6 ms·

I've used Molly for over a year. Overnight it lost the device registration and will not contact the servers to re-register. The backup feature also does not wor

by n3dm 10mo ago

I've used Molly for over a year. Overnight it lost the device registration and will not contact the servers to re-register. The backup feature also does not work which left me dead in the water for several days with no fix. I switched back to signal and had to start a new database. It was a disaster. YMMV

jeltz 10mo ago
Sounds pretty much like my experience with the official Signal app. It is a mess too and I only use Signal/Molly because I have friends who use it. But sadly the competitors are as bad, just in different ways. Why has nobody yet managed to build a good IM client? It does not seem like we have come far from what we had back in the Pidgin days.
- stackghost 10mo ago
  Beeper is pretty good. I daily drive it on multiple protocols.
  - geoah 10mo ago
    I love beeper and have been using it for a very long time at this point, but I wouldn’t go as far as calling it a good client. Whatsapp mentions don’t work (just show the name of the mention to the other users), and polls or albums don’t work. Messenger disconnects every couple of days at this point. Pasting links won’t always expand. Attachments are always hit or miss. So many small other things. Still love it.
- prmoustache 10mo ago
  conversations (xmpp) and deltachat work pretty well in my experience.
  - fao_ 10mo ago
    Conversations has an issue where the main tool for reading a backup on a computer (ceb2txt (so, say, I can properly and correctly archive a text dump archive of a person I loved who died)), will not work for me. I filed a support request and there's been no movement on it whatsoever and it genuinely seems like nobody gives a shit. Restoring a backup even with all the images and media files in the correct place with the correct filenames will then refuse to show any filenames. This is par for the course with chat backups, though. Messenger - Bad - No way to save chat responses of people you have talked to. This means you only ever have one side of a conversation, making it meaningless. Twitter DMs - Bad - See Messenger. Jami - Ehhhh - Saves a git local repository of messages. The only problem is message syncing is effing abysmal. Dino (XMPP) - Bad - Does not allow backing anything up, this is "intentional". Depending on which protocol you use, as soon as you move to another device all the messages you _had_ are retroactively converted to Cannot Decrypt. They're my effing messages! Discord - Good - Discord History Tracker (tedious to use but slurps everything up into a sqlite3 database that is itself, an official archival format) WhatsApp - Good - Dumps a text record + files/images/etc. onto the phone's filesystem. This is reasonably easy to archive. Signal - Mediocre - If you have an old Signal backup from 2018? That you could only transfer off your phone by deleting old messages? lmao you're effed. Load up a version from ten years ago, gradually update it and then maybe, MAYBE you can extract the sqlite3 archive? These days you have a .signalbackup or whatever which is an encrypted archive, and I assume that there's a tool to decrypt it, but uhhhhhh. Last I tried to use it it required way more RAM than I had accessible.
    - vitorgrs 10mo ago
      What about Telegram?
      - gardnr 10mo ago
        Telegram, which ostensibly claimed to provide e2e but really only did in very specific circumstances? My right wing uncle is still bitter about that. Then there's the rolling over the founder did after getting pulled up by Interpol. I'm not sure why anyone would trust Telegram.
  - nextos 10mo ago
    Dino (XMPP, https://dino.im https://dino.im) is a great desktop client to talk to other XMPP clients, in particular Conversations, due to its broad support of XEPs.
  - BSDobelix 10mo ago
    +1 for Deltachat
- ForHackernews 10mo ago
  Very few of the protocols supported by Pidgin were encrypted, unless you used the OTR plugin. That makes it a lot easier to support things like chat history.
  - jeltz 10mo ago
    I used the OTR plugin a lot.
  - compass_copium 10mo ago
    Shouldn't your client have no problem saving a chat history? It is, by definition, able to read every message you send and receive.
- e40 10mo ago
  I’ve used Signal across many devices for years with zero problems.
  - princevegeta89 10mo ago
    Signal seems to work alright for me, although I felt the desktop app gets a bit annoying because of too many frequent updates happening to the app, which I believe is based on Electron. But besides this, there is really a strong need for a web client, just like Telegram or WhatsApp. If only the protocol can be extended in such a way that it allows for integrating into a web app, that would be incredibly great.
    - shmel 10mo ago
      Which is pretty odd as WhatsApp allegedly uses the very same E2E encryption and has no problem implementing a web client. I really don't see the point of Electron if it doesn't allow you to provide a web client.
      - teekert 10mo ago
        It’s easier to make cross platform?
      - fn-mote 10mo ago
        > Which is pretty odd I have always assumed no Signal web client was a choice made to improve security.
  - bjoli 10mo ago
    I have been particularly impressed with the device migration experience. I have an 18gb db, and even the time my device died I managed to get things over correctly.
    - gojomo 10mo ago
      If the device with an 18GB message history was truly 'dead', how did you transfer the history over?
- krater23 10mo ago
  The deathblow for Signal was that I was in a group and some group messages just got lost for some members completely unnoticed. So you could never be sure if you missed something or someone. I'm using WhatsApp again, now since years and had never issues, it just works.
- miki123211 10mo ago
  Because everybody (except Telegram funnily enough) is prioritizing security over user convenience. Most apps on the market are E2E by default these days, and that introduces a whole host of complications. It's the wrong tradeoff for 95+ percent of users. If you can only afford 1 device and only switch to a new one when the old device breaks, E2E is a disaster in the making. For the overwhelming majority of users, making sure that they have access to their messages when they switch devices is far more important than being protected from the NSA. This is something most signal advocates are completely unwilling to talk about.
  - homebrewer 10mo ago
    Wire was able to implement a fully E2E-encrypted messenger with proper multi-device support almost a decade ago, long before it became mainstream. Fully FOSS too, including the server. For some reason it never became popular. They don't have proper desktop clients (just the usual Electron mess), but then, which one of them does except for Telegram? https://github.com/wireapp/wire-server https://github.com/wireapp/wire-server , etc.
    - almogo 10mo ago
      I moved all my friends to Wire about a decade ago. Pretty, but the actual user experience was awful. We moved to Telegram and since then to Signal. I didn't actually know Wire was FOSS.
    - styanax 10mo ago
      My memory is really fuzzy, but I recall back when the new IM apps were all coming out and competing for the small share of people wanting to test them, either the Wire app or using the Wire service had a hard cost ($5 USD?) (no free-to-test tier, you had to pay to use). I believe history has shown a vast majority of folks will choose free (even with ads, sadly) over a hard cost for IM. Signal talked a better game and offered everything for free.
    - miki123211 10mo ago
      How do they handle message recovery when all your devices have been lost (and possibly when you've forgotten your password)? That's (almost) incompatible with E2E encryption. You could do it via "social proof" or server-side secure enclaves and pins, but that's about it.
- boznz 10mo ago
  SMS works just fine for me, but international calling is a killer, it's 2025 you would think this would be free by now.
echelon_musk 10mo ago
I haven't dropped molly for a long time. But it feels like the right thing here.

by n3dm 10mo ago

jeltz 10mo ago

Sounds pretty much like my experience with the official Signal app. It is a mess too and I only use Signal/Molly because I have friends who use it. But sadly the competitors are as bad, just in different ways. Why has nobody yet managed to build a good IM client? It does not seem like we have come far from what we had back in the Pidgin days.

stackghost 10mo ago
Beeper is pretty good. I daily drive it on multiple protocols.
- geoah 10mo ago
  I love beeper and have been using it for a very long time at this point, but I wouldn’t go as far as calling it a good client. Whatsapp mentions don’t work (just show the name of the mention to the other users), and polls or albums don’t work. Messenger disconnects every couple of days at this point. Pasting links won’t always expand. Attachments are always hit or miss. So many small other things. Still love it.
prmoustache 10mo ago
conversations (xmpp) and deltachat work pretty well in my experience.
- fao_ 10mo ago
  Conversations has an issue where the main tool for reading a backup on a computer (ceb2txt (so, say, I can properly and correctly archive a text dump archive of a person I loved who died)), will not work for me. I filed a support request and there's been no movement on it whatsoever and it genuinely seems like nobody gives a shit. Restoring a backup even with all the images and media files in the correct place with the correct filenames will then refuse to show any filenames. This is par for the course with chat backups, though. Messenger - Bad - No way to save chat responses of people you have talked to. This means you only ever have one side of a conversation, making it meaningless. Twitter DMs - Bad - See Messenger. Jami - Ehhhh - Saves a git local repository of messages. The only problem is message syncing is effing abysmal. Dino (XMPP) - Bad - Does not allow backing anything up, this is "intentional". Depending on which protocol you use, as soon as you move to another device all the messages you _had_ are retroactively converted to Cannot Decrypt. They're my effing messages! Discord - Good - Discord History Tracker (tedious to use but slurps everything up into a sqlite3 database that is itself, an official archival format) WhatsApp - Good - Dumps a text record + files/images/etc. onto the phone's filesystem. This is reasonably easy to archive. Signal - Mediocre - If you have an old Signal backup from 2018? That you could only transfer off your phone by deleting old messages? lmao you're effed. Load up a version from ten years ago, gradually update it and then maybe, MAYBE you can extract the sqlite3 archive? These days you have a .signalbackup or whatever which is an encrypted archive, and I assume that there's a tool to decrypt it, but uhhhhhh. Last I tried to use it it required way more RAM than I had accessible.
  - vitorgrs 10mo ago
    What about Telegram?
    - gardnr 10mo ago
      Telegram, which ostensibly claimed to provide e2e but really only did in very specific circumstances? My right wing uncle is still bitter about that. Then there's the rolling over the founder did after getting pulled up by Interpol. I'm not sure why anyone would trust Telegram.
- nextos 10mo ago
  Dino (XMPP, https://dino.im https://dino.im) is a great desktop client to talk to other XMPP clients, in particular Conversations, due to its broad support of XEPs.
- BSDobelix 10mo ago
  +1 for Deltachat
ForHackernews 10mo ago
Very few of the protocols supported by Pidgin were encrypted, unless you used the OTR plugin. That makes it a lot easier to support things like chat history.
- jeltz 10mo ago
  I used the OTR plugin a lot.
- compass_copium 10mo ago
  Shouldn't your client have no problem saving a chat history? It is, by definition, able to read every message you send and receive.
e40 10mo ago
I’ve used Signal across many devices for years with zero problems.
- princevegeta89 10mo ago
  Signal seems to work alright for me, although I felt the desktop app gets a bit annoying because of too many frequent updates happening to the app, which I believe is based on Electron. But besides this, there is really a strong need for a web client, just like Telegram or WhatsApp. If only the protocol can be extended in such a way that it allows for integrating into a web app, that would be incredibly great.
  - shmel 10mo ago
    Which is pretty odd as WhatsApp allegedly uses the very same E2E encryption and has no problem implementing a web client. I really don't see the point of Electron if it doesn't allow you to provide a web client.
    - teekert 10mo ago
      It’s easier to make cross platform?
    - fn-mote 10mo ago
      > Which is pretty odd I have always assumed no Signal web client was a choice made to improve security.
- bjoli 10mo ago
  I have been particularly impressed with the device migration experience. I have an 18gb db, and even the time my device died I managed to get things over correctly.
  - gojomo 10mo ago
    If the device with an 18GB message history was truly 'dead', how did you transfer the history over?
krater23 10mo ago
The deathblow for Signal was that I was in a group and some group messages just got lost for some members completely unnoticed. So you could never be sure if you missed something or someone. I'm using WhatsApp again, now since years and had never issues, it just works.
miki123211 10mo ago
Because everybody (except Telegram funnily enough) is prioritizing security over user convenience. Most apps on the market are E2E by default these days, and that introduces a whole host of complications. It's the wrong tradeoff for 95+ percent of users. If you can only afford 1 device and only switch to a new one when the old device breaks, E2E is a disaster in the making. For the overwhelming majority of users, making sure that they have access to their messages when they switch devices is far more important than being protected from the NSA. This is something most signal advocates are completely unwilling to talk about.
- homebrewer 10mo ago
  Wire was able to implement a fully E2E-encrypted messenger with proper multi-device support almost a decade ago, long before it became mainstream. Fully FOSS too, including the server. For some reason it never became popular. They don't have proper desktop clients (just the usual Electron mess), but then, which one of them does except for Telegram? https://github.com/wireapp/wire-server https://github.com/wireapp/wire-server , etc.
  - almogo 10mo ago
    I moved all my friends to Wire about a decade ago. Pretty, but the actual user experience was awful. We moved to Telegram and since then to Signal. I didn't actually know Wire was FOSS.
  - styanax 10mo ago
    My memory is really fuzzy, but I recall back when the new IM apps were all coming out and competing for the small share of people wanting to test them, either the Wire app or using the Wire service had a hard cost ($5 USD?) (no free-to-test tier, you had to pay to use). I believe history has shown a vast majority of folks will choose free (even with ads, sadly) over a hard cost for IM. Signal talked a better game and offered everything for free.
  - miki123211 10mo ago
    How do they handle message recovery when all your devices have been lost (and possibly when you've forgotten your password)? That's (almost) incompatible with E2E encryption. You could do it via "social proof" or server-side secure enclaves and pins, but that's about it.
boznz 10mo ago
SMS works just fine for me, but international calling is a killer, it's 2025 you would think this would be free by now.

echelon_musk 10mo ago

I haven't dropped molly for a long time. But it feels like the right thing here.