4 ms·
> (...) not Signal's weird "link your phone up to your MacBook" solution What are the properties of this solution that you dislike?
by robryk 10y ago
> (...) not Signal's weird "link your phone up to your MacBook" solution
What are the properties of this solution that you dislike?
- LeoPanthera 10y agoMy main criticism is that it requires Chrome, which I don't want.
- harry8 10y agoSo use chromium? Or have your messages stored by a third party in clear text - which seems like a far worse option than having a browser you don't otherwise have to use at all, installed.
- amk_ 10y agoThere are other browsers than Chrome and Chromium, you know.
- harry8 10y agoI think you missed the point. Use another browser by all means, I do. Chrome or Chromium is required to run the Signal desktop client.
- fabulist 10y agoNo, you missed the point. They don't want Chrome, and if their aversion could be solved with small tweaks to the branding they'd have probably just gotten over it.
- harry8 10y agoIf you don't want to use chrome or chromium to run one single app to have proper encryption on your desktop in addition to your mobile device - which doesn't need a browser at all, and as a result of that "aversion" would prefer your messages are kept in clear text on a server your aversion is not worth considering further. Or I'm wrong, what's the aversion that is more important than having your messages stored in clear text by a third party?
- antimatter 10y agoI may be wrong but doesn't this solution also require an Android device?
- lorenzhs 10y agoI believe compatibility with the iOS client is being worked on