3 ms·

I agree it would be a lot better, but 1) I don't have the infrastructure or the time to self host at the moment, and almost none of my contacts have the abilit

I agree it would be a lot better, but 1) I don't have the infrastructure or the time to self host at the moment, and almost none of my contacts have the ability. 2) My XMPP experience (using Conversations and a couple of free servers online) was inconsistent. No attachments were delivered, message storage was limited to the client side, and a few niggles in general. 3) Matrix.org tended to be slow and unreliable for me, definitely more so than Signal. And as mentioned, I can't self-host right now. If I could, I would have moved them to an open network, but for the reasons I mentioned and others, it's just not at the same level of convenience or usability yet. I might be more tolerant of these issues for advocacy's sake, but my contacts certainly wouldn't be.

MattJ100 5y ago
I hear you (and others), which is why we're trying to solve these kinds of barriers to XMPP adoption, with Snikket. It's a preconfigured server that can be self-hosted, or there is a hosted service available (you can migrate between them). Also included in the project are client apps with consistent feature set and behaviours across platforms (currently Android/iOS). This includes things you mentioned such as smooth file sharing, server-side storage, end-to-end encryption, etc. It's still relatively early days for the project (launched last year), but I guess my point is - if the things you listed are all that's holding you back from XMPP, try Snikket and give us some feedback :)