They're identical but countries pretend they're different. I got an evisa when I went to Indonesia and India. For each country, the process involved uploading a picture, filling in some basic details, and paying a fee. I was approved in 30 seconds for each. I'm pretty sure it was automatic.

ESTA is supposed to be a lower hurdle than a visa. But from what I've heard, approvals take longer and quite a few people get rejected.

Countries like to pretend they're still visa free, but honestly, it's just a pain in the ass and I'd rather they call it a visa. It's very, very easy to book a plane to a country, see all info indicating its visa free and you can just go, then right as you're about to head out, you decide to check for the 50th time just to be sure... and it turns out there's some "visa free process" for your country called EDtdjvubHHVJVF or some other random assortment of letters that involves a 2 hour application process and 24-72 hours (business days only) for approval results to come in. A visa would be preferable because it's more transparent.

▲

twothreeone a day ago | parent | next [-]

You don't need to visit an embassy for ESTA, for a Visa this in-person interview at the embassy is required.

	▲	kdheiwns 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Other countries have visas and don't require embassy visits. There's no difference between as ESTA and how other countries do visas.

▲

iso1631 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

ESTAs used to be instant for me, but last time I got one (2023) it took 2 days

The US is particularly bad as you need an ESTA to transit. I had a friend nearly caught out by that on a flight from London to Lima which involved changing in Miami. When changing plane from an international to international flight in most countries you get off a plane, maybe go through security, and then get on another plane. In the US this isn't a thing. You have to immigrate into the country for 20 minutes.

▲

themaninthedark a day ago | parent [-]

The same rules in Canada and Mexico.

▲

throw-the-towel a day ago | parent [-]

And the UK I think.

▲

iso1631 a day ago | parent [-]

No, you land at Heathrow you don't go pass passport control if you change onto another international flight. You go through security and then into the departure lounge.

Obviously if you land at Heathrow and fly out of Manchester then sure you have to immigrate, but not at the same airport.

Same at Dubai and Qatar, Helsinki and Frankfurt, Singapore. and Seoul.

Indeed last time I transited Seoul I stayed in a hotel airside for 12 hours before my next flight.

▲

joshuaissac a day ago | parent [-]

> land at Heathrow you don't go pass passport control if you change onto another international flight. You go through security and then into the departure lounge.

This requires a Direct Airside Transit visa, unless you are a citizen of one of the exempt countries or have a visa/residence permit from certain countries (US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Schengen). Applying for this visa involves going to the local visa processing centre, so it is not an online or on-arrival process, and takes around 3 weeks.

https://www.gov.uk/transit-visa/direct-airside-transit-visa

	▲	iso1631 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		majority of countries don't need an airside transit, from Bhutan to Kazakhstan, Indonesia to Venezuela, hell even North Korea. A US citizen flying New York to London to Egypt does not need to pay £20 for an ETA "visa waiver" to transfer in London. A UK citizen flying London to New York to Lima does need to pay for an ESTA