[anoncake]

I doubt that is true and anyway Telegram does have end to end encryption.

[robjan]

It does but not by default and it only works between two specific devices.

[ffpip]

Which is why I recommended it as an alternative to Messenger.

[anoncake]

Which means you get better usability by default and E2E when you need it.

[dogma1138]

Telegram still uses MTProto which was criticized for making quite a few odd choices.

It’s odd that people would recommend it over say Signal.

[antihero]

I'd say Telegram is probably the "nicest" app I've used for messaging. WhatsApp and Messenger are Ok. Signal, whilst being idealistically the best, is spartan, kinda ugly, and lacks many features that make messaging "fun".

[anoncake]

Signal is openly hostile to alternative clients, making it hardly better than other corporations' offerings.

[dogma1138]

Alternative client without being to independently verify their correctness do not fit the trust model of Signal or any of the chat systems.

[anoncake]

I don't care why Signal tramples on its users' freedom.

[dogma1138]

It doesn’t, you aren’t compelled to use Signal, I care that the clients I’m talking to are conform to the spec and don’t expose myself to side channel attacks (e.g. previewing content directly from the client)

[anoncake]

Fortunately, I'm not. But due to the nature of messengers, I likely would if Signal became popular.

If you don't want others to use a client of their choice for some (real or imagined) security benefits, that's between you and them. I think most people will think your priorities are silly.

[ffpip]

Signal cannot be even compared to Telegram. they are different. Telegram is Discord+Messenger, but on steroids.