Yeah, I don't know about that. I started using Signal about 6 years ago, I think. I remember back in the day there was a stable native Telegram desktop client that just worked (keeps working without single issue for years) and web WA client that just worked if the phone is online (mildly annoying, but very rarely a problem). Over time Signal developed an Electron-based client that annoyed me every time I use it. It requires relinking to the phone, it can't decrypt messages read from mobile, it can't send messages, it can send them, but the other party can't read them. I try it again every few months hoping that they fix these problems. Instead I get stickers and reactions =/

Yeah, I get it, multi-client encryption is hard, but WA seems to solve it using the same protocol. What I experience with Signal desktop client reminds me of Jabber OTP client compatibility issues 10 years ago. I almost stopped using Signal despite shiny E2EE. 90% of my texting is from desktop. I need it to work reliably. I don't care about stickers and reactions.

> Yeah, I don't know about that. […] What I experience with Signal desktop client reminds me of Jabber OTP client compatibility issues 10 years ago.

Like for the sibling commentator, the desktop client has been working for me largely flawlessly. Sure, doing backups on the desktop (and restoring them) would be nice, and no longer needing a phone number or needing to link it to a phone would be even nicer.

Meanwhile, though, WhatsApp doesn't even have a desktop client to begin with and their web UI is still mediocre and unsafe.

And let's not even speak about E2E encryption (or the general state of security) in Telegram.

So yes, I would argue most of Signal's features are more than on par with WhatsApp and Telegram.

If it's browser based just let me run it in a tab.

While I agree the app is a resource hog for what it is, I haven't ever had to relink my phone after the first time unless I reinstalled the app or got a new phone (duh). As for unreadable messages, I use Signal daily and have never had that issue once. I have had that issue multiple times using Whatsapp however.

It's taken a few years, and there may be a few bugs left that I don't know about (out of sight, out of mind), but Matrix uses the same double-ratchet encryption, and has solved multi-client encryption with cross-signing. Some clients may be imperfect, but this is the price we pay for being able to develop other clients - something Signal steadfastly refuses.

I honestly don't know what these features are. The only thing I hear from normal people is stickers and "but none of my friends are there." This is a genuine question because I can't figure out what others have that Signal doesn't.

The "backup" system Signal has is a joke for everyone outside the paranoid community. Every messaging platform has a single chance of losing users data before they switch away. Signal does it constantly.

The idea of any of my contacts logging every message I ever sent to them, and backing them up in clear text on whatever dumb cloud provider they're using this week, is a pretty scary one.

This arrogance is the worst cancer on "privacy" software. Essence of privacy is _control_ over data, not destruction.

It’s also awkward to try to herd a conversation partner from chat to email at some arbitrary point when you think the conversation is veering in a direction where preservation is important.

I use Signal as my main messaging app now, but even for the contacts on there I have to fall back to Whatsapp to share our live locations in order to find each other. Doesn't happen very often but it is a useful feature that it is missing.

Thanks for that.

Is it really that hard to tell someone where you are with words?

Yes, people need it. Had to use Telegram for it recently, because Matrix didnt have it at that time, and I don't have WhatsApp.

Just tell them your final destination verbally, and you're done.

Sometimes its about the journey, not the destination.

"From the XYZ Street beach entrance, we're about 100 yards north, with a blue umbrella."

Using realtime GPS tracking for this sort of thing is fetishizing technology to overoptimize a problem that was trivially solved for millenia using verbal offsets from known landmarks, while at the same time introducing and normalizing grave privacy concerns in society.

Good luck at long beaches where there are endless swaths of identical copy-paste tress, tents, deck chairs and umbrellas, without any unique elements to use as bearings. I would hate to have to send people on wild goose chases in the hot sun.

>wearing a red shirt

You've obviously never experienced how difficult it is to be found by your friends if you're short in a crowd of tall people at a concert or any sort of wide festival/gathering. Telling people what color your shirt is doesn't do anything to help if they can't see you until they're within 1m of you. And that's without it being dark at night. It's like finding Waldo IRL but more difficult.

> fetishizing technology to overoptimize a problem that was trivially solved for millenia

Ok Fred Flintstone, you do you, just let me enjoy the modern comforts of current technical achievements please and you feel free to follow the stars and buffalo tracks with your friends.

I think Apple has done a really good job with this — you can share your location for an hour, the rest of the day, or forever. I use the “share for an hour” option all the time.

This is already possible (on Android at least), and has been for a long while.

Long press on one, press "select" which allows you to select other photos, select the photos you like, and then press forward.

One issue with that is that if multiple photos are grouped together, you have to select the whole group, but you can definitely forward multiple photos in one go.