alt Hacker NewsPart of "good UI" is not having E2E, which e.g. gives you sync that actually works, even on new devices, with no weird backups and PIN codes necessary, just like the good old days.
Replies
aledue • last Wednesday at 7:30 AM
Partly, but Signal etc. could just as well have a fast and polished client, and Telegram a clunky electron sloth. Even if you restrict yourself to one device (so no syncing) the difference in quality is undeniable.
➕ show 1 reply
E2EE can work just fine with backup and sync. Signal chose not to do it for a long time and remains cautious, sticking to security over tolerating security-ignorant users.
WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted, for instance, and it's used by billions. It being closed-source changes nothing about its feature set.
These days, Signal supports (encrypted, even cloud) backups just like WhatsApp or any other messenger.
The problem with UX for many of these apps is that they're designed for people who want to be sure that the government can't read their messages, but that's not something that's possible without compromising on the ease-of-use of SMS and other insecure methods. It's foolish to try to shove a Signal-shaped app into a SMS-shaped hole. I believe Signal's mobile app and (with a better underlying protocol) Telegram's cross-platform UX offer the best mix of secure and safe by default.