But please don't dismiss well written and well thought-out critiques like this one just because you didn't understand the arguments.
As for the article, it's well written, but most of the points had been answered in Telegram FAQ or comments on HN. And yet they come up again and again. Not all, most.
I'm not sure what you mean by this as I'm not the author, so you haven't criticised anything I've said.
>> As for the article, it's well written, but most of the points had been answered in Telegram FAQ or comments on HN. And yet they come up again and again. Not all, most.
Not adequately, hence the well written deconstruction by the post author.
I'm going to echo what I've seen in another post - you appear to be a Telegram cheerleader with a brand new account, are you associated with them at all?
Discussions on HN about Telegram were mentioned on several Russian sites (e.g. [1]). No wonder that some persons decided to pitch in.
[1] http://www.siliconrus.com/2013/12/telegram-vs-hacker-news/ Approximate translation: "How experts on Hacker News laughed at Telegram."
The problem isn't that potential users are lacking anything. It's that nobody on our side of the table has communicated clearly and succinctly. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6941007
Further, your linked comment seems to be exactly what they're complaining about - Textmate good, Telegram bad. It doesn't explain why and why turns out to be quite hard to explain succinctly.
What makes the Article here not sufficient from your perspective?
