Why Textly does not support Signal or iMessage

Every time someone lists the channels Textly unifies, the same two questions follow. Both deserve a straight answer rather than a roadmap deflection.

iMessage: there is nothing to connect to

iMessage has no client interface outside Apple's own devices. Not a restricted one, not an undocumented one. None. The protocol is proprietary, the authentication is bound to Apple hardware identity, and there is no sanctioned path for a third-party client on any platform.

Projects that have delivered iMessage on Android worked by relaying messages through a Mac you own, or by borrowing hardware identifiers from real Apple devices. The first requires you to keep a Mac permanently online as a proxy. The second is legally precarious and has consistently been shut down.

Neither is something we would build, and neither is something we would want you to depend on. So iMessage is not on our roadmap, and it will not appear on it.

Signal: the answer is "correctly, no"

Signal is different, and the difference is worth understanding, because it explains something important about how encryption works.

Signal could technically permit third-party clients; the protocol is open and documented. It deliberately does not, and its reasoning is sound.

Signal's security model depends on the endpoints. Messages are encrypted on your device and decrypted on your recipient's, and the guarantee holds only if both endpoints behave correctly: keys stored properly, safety numbers verified, forward secrecy maintained, nothing logged where it should not be.

A third-party client is an endpoint that Signal cannot audit. A poorly built one does not just endanger its own user. It silently weakens the guarantee for everyone who messages that user, without their knowledge and with no way to detect it.

Encryption is only as trustworthy as its weakest endpoint, and endpoints you cannot verify are the weakest kind.

So Signal restricts clients on purpose. We think that is the right call, and it would be incoherent for us, a company whose entire pitch is that architecture beats policy, to argue otherwise the moment it is inconvenient.

The rule we apply

We only integrate channels that can be integrated legitimately: through a documented interface, with your explicit authorisation, without impersonating another client and without breaching anyone's terms.

That rule costs us features people ask for. It also means the channels Textly supports will keep working, and that using Textly will not put an account of yours at risk. Integrations built on reverse-engineered protocols break when the provider changes something, and take user accounts with them when the provider decides to enforce.

If those two matter most to you

Then Textly is not the right tool for that part of your messaging, and we would rather say so than have you find out after installing.

Use Signal for what Signal is for. It is genuinely the best-designed messenger available, and its restrictions are a feature. Keep iMessage where Apple keeps it.

Textly can still collapse the remaining channels into one list, which for most people is where the fragmentation actually lives. Worth noting for iPhone users: the same Apple restriction that keeps iMessage closed also means Textly cannot handle SMS on iOS. That is a platform limit, not a choice. The download page sets out exactly what differs.