This sentence on the App Store page needs fixing: "Wire works on iOS and OS X, it is inspired by and developed for the latest in hardware."
Wire – Modern Communications Network
311–320 of 411 posts
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#312Skype is the most resource hungry app on my Mac. It deserves to die. Unfortunately I am forced to resort using it whenever FaceTime fails. And that happens approx. every 15nth call.
Really? I use it on variety of Macs (2008 Mac Pro, 2011 27'' iMac, 2007 24'' iMac, 2008 Aluminum Macbook, 2011 17'' Macbook Pro) and it runs smoothly and doesn't use much CPU at all on any of them. During video calls it will use more CPU but that's somewhat expected (Factime video calls do too).
It beats Safari and Chrome by CPU time and packets sent by orders of magnitude. Of course Chrome and Safari processes are separated nowadays, but still they do have some central stuff.
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#313No video and no win32/64. Skype wins by default.
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#314Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We've moved from irc, to ICQ, to Microsoft Messenger, to ..., to Skype, to (what's hot now) You forgot Hangouts, which works on Android, iOS, and the desktop. It supports text, voice, and video, just like Wire. Its only negative from my personal viewpoint is no Windows Phone support, but that OS is the punchline of many jokes these days. There's also Slack for businesses, non-profits, and private groups (my local I…
> You forgot Hangouts, which works on Android, iOS, and the desktop. It supports text, voice, and video, just like Wire. So that would be the "what's hot now". I didn't mention it because few people I know use it. And I wouldn't touch it a Google + Google+ affilicated messaging solution with a 10-feet pole anyway...
I wouldn't say that it's "hot". It's recently become more popular since Google started forcing it on Android 4.4+ users as the only SMS option on their phones. Personally, I wouldn't use it at all if not for easy group communication with my Ingress mates (most Ingress communities use Hangouts, Slack, or both; ours uses both but mostly Hangouts).
I just felt that it was a glaring omission, especially considering its more popular and more reliable precursor, Google Talk.
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#316Something here I don't understand. First, the terms state that there are two kinds of governing laws: One for those using the service outside the US, and one for those from the US. This is the first time I see a supposedly non-US company applying two different laws. Also, if you go through the terms, you see that basically any legal aspect is governed by the County of San Francisco, California. Why not Switzerland wh…
The Mac App Store app [1] is submitted by "Zeta Project Swiss GmbH" which does exist in the registry [2]. [1] https://itunes.apple.com/app/wire/id931134707?mt=12 [2] http://www.hrazg.ch/webservices/inet/HRG/HRG.asmx/getHRGHTML...
Interesting. Judging from this LinkedIn page [1], Wire Swiss GmbH has been around since at least March 2014, and has between 50-200 employees [2]. My guess: they renamed Zeta Project to Wire, but didn't want to wait with the announcement until it's updated in the registry?
Still not sure what's up with the two governing laws.
[1] https://www.linkedin.com/pub/pierrine-auberson/5a/70a/537 [2] https://www.linkedin.com/company/4836762
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We've moved from irc, to ICQ, to Microsoft Messenger, to ..., to Skype, to (what's hot now) You forgot Hangouts, which works on Android, iOS, and the desktop. It supports text, voice, and video, just like Wire. Its only negative from my personal viewpoint is no Windows Phone support, but that OS is the punchline of many jokes these days. There's also Slack for businesses, non-profits, and private groups (my local I…
Hangouts is getting worse as far as I'm concerned. Google Talk had only chat, but I could trust it to work as intended and deliver my messages. With Hangouts: - synchronization between devices is not as good. I will often not see everything I typed on my mobile when I open it on my desktop. - Messages do not arrive in order !!! Sorry for the triple exclamation marks, but this is implemented in the most stupid way I h…
I preferred Google Talk as well, especially since it was built upon an open platform and was easily implemented on unsupported OSes (Windows Phone via IM+ for example). Personally I haven't seen the out-of-order issue in one on one conversations, but it's prevalent in the group chats I'm in. When it happens to my messages, it's almost always when I'm being handed off between towers on the go; it hasn't happened to me on WLAN yet. Since there are no message size limitations like SMS has, I rarely send multi part messages anyway.
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#318I'd love to replace my company Skype with a client/service that has an API, that I can script bots for, and has great support for both mobile and desktop.
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it really matter whether they have encryption a or b? If it is poorly implemented it is unsafe. So either you trust them to do a good job or you don't. Whether someone in marketing knows the name of your favorite encryption doesn't really change that.
Choosing a standard protocol indicates that you aren't completely inept when it comes to encryption.
Disagree, depending on how strong you mean the word "indicate" to be.
Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are already FOSS replacements for Skype, such as Tox. The fact is that if every line of code can't be inspected then the software can't be considered secure, and we're forced to put blind faith in a faceless corporation, which is understandably not acceptable for many people. I don't really care if you think this is "practical" or not. That's simply the reality of the situation. Proprietary == insecure. If a co…
I would argue that, theoretically, proprietary can be secure. A code base can be made secure by highly experienced engineers who are paid to make the code secure. You might never be able to see the code, but it could still be secure. The problem is that you can never actual verify how secure the proprietary solution is. So whether or not it is secure, you don't trust it. (there are even some interesting arguments to…
I don't even have to argue to make this point, I merely have to point out Heartbleed or Shellshock.
The reason both were found and had the absurd propaganda campaigns behind them as they did that are the only reason you can even name them to begin with, is precisely because the underlying software was free.
On the other hand, let's name drop another vulnerability and its exploit: SMBRelay. Took 7 years after it was made public to introduce an incomplete and partial fix. Still exploitable to this day, 13 years later.