3 ms·

Is Matrix a good alternative to Signal? I'm currently using Signal, but I'm not entirely satisfied. My major issues are that I don't like their stance on a coup

Is Matrix a good alternative to Signal? I'm currently using Signal, but I'm not entirely satisfied. My major issues are that I don't like their stance on a couple of issues: third party clients are not allowed, mobile first and desktop is only synced, phone number required, and distribution only over the app stores. Also we frequently get "encryption errors" and everybody ignores them, this is worse than with SSH key errors :-).

robjan 6y ago
There is more metadata with Matrix but the privacy and security of message content is good. I find the UX a bit clunky because it's kind of trying to combine bits of a instant messenger with something like slack.
zaggynl 6y ago
matrix-synapse(server) suffers from performance issues[1], dendrite[2], the replacement should be resolving that but is currently in beta. Apart from that it integrates fairly well with other networks through bridges.[3] It can be self hosted and it federates, which is a pro. Not too sure about audits and security, it has improved much, when I started using it (2019) they didn't have login throttling[4] and shortly after that were breached.[5] Much has improved since. [1] https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+performance https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is... [2] https://matrix.org/docs/projects/server/dendrite https://matrix.org/docs/projects/server/dendrite [3] https://matrix.org/bridges/ https://matrix.org/bridges/ [4] https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/1452 https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/1452 [5] https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/83751/data-breach/matrix-org-hack.html https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/83751/data-breach/matri...
- remirk 6y ago
  Your first link lists a lot of tickets than actual performance issues. Searching on an issue tracker for the word 'performance' is not a good source for claiming there are performance issues. Synapse used to have scaling issues. Those are pretty much fixed.[1] [1] https://matrix.org/blog/2020/11/03/how-we-fixed-synapses-scalability https://matrix.org/blog/2020/11/03/how-we-fixed-synapses-sca...
  - joepie91_ 6y ago
    Speaking as a Matrix user: it definitely still has performance issues. I'm regularly running into sudden lag spikes that have no clear justifiable reason to exist. More details about my specific case are found here: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/8612 https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/8612 - and occasionally other performance issues pop up for other people too. I'm sure this will eventually be fixed, and honestly the performance is probably good enough for most people, but Synapse is definitely not as performant yet as a homeserver should be.
cycomanic 6y ago
I like matrix, and the chat feature is pretty rock solid. However for calls and sending files it's currently not as good as Signal. I quite often have an issue with calls connecting (need several tries) while I hardly ever see this with signal. Similarly, sometimes I get failed sending of files (especially if they are big) and they somehow stay as a failed message in your chat afterwards, which is really annoying.
Hamuko 6y ago
I would personally have a hard time convincing people to switch to Matrix when the Elements UX is so bad and I haven't found any good alternatives.
- adamcstephens 6y ago
  The clients are Matrix’s limiter right now. I’ve tried multiple and none are polished. Fluffy chat may be the best, but still needs lots of love.
  - Hamuko 6y ago
    Yeah. I'd love to love Matrix but the clients are getting in the way. I did find a native macOS Matrix client and quite honestly I'd love to be able to use a native client since all platforms really only have Electron apps. But the macOS client only gets me so far since I also want to use it on my phone.
josteink 6y ago
> Is Matrix a good alternative to Signal? To a certain degree I'd say this is apples vs oranges. Before you shoot me down, let me explain. The reason I say that is because of the core focus of the different platforms. Signal's priority-one use-case is clearly person-to-person IM and communication. The UI, setup-process and entire architecture is optimized for this one use-case, with all other use-cases being shoehorned in to fit whatever was built for that. I'd say Matrix (for the moment disregarding a key feature, bridging) has as its primary use-case to be a discord/slack/IRC alternative, to handle "channels", long term group chats and basically persistent online collaboration workspaces. Sure. Technically speaking, Matrix has a full support for E2E encrypted person-to-person IM and communications (even phone-calls and audio!), and you can use it for that. But this was clearly not the primary use-case Matrix was designed to solve. Therefore IMO Matrix person-to-person chat has this slightly shoehorned-in feeling, so you may have a somewhat lesser user-experience when using Matrix to do these things than other platforms which had this as their primary goal. Disclaimer: Happy Matrix-user, running own server, bridging both FB, WhatsApp and Signal into the matrix-verse.
- fsflover 6y ago
  Are you suggesting to use a separate app for every different use case?
  - josteink 6y ago
    Not at all. I’m just saying that if you try to suggest Matrix as a “drop in” replacement for WhatsApp or other dedicated IM platforms, it may not immediately give you that “at home” feeling right now. It’s much more capable, but different. For better and worse.
- juniperplant 6y ago
  As far as I know, the Matrix protocol shouldn't be limiting when it comes to one-to-one chats. There are already Matrix mobile clients focusing on this use case, aiming at being a WhatsApp replacement. Examples are: Ditto Chat[1], Nio[2], and FluffyChat[3]. Before trying to solve the network-effect issue (i.e. all people using WhatsApp), we should make one of the mentioned clients at least as good as WhatsApp, or else users won't switch. [1] https://dittochat.org https://dittochat.org [2] https://nio.chat https://nio.chat [3] https://fluffychat.im https://fluffychat.im
kelchqvjpnfasjl 6y ago
Signal for Android is also distributed via their website.

robjan 6y ago

There is more metadata with Matrix but the privacy and security of message content is good. I find the UX a bit clunky because it's kind of trying to combine bits of a instant messenger with something like slack.

zaggynl 6y ago

matrix-synapse(server) suffers from performance issues[1], dendrite[2], the replacement should be resolving that but is currently in beta. Apart from that it integrates fairly well with other networks through bridges.[3] It can be self hosted and it federates, which is a pro. Not too sure about audits and security, it has improved much, when I started using it (2019) they didn't have login throttling[4] and shortly after that were breached.[5] Much has improved since. [1] https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+performance https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is... [2] https://matrix.org/docs/projects/server/dendrite https://matrix.org/docs/projects/server/dendrite [3] https://matrix.org/bridges/ https://matrix.org/bridges/ [4] https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/1452 https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/1452 [5] https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/83751/data-breach/matrix-org-hack.html https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/83751/data-breach/matri...

remirk 6y ago
Your first link lists a lot of tickets than actual performance issues. Searching on an issue tracker for the word 'performance' is not a good source for claiming there are performance issues. Synapse used to have scaling issues. Those are pretty much fixed.[1] [1] https://matrix.org/blog/2020/11/03/how-we-fixed-synapses-scalability https://matrix.org/blog/2020/11/03/how-we-fixed-synapses-sca...
- joepie91_ 6y ago
  Speaking as a Matrix user: it definitely still has performance issues. I'm regularly running into sudden lag spikes that have no clear justifiable reason to exist. More details about my specific case are found here: https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/8612 https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/8612 - and occasionally other performance issues pop up for other people too. I'm sure this will eventually be fixed, and honestly the performance is probably good enough for most people, but Synapse is definitely not as performant yet as a homeserver should be.

cycomanic 6y ago

I like matrix, and the chat feature is pretty rock solid. However for calls and sending files it's currently not as good as Signal. I quite often have an issue with calls connecting (need several tries) while I hardly ever see this with signal. Similarly, sometimes I get failed sending of files (especially if they are big) and they somehow stay as a failed message in your chat afterwards, which is really annoying.

Hamuko 6y ago

I would personally have a hard time convincing people to switch to Matrix when the Elements UX is so bad and I haven't found any good alternatives.

adamcstephens 6y ago
The clients are Matrix’s limiter right now. I’ve tried multiple and none are polished. Fluffy chat may be the best, but still needs lots of love.
- Hamuko 6y ago
  Yeah. I'd love to love Matrix but the clients are getting in the way. I did find a native macOS Matrix client and quite honestly I'd love to be able to use a native client since all platforms really only have Electron apps. But the macOS client only gets me so far since I also want to use it on my phone.

josteink 6y ago

> Is Matrix a good alternative to Signal? To a certain degree I'd say this is apples vs oranges. Before you shoot me down, let me explain. The reason I say that is because of the core focus of the different platforms. Signal's priority-one use-case is clearly person-to-person IM and communication. The UI, setup-process and entire architecture is optimized for this one use-case, with all other use-cases being shoehorned in to fit whatever was built for that. I'd say Matrix (for the moment disregarding a key feature, bridging) has as its primary use-case to be a discord/slack/IRC alternative, to handle "channels", long term group chats and basically persistent online collaboration workspaces. Sure. Technically speaking, Matrix has a full support for E2E encrypted person-to-person IM and communications (even phone-calls and audio!), and you can use it for that. But this was clearly not the primary use-case Matrix was designed to solve. Therefore IMO Matrix person-to-person chat has this slightly shoehorned-in feeling, so you may have a somewhat lesser user-experience when using Matrix to do these things than other platforms which had this as their primary goal. Disclaimer: Happy Matrix-user, running own server, bridging both FB, WhatsApp and Signal into the matrix-verse.

fsflover 6y ago
Are you suggesting to use a separate app for every different use case?
- josteink 6y ago
  Not at all. I’m just saying that if you try to suggest Matrix as a “drop in” replacement for WhatsApp or other dedicated IM platforms, it may not immediately give you that “at home” feeling right now. It’s much more capable, but different. For better and worse.
juniperplant 6y ago
As far as I know, the Matrix protocol shouldn't be limiting when it comes to one-to-one chats. There are already Matrix mobile clients focusing on this use case, aiming at being a WhatsApp replacement. Examples are: Ditto Chat[1], Nio[2], and FluffyChat[3]. Before trying to solve the network-effect issue (i.e. all people using WhatsApp), we should make one of the mentioned clients at least as good as WhatsApp, or else users won't switch. [1] https://dittochat.org https://dittochat.org [2] https://nio.chat https://nio.chat [3] https://fluffychat.im https://fluffychat.im

kelchqvjpnfasjl 6y ago

Signal for Android is also distributed via their website.