Pros of tdesktop

• Official Telegram desktop client, ensuring full compatibility and timely updates
• Larger development team and community support
• More frequent releases and bug fixes

Cons of tdesktop

• Less customization options compared to Kotatogram
• Stricter adherence to Telegram's design guidelines, limiting UI flexibility
• Fewer experimental features

Code Comparison

tdesktop:

void MainWindow::setupMain() {
    auto widget = object_ptr<Widget>(this);
    _mainWidget = widget.data();
    _body->setMainWidget(std::move(widget));
}

Kotatogram:

void MainWindow::setupMain() {
    auto widget = object_ptr<Widget>(this);
    _mainWidget = widget.data();
    _body->setMainWidget(std::move(widget));
    setupCustomTheme();
}

The code comparison shows that Kotatogram builds upon tdesktop's codebase, adding extra functionality like custom theme support. Both projects share a similar structure, with Kotatogram extending features while maintaining compatibility with the original Telegram client.

Kotatogram offers more customization options and experimental features, making it appealing to users who want greater control over their messaging experience. However, tdesktop, being the official client, ensures better long-term stability and compatibility with Telegram's core services.

Pros of Telegram-iOS

• Official iOS app with direct support from Telegram
• Regularly updated with new features and improvements
• Optimized for iOS devices and follows Apple's design guidelines

Cons of Telegram-iOS

• Closed-source, limiting community contributions and customization
• Limited to iOS platform, not available for desktop or other mobile OS
• Stricter adherence to Telegram's official features, less flexibility

Code Comparison

Kotatogram-Desktop (C++):

void MainWindow::showNotification(const QString &title, const QString &subtitle, const QString &msg) {
    if (QSystemTrayIcon::supportsMessages()) {
        trayIcon->showMessage(title, subtitle + "\n" + msg, QSystemTrayIcon::Information, 10000);
    }
}

Telegram-iOS (Swift):

func showNotification(title: String, body: String) {
    let content = UNMutableNotificationContent()
    content.title = title
    content.body = body
    let request = UNNotificationRequest(identifier: UUID().uuidString, content: content, trigger: nil)
    UNUserNotificationCenter.current().add(request)
}

The code comparison shows different approaches to displaying notifications, with Kotatogram-Desktop using Qt framework for cross-platform support, while Telegram-iOS utilizes native iOS APIs for notification handling.

Pros of Telegram

• Official Telegram client, ensuring full compatibility with the Telegram network
• More frequent updates and faster implementation of new Telegram features
• Larger user base and community support

Cons of Telegram

• Less customization options compared to Kotatogram
• Fewer advanced features for power users
• Stricter adherence to Telegram's design guidelines, limiting UI flexibility

Code Comparison

Telegram (Java):

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

Kotatogram (C++):

int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
    Sandbox::WorkingStatus status = Sandbox::start(argc, argv);
    if (status == Sandbox::WorkingStatus::Failed) {
        return 1;
    }
    Sandbox::finish();
    return 0;
}

The code snippets show different approaches to application initialization. Telegram uses Java and focuses on native library loading, while Kotatogram uses C++ and implements a sandbox pattern for the main application loop.

Pros of TelegramSwift

• Written in Swift, providing better performance and native integration for iOS devices
• More focused on mobile development, potentially offering a smoother mobile experience
• Actively maintained with frequent updates and bug fixes

Cons of TelegramSwift

• Limited to iOS platform, lacking cross-platform support
• Smaller community and fewer contributors compared to Kotatogram Desktop
• May have fewer features or customization options than Kotatogram Desktop

Code Comparison

Kotatogram Desktop (C++):

void MainWindow::showSettings() {
    if (_settings) {
        _settings->showSettings();
    }
}

TelegramSwift (Swift):

func showSettings() {
    let settingsViewController = SettingsViewController()
    navigationController?.pushViewController(settingsViewController, animated: true)
}

Both code snippets demonstrate a method for showing settings, but TelegramSwift uses Swift's syntax and iOS-specific navigation patterns, while Kotatogram Desktop uses C++ and a more generic approach.

Pros of Webogram

• Web-based client, accessible from any browser without installation
• Lightweight and fast-loading interface
• Cross-platform compatibility

Cons of Webogram

• Limited features compared to native desktop clients
• Potentially less secure due to browser-based nature
• Dependent on web technologies, may have performance limitations

Code Comparison

Webogram (JavaScript):

AppMessagesManager.sendText = function (peerString, text, options) {
  if (!angular.isString(text) || !text.length) {
    return $q.reject({type: 'TEXT_EMPTY'});
  }
  options = options || {};
  var messageID = tempID--;

Kotatogram Desktop (C++):

bool MainWindow::sendMessage(
		not_null<History*> history,
		MsgId replyTo,
		const QString &text,
		MessageFlags flags,
		bool silent,
		bool clearDraft) {
	const auto webPageId = _history->webPageId();

Key Differences

• Webogram is a web-based Telegram client, while Kotatogram Desktop is a native desktop application
• Kotatogram Desktop offers more advanced features and customization options
• Webogram has a broader reach due to its web-based nature, but Kotatogram Desktop provides a more robust user experience