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

Wire – Modern Communications Network

wire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 411 posts

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#321

Post by morganvachon »

graeme wrote: post #187
morganvachon wrote: post #159

Earlier 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. Its only negative from my personal viewpoint is no Windows Phone support, but that OS is the punchline of many jokes these days. Have you ever tried to start a Hangout with a non-technical user? It's a nightmare. I do remote tutoring. Skype is easy. Everyone has it, you add the username, and call. H…

> Have you ever tried to start a Hangout with a non-technical user?

Yes, my technophobe sister in law. She got a new Android phone and was texting me via plain old SMS, which are metered on her account. I texted her back "Look for an icon that is a green circle with a double quote mark in it. Open it, follow the prompts, and send me a message". Within a minute I had a Hangout message from her, and she's been using it since.

Purely anecdotal, but then so was your example. I'll agree it's not so simple doing it on a computer, but they still make it fairly simple; do a Google search for "hangouts", the top link takes you to a page that has a button that says "Available for your computer".

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#323

Post by Schweigi »

mrsaint wrote: post #293

Something 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…

Based on the address I would guess its only a mailbox anyway.

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#324

Post by mdda »

Tepix wrote: post #278

Is it just a coincidence that Skype changed their AUP last week, requesting a license to all content transmitted via Skype (point 5.7 of their legalese)? That ought to scare some people away. To Wire?

I don't see that Skype get a license to the content, only that you should have the rights to distribute it (http://www.skype.com/en/legal/tou-usa/#5), and that they have the right to "take it down" if they feel like it.

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#325

Post by espadrine »

Two things of interest:

- They use Scala on Android[1]

- They plan on a full-browser version[2]; I assume it'll rely on WebRTC. The fact that they don't indicate plans on a specific browser makes me happy.

[1]: http://jobdb.softgarden.de/jobdb/public/jobdb/posting/126982...

[2]: https://www.wire.com/download/

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#326

Post by Kronopath »

onion2k wrote: post #8
NullReference wrote: post #4

"What we need is another messaging app" said nobody, ever. It looks pretty, but this is yet another app in the long list of "Skype killers" or "Voice/video/text" messaging. It seems like it's the default goto for anyone that can't think of something more interesting these days.

Everyone thinks we don't need another one until they see one that does something they like but hadn't realised would be useful. WhatsApp with its free messages, Twitter with its enforced terseness, Snapchat with its take on ephemerality - they were all adopted by millions of users who, before seeing the app, would probably have declared they didn't need a new messaging app. Yet they installed it, tried it, and contin…

Twitter's success wasn't due to "enforced terseness", it was due to the fact that it supported posting to it from SMS messages back when the majority of the population still had dumbphones. Once smartphones became ubiquitous, Twitter kept riding that wave due to network effects. In fact, the entire reason for the 140-character limit was so that it could interoperate with SMS cleanly.

I do somewhat agree with your overall point though. And it's worth noting that sometimes that "new feature" can be things like "my parents don't use it yet", in the case of teenagers and the like.

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#327

Post by Someone1234 »

Ridley wrote: post #266
FreezerburnV wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, even if they DID specifically list out all the security measures that they used, someone would still complain because it isn't completely open source. The previous company I worked for not only had legitimate encryption for anything private we received from the user (e.g.: email passwords) so that nobody at the company could ever read them, but also had some (if I remember correctly) good documentation…

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…

Tox is not a Skype replacement. For example:

- Skype is "everywhere" (Windows, Windows RT, Windows Phone, OS X, iOS, Android, Linux, FreeBSD, Blackberry, XBox One) and opposed to a handful of places (Windows, Linux, OS X, Android, iOS, FreeBSD, OpenIndiana). Plus Outlook.com's Skype implementation supports most platforms with a HTML5 browser.

- Landline/cellular phone calling. Text message sending.

- Caller ID, Voicemail, etc.

- Skype Numbers (i.e. buy a landline phone number people can call your Skype via, which is insanely useful for SMBs and individuals alike).

- Tox's feature list is largely a myth. Most clients are missing major Skype features and none support all of them, see this: https://wiki.tox.im/Clients#Features

People who think Tox is a Skype replacement aren't Skype's core demographic. The landline/cellular/etc functionality is heavily used by many and nothing that claims to be a replacement can be taken seriously if it lacks that.

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#328

Post by johnward »

chdir wrote: post #247

That domain name would have been one expensive purchase. I wonder if there's any significant correlation between buying an expensive domain upfront & success rate. That aside, It has spent most of it's life being parked with ads. https://web.archive.org/web/*/wire.com

I often wonder about price when I see great domain names like this. Sometimes they seem to boost the product and many times it doesn't matter. I saw a post on reddit about examine.com. I think the guy said he paid like 40k for the domain and he believes it was a big part of why they were growing. He basically said that he had money from previous business selling and he figured even if the site didn't work out the domain name would get him back most of that money if not more if he had to resell it.

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#329

Post by bad_user »

FreezerburnV wrote: post #253
secfirstmd wrote: post #114

So in the age of Edward Snowden this is all they say about encryption... "Are Messages And Calls Encrypted? Yes. Wire uses industry-standard encryption on all of your Wire messages and calls." "WHAT SECURITY MEASURES DO WE TAKE TO SAFEGUARD YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION? We are concerned about safeguarding the confidentiality of your information. We provide physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards to protect infor…

Unfortunately, even if they DID specifically list out all the security measures that they used, someone would still complain because it isn't completely open source. The previous company I worked for not only had legitimate encryption for anything private we received from the user (e.g.: email passwords) so that nobody at the company could ever read them, but also had some (if I remember correctly) good documentation…

No, much larger than the issue of open-source is that we already have dozens of major communication protocols that are not based on open standards or that do federation (one implies the another).

XMPP does OTR for example. And you know, the cool thing about an open standard is that it can have many clients. Throw federation in the mix and then many people will actually find it desirable.

Otherwise it's just a matter of being new and shiny. Because other than that, I don't understand how this new messenger competes with Hangouts, Skype, FB's Messenger, WhatsApp, Viber, iMessages, FaceTime, Snapchat, Y! Messenger, Lync, HipChat, Slack, IRC in general, or plain old calls and SMS messages, which are pretty cheap lately in Europe (at least in my country). Note that I enumerated about a dozen of popular alternatives.

I expect new entries to brag about something more than UI. Because my phone has the best UI ever - I just call somebody and that somebody responds because everybody has a phone number. I want to see open standards, federation and encryption, because otherwise new entries are useless for me.

So another proprietary walled garden that promises to keep my conversations secure, cross their hearts? No thanks.

Re: Wire – Modern Communications Network

#330

Post by mrsaint »

Schweigi wrote: post #323
mrsaint wrote: post #293

Something 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…

Based on the address I would guess its only a mailbox anyway.

Yes, at this address is a "workplace provider" [1] where you can get a virtual office starting at 180 SFr/Month.

[1] http://www.en.regus.ch/

Post reply on HN