zlacker

I would ditch WhatsApp in a heartbeat if Signal had a browser client.

>>enrage+(OP)
Not in the browser, but it does have pretty decent desktop applications for most operating systems.

>>enrage+(OP)
In my opinion Desktop Clients > Browser Clients when it comes to messengers. If you have more than ten tabs open it is annoying to always have to switch tabs or break out a window. Having a desktop application that remembers where you want to save stuff people send you is a plus too.

>>atoav+X
Just make a new browser profile for your browser client. It will have its own window, and different profiles prevent windows of the same browser from being collapsed onto each other on some platforms.

>>atoav+X
If you really like having app-like websites, you can do that in Chrome by clicking "Create Shortcut" then click the box that says "Open In Window". Voila. It behaves like a native app, and you can embed it in your Windows taskbar with a favicon and everything.

Electron isn't as safe as Chromium. Last I checked it's based off a vintage build of Chromium with some very important features like the sandbox turned off (!)

>>enrage+(OP)
I would not trust any browser-based e2ee.

>>atoav+X
My opinion is the opposite, because Electron is quite heavy (which is an issue for Signal Desktop at least), and because you can't use browser containers to use multiple accounts.

>>enrage+(OP)
Will only ever happen once Signal ditches their dependency on mobile phone number.

>>atoav+X
I trust the browser security model more than the desktop app security model

>>jhoech+Qa
I don't see how the two are related? They've already got a Desktop client.

>>jhoech+Qa
Doesn't whatsapp also rely on the phone number as Id? Why can they have a desktop and browser client?

>>hjek+Y9
There are other options than Electron. Telegram's desktop app is a big factor to why I use it.

There's one big drawback though that's relevant here, and that is that it doesn't support E2E encrypted chats, those are confined to the phone app. I guess it's a security feature, I haven't looked into it too much, but I don't think it would be that difficult to share keys locally between devices you own.

>>hjek+Y9
Workaround for Signal for 2 accounts: you can use the beta version, which uses a different data folder, to use two different accounts.

Obviously that'd be better to have a configurable data folder.

>>Vinnl+rb
The Desktop Client is only functional when you "pair" it to your phone client.

>>jhoech+Qa
E2E in a browser client is always questionable, I doubt Signal is ever going to add one.

>>jhoech+lw
Right, and they could do the same for the web client, so I don't see how the phone number requirement would prevent them from creating one.

>>atoav+X
I don't know if many people here don't know about the feature, but most browsers support pinning of tabs makes this relatively easy (especially in combination with Alt+<number> for switching to tab <number> from the left-hand side): https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/pinned-tabs-keep-favori...

>>jobigo+kf
Browser WhatsApp works through a connection to the phone, and not directly to servers. If your phone is off, Web WhatsApp doesn't work.

>>atoav+X
our even worse if you browser is closed and you have to open it and load 30+ tabs just to send a message on signal