10 ms·

Telegram is a great IM experience. The client is good, feature set is good, the stickers are amusing (if you're into that kind of thing), the feature set is com

by Lazare 6y ago

Telegram is a great IM experience. The client is good, feature set is good, the stickers are amusing (if you're into that kind of thing), the feature set is complete and everything is polished. Telegram is, I think, going to be one of the easier sells if you're trying to convince non-technical users to switch from WhatsApp or FB Messenger. The privacy, security, and governance story is not great though. If you care about such things, I think Signal wins hands down. And the UX is fine, just not quite as good as Telegram in my view. (A third option not in your poll that might be worth evaluating is Wickr. I haven't used it personally, but I've seen it come up in these sorts of discussions.)

Erazal 6y ago
/Aside First time I'm meeting my virtual Doppelganger, best part is, it's on HN !
- einpoklum 6y ago
  Yeah, you and me both. Took the words out of my mouth.
- serbrech 6y ago
  My mother's family name is "Lazare". it's pretty common isn't it?
  - Erazal 6y ago
    Humm, not where I come from (France). And it's actually my first name !
pelasaco 6y ago
if with Telegram "the privacy, security, and governance story is not great though", why would you migrate from WhatsApp to Telegram in first place? I personally have all 3 (Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram) and use all three with different groups and scenarios. For example: - With my mom and grandmom: WhatsApp - Group of friends from jiu-jitsu: WhatsApp - Work Colleagues and friends working with Network Security: Signal - Notifications from services that I run like weather station, waves forecast, how full my gym is right now, some other batch services that I have: Telegram There is no reason to be radical here. We have options, and that's great!
- londons_explore 6y ago
  It's about time someone made a unified messenger client that combines all these conversations and hides the detail of which service you are using to talk to friends.
  - pelasaco 6y ago
    I agree with you. However it won't solve the problem of privacy regarding Facebook. Other issue that I see here, people want an unified messenger, with a great user experience, 100% secure, open-source, multi-platform, free (as in beer) and no monetization included. I'm sometimes shocked that here - hacker news - people underestimate the price of good software development, infrastructure and maintenance.
    - londons_explore 6y ago
      Even a tiny amount of monetization should pay for development of a chat app... Imagine you build it with a team of 5 software devs for each of linux, mac, windows, android, ios, web. You build it in Europe paying a generous salary of $80k. You need 1 server per million users (as whatsapp did pre-acquisition), hosted on say AWS. If you get 10% of the world to use it, the total running costs are 1.2 cents per user per year. That can totally be paid for by sending each user 1 sponsored chat message per decade. That's a pretty acceptable level of advertising I'd say. It's incompatible with VC's demanding hockey-stick revenue growth though...
      - pelasaco 6y ago
        > Imagine you build it with a team of 5 software devs for each of linux, mac, windows, android, ios, web. You build it in Europe paying a generous salary of $80k. Optimistic and dangerous. You will need at least a visionary person like Moxy willing to dedicate his/her life to the project. You need a master mind to get all the security architecture right. BTW You will need an operation team and multiple servers to make sure that everything runs stable. Just look the costs for running COVID-19 apps. Development and operation. Million of Euros. You can expect similar costs to run a service able to compete with WhatsApp.
ValentineC 6y ago
> If you care about such things, I think Signal wins hands down. And the UX is fine, just not quite as good as Telegram in my view. Signal (by design, probably) has no chat sync or backup. That's a dealbreaker in my book. Edit: looks like chat history transfer has been a feature since June 2020: https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/9/21280664/signal-chat-transfer-account-data-ios-iphone-ipad-encrypted-messaging https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/9/21280664/signal-chat-trans...
- kelchqvjpnfasjl 6y ago
  Signal has had backup on Android for a long time. On iOS you can transfer from an old iPhone to a new one now. You scan an QR code on your old iPhone with your new iPhone to exchange a secret for transferring your messages to your new phone. I don't think you can do Andriod<->iOS. You can have sync between desktop, phone, and iPad. However you can not have messaged synced to two phones or an Android tablet yet.
- danparsonson 6y ago
  That's not entirely true: https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba...
- shiftingleft 6y ago
  It does have a backup functionality, which unlike WhatsApp's doesn't store your messages unencrypted. It also doesn't force you to use a specific storage provider. If you want to have it synced, you can point your favorite sync client at it. https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba... Additionally, they've introduced an optional PIN which you can use to recover profile, contacts and settings when switching devices - without the need to setup sync yourself. https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059792-Signal-PIN https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059792-Si...
  - proactivesvcs 6y ago
    No backup on iOS, only a live move of Signal data from one working iOS handset to another.
FiloSottile 6y ago
As a reminder, Telegram groups are not encrypted at all, and 1:1 chats are not encrypted by default, so while WhatsApp might see your contacts, Telegram can see most of your messages.
- ignoramous 6y ago
  Not just see messages, but show you ads as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200 Telegram's a down-right bad IM experience compared to WhatsApp despite Facebook's forced integration: You see ads and the chats aren't encrypted.
  - stjo 6y ago
    Not true at all - you have no ads looking at your screen, neither chatting privately. Group/channel owners may choose to add ads, but you can always run your own client made to ignore them - telegram is open source.
    - ignoramous 6y ago
      Not showing you ads in 1:1 chat or in groups the maintainer has chose not to enable them in is different from, "I have your data ready to go for targeted advertisement". This is essentially the Google model. Your search queries and browsing history (and Android and Chrome) are essential to targeted ads shown on every website "the webmasters choose to enable them on".
      - ffpip 6y ago
        > This is essentially the Google model. What? Google uses all your info for creepy personalized ads. Telegram is showing the same ads to everyone in a channel. And it isn't in 1:1 chats cuz they're supposed to be non-intrusive and gives a feeling of privacy. Who is the 'maintainer'? Telegram is the only entity here.
        6y ago
sdfhbdf 6y ago
Telegram still doesn't support message reactions. I agree with all the rest and I like to use it for some less important chats taking into account the lack of the encryption but the reactions feature seems to be really lacking and no replacement comes close - replying with stickers seems counterproductive - reactions allow less messages, not more.
arnoooooo 6y ago
The governance until now might have been very different, but Telegram is to VK what Whatsapp is to Facebook. In a way, you could say that the enemy of your enemy is your friend, but I'd still recommend Matrix as a seemingly more future-proof alternative.
- dunefox 6y ago
  Matrix does not offer the same UX at all. I say this as someone who uses both. Telegram is just better as a frontend in every way.
  - up6w6 6y ago
    Telegram apps are open source, I wonder if it would be simple to make it work with matrix's protocol.
- keraf 6y ago
  The only link between Telegram and VK is that they have the same founder. Durov has been fired from VK and built Telegram after that. There is no other relation between Telegram and VK. Not really comparable to WhatsApp and Facebook controlled by the same Zuck.
pqb 6y ago
Relating Telegram, it is worth to read one of the latest Durov post [0] about the possible future of the Telegram becoming used as a construct of a social platform. [0]: https://t.me/s/durov/142 https://t.me/s/durov/142
jcul 6y ago
Yes telegram is more usable IMO, but worse security. In the past I might have said to people try telegram or signal, but now with the momentum of this whatsapp policy change I am pushing signal so I don't dilute the efforts.
wussboy 6y ago
Telegram is my go-to because it has a browser client and a native Windows Desktop client.
- coolspot 6y ago
  Linux support is first-class native as well.

by Lazare 6y ago

Erazal 6y ago

/Aside First time I'm meeting my virtual Doppelganger, best part is, it's on HN !

einpoklum 6y ago
Yeah, you and me both. Took the words out of my mouth.
serbrech 6y ago
My mother's family name is "Lazare". it's pretty common isn't it?
- Erazal 6y ago
  Humm, not where I come from (France). And it's actually my first name !

pelasaco 6y ago

if with Telegram "the privacy, security, and governance story is not great though", why would you migrate from WhatsApp to Telegram in first place? I personally have all 3 (Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram) and use all three with different groups and scenarios. For example: - With my mom and grandmom: WhatsApp - Group of friends from jiu-jitsu: WhatsApp - Work Colleagues and friends working with Network Security: Signal - Notifications from services that I run like weather station, waves forecast, how full my gym is right now, some other batch services that I have: Telegram There is no reason to be radical here. We have options, and that's great!

londons_explore 6y ago
It's about time someone made a unified messenger client that combines all these conversations and hides the detail of which service you are using to talk to friends.
- pelasaco 6y ago
  I agree with you. However it won't solve the problem of privacy regarding Facebook. Other issue that I see here, people want an unified messenger, with a great user experience, 100% secure, open-source, multi-platform, free (as in beer) and no monetization included. I'm sometimes shocked that here - hacker news - people underestimate the price of good software development, infrastructure and maintenance.
  - londons_explore 6y ago
    Even a tiny amount of monetization should pay for development of a chat app... Imagine you build it with a team of 5 software devs for each of linux, mac, windows, android, ios, web. You build it in Europe paying a generous salary of $80k. You need 1 server per million users (as whatsapp did pre-acquisition), hosted on say AWS. If you get 10% of the world to use it, the total running costs are 1.2 cents per user per year. That can totally be paid for by sending each user 1 sponsored chat message per decade. That's a pretty acceptable level of advertising I'd say. It's incompatible with VC's demanding hockey-stick revenue growth though...
    - pelasaco 6y ago
      > Imagine you build it with a team of 5 software devs for each of linux, mac, windows, android, ios, web. You build it in Europe paying a generous salary of $80k. Optimistic and dangerous. You will need at least a visionary person like Moxy willing to dedicate his/her life to the project. You need a master mind to get all the security architecture right. BTW You will need an operation team and multiple servers to make sure that everything runs stable. Just look the costs for running COVID-19 apps. Development and operation. Million of Euros. You can expect similar costs to run a service able to compete with WhatsApp.

ValentineC 6y ago

> If you care about such things, I think Signal wins hands down. And the UX is fine, just not quite as good as Telegram in my view. Signal (by design, probably) has no chat sync or backup. That's a dealbreaker in my book. Edit: looks like chat history transfer has been a feature since June 2020: https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/9/21280664/signal-chat-transfer-account-data-ios-iphone-ipad-encrypted-messaging https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/9/21280664/signal-chat-trans...

kelchqvjpnfasjl 6y ago
Signal has had backup on Android for a long time. On iOS you can transfer from an old iPhone to a new one now. You scan an QR code on your old iPhone with your new iPhone to exchange a secret for transferring your messages to your new phone. I don't think you can do Andriod<->iOS. You can have sync between desktop, phone, and iPad. However you can not have messaged synced to two phones or an Android tablet yet.
danparsonson 6y ago
That's not entirely true: https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba...
shiftingleft 6y ago
It does have a backup functionality, which unlike WhatsApp's doesn't store your messages unencrypted. It also doesn't force you to use a specific storage provider. If you want to have it synced, you can point your favorite sync client at it. https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Backup-and-Restore-Messages https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059752-Ba... Additionally, they've introduced an optional PIN which you can use to recover profile, contacts and settings when switching devices - without the need to setup sync yourself. https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059792-Signal-PIN https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059792-Si...
- proactivesvcs 6y ago
  No backup on iOS, only a live move of Signal data from one working iOS handset to another.

FiloSottile 6y ago

As a reminder, Telegram groups are not encrypted at all, and 1:1 chats are not encrypted by default, so while WhatsApp might see your contacts, Telegram can see most of your messages.

ignoramous 6y ago
Not just see messages, but show you ads as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25520200 Telegram's a down-right bad IM experience compared to WhatsApp despite Facebook's forced integration: You see ads and the chats aren't encrypted.
- stjo 6y ago
  Not true at all - you have no ads looking at your screen, neither chatting privately. Group/channel owners may choose to add ads, but you can always run your own client made to ignore them - telegram is open source.
  - ignoramous 6y ago
    Not showing you ads in 1:1 chat or in groups the maintainer has chose not to enable them in is different from, "I have your data ready to go for targeted advertisement". This is essentially the Google model. Your search queries and browsing history (and Android and Chrome) are essential to targeted ads shown on every website "the webmasters choose to enable them on".
    - ffpip 6y ago
      > This is essentially the Google model. What? Google uses all your info for creepy personalized ads. Telegram is showing the same ads to everyone in a channel. And it isn't in 1:1 chats cuz they're supposed to be non-intrusive and gives a feeling of privacy. Who is the 'maintainer'? Telegram is the only entity here.
      - 6y ago

sdfhbdf 6y ago

Telegram still doesn't support message reactions. I agree with all the rest and I like to use it for some less important chats taking into account the lack of the encryption but the reactions feature seems to be really lacking and no replacement comes close - replying with stickers seems counterproductive - reactions allow less messages, not more.

arnoooooo 6y ago

The governance until now might have been very different, but Telegram is to VK what Whatsapp is to Facebook. In a way, you could say that the enemy of your enemy is your friend, but I'd still recommend Matrix as a seemingly more future-proof alternative.

dunefox 6y ago
Matrix does not offer the same UX at all. I say this as someone who uses both. Telegram is just better as a frontend in every way.
- up6w6 6y ago
  Telegram apps are open source, I wonder if it would be simple to make it work with matrix's protocol.
keraf 6y ago
The only link between Telegram and VK is that they have the same founder. Durov has been fired from VK and built Telegram after that. There is no other relation between Telegram and VK. Not really comparable to WhatsApp and Facebook controlled by the same Zuck.

pqb 6y ago

Relating Telegram, it is worth to read one of the latest Durov post [0] about the possible future of the Telegram becoming used as a construct of a social platform. [0]: https://t.me/s/durov/142 https://t.me/s/durov/142

jcul 6y ago

Yes telegram is more usable IMO, but worse security. In the past I might have said to people try telegram or signal, but now with the momentum of this whatsapp policy change I am pushing signal so I don't dilute the efforts.

wussboy 6y ago

Telegram is my go-to because it has a browser client and a native Windows Desktop client.

coolspot 6y ago
Linux support is first-class native as well.