4 ms·

This post promotes Snikket, a chat app built on top of XMPP. It talks a lot about decentralization and protocol development, but I doubt it will be able to best

This post promotes Snikket, a chat app built on top of XMPP. It talks a lot about decentralization and protocol development, but I doubt it will be able to best Matrix in this regard. Matrix has bridges connecting it to other apps like Facebook Messenger. XMPP, meanwhile, seems to have been shuffling along slowly for 20 years without many users or features that appeal to a mass audience (GIFs, etc). So while Matrix could potentially (or already does) link up with Signal, this app doesn't seem like it could get traction/expand because of the dubious base that it stands on.

Mediterraneo10 6y ago
> So while Matrix could potentially (or already does) link up with Signal Matrix doesn't link up with Signal. The Signal devs have emphasized time and time again that they don’t want any third-party applications talking to their servers. While there does exist some outside software that connects to Signal’s own infrastructure without Signal’s permission (e.g. signal-cli), that is only tolerated because those third-party apps have very few users.
- 3np 6y ago
  While you’re very correct about Signal’s hostility to third-party clients, there is a decently well-functioning Signal bridge for Matrix (using signald under the hood). They very well might sabotage that, but it does link up today.
TheJoYo 6y ago
If they can undercut the resource consumption of Matrix then I'm already sold.
upofadown 6y ago
>Matrix has bridges connecting it to other apps like Facebook Messenger. XMPP is traditionally all about intercommunication with other systems. Here is a XMPP transport for Whatsapp for an example: * https://git.theta.eu.org/eta/whatsxmpp https://git.theta.eu.org/eta/whatsxmpp Such gateways eventually get banned/blocked by the siloed IM systems. So the XMPP people have over the years tired of the game. The same will happen in the case of Matrix.
wahern 6y ago
> XMPP, meanwhile, seems to have been shuffling along slowly for 20 years without many users or features that appeal to a mass audience (GIFs, etc) GTalk was based on XMPP and for many years supported federation with XMPP servers, even for a year or more after Google announced it was going to end federation. (IIRC, it supported XMPP almost until the day they pulled the plug entirely, circa 2016-2017.) Because of its integration with GMail[1] and GMail's prevalence, XMPP (both the protocol and the network) was one of the largest, if not the largest, IM network. Matrix is a nice protocol but at the end of the day it's biggest differentiator with XMPP is using HTTP and JSON for transport. Theoretically that means it should be easier to implement Matrix clients and servers, but in reality AFAICT the XMPP ecosystem is still richer than Matrix. Worse, Matrix deployment still seems far more centralized than XMPP ever was. I'm curious, by show of hands who in this forum runs or has run for any significant amount of time their own federated Matrix server? XMPP server? I ran my own XMPP server for years until GTalk dropped off. I would love to see Matrix achieve widespread federated deployment. Personally I think XMPP stands a better chance, if only because it came tantalizingly close to critical momentum, joining the ranks of HTTP and SMTP, before Google killed it[2]. But I really couldn't care much one way or another which protocol wins so long as we see a real, federated solution. I would try running my own Matrix server but I'm still confused whether I need to register my own user ID or my own server with a central Matrix authority (other than DNS), which seems like it defeats the purpose of traditional federation. Running an XMPP server was easy--once DNS records were properly published people could just contact me at my e-mail address. [1] You could chat with anyone logged into the GMail web interface. [2] IIRC, the official reason was because of spam, though Google seemed to have had basically solved that by the time they ended federation. The real reason seems to have been that other IM networks, like MSN, abused XMPP GTalk federation in an anti-competitive manner, so Google decided to take its ball and go home. Also, GTalk apparently worked too well--after GTalk was a series of horrible products and services that ending up destroying Google's position in the IM space.
- jasonjayr 6y ago
  /me raises hand. I run a personal federated matrix server. It has many .. 'quirks', including an upgrade that screwed up my database and required me to redo it from scratch, and a lot of little ongoing http requests (as it syncs room state and what not) I'm doing it as a test run to see if it would work as an IRC replacement at my day job, but based on my experience, I have not found anything as maintenance free as our IRC server. FWIW, my current primary use case is running a matrix/sms gateway on my phone so I can forward my SMS to my desktop; the xmpp one I used eons ago was slightly more cumbersome. Quick edit: there is no central authority to register your personal server. you create a /.well-known/matrix/server endpoint on your primary domain that points at your real matrix server (and/or DNS SRV records) and your good to go.
Semaphor 6y ago
XMPP has far better clients (at least on Desktop) available than Matrix for me.
southerntofu 6y ago
> It talks a lot about decentralization and protocol development, but I doubt it will be able to best Matrix in this regard. Matrix has bridges XMPP has had bridges for more than a decade. That was actually one of the core promises of the XMPP protocol, compared to others (like IRC). Both XMPP and matrix have exactly the same promise to be the only and ultimate federated protocol you will ever need, so there's no real distinction on this front. > without many users or features that appeal to a mass audience Many people were (are?) unconsciously using Jabber/XMPP on a daily basis. What plagued XMPP is open standards with closed-source implementations: i.e. private companies ripping off the benefits of specifications. There's a ton of fancy new features in the Jabber/XMPP ecosystem, including some unique stuff like federated forging: https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/ https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/

Mediterraneo10 6y ago

> So while Matrix could potentially (or already does) link up with Signal Matrix doesn't link up with Signal. The Signal devs have emphasized time and time again that they don’t want any third-party applications talking to their servers. While there does exist some outside software that connects to Signal’s own infrastructure without Signal’s permission (e.g. signal-cli), that is only tolerated because those third-party apps have very few users.

3np 6y ago
While you’re very correct about Signal’s hostility to third-party clients, there is a decently well-functioning Signal bridge for Matrix (using signald under the hood). They very well might sabotage that, but it does link up today.

TheJoYo 6y ago

If they can undercut the resource consumption of Matrix then I'm already sold.

upofadown 6y ago

>Matrix has bridges connecting it to other apps like Facebook Messenger. XMPP is traditionally all about intercommunication with other systems. Here is a XMPP transport for Whatsapp for an example: * https://git.theta.eu.org/eta/whatsxmpp https://git.theta.eu.org/eta/whatsxmpp Such gateways eventually get banned/blocked by the siloed IM systems. So the XMPP people have over the years tired of the game. The same will happen in the case of Matrix.

wahern 6y ago

> XMPP, meanwhile, seems to have been shuffling along slowly for 20 years without many users or features that appeal to a mass audience (GIFs, etc) GTalk was based on XMPP and for many years supported federation with XMPP servers, even for a year or more after Google announced it was going to end federation. (IIRC, it supported XMPP almost until the day they pulled the plug entirely, circa 2016-2017.) Because of its integration with GMail[1] and GMail's prevalence, XMPP (both the protocol and the network) was one of the largest, if not the largest, IM network. Matrix is a nice protocol but at the end of the day it's biggest differentiator with XMPP is using HTTP and JSON for transport. Theoretically that means it should be easier to implement Matrix clients and servers, but in reality AFAICT the XMPP ecosystem is still richer than Matrix. Worse, Matrix deployment still seems far more centralized than XMPP ever was. I'm curious, by show of hands who in this forum runs or has run for any significant amount of time their own federated Matrix server? XMPP server? I ran my own XMPP server for years until GTalk dropped off. I would love to see Matrix achieve widespread federated deployment. Personally I think XMPP stands a better chance, if only because it came tantalizingly close to critical momentum, joining the ranks of HTTP and SMTP, before Google killed it[2]. But I really couldn't care much one way or another which protocol wins so long as we see a real, federated solution. I would try running my own Matrix server but I'm still confused whether I need to register my own user ID or my own server with a central Matrix authority (other than DNS), which seems like it defeats the purpose of traditional federation. Running an XMPP server was easy--once DNS records were properly published people could just contact me at my e-mail address. [1] You could chat with anyone logged into the GMail web interface. [2] IIRC, the official reason was because of spam, though Google seemed to have had basically solved that by the time they ended federation. The real reason seems to have been that other IM networks, like MSN, abused XMPP GTalk federation in an anti-competitive manner, so Google decided to take its ball and go home. Also, GTalk apparently worked too well--after GTalk was a series of horrible products and services that ending up destroying Google's position in the IM space.

jasonjayr 6y ago
/me raises hand. I run a personal federated matrix server. It has many .. 'quirks', including an upgrade that screwed up my database and required me to redo it from scratch, and a lot of little ongoing http requests (as it syncs room state and what not) I'm doing it as a test run to see if it would work as an IRC replacement at my day job, but based on my experience, I have not found anything as maintenance free as our IRC server. FWIW, my current primary use case is running a matrix/sms gateway on my phone so I can forward my SMS to my desktop; the xmpp one I used eons ago was slightly more cumbersome. Quick edit: there is no central authority to register your personal server. you create a /.well-known/matrix/server endpoint on your primary domain that points at your real matrix server (and/or DNS SRV records) and your good to go.

Semaphor 6y ago

XMPP has far better clients (at least on Desktop) available than Matrix for me.

southerntofu 6y ago

> It talks a lot about decentralization and protocol development, but I doubt it will be able to best Matrix in this regard. Matrix has bridges XMPP has had bridges for more than a decade. That was actually one of the core promises of the XMPP protocol, compared to others (like IRC). Both XMPP and matrix have exactly the same promise to be the only and ultimate federated protocol you will ever need, so there's no real distinction on this front. > without many users or features that appeal to a mass audience Many people were (are?) unconsciously using Jabber/XMPP on a daily basis. What plagued XMPP is open standards with closed-source implementations: i.e. private companies ripping off the benefits of specifications. There's a ton of fancy new features in the Jabber/XMPP ecosystem, including some unique stuff like federated forging: https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/ https://staticadventures.netlib.re/blog/decentralized-forge/