Pros of Telegram

• Native Android app with better performance and integration
• More frequent updates and active development
• Smaller app size, optimized for mobile devices

Cons of Telegram

• Limited to Android platform, not cross-platform like tdesktop
• Less customizable UI compared to tdesktop
• May lack some advanced features available in the desktop version

Code Comparison

Telegram (Java):

@Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
    super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
    setContentView(R.layout.activity_main);
    // Android-specific initialization
}

tdesktop (C++):

int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
    Sandbox sandbox(argc, argv);
    return Messenger::main(sandbox);
}

The code snippets highlight the different languages and platforms: Telegram uses Java for Android development, while tdesktop employs C++ for cross-platform desktop applications. Telegram's code focuses on Android-specific lifecycle methods, whereas tdesktop's main function initializes the application using custom classes for sandboxing and messaging functionality.

Both repositories are actively maintained and contribute to the Telegram ecosystem, with Telegram focusing on the Android platform and tdesktop providing a cross-platform desktop solution.

Pros of Telegram-iOS

• Native iOS experience with smooth performance and UI/UX optimized for Apple devices
• Swift-based codebase, leveraging modern iOS development practices
• Tighter integration with iOS-specific features like Siri, widgets, and app extensions

Cons of Telegram-iOS

• Limited to iOS platform, lacking cross-platform compatibility
• Smaller contributor base due to platform-specific nature
• Potentially slower feature rollout compared to the desktop version

Code Comparison

Telegram-iOS (Swift):

class ChatListController: ViewController {
    private let chatListNode: ChatListNode
    
    init(context: AccountContext) {
        self.chatListNode = ChatListNode(context: context)
        super.init(navigationBarPresentationData: nil)
    }
}

tdesktop (C++):

class MainWidget : public QWidget, private base::Subscriber {
public:
    MainWidget(QWidget *parent);

    void showSettings();
    void setInnerFocus();
    void updateOnlineDisplay();
};

The code snippets demonstrate the different languages and approaches used in each project. Telegram-iOS uses Swift with a more modern, object-oriented structure, while tdesktop employs C++ with Qt framework integration for cross-platform development.

Pros of td

• More focused and lightweight library for Telegram API integration
• Better suited for cross-platform development and embedding in other applications
• Provides a lower-level API, offering more flexibility and control

Cons of td

• Requires more setup and configuration compared to tdesktop
• Less user-friendly for developers who want a ready-to-use Telegram client
• May require additional work to implement a full-featured Telegram client

Code Comparison

td (C++ example):

auto client = td::Client::create();
client->send({1, td_api::make_object<td_api::setAuthenticationPhoneNumber>(
                     phone_number, nullptr)});

tdesktop (C++ example):

auto &account = Core::App().domain().active();
account.setPhoneNumber(phone_number);

Summary

td is a more flexible and lightweight library for Telegram API integration, suitable for cross-platform development and embedding in other applications. It offers a lower-level API, providing developers with more control but requiring additional setup and configuration.

tdesktop, on the other hand, is a full-featured Telegram desktop client, offering a more user-friendly experience for developers who want a ready-to-use application. It may be less flexible for custom integrations but provides a complete Telegram client out of the box.

The choice between td and tdesktop depends on the specific requirements of the project and the level of customization needed.

Pros of Webogram

• Web-based client, accessible from any browser without installation
• Lightweight and faster to load initially compared to desktop app
• Easier to maintain and update across platforms

Cons of Webogram

• Limited access to system-level features and notifications
• May have slower performance for resource-intensive tasks
• Potentially less secure due to browser vulnerabilities

Code Comparison

Webogram (JavaScript):

function sendMessage(message) {
  return $q(function (resolve, reject) {
    MtpApiManager.invokeApi('messages.sendMessage', {
      peer: getInputPeer(peerID),
      message: message
    }).then(function (result) {
      resolve(result);
    }, reject);
  });
}

TDesktop (C++):

bool MainWidget::sendMessage(const QString &message) {
    if (!_history) {
        return false;
    }
    auto result = _history->sendMessage(
        message,
        MessageFlag::HasFromId,
        0,
        false,
        nullptr,
        nullptr,
        nullptr);
    return result != nullptr;
}

The code snippets show different approaches to sending messages, with Webogram using JavaScript and promises, while TDesktop uses C++ and object-oriented programming.

Pros of Telegram-FOSS

• Fully open-source, allowing for community audits and contributions
• Removes proprietary dependencies, enhancing privacy and security
• Excludes Google Play Services, reducing data collection concerns

Cons of Telegram-FOSS

• May lack some features present in the official Telegram app
• Potentially slower update cycle compared to the official version
• Might have compatibility issues with certain devices or systems

Code Comparison

Telegram-FOSS:

#define TDESKTOP_DISABLE_AUTOUPDATE
#define TDESKTOP_DISABLE_CRASH_REPORTS
#define TDESKTOP_DISABLE_REGISTER_CUSTOM_SCHEME

tdesktop:

// These features are typically enabled in the official version
// #define TDESKTOP_DISABLE_AUTOUPDATE
// #define TDESKTOP_DISABLE_CRASH_REPORTS
// #define TDESKTOP_DISABLE_REGISTER_CUSTOM_SCHEME

The Telegram-FOSS codebase disables certain features by default to enhance privacy and reduce reliance on proprietary services. The tdesktop repository typically keeps these features enabled, providing a more feature-rich but potentially less privacy-focused experience.

Pros of Telethon

• Written in Python, making it more accessible for scripting and rapid development
• Focuses on API interactions, ideal for building bots and automated tools
• Lightweight and easy to integrate into existing Python projects

Cons of Telethon

• Limited to backend functionality, not suitable for creating full-fledged desktop applications
• May require additional libraries for advanced features like GUI development
• Performance may be slower compared to C++ implementations for resource-intensive tasks

Code Comparison

Telethon (Python):

from telethon import TelegramClient, events

client = TelegramClient('session', api_id, api_hash)

@client.on(events.NewMessage(pattern='/start'))
async def start_handler(event):
    await event.reply('Hello, I am a Telethon bot!')

client.start()
client.run_until_disconnected()

tdesktop (C++):

#include "api/api_text_entities.h"
#include "core/application.h"
#include "main/main_session.h"

void sendMessage(const QString &text) {
    auto &session = Core::App().session();
    session.sendMessage(text, Api::EntitiesInText());
}

The code snippets demonstrate the difference in approach and language between the two projects. Telethon focuses on event-based bot creation, while tdesktop provides lower-level access to Telegram's functionality for building a complete desktop application.