231–240 of 333 posts
Why don't more people use it? I can't understand why people would jump from one closed source silo like WhatsApp to another closed source Silo like Telegram or Signal.
The UX of Element is terrific now.
Are there many here who use a Matrix client like Element? [1] Or one of the dozens of compatible chat apps? [2] Why don't more people use it? I can't understand why people would jump from one closed source silo like WhatsApp to another closed source Silo like Telegram or Signal. The UX of Element is terrific now. [1]: https://element.io/ [2]: https://matrix.org/clients/
2. At least on the desktop, the UX of element is pretty bad IMHO. It's slow and feels like a web browser (and it probably is something like that under the hood, I would bet). Telegram feels much nicer (but only as an instant messaging app; you can't make it look and feel like IRC for chatting, while Element can be twisted to partially resemble an IRC client). Signal is closer to where Element is at, in my experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue was branding, not bandwidth. There’re 3rd party clients: https://github.com/mollyim/mollyim-android
No, not just branding. Read the message I linked to. He explicitly says he doesn't want other clients to use their infra.
And there is an actual demand for features not provided by the official client, as stated by the amount of PRs contributed by non-Signal developers waiting in their GitHub repo, so people will continue to come with their own changes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Signal user here, on iOS and using the Mac client. What am I missing?
- Seamless sync and backup - 100x more people use it (I joined Signal years ago and I still have 1 actual conversation) - The speed and the level of polish is unmatched Of course for any serious Signal user it isn't an alternative but for many of us we only use it for postcard level anyway.
They have the opportunity and a need for profit from a smaller advertising base.
I'd bet on it actually: in a few years we'll get a big fuss when Telegram reveals their new targeted advertising functionality...
Pavel Durov, the CEO of Telegram, has repeatedly said the following on his Telegram channel about ads on Telegram: - ads will be only on very large public channels and not on all public channels - there won’t be any ads in chats - the ads will be contextual, and not based on tracking or profiling users and their activity - users will be able to opt out of ads Other monetization options like donations and subscription…
Same. UI/UX-wise and super light and blazing fast native clients - I would gladly pay like ~$5/month.
Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".
I’ve used Telegram for years now, along with almost all my family and friends. I’m a huge fan of it, and it’s basically the only IM I use anymore (other than Signal with some tech friends). If Telegram adds ads, rather than offer us a chance to just pay them, I’ll delete it instantly and push everyone I know to do the same. I absolutely despise ads of any kind, and go to a decent amount of effort to block them from a…
No one cares, my man. This position is so off the grid that your anti-ad cruzade will likely have 0 impact in the real world.
The founder's response to the article: Why users shouldn’t worry about ads on Telegram I read an article that cautioned users from switching to Telegram from other apps, because "Telegram is going to introduce ads". This is misleading for at least 3 reasons: 1. There will be no ads in chats on Telegram. Users who rely on Telegram as a messaging app, not a social network, will never see ads. Private chats and group ch…
> User data will not be used to target ads. I actually prefer personalized (targeted) ads, as long as it is a company I trust with my data. And they generate more revenue so they would need fewer ads. I realize people will argue that they don't generate more revenue, but if that were true then how has this whole industry developed around them? By tossing out personalized ads we are throwing out the baby with the bath…
If it were so obvious that targeted ads increase revenue, you’d think that the advertising industry would be able to prove it. They can’t.
Do they really need advertisers? I'm not sure why all these companies think the whatsapp route isn't possible. People are happy to pay a small yearly subscription for apps if they're truly doing something useful. While I don't personally use telegram, I'd argue it falls into the category of "useful enough to pay for".
A paid telegram would be crippled from large part userbase. I would not be able to convince anyone from friends and family to use it if it were paid - they can't see the value before installing. Without them I would not pay for it as well.