[r3bl]

I really don't get this. What's their advantage over using this over... well, anything else?

They seem like a complete copy of Signal to me: they're a centralized service with open source clients that promises end-to-end encrypted communication. I see no difference between them. It's like re-inventing the wheel. Honestly, I don't see a single reason why I should use this.

[detaro]

The list of secure messengers that run on mobile and desktop is already pretty short. Add voice and video chat to the requirements...

I'm kind of skeptical if this is the solution, but it checks a lot of boxes I want.

[kitsunesoba]

The problem with Signal (at least for me) is that its desktop client relies on your phone's Signal app, which feels weird and "duct tape-ish". I've been spoiled by the ease of using iMessage with multiple devices (phone, tablet, desktop, or otherwise): just sign in and it works, no janky-feeling interdevice communication necessary, and I've come to expect that from any messaging service I use.

Signal is great for those who confine their instant-message-like communication to their phones, since desktops being treated as second class citizens isn't an issue for them. I am not one of those individuals. I want to be able to read and reply to messages on whichever device I'm using at the moment without having to think about my phone's presence at all.

[cyphar]

Well, when you consider that the keys are ethereal, it makes it clear why it's "duct tape-ish". You could argue they should have a syncing protocol but now you need to come up with a secure syncing protocol.

[ycmbntrthrwaway]

They have comparison table on "Privacy" page: https://wire.com/privacy/#table-competition

[andreyf]

How does e2ee group video work?

[Siimteller]

Video calls are only 1:1

[dontscale]

Why... can't there be alternatives?

[r3bl]

Of course they can.

But, I feel like that the tools that promise to solve the same problem should at least have one drastic difference between them.

Kind of like social networks. Even though they all tackle the same problem (trying to keep us connected) each of them does it in its own distinct way.

I don't see any such feature here. They're tackling the very same problem in a very similar way. A bit too similar for me in fact. And since their target is a niche audience, I only see us having even more difficulties if Signal gets more and more alternatives.

[dontscale]

But you shouldn't condemn the developers over this. Arguably, there's not major differences between Colgate and Crest toothpaste, but having alternatives in the market drives innovation and keeps prices down.

[mchahn]

> should at least have one drastic difference

That's not how evolution works.

[DavidNielsen]

Signal is great in principle but:

1. Their desktop support isn't provided by a native app but rather ducktaped onto Chrome, which in turn forces me to have that pole of junk installed.

2. There's no iPad app, granted you can run the iPhone app in compatibility mode but that's just feels wrong in 2016.

3. Their support for multiple devices using one account can at best considered an afterthought attached to their mobile apps with gum. When I checked last it only worked with their Android and their Chrome clients so no love for iOS users.

Wire provides all of this, wrapped in beautifully designed apps (if currently a touch unstable)

[nailer]

Does Signal do video now?

[reidflix]

No, I think it's in the roadmap though.