Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Cleaning / correction of the comparison table #109

Open
aeddi opened this issue Jul 3, 2020 · 5 comments
Open

Cleaning / correction of the comparison table #109

aeddi opened this issue Jul 3, 2020 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
backlog bug Something isn't working verified Bug is verified

Comments

@aeddi
Copy link
Member

aeddi commented Jul 3, 2020

First question at https://berty.tech/faq . That some boxes are empty seems ok as long as anyone can complete the table via a PR (even if some boxes are obvious like the purchase/runtime fee from Telegram or the privacy respecting terms of Weechat).
But for reasons of credibility, we must at least ensure that there is no obvious misinformation. For the same reasons we should correct typos / wrong naming and add sources that confound the veracity of a checkbox.

Global:

  • end-to-end encryption -> End-to-End Encryption
  • Skuttlebut -> Scuttlebutt
  • Skred -> Skred (Twinme) or Twinme (Skred)
  • Facebook -> Facebook Messenger (or at least Facebook M. if there are size constraints)
  • Anonymous use possible -> What does that mean? Shouldn't we decline into Email required, Credit card required, etc...?
  • We should have a tooltip that displays a description and links on each feature / checkbox.

Signal:

  • No purchase fee == Partially -> ?
  • No phone number required == True -> I don't think so.

Threema:

  • Open Spec == False -> They have a whitepaper so it should at least be Partially.

Olvid: (changes reverted by error, adding them to the checklist as a reminder)

  • No phone number required == False -> Wrong it's true.

Matrix:

@palmier3
Copy link

palmier3 commented Feb 8, 2021

Hello, may I ask why this issue was closed?
Skuttlebutt IS the wrong name so it should be corrected/removed.
Another issue regarding the comparison is mixing together protocols (matrix, scuttlebutt, etc...) with messaging apps. I think this will confuse users, especially the less technical ones.

One last note (maybe this should have it's own issue): at the time of this comment, the comparison table is broken and every entry is repeated twice.

@palmier3
Copy link

palmier3 commented Feb 8, 2021

Ok, sorry everyone, I made a mistake, the issue is actually open. The rest of my previous comment still stands, but I had to correct this one thing.
Sorry!

@staltz
Copy link

staltz commented Feb 11, 2022

Hi! Commenting on Scuttlebutt, I lead the Manyverse project which is built on Scuttlebutt and is a messaging app, it ticks all the boxes except "Multi-device messaging". :)

@jefft0 jefft0 added the bug Something isn't working label Apr 18, 2023
@jefft0 jefft0 added the verified Bug is verified label May 10, 2023
@jefft0
Copy link
Contributor

jefft0 commented Feb 2, 2024

Look at this again when we are reviewing the comparison matrix.

@jefft0
Copy link
Contributor

jefft0 commented Oct 11, 2024

Backlog until we have time for a new promotional push.

@jefft0 jefft0 added the backlog label Oct 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backlog bug Something isn't working verified Bug is verified
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants