[tarasmatsyk]

Here is what puzzles me every time about telegram (which is my primary messager so far)

I can get the reasons behind not doing e2e encryption by default to reach more audience (msgs history, lack of resources on start, special backups)

What I cannot get is why Durov is blaming FB/WhatsApp that much, it seems to be the main competitor. As for me the story with WhatsApp is clear, it's Facebook and if you like being Zucked - go with it. But why so much hate on it?

On the other hand, every time Signal pops up the only answer I see: 'because it does only e2e well which is only one feature of Telegram' - wrong, Signal does secure messaging and messager has to do its job well, that's it. You need a media platform - go for Telegram/WhatsApp/Facebook, you need a messager - use Signal/Wire/etc

Does anyone else feels this bias towards WhatsApp? I cannot blame WhatsApp for being WhatsApp, that's how FB makes money

[ip26]

There was & may still be a lot of anger towards WhatsApp. It was only after it became the de facto messaging app for most of the world that it became a FB property, so I think people felt either betrayed, hoodwinked, or simply trapped without a good exit. Compare to FB Messenger, which was always a FB product from day one, so you always knew what you were getting.

[tarasmatsyk]

What you say makes sense, In any case, I am glad WhatsApp founder put some money into Signal, he's done an amazing job and deserves all the money.

I am from another side of messagers, as Viber concured Easter Europe - Telegram seemed like an obvious choice after VK got stolen from Durov. Signal was not that popular, that's why I did not start migration earlier