5 ms·
The provide a fairly clear rationale beyond the ideological concern: users don't know/see who is on SMS and who isn't, and are being hit with high fees, and the
by wslack 4y ago
The provide a fairly clear rationale beyond the ideological concern: users don't know/see who is on SMS and who isn't, and are being hit with high fees, and they are concerned that users may believe they have privacy when they do not.
These are reasonable issues and concerns, so I don't follow why you would question all of the other decisions they make.
- roer 4y agoThere are surely ways around this that don't limit the functionality of the application
- dylan604 4y agoAs if Signal couldn't change the color of the text bubbles to some shade of, let's just say, green, to indicate when a user is chatting via SMS instead of a Signal secured message.
- busymom0 4y agoCouldn’t they just do something like have the sms messages in a different color than the rest? Similar to how iOS used blue for iMessage and green for texts? Signal could use an annoying red color for sms to make it even more clear.
- nh2 4y ago> users don't know/see who is on SMS and who isn't They could just show the literal word "SMS" in the send button. I think that would be more obvious than wha they do now (button being grey instead of blue with a minimally changed lock symbol [1]). [1]: https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007318911#android_private https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007318911#an...
- Markoff 4y agoso put SMS in different tab and let users turn on/off this feature in settings, done, problem solved, but I understand giving users options nowadays ain't trendy
- rodgerd 4y agoIf only there were a company that had, at some point, demonstrated that you can use indicators such as colour to indicate to users whether their messages were being transported via SMS or an E2E secure transport layer. I guess that's just a pipe dream though.