4 ms·

Moxie makes some good arguments for having the server centralized, which is evidenced in Matrix moving/developing insanely slow due to it's decentralized nature

by spurgu 5y ago

Moxie makes some good arguments for having the server centralized, which is evidenced in Matrix moving/developing insanely slow due to it's decentralized nature.

GekkePrutser 5y ago
Matrix is not really that slow IMO. They've done a lot over the last years. Their E2E encryption is a ton better. And what's there works well. And what has signal delivered in the last 2-3 years? Not much either. The product is just finished. I'm sure it makes development a lot easier but it also makes signal a lot less viable. I'm not going to convince my friends to move into yet another walled garden we have to move out of again at some stage.
GekkePrutser 5y ago
Also I wanted to add: matrix is also trying to do a lot more than signal is. Signal is not substantially different than for example WhatsApp, only with more responsible owners. Matrix is aiming at being a completely open network standard, identity service (can use a phone number but doesn't have to!), multiuser conferencing system etc, in the decentralised spirit of the early internet. In that sense it's more comparable to MS Teams (which is moving fast in development but MS is rolling in it and they're making it slower and buggier with every version recently) It's not perfect but considering their scope is much bigger, they're moving fast enough IMO. Moxie has mentioned before that clients not supporting certain features was a burden but this is not something that Matrix seems to be having much delay from. If a client doesn't support pictures, audio messages or whatever they just don't show them. Ps when I said matrix E2E encryption is a ton better I mean it's much better than it used to be 2 years ago. Not better than signal, which is technically better but more limited in terms of number of clients.
- spurgu 5y ago
  Fair points and I agree. And I love Matrix as a concept, it just has been really rough around the edges in practice (been on and off since 2017 or so and regular user since 2019). As I see it Signal is superior to Matrix in the (Whatsapp|Signal|FBMessenger|Telegram|whatever) space, but Matrix has great potential across the board. It just irks me when people suggest using Matrix (Element) as a replacement to Signal - the use cases are very different and the UI/UX and overall user friendliness are very different - I would never try to get my aunt on Matrix, whereas on Signal the onboarding and use is just the same as any other regular messaging app, except with top notch encryption. And I've been using Signal/TextSecure since 2013-2014 (granted I didn't have many (any) contacts using it back then). And overall I'm happy to see continuous progress with Matrix, it's just slow IMO. But obviously you need to consider what's actually involved under the hood - where Signal has a much easier job due to its centralization. Personally I wish both projects great success!

by spurgu 5y ago

Moxie makes some good arguments for having the server centralized, which is evidenced in Matrix moving/developing insanely slow due to it's decentralized nature.

GekkePrutser 5y ago

Matrix is not really that slow IMO. They've done a lot over the last years. Their E2E encryption is a ton better. And what's there works well. And what has signal delivered in the last 2-3 years? Not much either. The product is just finished. I'm sure it makes development a lot easier but it also makes signal a lot less viable. I'm not going to convince my friends to move into yet another walled garden we have to move out of again at some stage.

GekkePrutser 5y ago

Also I wanted to add: matrix is also trying to do a lot more than signal is. Signal is not substantially different than for example WhatsApp, only with more responsible owners. Matrix is aiming at being a completely open network standard, identity service (can use a phone number but doesn't have to!), multiuser conferencing system etc, in the decentralised spirit of the early internet. In that sense it's more comparable to MS Teams (which is moving fast in development but MS is rolling in it and they're making it slower and buggier with every version recently) It's not perfect but considering their scope is much bigger, they're moving fast enough IMO. Moxie has mentioned before that clients not supporting certain features was a burden but this is not something that Matrix seems to be having much delay from. If a client doesn't support pictures, audio messages or whatever they just don't show them. Ps when I said matrix E2E encryption is a ton better I mean it's much better than it used to be 2 years ago. Not better than signal, which is technically better but more limited in terms of number of clients.

spurgu 5y ago
Fair points and I agree. And I love Matrix as a concept, it just has been really rough around the edges in practice (been on and off since 2017 or so and regular user since 2019). As I see it Signal is superior to Matrix in the (Whatsapp|Signal|FBMessenger|Telegram|whatever) space, but Matrix has great potential across the board. It just irks me when people suggest using Matrix (Element) as a replacement to Signal - the use cases are very different and the UI/UX and overall user friendliness are very different - I would never try to get my aunt on Matrix, whereas on Signal the onboarding and use is just the same as any other regular messaging app, except with top notch encryption. And I've been using Signal/TextSecure since 2013-2014 (granted I didn't have many (any) contacts using it back then). And overall I'm happy to see continuous progress with Matrix, it's just slow IMO. But obviously you need to consider what's actually involved under the hood - where Signal has a much easier job due to its centralization. Personally I wish both projects great success!