[General] Tox questions

[GDR!]

Hi,

I find your lack of formatting disturbing, but...

On Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:52:08 +0100
L e <mangholb at hotmail.com> wrote:

> world...Second, why do all the clients have different names? Wouldn't
> it be easier for users if the names were consistent?

They're different clients, how do expect them to be named, the same?

That said, yeah, it would be nice to have an official client named Tox.

> How reliable are
> the apps currently? 

They're still in development.

uTox, for one, hasn't crashed for me in a very long time, but it has
lost ability to make (working) video calls somewhere around December,
perhaps they fixed it now.

Some time in 2015 there was a protocol change and all of the sudden,
oleder clients couldn't speak with newer ones (well, it was even more
interesting, older clients would see messages from newer ones, but with
first ~15 characters deleted, it was confusing).

So yeah, it's usable day to day but as long as you're willing to take
some time to fix things if they're wrong - downgrade to a latest
working version, etc. But bugs are usually quickly fixed.

> Will there ever be the possibility to sync
> contacts with one's phone numbers to automatically discover
> friends?

That's a question for devs, but I'll guess no, it won't. It is not
impossible to do it in a centralized manner (like tox-dns), but I doubt
somebody will start implementing this.

> I'm assuming you know Signal by Whispersystems. Why not adopt
> their encryption? Or why not help them with their project since they
> seem to be farther into development? Is it because it's centralized?

Well, if you use Tox it's usually because you believe that
decentralization is a good idea. There are plenty of messengers like
Signal, having plenty of developers working on them - because they're
relatively easy to implement, like all centralized apps are.

Note: I'm not a Tox dev.

> (I'll be the first to admit I don't fancy my messages to go through
> amazon's servers...).Thank you for your time.
>