Unigram

Pros of tdesktop

• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux)
• More mature and feature-rich codebase
• Closer integration with Telegram's core functionality

Cons of tdesktop

• Larger resource footprint
• Less modern UI design compared to Unigram
• Slower update cycle for new features

Code Comparison

tdesktop (C++)

void MainWindow::setupMain() {
    auto widget = new Widget(this);
    _main = widget;
    _body->setMainWidget(widget);
    updateControlsGeometry();
}

Unigram (C#)

private void SetupMain()
{
    var widget = new Widget();
    _main = widget;
    Body.SetMainWidget(widget);
    UpdateControlsGeometry();
}

Both repositories implement Telegram clients, but tdesktop is the official desktop client while Unigram is a third-party UWP client. tdesktop offers broader platform support and deeper integration with Telegram's features. However, Unigram provides a more modern UI design tailored for Windows 10 and later. The code comparison shows similar structure but different languages (C++ vs C#) and slight variations in naming conventions.

Pros of Telegram-iOS

• Native iOS development using Swift, providing better performance and integration with iOS features
• Direct access to the latest Telegram features and updates
• Larger development team and resources from Telegram

Cons of Telegram-iOS

• Limited to iOS platform, not cross-platform like Unigram
• Closed-source development model, less community involvement
• Stricter App Store guidelines and review process

Code Comparison

Telegram-iOS (Swift):

class TGViewController: UIViewController {
    override func viewDidLoad() {
        super.viewDidLoad()
        setupUI()
    }
}

Unigram (C#):

public sealed partial class MainPage : Page
{
    public MainPage()
    {
        this.InitializeComponent();
    }
}

The code snippets show the basic structure of a view controller in Telegram-iOS using Swift, and a page in Unigram using C#. Telegram-iOS follows iOS-specific patterns, while Unigram uses the Universal Windows Platform (UWP) framework.

Unigram offers cross-platform compatibility for Windows devices, while Telegram-iOS provides a native iOS experience. The development approaches differ significantly due to the target platforms and programming languages used.

Pros of Telegram

• More mature and established project with a larger user base
• Supports a wider range of platforms, including iOS and Android
• Has a more extensive feature set due to its longer development history

Cons of Telegram

• Less focus on Windows-specific optimizations and integrations
• May have a steeper learning curve for new contributors due to its larger codebase
• Potentially slower release cycle for new features specific to Windows users

Code Comparison

Telegram (Java):

public class TelegramApplication extends Application {
    @Override
    public void onCreate() {
        super.onCreate();
        NativeLoader.initNativeLibs(ApplicationLoader.applicationContext);
    }
}

Unigram (C#):

public sealed partial class App : Application
{
    protected override void OnLaunched(LaunchActivatedEventArgs e)
    {
        TLContainer.Current.Resolve<ILifetimeService>().Start();
    }
}

Summary

Telegram is a more established and feature-rich project with broader platform support, while Unigram focuses specifically on Windows integration and optimization. Telegram's codebase is primarily in Java, whereas Unigram uses C# for better Windows integration. Unigram may offer a more tailored experience for Windows users, but Telegram provides a more comprehensive cross-platform solution.

Pros of Telegram-FOSS

• Fully open-source, ensuring transparency and allowing community contributions
• Available on F-Droid, making it easily accessible for privacy-conscious users
• Removes proprietary dependencies, enhancing privacy and security

Cons of Telegram-FOSS

• May lack some features present in the official Telegram app
• Updates might be delayed compared to the main Telegram client
• Limited platform availability (Android-only)

Code Comparison

Telegram-FOSS (Java):

public class TelegramApplication extends Application {
    @Override
    public void onCreate() {
        super.onCreate();
        NativeLoader.initNativeLibs(ApplicationLoader.applicationContext);
    }
}

Unigram (C#):

public sealed partial class App : Application
{
    public App()
    {
        this.InitializeComponent();
        this.Suspending += OnSuspending;
    }
}

The code snippets show different approaches to application initialization, reflecting the distinct platforms and programming languages used by each project. Telegram-FOSS focuses on native library loading, while Unigram sets up event handling for application suspension.

Pros of tweb

• Web-based implementation, accessible across platforms without installation
• More frequent updates and active development
• Supports a wider range of Telegram features

Cons of tweb

• May have slower performance compared to native applications
• Potentially less integrated with operating system features
• Limited offline functionality

Code Comparison

tweb (JavaScript):

export function getHeavyAnimationPromise() {
  return new Promise((resolve) => {
    window.requestAnimationFrame(() => {
      window.requestAnimationFrame(() => {
        resolve();
      });
    });
  });
}

Unigram (C#):

public static Task<bool> WaitForApplicationIdleAsync()
{
    var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>();
    CoreApplication.MainView.CoreWindow.Dispatcher.RunIdleAsync(args => tcs.SetResult(true));
    return tcs.Task;
}

Both code snippets deal with animation and idle states, but tweb uses web-specific APIs while Unigram utilizes UWP-specific methods. tweb's approach is more lightweight and browser-compatible, while Unigram's implementation is tightly integrated with the Windows platform.