesting)
You do realize you're defining the needs of the 1 by how 99 other people (people they don't know and will likely never meet) are choosing to satisfy different needs until different circumstances?
"The" market isn't just how 99 people satisfy their needs, it's how all 100 people satisfy their needs. In a good market, all 100 people achieve satisfaction.
"The" market as viewed through the corporate lens of WhatsApp is a different thing, of course.
In some aspects of my life, I'm part of the 99, in other aspects
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck! I got a "their" wrong. Someone kill me now, please.
No. (Score:2)
WhatsApp is forcing older OS owners to move to Telegram.
Re: (Score:2)
Where can I download a Symbian S60 version of Telegram?
Good (Score:2)
I haven't loaded the Facebook app on my phone, and do not want the app for this either. Because it is Facebook-owned. And the privacy issues have already been reported a couple of years back (see e.g. the Wikipedia article).
In fact, I have the data on my phone turned off most of the time. No need for $HANDSET_COMPANY to spy on me and drain my batteries.
Also, no need for constant interruptions.
I just tell my friends that want me to also use it No. They can send me whatever via good old e-mail, etc. Will g
I understand the value of OTT messaging apps (Score:2)
Sort of, if you live in some third-world banana republic where MMS is outrageously expensive, but for the rest of the civilized world can I get a resounding "Who gives a shit?".
No one in the real world uses this crap. Can you imagine if you told your boss you were going to send him a "WhatsApp" after the meeting? Or tell your girlfriend you're going to "WhatsApp" her where to meet for dinner. Maybe you can "Sextapp" her too while she's at work.
No, in the real world we use SMS and MMS, email, and at least
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I live in North America now but I have lived and worked in three different countries. Staying in touch with friends Internationally is free on internet based messaging apps, not so with SMS and MMS I assure you. I use Skype, WhatsApp and Google Hangouts depending on what my contacts prefer.
BTW: You use Skype but think WhatsApp is for kids - they do the same things...
Re: (Score:2)
You must live in a very different world than me. You said it yourself - people use iMessage. Well WhatsApp is basically like iMessage + FaceTime, but cross-platform. How is that not useful? There are alternatives out there but I've worked in the US, Canada, Australia and the UK and WhatsApp is the closest thing out there to a 'standard' app for this kind of stuff. With over a billion users people are more likely to have it than any other messaging app.
SMS and MMS work but they are not as secure or reliable
Re: (Score:2)
Wechat... I hope ypou're not discusing something sensitive, or something the Chinese goernement wants to censor like the Tiananmen Square massacre.
Won't affect BB10 much (Score:2)
Oh, No! This will crush Symbian phones sales! (Score:2)
Someone stop them! (?)
Just un-installed it anyway. (Score:2)
The irony (Score:2)
Re:LOL ... whatever ... (Score:5, Informative)
No, you're wrong. Whatsapp may be relatively small in the US, where most people pay so much for their mobile connection that the providers could afford to deliver free sms with the subscription. In most other countries the providers have treated sms (and certainly mms) as a cash cow, and are now repaid with the popularity of internet message services that remove the need for sms. WhatsApp is the largest of those services, and the most widely used one too. Others like Wechat or Line are mostly used in China resp. Japan. I use sms onbly as a last fallback, when I need to message someone with no mobile internet or an old prone.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you're wrong. Whatsapp may be relatively small in the US, where most people pay so much for their mobile connection that the providers could afford to deliver free sms with the subscription.
"Could afford"? SMS is 1 packet
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have to pay for SMS - I declined. I barely send even 1 sms per month. Now, teenagers, they were texting a whole lot. No more - whatsapp has replaced texting completely in that age group. In other groups it has added a communications ability that is very useful.
Ever since I have whatsapp I use it for work, for family, for leisure, and for the neighbourhood stuff. And if I have to ask someone a quick question, it's through whatsapp rather than mail. The kids sportsteam uses whatsapp as well so we and other
Re:LOL ... whatever ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not quite.
It's the de-facto replacement for stupendously limiting and expensive text and picture messages, which outside of contracts can run into thousands per Mb of actual data.
All with an app that cost 69p per year, free for the first year, and has just recently been made free forever.
It's like loading up MSN Messenger on your phone so you don't have to send a text. It just so happens to have made a brand name for itself in the process.
If telcos didn't charge ridiculous amounts for picture messages - especially from abroad - their business model would be dead overnight. It basically uses your data connection to do what the telcos should have been doing all along, but would rather sting you.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think it's virtually unused and unheard of in the US, you're living in an isolated bubble.
Re: (Score:2)
phone networks long ago quit charging for SMS messages on most contracts.
This is only true on the more expensive plans. I am on a much cheaper plan and I get only 100-500 msgs per month without going to the next tier. In developing markets, getting the monthly fee to the lowest possible number and then overcharging for overages is the more profitable business model. In the US, you just pay extra by default for features you may not even be using.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I went to their homepage to see what the app is and this is their first paragraph,
WhatsApp Messenger is a cross-platform mobile messaging app which allows you to exchange messages without having to pay for SMS. WhatsApp Messenger is available for iPhone, BlackBerry, Android, Windows Phone and Nokia and yes, those phones can all message each other! Because WhatsApp Messenger uses the same internet data plan that you use for email and web browsing, there is no cost to message and stay in touch with your
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it does make sense in that sms is completely unencrypted and subject to mass surveillance. WhatsApp is implementing the Axolotl end to end encryption protocol on all systems, and dropping those where it can't be implemented properly so the unencrypted fallback option can be removed. About costs: I know a lot oof people with a smartphone without a data plan (quite common outside the US) who use iton Wifi only.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what WhatsApp is implementing too. Even better, Blackberry has explicitly stated they prefer to be able to give shady law enforcement departments access to your messages while WhatsApp CAN'T do that with encrypted messages. And, WhatsApp uses not the pgp model with the same encryption key for all messages but perfect forward secrecy with a new key for each mssage. So even with a confiscated phone someone will not be able to decrype messages that are already deleted on the pnone but intercepted in tra
Re: (Score:2)
This app makes no sense to use for anyone I know.
For one thing, you can send photos (downsized to For another thing, you get lots of emojis (Unicode smileys and other pictograms) that will look the same between the sender and the recipient (unlike how native Android would render an emoji sent from an iphone).
Before you accuse me of being a 16-year old with ADD: I'm in my fourties. Even my mother-in-law uses these features.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe that's true for most people (I have no idea if it is), but it's definitely not true for everyone.
I just checked, and some of the plans at virginmobile still have limited texts or explicit charges for text at the lowest end. (Before I had a work supplied phone, I had a very very inexpensive virgin mobile phone as an emergency phone. You could get it down to $5/month with auto-pay.. It looks like they no longer have that.)
Re: (Score:2)
Am I right?
No, you are wrong.
It is just a messaging app. No idea what can be "over hyped" in that.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard for anyone in the US to give a crap about anything. That's how you end up with Trump and Hillary as the front runners for President. So, I'd not exactly take it as a good thing that Americans are apathetic idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
I find it hard to believe the US has no use for a cross-platform instant messaging app. It's a lot more versatile than SMS, in that you can send pictures and videos etc. You can also make voice calls (so it's essentially like iMessage + FaceTime, but not restricted to iOS only).
I'm in the US and I find it useful. Not all my friends have the same type of phone, after all.
Re: (Score:2)
1 billion users beg to differ.
While that's not always a good sign, I recommend you give it a try. It's MUCH better than SMS.
Re: (Score:2)
Messaging is about being notified when you receive a message, and auto-login on boot.
Both of these essential features are not available (or greatly diminished) within a browser.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure why you're trying to make the first point. I'm sure somehow whatsapp will get along with it's billions of users and somehow manage the few users here and there that don't use it.
The last two points ignore network effects. All these chat programs pretty much just talk to themselves. If all your friends have whatsapp, and your phone can't talk to whatsapp, you're not talking to them. You can get all your friends to switch to a new talk program (good luck with that) or you can switch phones.
As
Re: (Score:2)
I think They should make a real statement and drop windows mobile 10 support as well. It has a market share comparable to Symbian.
Re: (Score:2)
You can get all your friends to switch to a new talk program (good luck with that) or you can switch phones. ... have only one contact there, so I don't really use it and don't remember the name ... forgot the name as I have only one contact there
Not that difficult.
Most use several chat programs simultaneously.
WhatsApp
Viber
iMessanger
Facebook Messanger
Threema (the one you should all prefer)
Hangout
Kik - or is it Kiq
Another Android one, like Hangout
I for my part have no problem installing a new chat client (1
Re: (Score:2)
Well, on Symbian S60 there is not much else. The old Skype version on that OS is killed off by MS, iber will on;y run on some of tha last Symbian S3 models and now WhatsApp is killed off. SMS and MMS is in most of the world not a real fallback due to costs, chatting through sms will cost quickly more than a cheap Android phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For the price Americans pay for internet I could send all my messages via sms/mms as well. However, for the approx $20 I pay now for unlimited internet and 100 call minutes I can not.
Re: What's Whatsapp? (Score:2)
â15 a month for 1Gb internet (enough for me - I have WiFi at home), and 300 texts (or 300 minutes, but I text more). I use hangouts to talk to just about everyone else. I haven't had a need for WhatsApp.
Re: (Score:2)
The rest of the world may still usually pay for SMS, but their monthly plan fees are usually also far lower. So you can argue the US is ahead because you don't have to pay for SMS, but then, you're also paying 3x as much per month just to have the plan in the first place.
I'm in Australia and I do have to pay a hefty amount per-SMS (which is why no-one sends SMS anymore - they use iMessage, Viber, WhatsApp, etc.). But then, I'm only paying ~15 USD a month for calls and data...
Re: (Score:3)
They want to remove support because they can't or won't port their new Axolotl encryption library to thiose OSes. And they want to remove the option to send unencrypted messages completely to give the FBI, NSA, BND and similar organisations the finger.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people don't care about web-based clients. Only some computer proffessionals do.
Re: (Score:2)
I just checked Crackberry.com The android version still works on BB10. In case you just can't give it up delete the BB10 version and load the Android one.
http://forums.crackberry.com/b... [crackberry.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It's more likely programs, not devices are they want to limit. Otherwise, there would be WhatsApp - ad-free! as an FOSS project in three minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree - it is by far the most idiotic idea of the day. Except I haven't watched the news so I don't know what the US presidential candidates have been saying - it may be that it's topped by something worse.