It also puts a spot-light on the "your phone number is your username" policy. This made perfect sense when you are using Signal for opportunistic encryption of texting. It is much less justifiable when using it as a Silo'd app. I really hope they change that and give people who were waiting for that change time to join before killing SMS support.
That’s a major boost for those that might not particularly care about encryption to look for specific messaging apps, while still helping by building out the network slowly over time.
This became much more of a problem for me after they rolled out their shitcoin; suddenly my techie friends were just not responding to messages, and Signal as my main SMS app was not falling back to SMS for these folks.
I’ve only done the switch from iOS to Android once and I remember it was a pain for a few days until everything realized I didn’t have iMessage anymore.
The user cannot just log out of Signal and have the app on other people's devices automatically fall back on SMS the way it works with iMessage?
Logging out might not even be enough, depending on the logic on Signal’s side. Do they use active devices, or just that an account exists?
For two weeks, messages will be shown as sent but not delivered, and after two weeks Signal will not let you send messages to that number until it reconnects to the Signal servers.
For comparison, Apple automatically sends all SMS messages via iMessage opportunistically, and if the user then switches to another phone, all SMS messages from iOS users will be silently discarded in perpetuity. This is a big problem because the recipient has no idea that they're missing messages, and also if they no longer have access to an iPhone, there's no way for them to deregister their phone number from iMessage.
https://selfsolve.apple.com/deregister-imessage/
They will also deregister you automatically after some period of time. What you described is the situation several years ago, but it's much better now.
In that case, Signal's current behavior would be comparable to Apple's, if Apple also deregisters you after a period of inactivity.
I'm willing to bet that this decision is just jumping the gun by a month or two since usernames are around the corner (code exists, just not enabled. Can be used if built from source).
Though I haven't had a hard time converting (Android) users by using another app. Especially people that already use WA. The "other app" just comes off as normal. Apple is a different ball game because the walled garden, but that's also the weakness because you can't send photos/videos in group chats with mixed devices (but Signal can).
I hope it's communicated well to users who aren't readers of Signal's blog. I have relatives who use Signal, and they rely on its fallback-to-SMS feature, possibly without fully understanding it. I'll make sure they understand and are aware of this change, but others may be in the same position.
https://community.signalusers.org/t/dont-want-pin-dont-want-...
Even when security concerns were brought up:
https://community.signalusers.org/t/proper-secure-value-secu...
I learned to stop trying to improve the technical lives of other people after Dropbox's decision to restrict free accounts to three devices resulted in a shitstorm of angry and confused messages from half the people I know.
But I have to admit your perspective calls to me. I can imagine it would feel quite freeing.
I’m in a minor mess of a situation with my dad’s phone and computer because I’ve tried to be helpful. Now he resists help and that makes both of us frustrated.
I had recommended signal to others, but thankfully I've already warned those same people against continuing to use Signal years ago. Nobody was mad at me for Signal's actions and changing your default SMS app isn't hard anyway.
I don't think you have to stop recommending things to people just because situations change. Hasn't everybody had some service or software they depended on go from great to shitty? It's just the nature of using someone else's stuff. At some point they get greedy or busy or decide to pivot into something different from what you want and you have to find something new. Isn't everyone used to that? Why would they blame you?
This is why we need at least open source clients that can be forked when these decisions are made.
Taking that factor away - allowing people to mess it up - makes it easier for developers.
Rock solid and both works and looks great right out of the box. So customizable that using literally anything else feels like using a Fisher-Price computer for toddlers.
Windowing rules for one. Simple example: Firefox picture-in-picture. On KDE I have a windowing rule so that if from any firefox window playing video I hit the picture-in-picture button the picture-in-picture window becomes a certain size, goes to a certain placement on my monitors, stays on top of all windows, and is visible across all virtual desktops.
Ability to control the layout of my virtual desktops is also incredibly useful to me. (I use a 3x3 grid, so switching from my "main" task in the center to any one of 4 sub-tasks up-down-left-right is easy, and my universal tasks (chat/email/etc) go in the 4 corners.
KDE puts you in control, and gives you a LOT of control. IMO GNOME feels much more windows/mac in it's design philosophy. "We know best, do it the way we let you."
And as far as an API, yes, also that. With the Plasma desktop plugin Firefox remembers which virtual desktop each window is supposed to go to, so I have no issue rebooting with 5 or 6 different windows open.
I apologize if it sounds over the top, but for my use-cases at least the level of control and "just does the right thing" really do stand out above the alternatives.
Because Whatsapp and Signal are walled gardens. (Everyone knows why IM>sms)
Until next year?
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220701IP...
"... those designated as gatekeepers will have to: allow third parties to inter-operate with their own services, meaning that smaller platforms will be able to request that dominant messaging platforms enable their users to exchange messages, send voice messages or files across messaging apps. ..."
(I admit that I actually edited that original comment, since the link I initially included was more speculative, talking about a law that was expected to pass, and being much more vague about when it might enter into force. The page at the updated link is more definitive, but not as narrowly focused, so I'm glad you managed to isolate the relevant section.)
But I actually like this decision. It makes things less confusing and accidental use of unsecure SMS impossible. The downside is if you still use SMS you have to keep 2 apps, back them up separately, etc.
> "Why do I need 3 apps (Android Messages, Signal, Whatsapp)"
"You need Signal to talk to people on Signal, WhatsApp to talk to people on WhatsApp, and Messages to talk to people on SMS." Seems more straightforward than "use WhatsApp to talk to people on WhatsApp and Signal to talk to people on Signal or SMS; just pay attention to the color of the send button".
I feel like I'm not leaving Signal; Signal is leaving me.
I am very intentional and active when it comes to what has push notification privileges. I factor that into my app use consideration. I have multiple email accounts in two different email apps, each that send me notifications. I have Signal, Discord, iMessages and SMS. I have a few Google chat apps. I used to have WhatsApp and Wickr and Telegram. I have Skype, Teams, and two Mattermost servers.
It’s exhausting to constantly switch between these, so over the course of a few years I’ve been very clear in where people can expect to reach me reliably. If you need or want to chat with me on Discord, Skype, or Google whatever you need to send me an iMessage, SMS, Mattermost, or Signal message. Sending me a message anywhere else will get you a response only the next time I open that app. That only happens when someone specifically asks.
I’m OK with having 63847394038 chat and video calling apps, but I’m not OK with being instantaneously notified by an infinity such apps. I can’t be that available.
I don't know anybody else who uses Silence so I could exchange encrypted messages with them.
Oh well. Maybe somebody here could resurrect this?
>This is an unofficial, FOSS-friendly fork of the original Telegram App for Android.
Anyway, there is no need to worrying, MOSSAD watch as all.