3 ms·

> 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

> 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?
  - nathias 6y ago
    actually chat apps started decentralized, irc was a protocol and it was by far the best communication tool
CJefferson 6y ago
When I go to 'group chat', rather than show me my friends I could group chat with, my screen is filled with "channels" I have no interest in. When I first signed up, I couldn't figure out (quickly) how to talk to anyone I know, just how to join channels full of people I don't know (which to me is like IRC).

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?
- nathias 6y ago
  actually chat apps started decentralized, irc was a protocol and it was by far the best communication tool

CJefferson 6y ago

When I go to 'group chat', rather than show me my friends I could group chat with, my screen is filled with "channels" I have no interest in. When I first signed up, I couldn't figure out (quickly) how to talk to anyone I know, just how to join channels full of people I don't know (which to me is like IRC).