I'm not drawing an equivalence at all (not saying that Telegram and Signal are equivalently insecure or flawed, etc.) -- I was only asking why would Signal make any compromise on security if that is their main selling point (and probably the only one). I don't think that releasing a Chrome app is a good strategy considering the audience (but I don't know for sure, they probably have a better overview of their user base).
I could have compared it to Threema as well, actually.
I don't concede that Signal has made any security compromises. That was someone else.
If you care about security, use Signal. If you care about UX, and Threema has a better UX, use Threema. Threema is a closed-source system that apparently relies on Nacl. That is a much better answer than the one Telegram can give, but it still leaves a whole lot of questions unanswered. There's a lot that can go wrong in the layers above Nacl.
Here's an example, from adc and Juliano Rizzo, who co-discovered the TLS BEAST and CRIME vulnerabilities:
http://www.alexrad.me/discourse/a-264-attack-on-telegram-and...