EDIT: Just to be clear given the title, I'm not pro DRM, and we can be pro or against auto-removable content, but I just love how they implement features that their users are asking for and the quality of their apps.
EDIT: Just to be clear given the title, I'm not pro DRM, and we can be pro or against auto-removable content, but I just love how they implement features that their users are asking for and the quality of their apps.
The UX is slicker and more comfortable to use than that of whatsapp (and miles ahead signal). With the latest update if I got it correctly, even E2E encrypted chats can be synced to all clients (? Needs to be verified)
I guess you mean the security model of non-E2E chats. Although you can read into it that they can do MITM, the details reveal that the actual keys/messages are shared into datacenters in multiple countries so no government alone can retrieve plaintext from at-rest storage. To me (especially compared to anything Facebook products) is already much better than nothing. If it's an issue for you, opt in for E2E chats and enjoy!
Sometimes I have to use whatsapp with some contacts and it feels like a huge step back after telegram, especially in UX.
It's the reason why I avoid it. I talk to someone on the desktop client, yet my phone, work laptop and tablet will ring on every message.
I can't be assed to go and mute 3 other devices every time I decide to talk to someone.
ime the desktop will pickup the message a few seconds before any of the mobile clients does and mark it as read, hence surpressing any notifications on the latter.
ofc chat notifications don't make any sounds on my systems to begin with.
on Android at least you can set telegram to limit the frequency of notifications (eg "at most 3 every 5 minutes") it is not perfect but it is an improvement
The exact same thing also happens on Telegram for me all the time, and I have a gigabit connection. The push notification arrives on my phone instantly, but when I open the app it loads for like 15 seconds before showing everything.
> I guess you mean the security model of non-E2E chats. Although you can read into it that they can do MITM, the details reveal that the actual keys/messages are shared into datacenters in multiple countries so no government alone can retrieve plaintext from at-rest storage. To me (especially compared to anything Facebook products) is already much better than nothing. If it's an issue for you, opt in for E2E chats and enjoy!
It's unfortunately not that easy. For one, their promises of sharded keys is something we as users cannot verify, so we still just need to trust them here [0]. WhatsApp, on the other hand, at least attempts to have E2E. Secret chats are an option, but only the mobile clients support them [1] and you can't have them for groups at all. There's also some critique on mtproto, their roll-your-own encryption. I don't necessarily agree, but it's another strange point.
Like you I like the UX a lot and I have some trust in Durovs motivations, but the security model is questionable.
[0] They refuse to open source their servers, but I follow their argumentation in so far as that this would not help since we could not verify that the published source code is the one running on the servers.
[1] At least the official Linux desktop client and the web clients don't.
I don't have my laptop with me (for another month), so I have to check this, but based on the redesigned devices dialog, I can imagine that this is now solved.
I think my Mac Mini now allows me to create secret chats. I didn't test it but I am fairly certain I saw it less than a week ago.
I just checked on my Windows laptop and that does not allow it. My Linux machines are upstairs but I think we can trust your observation.