Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

stuker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 199 posts

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#141

Post by ezst »

haolez wrote: post #130

Kind of off topic, but why is Matrix better than XMPP? Genuine question. Just curious.

As of today, XMPP has a more diverse ecosystem of clients and servers implementations, that makes it much more versatile and resilient.

Matrix addresses the theoretically interesting issue of distributed chatrooms, which makes the protocol and its implementation very complex and inefficient… while not adding much in practice (that's only my opinion, but I think this self-inflicted complexity has done nothing but a disservice to Matrix)

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#143

Post by sceox »

mixedCase wrote: post #129
upofadown wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

> 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 h…

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.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#144

Post by sorunome »

mixedCase wrote: post #129
upofadown wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

> 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 h…

Have you tried other clients than Element yet? For phone, you could e.g. try FluffyChat or Ditto, and for Desktop you could try e.g. nheko or mirage

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#146

Post by ComodoHacker »

ezst wrote: post #140
ComodoHacker wrote: post #81

To be fair, Telegram's protocol is open and there are many open-source clients with their established userbases. There's even a separate team at Telegram developing an official alternative client (Telegram X) to foster competition. Also, there's Matrix-Telegram bridge in development. So the article's point is only partially applicable to Telegram. >Why does everybody wanting to exchange messages need the same client?…

Would that bridge not require you to hold a telegram account? If not, then that's some true federation there, and they have my respect and praise (as an XMPPer).

You can't post anything to Telegram without an account. No bridge can change that.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#147

Post by scotty79 »

I think we dropped the ball by awarding copyright protections unconditionally.

We should try to imitate patent protection and award copyright protections only if and for as long as software author publishes full description of the file formats and network protocols his software uses.

That was idea with patent protections. You get protection on the condition that you disclose details of your design to enable interoperability by future inventors, manufacturers and users.

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#148

Post by dep_b »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #58
CJefferson wrote: post #11

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.…

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 onl…

Yeah there's an SDK and a Kit, so the SDK just gives you the basic building blocks in terms of data and the Kit gives you some of the screens. But at least on iOS it all looks a bit outdated so I'm only using the data layer.

BTW aren't you on tweakers as well?

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#149

Post by [deleted] »

rwmj wrote: post #36
CJefferson wrote: post #11

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.…

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!

[deleted]

Re: WhatsApp and most alternatives share the same problem

#150

Post by ezst »

ComodoHacker wrote: post #146
ezst wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would that bridge not require you to hold a telegram account? If not, then that's some true federation there, and they have my respect and praise (as an XMPPer).

You can't post anything to Telegram without an account. No bridge can change that.

Then Telegram is no better than other silos, and just slightly better than the worst of them in the sense that it lets you use a (puppet) third party client.
Post reply on HN