• jivandabeast@lemmy.browntown.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Am also gonna stick with signal, eyeing up matrix. But what issues? The only reason i haven’t tested it out yet is none of my friends seem too keen on trying it.

        • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I use it with many friends and it is super buggy. Calls work only ok on browser version of Element, bugs in encryption are common where you cannot read a message, Synapse server is bloating the database and not clean after itself, etc.

          It’s getting better month by month, but still can’t recommend for your friends that are not technical people into open source. Better wait to not discourage them now.

    • totallynotfbi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      This week, TON Foundation announced that it’s forged a partnership with Tencent Cloud, which has “already successfully supported TON validators and plans to expand its services further to help meet TON’s high compute intensity and network bandwidth needs.” Validators, in web3 lingo, are participants that help authenticate transactions in a blockchain network.

      It looks like the partnership with Tencent only extends to their Web3 blockchain thing, and there doesn’t seem to be any partnership in the main app so it’s not the end of the world - at least, for now.

      Also, what even is this TON blockchain? I never knew Telegram had anything to do with crypto :/

      • fruitleatherpostcard@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, nah. Anything the CCP can slip it’s slimy festering little dick into, it will.

        There’s no way in hell that Telegram is secure.

        • totallynotfbi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I guess, but I don’t see how much they can really influence Telegram without any stake in the app itself. They only seem to have a deal for cloud-hosting with the TON Foundation, a non-critical part of the app, and even that appears to be non-exclusive. So if Tencent tries to force a bad decision onto Telegram, what’s stopping them from severing ties and moving everything over to another provider?

          Of course, we don’t know what the situation will be like in the future, but at this present moment, I don’t think Telegram’s security has been breached by this. (Also I think you triple-posted this comment)

          • fruitleatherpostcard@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Apologies for triple post. Lemmy seems a bit unresponsive so sometimes I hit ‘post’ a couple of times without realising that it actually registered.

      • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We have chat standard called XMPP created by literially the same org that makes standards for Internet and Email.

        And there are other public protocols to choose from.

        • TheEntity@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Unfortunately XMPP died roughly when the mobile devices became a mainstay. The way Google de facto took over the protocol didn’t help either, but even without it XMPP isn’t fit for the mobile-first world. The client needs to maintain an active connection at all times and there is nothing akin to push messaging, causing quite a significant battery drain. I might be unaware of some progress in this regard but this is how I remember it.

          • EngineerGaming@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “The client needs to maintain an active connection at all times” is just plain wrong. Offline messaging is what makes it so much more fit for the masses compared to IRC (I adore IRC btw).

            • TheEntity@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t mean offline messaging with messages waiting for the user to go online. I mean the lack of push messaging capabilities, so the user/client doesn’t know there is a message waiting until they already go “fully” online.

      • axo@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Signal for private conversations and for larger groups Matrix. Matrix can also be bridged to telegram effortlessly.

  • whitecapstromgard@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    1 year ago

    Telegram is a suprisingly good app.

    • Open source clients
    • Decent Linux client on the laptop (whatsapp desktop is just terrible)
    • It can be downloaded without Google’s appstore.

    I wish other apps were half as good as Telegram.

    • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Telegram has the best clients ever. But those clients need to connect to something and this is where we encounter a big problem.

      • Virkkunen@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        But isn’t that the whole point of a messaging service? Connect to something else that’s not local and have your messages exchanged?

        • Muehe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think smileyhead is alluding to the fact that Telegram servers are not open source, just the clients are.

          • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why would it matter if the servers are open source? How would you ever verify they are running the exact build they claim they are?

            • Muehe@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not about what build they are running. It matters because somebody just glancing at it might misinterpret the situation as “Telegram is open source”, but it actually isn’t because the server isn’t. Just some clients are, which is pretty useless if you can’t run a server to talk to them. Just for arguments sake, let’s say Telegram gets busted tomorrow in an international sting operation and all their servers get taken offline. The clients will be entirely useless at that point, somebody would have to reverse engineer the server.

            • TheEntity@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’d like to at the very least be able to run my own server. Not even necessarily federated with the original ones. Just run my own instance if I don’t trust the main one runs what they claim.

          • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not open source, centralized servers that store messages mostly without E2EE. By using Telegram we are locking ourself in situation where they can turn the knobs as they like, while we can’t do anything about it.

            • Muehe@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s kind of an apples an oranges comparison, WhatsApp doesn’t even try to present a facade of being open source. Telegram does, betting that the distinction between server and client code will go over most peoples heads, which it probably does to be honest.

              • whitecapstromgard@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                There are two realistic alternatives with hundreds of millions of users. Whatsapp has a closed source client, Telegram has an open source one. The choice for me is easy.

                • Muehe@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That sounds like a false dichotomy and I’m not sure why you even think the number of users is relevant. Why not choose something fully open source?

    • axo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, thats also easy since telegram clients dont do much more than displaying messages stored on a server. Its more a viewer than a full client.

      And that compromises hard on privacy and security, which Signal and Whatsapp dont do, they have proper Clients that have to really handle and store incoming messages. And the E2EE makes it harder, developing an independent desktop client, like Signal always had and Whatsapp recently got. But both are mediocre at best, sure.

    • jack@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Being foss and available on Linux is the prerequisite, it doesn’t make the app “good”

    • Clot@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      yeah it is too good for just to be called a messaging app, hope it will be more privacy focused

  • Engywuck@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    The shitty forced “stories” did me question seriously this once wonderful app. If I’d want to look at crappy TikTok-like shorts from other people, I’d be on TikTok.

  • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was under impression that Google Play and Apple App Store don’t allow apps that can do practically everything (super apps). Is it really allowed? If a completely new company submit a chat app that somehow includes taxy hailing, food delivery, nfc/qr wallet and micro-loan features all at once instead of adding those features gradually in future updates, would Apple and Google accept the app?

    • friendlyhobo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      WeChat and other composite apps are already on the stores, so I don’t see why others also wouldn’t be allowed.

      • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But outside China, WeChat is only a messaging app, right? The super app aspect is only available for China domestic users with a WeChat version distributed outside Play Store? Other notable super apps (Tata Neu, Grab, Gojek, etc) are also seemingly only operates in Asia. Or is there any US/EU-based super apps out there? Is the lack of western super apps caused by regulation, app store rules, or something else entirely?

        • friendlyhobo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve seen wechat pay and other features used throughout Asia, though to a much lesser degree than localized services. That is to say, it’s still a “super-app” in all markets. Which services are supported in each market is up to the real-world marketplace, not necessarily the Google Play or App Store. As far as I know, the international version of wechat still has most of the same capabilities (and privacy concerns thereof) that the domestic China Weixin app has.

          It’s a good question why western super apps haven’t taken off yet, and I feel like most users prefer fractured services until now. For example, Facebook had marketplace and messenger as part of its main service for years. Then, it decided to fracture them off into separate apps/services.

  • figaro@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Everyone complaining about both telegram and signal here should, idk, just start dead dropping handwritten notes to people inside of dead rats, like the true privacy experts.

    Privacy is important, yes. But if all of my friends use telegram, I’m going to use it too. Not only that, I’m going to be happy about it, because the telegram app is 1000x better than pretty much any other messaging app.

    braces for angry downvotes

  • HaggierRapscallier@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It does have a ton of functions tbh. I use it to access bots and keep notes. Even repositories for apps - Revanced Extended uses it for e.g. !

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Telegram, the popular messenger with 800 million monthly active users worldwide, is inching closer to adopting an ecosystem strategy that is reminiscent of WeChat’s super app approach.

    To build out this super app platform, Telegram relies on a network of infrastructure partners both from the established tech world and the crypto space.

    WeChat has pioneered the mini app model in China and now powers millions of them serving functions from payments, food delivery, e-commerce, ride-hailing, to driver’s license renewal, just to name a few.

    The developers would also need to learn the programming languages of blockchain apps, which might actually be an easier barrier to overcome than the process of understanding the economic incentives that facilitate decentralized applications.

    Importantly, payment functionality played a critical role in WeChat’s early rise as it instilled a habit among users to make daily transactions through the chat app.

    It will be fascinating to witness what lessons Telegram and TON take from WeChat and how a mini app platform with a decentralized twist unfolds.


    The original article contains 678 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!