Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 972 posts

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#601

Post by jrockway »

apexalpha wrote: post #155

Where is the "Don't switch" option? Because as much as I hate that Facebook bought them, they're part of what I would call "critical social infrastructure." Asking to leave WhatsApp is like cancelling your contract with your ISP and going offline just because you don't like the company.

I've never used WhatsApp nor have any of my friends ever mentioned it as a method they'd like to use to chat with me.

I typically send normal SMS messages.

The impression that I get is that WhatsApp is not "a thing" in the US?

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#602

Post by 51Cards »

fahadkhan wrote: post #345
hoorayimhelping wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody cares that you and your crew are using a WhatsApp alternative, which is why there's no option for you to signal that you're using an alternative. This is for people who want to switch and are looking for suggestions, not for people who are trying to show off that they don't need to switch.

I find it interesting to that people don't use WhatsApp at all. Many posts here are claiming not using WhatsApp is impossible. Grandparent's experience demonstrate that it is.

Canada here, have used WhatsApp perhaps 5 times, all just to communicate with small teams at events. Always uninstalled it right after and honestly have never A. missed it, or B. been asked why I'm not using it.

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#603

Post by aljgz »

From your list I've extensively used Telegram and Whatsapp. I love the former and hate the latter. I'm going to tell you why.

I used telegram seriously, to connect to my team members, connect to friends in groups and message friends privately, before our government blocked it and people migrated to whatsapp.

Usability:

1-Whatsapp is only available on one phone (I know it's because of e2e encryption, but we'll get to that later) and only android/ios. Anything else needs to use web and connect to the main device, which limits the experience, if you use it heavily.

2-Whatsapp does not have edit, the web version cannot set ctrl-enter to send, any mistaken enter will send an incomplete message that cannot be edited.

3-You lose all your chats when you change your phone. Backup is still a solution, but not if you want to migrate from iphone to android (something I did) and do not trust an app that has 100 install to migrate your data.

4-You cannot use multiple phone numbers by one whatsapp on one phone.

5-If you add a person to a group, they cannot see past messages. (I know, another side-effect of e2e)

6-It has many minor bugs with bluetooth headsets. If you press the answer, it just disconnects from the headset, you should answer on phone screen.

7-Lacks many useful features for organization, like chat folders (I know, this is also recent in Telegram)

On the other hand, telegram is heavily customizable, has clients for all major platforms, can connect to many accounts at once, your data is not tied to your device.

About E2e encryption:

I don't mind that telegram does not have e2e. My private messages are not worth the effort for a large organization or government. As a citizen of a country where the government actively and strongly suppresses freedom of speech, e2e in groups is not useful. Any breached device or one informer in any group is enough for all messages to be breached. This is only needed in case the government does not have access to the (apparently infinite) list of security problems by whatsapp, which apparently they do (why they block Telegram and not whatsapp?)

In usability, I can go on and on with increasingly detailed differences between whatsapp and Telegram and everywhere Telegram wins hands down, except that by default, chats do not have e2e encryption and groups cannot have e2e at all.

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#604

Post by dalu »

danlugo92 wrote: post #97
remirk wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on what you want with privacy. If you'd want to chat anonymously, having to use your real phone number is a bummer. At least in my country, it's getting harder and harder to get a SIM-card that is not tied to your name. The alternative is getting a burner SIM-card. Though, that will become harder once more prepaid providers require your ID.

If you got a friend in Colombia they can hook you up with unlimited SIM cards for like $3 a pop.

Unlimited what exactly?

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#606

Post by jokethrowaway »

matthew_wilson wrote: post #572
jokethrowaway wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you want your government to mandate how technology works? Sounds like a recipe for disaster and the perfect way to stifle innovation

“One System — One Policy — Universal Service” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsbury_Commitment?wprov=sft... "the promise of mail delivery [helped] grow the nation and economy instead of serving only existing communities." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Service_Act?wprov=sfti1

I think it's a different problem - mail delivery requires a series of entities interacting with each others (think about a network of mailmen).

Also, private mail exists and it's definitely useful.

Digital messages are usually built on top of the internet (which would have similar problems) and every service can be used across the entire network.

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#607

Post by eitland »

Quiark wrote: post #553
eitland wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Encryped chat might mean E2E-encrypted yes, but even then why not add those four extra letters "E2E-" and make it obvious? Besides, here is what I replied to: > As a reminder, Telegram groups are not encrypted at all [...] (emphasis mine) This is very possible to misunderstand for someone who isn't aware and the result might easily be that they stay in their abusive relationship with WhatsApp because of such FUD. As…

I still fail to see how switching from fully E2E encrypted WhatsApp to most-of-the-time NOT E2E encrypted Telegram is an improvement.

Because unlike with Facebook no one has been able to show a single example of Telegram abusing their customers even once.

Let me use an example:

Would you want to ride the absolutely bulletproof and soundproof taxi that has one disadvantage: that it is well known that the drivers make notes about who you are and who you visit and sell that data to companies like Cambridge Analytica?

Or would you take another more ordinary taxi that might not be armoured and soundproof and might or might not log your visits - but at least no one has caught them red handed?

The answer depends on who you are I guess: [edit: if your main fear is that someone might be listening to your conversations and you don't care if the known shady taxi company logs who you visit, go with armoured, bulletproof taxi. I admit] there are times when E2E is a massive difference but for me this is mostly about preventing future Cambridge Analytica situations.

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#608

Post by deepstack »

skrowl wrote: post #505
ignoramous wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just see messages, but show you ads as well: 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.

This is false. No proposed ads in 1:1 or any size group chats, only large channels (which are like RSS feeds, you can join but not post). In addition 100% of Telegram traffic is encrypted over the wire (like this website, your bank, etc). The only difference with secret chats is that they're end to end encrypted. Signal is a very bad user experience if you use several devices (phone, tablet, home computer, work compu…

Telegram NON Secrete Chat are not E2E.

Re: Poll: Switching from WhatsApp

#610

Post by keraf »

tiagod wrote: post #277
beertoagunfight wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telegram gets a lot of flak for this, but if what they're saying here is true, I believe that it's a pretty sane architecture: https://telegra.ph/Why-Isnt-Telegram-End-to-End-Encrypted-by... Definitely a better alternative to WhatsApp in any case.

Nothing prevents Telegram from not implementing that architecture and reading every single group message and non-secret chat. Telegram is sketchy in many ways, I wouldn't trust that easily.

Genuinely curious to know why you think Telegram is sketchy in many ways?
Post reply on HN