[alerighi]

Signal has most of the problems that has WhatsApp: mainly the fact that it's dependent on a smartphone, yes you have a Chrome-based application that is the same as WhatsApp web, it's only a remote interface that connects to your phone.

Telegram in my opinion is far better, it's completely cloud based, you can use it from whatever device you want, it has real desktop apps, you can send files, you have bots, channels, large groups, usernames, you name it.

I don't get why using Signal, yes it's free software, also Telegram it is (ok, the server is proprietary but even if you have the source how can you be sure that what they release is what is running on the servers ? If you don't run your own server the source are useless), but I don't see other advantages, so why bother with a third messaging app ? I use WhatsApp for the large user base, and I use Telegram for the advanced features if I need them.

[aylons]

No, Signal Desktop is NOT the same as WhatsApp web. You still need your phone for the initial setup (same as Telegram), but after that, the desktop app is untethered until de-authentication.

Also, it has a much more praised security and cryptography than Telegram, is always encrypted (Telegram is only encrypted in secret chats) and has a much more secure codebase, with more open development (Telegram sometimes takes weeks to release source code), reproducible builds and a more transparent history.

I do use Telegram (mainly for group chats), but I treat everything posted in it as I would treat a public forum like HN.

[narsil]

Are you certain Signal is dependent on a phone? The new Signal desktop client I use seemed to send messages fine over in-flight wifi.