Looks like they are prioritizing a path towards being a social influencer platform. To displace Twitter, Youtube, Instagram, does facebook even count anymore?
I know nobody who is still using facebook. I wonder that it still exists.
Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
51–60 of 128 posts
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but I can't get my family to switch if the UX is subpar.
How long ago did you use signal? The UX is on par with WhatsApp. In fact I've found tiny things that signal does better (it groups sending multiple pictures into on "album" message instead of sending one message per picture like WhatsApp) The only place I could agree WhatsApp has a significantly better UX is with backing up messages.
> The UX is on par with WhatsApp
So as the GP said, subpar.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
How long ago did you use signal? The UX is on par with WhatsApp. In fact I've found tiny things that signal does better (it groups sending multiple pictures into on "album" message instead of sending one message per picture like WhatsApp) The only place I could agree WhatsApp has a significantly better UX is with backing up messages.
Signal on desktop is very slow. It's a very unpleasant experience.
That is fair, the startup time takes forever.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#54Curious how this can work for recording podcasts.
I assume as well as any VoIP system, which (in my experience) is "meh", although the results can be very tolerable with a little knowledge, care, and post-processing.
An ideal system would automate a "double ender"[1] setup, streaming low-bitrate voice for the conversation itself but also recording uncompressed/losslessly-compressed audio at both ends, then delivering high fidelity sync'd audio as one file per participant (for easier editing) to the podcaster.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#55I really like Telegram and these features but I don’t use it because they don’t have end2end encryption as default. Also you can’t create a secret group chat that you can start from your phone and continue from your Mac.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of discussion do you have that require e2e? Myself I use TG extensively with friends, family, girlfriend and I think I've used secret chats once when the gf wanted to send a naughty photo. It's not that I don't have anything to hide, it's just I choose what to say according to the environment and I feel the features of telegram far outweigh the con of not having e2e at all times.
There are two kinds of things someone may want to hide: legal stuff and illegal stuff. It's a real shame that governments have succeeded in conflating the two and forcing us to take a position that is not the one we really have. Truly a brilliant move.
Of course you have something to hide, it's called privacy. There is absolutely no reason your private life should be public by default, so why accept it ?
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
How long ago did you use signal? The UX is on par with WhatsApp. In fact I've found tiny things that signal does better (it groups sending multiple pictures into on "album" message instead of sending one message per picture like WhatsApp) The only place I could agree WhatsApp has a significantly better UX is with backing up messages.
Telegram also does “albums”
Yes but UI/UX around E2E is not good.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but I can't get my family to switch if the UX is subpar.
How long ago did you use signal? The UX is on par with WhatsApp. In fact I've found tiny things that signal does better (it groups sending multiple pictures into on "album" message instead of sending one message per picture like WhatsApp) The only place I could agree WhatsApp has a significantly better UX is with backing up messages.
No it’s not. Does it even have a native app yet?
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#58Telegram has by far the best desktop experience from all messengers. Smallest memory footprint and snappy UI.
It is very nice indeed. I only wish some keyboard accessibility was better.
Re: Telegram: Voice Chats 2.0:Channels, Millions of Listeners, Recorded Chats
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think this necessarily has to hold true (Discord for instance have implemented their apps really well), but in reality this holds true for most electron apps in my experience.
As a heavy discord user, its performance is just nothing compared to a native app (gtk etc). Its notably not native in performance
True, but it is acceptable rather than having a noticeable delay etc. which I observe in other apps.