asked 2014-02-06 22:10:29 +0200
This post is a wiki. Anyone with karma >75 is welcome to improve it.
Now facebook has bought all current whatsapp users it only makes it more pressing to find a decent alternative. There is: telegram :This 'new' messaging app is open source and safe.. https://telegram.org/
or
tox.im
answered 2014-02-20 12:37:25 +0200
There is telepathy with lots of outdated plugins, how about getting gabble (XMPP) up to speed (PGP,OTR and actually all missing XEP-**) and our beloved androids and zombies may use Xabber or ChatSecure instead of an new, uncommon, unavailable on most platforms service that has proprietary servers.
I agree completely. All the pieces are ready. With Message Carbons, Archive Management, OTR and MUC, we could have a great mobile experince using XMPP. The most widely used servers like ejabberd or Prosody nowadays implement all the XEPs we need. And there are Android clients like Xabber or Conversations that take advantage of that. The real problem is Telepathy, which is not moving fast enough. The only viable option for Jolla to provide great IM is to contribute or to push/sponsor the Telepathy guys to implement the needed XEPs.
asgeirr ( 2015-01-30 13:32:50 +0200 )editOn the other hand, there are features already implemented in telepathy but not in the Sailfish messaging app. Please vote for OTR, typing notifications or MUC.
asgeirr ( 2015-01-30 13:36:27 +0200 )editanswered 2014-05-11 11:57:34 +0200
So there is now OTR for Telepathy
Source: https://freedomsponsors.org/core/issue/333/telepathy-should-support-otr-encryption
answered 2014-02-28 18:30:39 +0200
Telegram isn't that good. Their server code is proprietary, messages are not encrypted by default and their encryption protocol seems to be weak.
I'm all for using telepathy to support encryption and XEPs which are important for mobile communication.
This was also discussed on reddit a few months ago: http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/1t4kg3/telegram_aka_stand_back_we_have_math_phds/
slava ( 2014-03-24 12:11:13 +0200 )editanswered 2014-05-25 13:22:36 +0200
Why do people want all these alternatives when all the alternatives can use XMPP, which is already supported? Isn't it better if we tell the alternatives to use XMPP instead of adding proprietary protocol support? Even facebook uses it. I mean. Really.
because people (normal users) are not aware of what exactly is this XMPP. or 'protocol' sounds too technical. or dont know how to configure the phone to make use of it. or unwilling to convince their messaging partners the same. So it would be of great help if you could explain how to configure Jolla to message or video/audio call someone without using alternatives.
User ( 2014-05-25 16:03:57 +0200 )editAnz: protocol, in simple terms, means the language that a client and server use to communicate. XMPP is common, open, contributable. Everybody can write a client or a server. You can message anybody using any XMPP service out there, so long as that somebody has an account there. Popular examples are Google Talk/hangouts and facebook. Let us know if you need help configuring that (open a new question).
AxMi-24: XMPP does support push, there is the question as to whether the server or client support it too. Having said all that, I have 3 accounts set up at the moment and the battery consumption goes unnoticed (unless I'm chatting all the time, in which case it's mostly the display's fault rather than the open connections).
@AxMi-24 XMPP certainly supports multiple logged devices, and it certainly supports "push", as you clearly don't have to poll the server for changes. It doesn't support Apple or Google's push services, though.
javispedro ( 2014-05-26 16:58:23 +0200 )editThere is a reason why skype is what it is. Multi client aware and chats synced on all of them. XMPP has that in theory but in reality not even close.
It's better to implement something like textsecure which is from ground up designed for multiple devices and secure communication rather than using XMPP and hoping that one day it will work like the theory predicts.
AxMi-24 ( 2014-05-26 21:39:48 +0200 )editanswered 2014-04-04 10:14:59 +0200
A good and secure alternative might be Textsecure, already discussed here: https://together.jolla.com/question/11534/sailfish-redphone-and-textsecure-apps/
answered 2015-03-07 00:45:16 +0200
There is now a native tox client called cyanide in the warehouse :)
Asked: 2014-02-06 22:10:29 +0200
Seen: 4,012 times
Last updated: Mar 07 '15
This sounds excellent. Especially if the full security model is implemented (PFS and MiM protection). Sadly they still don't allow several phone numbers per account but that is hardly a huge issue. They do seem to allow several logged in devices and that is awesome (can have client on the desktop be synced with the phone).
AxMi-24 ( 2014-02-06 23:48:23 +0200 )edit@raimue: WhatsApp taking down third-party clients on GitHub. Only those similar named, as #Mitakuuluu is not affected? https://t.co/UANHJIDllw #Jolla
this only makes development of a good open source alternative more urgent..
teun ( 2014-02-13 21:12:23 +0200 )edithttp://security.stackexchange.com/questions/49782/is-telegram-secure
After reading that I would say that telegram is not something that should be integrated in to Jolla. There is no point in integrating another unsafe protocol. Sadly it seems that today it's more or less only textsecure that is actually safe. Rest of the IMs are at best just badly encrypted and at worst actively spy on you (skype).
AxMi-24 ( 2014-02-13 22:41:00 +0200 )editthis could be an alternative : http://tox.im/
teun ( 2014-02-13 23:48:29 +0200 )edit@teun oooo I did not know about that project. Sounds excellent and it actually is based on real cryptography unlike telegram. Thanks a lot.
PS: tox would be good alternative for jolla. Secure chat, audio and video chat. Possibly even sync between several logged in clients (still reading so not sure about that part).
AxMi-24 ( 2014-02-14 09:18:03 +0200 )edit