| |
| ▲ | taminka 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | whatsapp, facebook messenger, imessage all support multi-device and it's pretty convenient, in fairness to telegram they launched a bit before double ratched was invented, but still, they've had over a decade to switch to it... | | |
| ▲ | stavros 2 days ago | parent [-] | | WhatsApp doesn't support multi-device. You can't have it installed on two phones at once. | | |
| ▲ | taminka 2 days ago | parent [-] | | you can (https://faq.whatsapp.com/1046791737425017/?cms_platform=andr...) they even have it on fb messenger and instagram (though they recently removed e2ee completely from instagram lol) | | |
| ▲ | stavros 2 days ago | parent [-] | | That's still one device. If you turn the primary phone off, the secondary device stops working. WhatsApp just proxies everything through the primary device, it's like WhatsApp Web. | | |
| ▲ | wisenull 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | It used to be like that but not anymore. As siblings suggested you can now use it on up to 4 (I believe) additional devices. | |
| ▲ | lxgr 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They used to, but that hasn't been true for a few years now. Now it uses the Signal protocol's native multi-device capabilities, specifically in the "key per device" variant (unlike signal itself, which uses "key per account" if I'm not mistaken). | |
| ▲ | canpulseword 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is not true, even if the primary phone is offline you can send messages via secondary device, even whatsapp web It’s not proxied via primary, otherwise it wouldn’t work if primary were offline | | |
| ▲ | stavros 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > It’s not proxied via primary, otherwise it wouldn’t work if primary were offline That is correct, it doesn't work. |
| |
| ▲ | taminka 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | oh, i see, is it the same for facebook messenger and instagram, imessage, etc? | | |
| ▲ | stavros 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't know, I don't use those. It is for Signal, I don't think so for Instagram, since I don't think that encrypts end to end. | |
| ▲ | TeMPOraL 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Messenger seems to be properly multi-device, but you pay for this by some PIN code bullshit (maybe they removed that, I haven't seen a popup about this for over a year now?) and having to sync chat history in the background, through a process that is, of course, broken and unreliable. I'm actually still jaded about this. Messenger worked fine before they broke it by introducing E2EE; it took years for them to fix the problems this caused (at least the ones that were immediately user-perceptible). |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | ymolodtsov 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's called iMessage. It's possible, Telegram just doesn't care. All their differentiating features (large groups, channels, device sync) is directly enabled by the lack of encryption. | | |
| ▲ | taminka 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | they do have encryption, just not e2ee, and in fairness to them, it doesn't make sense to have e2ee on a channel or a group with 100k ppl in it, also device sync is possible with e2ee, it's just a slower | |
| ▲ | tcfhgj 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | you can have large groups and device sync WITH e2ee, see Matrix. |
| |
| ▲ | tcfhgj 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Matrix | |
| ▲ | lxgr 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | What are you talking about? WhatsApp, iMessage, and Signal all have multi-device support and are E2E encrypted, just to name a few very popular options. |
|
