6 ms·

Telegram Desktop is very good example of modern desktop client done in the most efficient way. C++ and qt, nothing else. Works like a charm an all major operati

by Gonzih 10y ago

Telegram Desktop is very good example of modern desktop client done in the most efficient way. C++ and qt, nothing else. Works like a charm an all major operating systems. Easy to install, use and update. Great stuff.

blueprint 10y ago
How do they manage to get the very native feel to the UI on Telegram for MacOS? Or is that a different native client? Also curious… in what language and UI framework is their iOS client written?
- jhasse 10y ago
  That's a different one.
- mi100hael 10y ago
  QT uses native macOS APIs & components in many cases. https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/osx-issues.html https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/osx-issues.html
zegerjan 10y ago
Except they've rewritten their Mac app in Swift now. So there must be a reason they moved away from that.
- Kipters 10y ago
  They didn't rewrite the app. There are multiple official apps, you could also write your own (that's what is happening for Unigram, an open source UWP client for Telegram)
- narrowtux 10y ago
  Probably because Qt apps don't feel like native macOS apps.
- Gonzih 10y ago
  telegram-desktop and telegram for mac are different projects
jacksg 10y ago
For anyone who interests in looking into the source code: https://github.com/telegramdesktop/tdesktop https://github.com/telegramdesktop/tdesktop
dilap 10y ago
I downloaded this and signed up just to give it a try, since I've never used a Qt app on the Mac that didn't fall in the uncanny valley of UI -- trying to be native, but failing. This doesn't break the trend. Some problems: - Text boxes are non-native and do not support any standard keystrokes for navigation (this is huge!) - The division between the titlebar and the main app body is weird looking - Highlighting around a focussed text box is weird - Weird inline dialogs - No bounce scroll Some of those are debatable (not everything has to be done using the standard system stuff, of course), but to me the overall effect is very alien. Slack, for all its inefficiency & handful of annoyances (not actually using unicode / text to represent emoji, anyone?), "feels" like a better Mac citizen than this app.
- skratlo 10y ago
  Mac citizen. Perhaps you should think of your computer as a thing computing things and showing them on the screen. There were many people in history obsessed with uniformity and it usually didn't end well. Yes, uniformity in UI has benefits, but you should appreciate every single deviation from that. In this case, it's the price for "write once, run everywhere", something that isn't appreciated by Apple and Microsoft.
  - golergka 10y ago
    Appreciate something that has no value for you? Why?
    - pdimitar 10y ago
      You not having value from Telegram means absolutely nothing and is not an argument. What's your point?
      - golergka 10y ago
        What value deviation from uniform UI has for me?
xpaulbettsx 10y ago
I'll give them credit where it's due, it's a great app. That being said, if you've read the source, it's not exactly the most approachable thing in the world. Also, if you're not making your code LGPL/GPL, be prepared to pay $300/person/mo for Qt Creator (seriously - https://www.qt.io/buy-product/ https://www.qt.io/buy-product/)
- tonyedgecombe 10y ago
  I think you only need to buy a license if you are linking statically, if you link dynamically to qt then there is no cost.

by Gonzih 10y ago

blueprint 10y ago

How do they manage to get the very native feel to the UI on Telegram for MacOS? Or is that a different native client? Also curious… in what language and UI framework is their iOS client written?

jhasse 10y ago
That's a different one.
mi100hael 10y ago
QT uses native macOS APIs & components in many cases. https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/osx-issues.html https://doc.qt.io/qt-5/osx-issues.html

zegerjan 10y ago

Except they've rewritten their Mac app in Swift now. So there must be a reason they moved away from that.

Kipters 10y ago
They didn't rewrite the app. There are multiple official apps, you could also write your own (that's what is happening for Unigram, an open source UWP client for Telegram)
narrowtux 10y ago
Probably because Qt apps don't feel like native macOS apps.
Gonzih 10y ago
telegram-desktop and telegram for mac are different projects

jacksg 10y ago

For anyone who interests in looking into the source code: https://github.com/telegramdesktop/tdesktop https://github.com/telegramdesktop/tdesktop

dilap 10y ago

I downloaded this and signed up just to give it a try, since I've never used a Qt app on the Mac that didn't fall in the uncanny valley of UI -- trying to be native, but failing. This doesn't break the trend. Some problems: - Text boxes are non-native and do not support any standard keystrokes for navigation (this is huge!) - The division between the titlebar and the main app body is weird looking - Highlighting around a focussed text box is weird - Weird inline dialogs - No bounce scroll Some of those are debatable (not everything has to be done using the standard system stuff, of course), but to me the overall effect is very alien. Slack, for all its inefficiency & handful of annoyances (not actually using unicode / text to represent emoji, anyone?), "feels" like a better Mac citizen than this app.

skratlo 10y ago
Mac citizen. Perhaps you should think of your computer as a thing computing things and showing them on the screen. There were many people in history obsessed with uniformity and it usually didn't end well. Yes, uniformity in UI has benefits, but you should appreciate every single deviation from that. In this case, it's the price for "write once, run everywhere", something that isn't appreciated by Apple and Microsoft.
- golergka 10y ago
  Appreciate something that has no value for you? Why?
  - pdimitar 10y ago
    You not having value from Telegram means absolutely nothing and is not an argument. What's your point?
    - golergka 10y ago
      What value deviation from uniform UI has for me?

xpaulbettsx 10y ago

I'll give them credit where it's due, it's a great app. That being said, if you've read the source, it's not exactly the most approachable thing in the world. Also, if you're not making your code LGPL/GPL, be prepared to pay $300/person/mo for Qt Creator (seriously - https://www.qt.io/buy-product/ https://www.qt.io/buy-product/)

tonyedgecombe 10y ago
I think you only need to buy a license if you are linking statically, if you link dynamically to qt then there is no cost.