This comparison table mainly focuses on private use cases. For business group chat solutions please refer to Comparison of Google Hangouts Chat, Slack, Cisco Jabber, Skype for Business, Telegram, WhatsApp and other group chat solutions.
| Criteria | Telegram | HipChat Server | Google Hangouts Chat | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incredibly fast loading times | UNRIVALED | OKAY | GOOD | VERY HIGH |
| Multiple accounts on one device |  |  | | MEDIUM |
| Fast sharing of pictures | 3 CLICKS | 1 AT A TIME | GOOD | HIGH |
| Zero upload picture forwarding | | | | HIGH |
| Easy forwarding of messages | | | | HIGH |
| Offline abilities | GOOD | | | HIGH |
| Un-send messages | | | | HIGH |
| Completely free and independent | | | | MEDIUM |
| Usernames and public messages | | | | MEDIUM |
| Stickers | |  | | MEDIUM |
| Possibility to chat with yourself | | | | MEDIUM |
| Sticky chats | | | | MEDIUM |
| Options to edit and annotate pictures | POWERFUL | | | MEDIUM |
| Improving pictures | | | | MEDIUM |
| Who reads it and when | | | | MEDIUM |
| End-to-end encrypted chats | | | | MEDIUM |
| Open source | | | | MEDIUM |
| Automatic Masks and Stickers | | | | LOW |
| Unread syncing over devices | GOOD | OKAY | GOOD | LOW |
| Message self-destruction | | | | LOW |
| Public channels and groups | | | | LOW |
| Channels | | | | LOW |
| Instant view for fast news consumption | | | | LOW |
| Groups with up to 200,000 people | | 8,000 | | LOW |
| Optimal text formatting for conversations copied over from other software (e.g. JIRA) | | | | LOW |
Link to this page: http://seibert.biz/hipchatvsgooglechat