> I opt for Signal now, hardly anyone uses it and the UX isn’t as nice, but it uses state of art in encryption.
Out of curiosity, what don't you like about the UX?
And doesn't it use the same "state of the art" encryption as WhatsApp?
Out of curiosity, what don't you like about the UX?
And doesn't it use the same "state of the art" encryption as WhatsApp?
Not GP, but I’ve railed against Signal’s stability and UX before.
Apart from messages not being delivered sometimes (or taking very long) and getting unnecessary “device changed” messages when nothing has changed (this happened as recent as last year), within a year or two of use, Signal makes sure that the user realizes that it’s meant for ephemeral use.
It does this by a few different ways. One is that if you change devices, you’d have to jump through hoops to rejoin groups you were a part of, and then see that you cannot see the list of members or the group’s name. Once you change devices, at least in iOS, you’d realize that you’ve permanently lost all your previous chats because Signal explicitly prohibits chat backup by iTunes and does not provide a way to backup chats and restore it either.
In terms of UX alone, Telegram > WhatsApp > Signal. FWIW, I use all these and Wire too. Signal gets the least amount of use because the people I chat with on it are also fed up with the poor UX and lack of features.
> at least in iOS, you’d realize that you’ve permanently lost all your previous chats because Signal explicitly prohibits chat backup by iTunes and does not provide a way to backup chats and restore it either.
This seems like an iOS limitation that Signal doesn't want to compromise on. On Android it outputs an encrypted backup file that you can use a file manager to upload or send wherever you want.
As far as I know yes Whatsapp uses some of Signal's tech but doesn't implement it in exactly the same way.