7 ms·

I really sympathise with this point of view, but when it comes to messaging with family and friends, I just don't really care. Matrix seems to want to be an IRC

I really sympathise with this point of view, but when it comes to messaging with family and friends, I just don't really care. Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app. That's fine, but often not what I want. Teaching my mother in law to use Signal: Install. Accept permissions. Choose a PIN. I can send you messages. You can see your friends who already use Signal. Well done! Matrix: When you start you will get to choose from [matrix.org], swirly symbol "element matrix services" (the biggest and middle option, but not the one you want), or other. Choose matrix.org (nothing else, or we will get very confused). Then click "sign up". Then enter a username and password (need a username which no-one has used before, you can't use your email address. Make sure to remember it). Oh, but do put your email address in the next page, which is how people in practice are going to find you. Bonus feature: How do you join a room? Click on it. How do you leave? Maybe long-press the room name, or swipe? Nope, you enter the room, click on the triple dots, settings, scroll down, leave room. Bonus feature 2: Once you join a popular room, all users of that room are added to "Known users", making the list completely without value. How do I actually find people I know?

maxwellito 6y ago
+1 Also about Matrix, the confusion when the client app doesn't have the same name as the protocol is so unfriendly for the non tech-savy users.
- junon 6y ago
  I was designing something similar to Matrix at one point several years back. The different names confused even myself when I was dabbling into Matrix. Matrix is cool, there's no doubt. The packaging is terrible, IMO. They really need a product manager.
  - anticensor 6y ago
    Do you have any links to share?
    - junon 6y ago
      Nah unfortunately not. I tabled that project a long time ago.
- dsr_ 6y ago
  There are a bunch of people who think that their mail system is named Thunderbird.
- GekkePrutser 6y ago
  This is the thing about multiclient protocols. You don't look for SMTP in the app store either :) The whole point is having multiple clients so they can't all have the same name. Having said that, the 'default' app constantly changing their name (Vector -> Riot -> Element) is super annoying. I thought Riot was a stupid name (living in a city that regularly sees riots), but don't really get what was wrong with Vector in the first place :P
- ekianjo 6y ago
  > client app doesn't have the same name it is not that hard to understand.
the_duke 6y ago
> Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app I don't know where you get that impression. Matrix / Element works great for 1-1 and small group chats, the general UX issues aside.
- newswasboring 6y ago
  > the general UX issues aside. I think those are the issues, at least according to the op. I mean, anyone can write a chat app. That tech has existed for ever. Putting the right UX on it is the hard problem good chat apps need to solve.
  - joepie91_ 6y ago
    Anyone can write a centralized chat app. Building a federated chat app is an order of magnitude more difficult, and is still a largely unexplored space.
    - Semaphor 6y ago
      XMPP/Jabber explored it pretty well. And for a glorious few months, I could use a FLOSS client (with for me far superior UX to any other modern client) to talk to people on Facebook and GTalk as well as all proper Jabber servers.
      - newswasboring 6y ago
        I remember those days. It was so rewarding to be able to throw together a Twitter and chat client in an afternoon (especially as a very new coder). I don't think that kind of stuff is possible any more.
    - newswasboring 6y ago
      Let me rephrase a bit, and this is now my opinion not op's. The UX is the most important problem to solve. Sure making a secure federated chat app may be harder in quantifiable sense, the structures are not really know. But for UX, honestly speaking I feel like nothing is known. We can copy WhatsApp interface, just like you can copy signal/WhatsApp architecture. But is that really what makes them successful?
cheph 6y ago
I am heavily against switching from WhatsApp to Signal, but you have very good points, and I think Matrix should take note of these points. Technically Matrix can yield a very similar user experience to Signal, but there has to be more focus on actually doing it if it wants to be considered as a serious player in the same space as WhatsApp and Signal.
- tchalla 6y ago
  > I am heavily against switching from WhatsApp to Signal, I'm curious - what are your arguments against the switch?
  - perryizgr8 6y ago
    I dunno about cheph, but I feel Signal and Whatsapp are identical. There is literally no difference between the products in any way. In fact Whatsapp has some extra features on it.
    - GekkePrutser 6y ago
      Same for me. Yet another walled garden. A slightly prettier garden, but when I make a big app move I want to solve more problems than just the privacy one.
    - waxpoeticwhy35 6y ago
      You are so wrong. Please read up on how far Signal goes to hide your metadata. WhatsApp diarrhoea-shits it's metadata to Facebook's hungry mouth. Signal goes to such lengths even gifs are implemented so carefully as to preserve user privacy and security.
    - Marsymars 6y ago
      Asides what the other user said about metadata, Signal is drastically better at multi-device support. WhatsApp only lets you log in one non-phone device at a time, and this device syncs via your phone so it doesn’t work if your phone is offline, and it doesn’t have an iPadOS app. Signal has desktop and iPadOS apps, and they all function independently of your phone once set up.
dpatterbee 6y ago
I get what you're saying, but you seem to just be criticising element, not matrix. All of these are temporary problems which can be overcome with more time to hone the user experience. I would love to see another company come along and make another matrix-based chat app to compete with element, hopefully that would result in them both getting better much quicker.
- pimeys 6y ago
  Beeper seems to be one. Hopefully they allow more people to join their beta soon. https://www.beeperhq.com/ https://www.beeperhq.com/
  - anthropodie 6y ago
    Here's another I haven't tried it but it looks slick https://github.com/syphon-org/syphon https://github.com/syphon-org/syphon
- spurgu 6y ago
  Element has a sad amount of bugs/inconsistencies, even though they're being fixed/improved all the time. Message formatting issues for example between mobile and desktop clients are things that really put me off using it. I like the protocol, and I love the idea, but it's just nowhere near grandmother (or even mother) level of usability. And it's not nowhere near good enough for someone as anal as me. People in between might not get put off by all the issues though.
- CJefferson 6y ago
  I hope so too, I'd be happy to suggest another client, if someone could make something as "ruthlessly simple" as the alternatives.
- didibus 6y ago
  The thing is criticizing Element is a criticism on Matrix. Interoperable protocols always also make it much harder to build a very usable client for. Even the great email is being "disrupted" with new closed alternatives like Slack, Discord, Teams, etc.
rwmj 6y ago
Moments of recognition reading this. A couple of weeks ago at virtual FOSDEM I was trying to work out how to join the FOSDEM chatrooms using the Android app formerly known as Riot.im (now Element.io). And I couldn't work it out - I gave up completely. I'm an actual programmer and heavy IRC user!
- sammorrowdrums 6y ago
  I actually felt that the instructions weren't that clear if you were joining via the app. I incidentally did join some of the rooms after the actual conference, but FOSDEM could have provided more instructions beyond "sign up on our server and use the web client" - the main Android App client, and most popular server are hardly niche. And many people already have that setup. I did eventually work out how to find the chats - but it took me a while too
  - LegitShady 6y ago
    The provided instructions would have allowed people to use it but the criticism of the ux remains
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- 0xy 6y ago
  Element's security UI is indecipherable garbage. There's absolutely no way a casual user can figure it out. It's clear no UX designers were involved. It's clunky, buggy and feels very unstable.
Hammershaft 6y ago
Seems like something that can be solved with a more streamlined client focused on usability. Consider the difference between setting up a custom domain on mxroute compared to just opening a gmail account. Both user experiences are possible on the email protocol. Personally I think we've been in something of a dark age for open protocols to our detriment, as oligopolistic companies have increasingly used walled gardens to manipulate or dominate. I'd like to see that trend reversed and protocols like this succeed. Maybe with the rise of the patron model we can actually sustainable fund people who do the work of maintaining these protocols.
GekkePrutser 6y ago
If your mother in law can't even pick a username and password, how will she shop on Amazon, sign up with Google, book a flight? Most other mobile apps require you to sign up for an account too. And it bypasses the big problem of having to use your phone number (though you can already add it if you want for people to easily find you!) In regards to the UX of Elements, I think it's not great either but it's not the only matrix client. That's the great thing about Matrix.
- CJefferson 6y ago
  Amazon doesn't have a username, it uses your email. Also, it doesn't give you a choice of "which amazon to sign up with", with 3 options.
  - arcturus17 6y ago
    This guy UXs.
  - ggm 6y ago
    Amazon would happily make multiple accounts with the same email. I've managed this twice. Unwinding it is somewhat complex. "Oh yeah, you think your id is the mail. Well.. it isn't"
  - Marsymars 6y ago
    Though if you go to amazon.<wrong TLD>, the accounts are sometimes, depending on TLD, entirely separate from your normal amazon, even if the site is in the same language and looks basically the same.
- andresp 6y ago
  Exactly. This idea of tech barrier is massively overstated. We see people adapt to new tech all the time. The bigger issues are network effects, inertia/lazyness. Alternatives to the status quo are expected to be 10x better to justify mass exodus. Most people don't value privacy and freedom of speech that much.
- cosmodisk 6y ago
indymike 6y ago
"I just don't really care." (Comparison of matix.org and Signal follows) It's a lot easier when everyone is using it already. Federated and distributed chat has been really elusive, and that's surprising given that chat has been around forever. This article was interesting because it was about the core problem: how to get a bunch of diverse systems to support a standard mail protocol and is suggesting the protocol behind matrix be used, and not necessarily some implementation of a client.
EGreg 6y ago
“I just don’t really care” sums up why all well-meaning attempts I have seen to switch Web 2.0 (the social Web) to open source have failed. Web 1.0 has Wordpress, Magento and a slew of other things. But for Web 2.0 people expect a growing number of real-time services, slick and easy to use, these days they all added audio chatrooms and video calls etc. Everything has to be super reliable, etc. It would take years to build a suite of components (chatrooms, events, managing subscriptions and notifications etc.) that could rival Facebook / Telegram / WhatsApp. I would like to think we did it at Qbix. But we are still playing catch-up to the big boys. User adoption will only come when something is good enough to be used as what’s currently out there. But once it comes, it has so many advantages: host where you want, configure components how you want. If you’re interested, look at the links in my profile.
agumonkey 6y ago
if the matrix guy can read this, it's important, make things mean and lean.. not overly powerful to the point of alienating the mass market. Maybe have an expert mode for that.
- dosenbrot 6y ago
  This. Using the app should be dead simple - with a default server, a default username, maybe even a pre set password (bound to the phone number or whatever, I'm not a fan of this but they all do it this way) and a feature adding contacts via link, qrcode, or phone-number. And then there should be a button for expert-mode giving you the complicated setup you want - choosing your own server, name, password and whatever.
sweden 6y ago
While Element.io still has some UX points to improve upon, I wish people would be a bit more honest about the state of Matrix clients and less fatalist. There are other alternative Matrix clients that implement an experience closer to Whatsapp than Element, like Fluffychat.
BubuIIC 6y ago
> How do you leave? Maybe long-press the room name, or swipe? Nope, you enter the room, click on the triple dots, settings, scroll down, leave room. Long press sure works in a recent version of element-android. (And I remember that being the case for a long time, but might be mistaken here.)
the__alchemist 6y ago
I still can't figure out how to verify my log in, or make the popups asking me to verify go away.
upofadown 6y ago
>Install. Accept permissions. Choose a PIN. I can send you messages. You can see your friends who already use Signal. Well done! Sure but that does not in any way take away from the point that siloed messengers are a bad idea. If the XMPP/Matrix people wanted to they could set up a trusted third party server to link identities to phone numbers just like Signal does. They could even claim to use some sort of hardware enclave to do it. You could at that point create clients that were functionally identical to Signal but that worked on the respective federated networks. Heck you could probably do that with encrypted email and no one would much mind any added latency. When people are talking about messaging systems that do not interoperate they are complaining about the underlying protocols. Client useability is a whole other discussion. I think there is a tendency to confuse the two in this sort of discussion.
- mixedCase 6y ago
  > Sure but that does not in any way take away from the point that siloed messengers are a bad idea. Well, too bad! Usability trumps idealism when network effects are at play. > If the XMPP/Matrix people wanted to they could set up a trusted third party server to link identities to phone numbers just like Signal does Usability is so bad that you're defending Matrix and don't even know this is already available, just has terrible UX. Chat protocols don't matter at all if the final product isn't something grandma can easily use. Element has many of the pieces in place, but it needs go further. I say this as I use Matrix. I've set-up Matrix for my SO and family just to talk to me, you know, like a bastard. I want Matrix to succeed. But it's not going to happen unless it can match tit-for-tat the usability of things like WhatsApp or Telegram, even if that means having defaults that geeks find "icky", like railroading the user into a single instance (and hiding non-matrix homeservers in a corner), defaulting to using the phone number as an account without passwords, and auto-joining to an identity server.
  - sceox 6y ago
    Because Matrix allows any number of clients to be made, it's entirely possible for one client to do the things you list at the same time as other clients don't for the reasons you mention. If I had to guess, it won't be Element, it will be a new client preconfigured to some (not matrix.org) server.
dvdgsng 6y ago
Or she could use OAuth with an existing login from Google, Apple, Facebook or even Github and Gitlab, if she fancies that more.
forgotmypw17 6y ago
The funny thing is that IRC is the last system which needs replacement. It's frustrating to see FOSS projects force-switch support communities to from IRC to Matrix, because IRC works great and has a lot of existing software, while Matrix requires a new, heavy client with tons of usability issues and few alternatives. (If you don't think there are usability issues, I challenge you go through the entire installation, registration, and connection process without using your pointing device, keyboard only.) For example, one browser's devs have decided to stop using IRC for support. That's OK, people can still hang out on IRC if they want to, right? Nope, they closed #browsername using the ban-on-join method, and if you don't know to look for ##browsername, the unofficial support channel, you're left with having to install yet another software package just to reach the official support channel?

maxwellito 6y ago

+1 Also about Matrix, the confusion when the client app doesn't have the same name as the protocol is so unfriendly for the non tech-savy users.

junon 6y ago
I was designing something similar to Matrix at one point several years back. The different names confused even myself when I was dabbling into Matrix. Matrix is cool, there's no doubt. The packaging is terrible, IMO. They really need a product manager.
- anticensor 6y ago
  Do you have any links to share?
  - junon 6y ago
    Nah unfortunately not. I tabled that project a long time ago.
dsr_ 6y ago
There are a bunch of people who think that their mail system is named Thunderbird.
GekkePrutser 6y ago
This is the thing about multiclient protocols. You don't look for SMTP in the app store either :) The whole point is having multiple clients so they can't all have the same name. Having said that, the 'default' app constantly changing their name (Vector -> Riot -> Element) is super annoying. I thought Riot was a stupid name (living in a city that regularly sees riots), but don't really get what was wrong with Vector in the first place :P
ekianjo 6y ago
> client app doesn't have the same name it is not that hard to understand.

the_duke 6y ago

> Matrix seems to want to be an IRC replacement rather than a one-to-one / small-group chat app I don't know where you get that impression. Matrix / Element works great for 1-1 and small group chats, the general UX issues aside.

newswasboring 6y ago
> the general UX issues aside. I think those are the issues, at least according to the op. I mean, anyone can write a chat app. That tech has existed for ever. Putting the right UX on it is the hard problem good chat apps need to solve.
- joepie91_ 6y ago
  Anyone can write a centralized chat app. Building a federated chat app is an order of magnitude more difficult, and is still a largely unexplored space.
  - Semaphor 6y ago
    XMPP/Jabber explored it pretty well. And for a glorious few months, I could use a FLOSS client (with for me far superior UX to any other modern client) to talk to people on Facebook and GTalk as well as all proper Jabber servers.
    - newswasboring 6y ago
      I remember those days. It was so rewarding to be able to throw together a Twitter and chat client in an afternoon (especially as a very new coder). I don't think that kind of stuff is possible any more.
  - newswasboring 6y ago
    Let me rephrase a bit, and this is now my opinion not op's. The UX is the most important problem to solve. Sure making a secure federated chat app may be harder in quantifiable sense, the structures are not really know. But for UX, honestly speaking I feel like nothing is known. We can copy WhatsApp interface, just like you can copy signal/WhatsApp architecture. But is that really what makes them successful?

cheph 6y ago

I am heavily against switching from WhatsApp to Signal, but you have very good points, and I think Matrix should take note of these points. Technically Matrix can yield a very similar user experience to Signal, but there has to be more focus on actually doing it if it wants to be considered as a serious player in the same space as WhatsApp and Signal.

tchalla 6y ago
> I am heavily against switching from WhatsApp to Signal, I'm curious - what are your arguments against the switch?
- perryizgr8 6y ago
  I dunno about cheph, but I feel Signal and Whatsapp are identical. There is literally no difference between the products in any way. In fact Whatsapp has some extra features on it.
  - GekkePrutser 6y ago
    Same for me. Yet another walled garden. A slightly prettier garden, but when I make a big app move I want to solve more problems than just the privacy one.
  - waxpoeticwhy35 6y ago
    You are so wrong. Please read up on how far Signal goes to hide your metadata. WhatsApp diarrhoea-shits it's metadata to Facebook's hungry mouth. Signal goes to such lengths even gifs are implemented so carefully as to preserve user privacy and security.
  - Marsymars 6y ago
    Asides what the other user said about metadata, Signal is drastically better at multi-device support. WhatsApp only lets you log in one non-phone device at a time, and this device syncs via your phone so it doesn’t work if your phone is offline, and it doesn’t have an iPadOS app. Signal has desktop and iPadOS apps, and they all function independently of your phone once set up.

dpatterbee 6y ago

I get what you're saying, but you seem to just be criticising element, not matrix. All of these are temporary problems which can be overcome with more time to hone the user experience. I would love to see another company come along and make another matrix-based chat app to compete with element, hopefully that would result in them both getting better much quicker.

pimeys 6y ago
Beeper seems to be one. Hopefully they allow more people to join their beta soon. https://www.beeperhq.com/ https://www.beeperhq.com/
- anthropodie 6y ago
  Here's another I haven't tried it but it looks slick https://github.com/syphon-org/syphon https://github.com/syphon-org/syphon
spurgu 6y ago
Element has a sad amount of bugs/inconsistencies, even though they're being fixed/improved all the time. Message formatting issues for example between mobile and desktop clients are things that really put me off using it. I like the protocol, and I love the idea, but it's just nowhere near grandmother (or even mother) level of usability. And it's not nowhere near good enough for someone as anal as me. People in between might not get put off by all the issues though.
CJefferson 6y ago
I hope so too, I'd be happy to suggest another client, if someone could make something as "ruthlessly simple" as the alternatives.
didibus 6y ago
The thing is criticizing Element is a criticism on Matrix. Interoperable protocols always also make it much harder to build a very usable client for. Even the great email is being "disrupted" with new closed alternatives like Slack, Discord, Teams, etc.

rwmj 6y ago

Moments of recognition reading this. A couple of weeks ago at virtual FOSDEM I was trying to work out how to join the FOSDEM chatrooms using the Android app formerly known as Riot.im (now Element.io). And I couldn't work it out - I gave up completely. I'm an actual programmer and heavy IRC user!

sammorrowdrums 6y ago
I actually felt that the instructions weren't that clear if you were joining via the app. I incidentally did join some of the rooms after the actual conference, but FOSDEM could have provided more instructions beyond "sign up on our server and use the web client" - the main Android App client, and most popular server are hardly niche. And many people already have that setup. I did eventually work out how to find the chats - but it took me a while too
- LegitShady 6y ago
  The provided instructions would have allowed people to use it but the criticism of the ux remains
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
0xy 6y ago
Element's security UI is indecipherable garbage. There's absolutely no way a casual user can figure it out. It's clear no UX designers were involved. It's clunky, buggy and feels very unstable.

Hammershaft 6y ago

Seems like something that can be solved with a more streamlined client focused on usability. Consider the difference between setting up a custom domain on mxroute compared to just opening a gmail account. Both user experiences are possible on the email protocol. Personally I think we've been in something of a dark age for open protocols to our detriment, as oligopolistic companies have increasingly used walled gardens to manipulate or dominate. I'd like to see that trend reversed and protocols like this succeed. Maybe with the rise of the patron model we can actually sustainable fund people who do the work of maintaining these protocols.

GekkePrutser 6y ago

If your mother in law can't even pick a username and password, how will she shop on Amazon, sign up with Google, book a flight? Most other mobile apps require you to sign up for an account too. And it bypasses the big problem of having to use your phone number (though you can already add it if you want for people to easily find you!) In regards to the UX of Elements, I think it's not great either but it's not the only matrix client. That's the great thing about Matrix.

CJefferson 6y ago
Amazon doesn't have a username, it uses your email. Also, it doesn't give you a choice of "which amazon to sign up with", with 3 options.
- arcturus17 6y ago
  This guy UXs.
- ggm 6y ago
  Amazon would happily make multiple accounts with the same email. I've managed this twice. Unwinding it is somewhat complex. "Oh yeah, you think your id is the mail. Well.. it isn't"
- Marsymars 6y ago
  Though if you go to amazon.<wrong TLD>, the accounts are sometimes, depending on TLD, entirely separate from your normal amazon, even if the site is in the same language and looks basically the same.
andresp 6y ago
Exactly. This idea of tech barrier is massively overstated. We see people adapt to new tech all the time. The bigger issues are network effects, inertia/lazyness. Alternatives to the status quo are expected to be 10x better to justify mass exodus. Most people don't value privacy and freedom of speech that much.
cosmodisk 6y ago

indymike 6y ago

"I just don't really care." (Comparison of matix.org and Signal follows) It's a lot easier when everyone is using it already. Federated and distributed chat has been really elusive, and that's surprising given that chat has been around forever. This article was interesting because it was about the core problem: how to get a bunch of diverse systems to support a standard mail protocol and is suggesting the protocol behind matrix be used, and not necessarily some implementation of a client.

EGreg 6y ago

“I just don’t really care” sums up why all well-meaning attempts I have seen to switch Web 2.0 (the social Web) to open source have failed. Web 1.0 has Wordpress, Magento and a slew of other things. But for Web 2.0 people expect a growing number of real-time services, slick and easy to use, these days they all added audio chatrooms and video calls etc. Everything has to be super reliable, etc. It would take years to build a suite of components (chatrooms, events, managing subscriptions and notifications etc.) that could rival Facebook / Telegram / WhatsApp. I would like to think we did it at Qbix. But we are still playing catch-up to the big boys. User adoption will only come when something is good enough to be used as what’s currently out there. But once it comes, it has so many advantages: host where you want, configure components how you want. If you’re interested, look at the links in my profile.

agumonkey 6y ago

if the matrix guy can read this, it's important, make things mean and lean.. not overly powerful to the point of alienating the mass market. Maybe have an expert mode for that.

dosenbrot 6y ago
This. Using the app should be dead simple - with a default server, a default username, maybe even a pre set password (bound to the phone number or whatever, I'm not a fan of this but they all do it this way) and a feature adding contacts via link, qrcode, or phone-number. And then there should be a button for expert-mode giving you the complicated setup you want - choosing your own server, name, password and whatever.

sweden 6y ago

While Element.io still has some UX points to improve upon, I wish people would be a bit more honest about the state of Matrix clients and less fatalist. There are other alternative Matrix clients that implement an experience closer to Whatsapp than Element, like Fluffychat.

BubuIIC 6y ago

> How do you leave? Maybe long-press the room name, or swipe? Nope, you enter the room, click on the triple dots, settings, scroll down, leave room. Long press sure works in a recent version of element-android. (And I remember that being the case for a long time, but might be mistaken here.)

the__alchemist 6y ago

I still can't figure out how to verify my log in, or make the popups asking me to verify go away.

upofadown 6y ago

>Install. Accept permissions. Choose a PIN. I can send you messages. You can see your friends who already use Signal. Well done! Sure but that does not in any way take away from the point that siloed messengers are a bad idea. If the XMPP/Matrix people wanted to they could set up a trusted third party server to link identities to phone numbers just like Signal does. They could even claim to use some sort of hardware enclave to do it. You could at that point create clients that were functionally identical to Signal but that worked on the respective federated networks. Heck you could probably do that with encrypted email and no one would much mind any added latency. When people are talking about messaging systems that do not interoperate they are complaining about the underlying protocols. Client useability is a whole other discussion. I think there is a tendency to confuse the two in this sort of discussion.

mixedCase 6y ago
> Sure but that does not in any way take away from the point that siloed messengers are a bad idea. Well, too bad! Usability trumps idealism when network effects are at play. > If the XMPP/Matrix people wanted to they could set up a trusted third party server to link identities to phone numbers just like Signal does Usability is so bad that you're defending Matrix and don't even know this is already available, just has terrible UX. Chat protocols don't matter at all if the final product isn't something grandma can easily use. Element has many of the pieces in place, but it needs go further. I say this as I use Matrix. I've set-up Matrix for my SO and family just to talk to me, you know, like a bastard. I want Matrix to succeed. But it's not going to happen unless it can match tit-for-tat the usability of things like WhatsApp or Telegram, even if that means having defaults that geeks find "icky", like railroading the user into a single instance (and hiding non-matrix homeservers in a corner), defaulting to using the phone number as an account without passwords, and auto-joining to an identity server.
- sceox 6y ago
  Because Matrix allows any number of clients to be made, it's entirely possible for one client to do the things you list at the same time as other clients don't for the reasons you mention. If I had to guess, it won't be Element, it will be a new client preconfigured to some (not matrix.org) server.

dvdgsng 6y ago

Or she could use OAuth with an existing login from Google, Apple, Facebook or even Github and Gitlab, if she fancies that more.

forgotmypw17 6y ago

The funny thing is that IRC is the last system which needs replacement. It's frustrating to see FOSS projects force-switch support communities to from IRC to Matrix, because IRC works great and has a lot of existing software, while Matrix requires a new, heavy client with tons of usability issues and few alternatives. (If you don't think there are usability issues, I challenge you go through the entire installation, registration, and connection process without using your pointing device, keyboard only.) For example, one browser's devs have decided to stop using IRC for support. That's OK, people can still hang out on IRC if they want to, right? Nope, they closed #browsername using the ban-on-join method, and if you don't know to look for ##browsername, the unofficial support channel, you're left with having to install yet another software package just to reach the official support channel?