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

Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

matrix.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 283 posts

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#271

Post by Arathorn »

solarkraft wrote: post #267
Arathorn wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Element X also is geared up for powerusers (e.g. as project lead, I consider myself a poweruser) and i've been absolutely loving it as my daily driver for the last few months on mobile. For instance, my account is in around 4,000 chatrooms, and Element iOS was taking ~10s to launch and sync, and could easily take minutes to sync in the morning (heaven forbid the app was offline for more than overnight). Meanwhile, El…

I'm really glad you're aware and trying to get in control of the UX paper cuts that sum up quickly. Telegram has been adding a ton of features during the last 5 years, all while keeping the core experience pretty much the same (fast and seamless). Whatsapp is also doing this. With some UX Design chops, you should be able to do it.

Yup, we're doing our best to nail it this time - and there's a lot of UX design chops involved. Hopefully the Ignition release of Element X shows that we've headed in the right direction at last :)

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#272

Post by orange-mentor »

ezst wrote: post #225
UltimateEdge wrote: post #7

> Therefore to use Element X, you need to be running a homeserver with Sliding Sync support, which (for now) means running a sliding-sync proxy which bolts Sliding Sync support on to existing homeservers. I am excited to try out Element X, but I do not want to administer yet another service, namely the Sliding Sync proxy. From a practical perspective, Sliding Sync (MSC3575) is still on the level of a proposal/experim…

Sliding Sync is just your old bouncer with lip service and a fancy name, because the Matrix protocol is now officially deemed hopeless to be implemented efficiently on the client side, hence the need for a proxy to maintain your "client state" i.e. your client running on the server. I'm really tired of the litany of buzzwords and excuses that the Matrix team comes up to cover-up this large sunk cost fallacy of a prot…

I 100% agree with this. I wanted to like Matrix, and I ran synapse for a while, but the operational aspects of it are an order of magnitude more complex than XMPP.

Perhaps the problem they're trying to solve warrants that complexity, but my particular use case doesn't. I just run XMPP now.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#273

Post by panick21_ »

ezst wrote: post #225
UltimateEdge wrote: post #7

> Therefore to use Element X, you need to be running a homeserver with Sliding Sync support, which (for now) means running a sliding-sync proxy which bolts Sliding Sync support on to existing homeservers. I am excited to try out Element X, but I do not want to administer yet another service, namely the Sliding Sync proxy. From a practical perspective, Sliding Sync (MSC3575) is still on the level of a proposal/experim…

Sliding Sync is just your old bouncer with lip service and a fancy name, because the Matrix protocol is now officially deemed hopeless to be implemented efficiently on the client side, hence the need for a proxy to maintain your "client state" i.e. your client running on the server. I'm really tired of the litany of buzzwords and excuses that the Matrix team comes up to cover-up this large sunk cost fallacy of a prot…

This comment makes no sense. The database replication has nothing to do with sliding sync. Sliding sync is about replacing the client to server protocol, and database replication is the server to server protocol.

Its flat wrong to say that it can't be efficiently implemented on the client side, the server side of the Api is the problem, not the client.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#274

Post by neop1x »

amstan wrote: post #18

It's quite disappointing that there's huge ongoing work around reinventing clients from scratch where the basic functionality of not ringing all my devices while I'm using only one of them [1] is still not there (bug open for years), despite it being a pretty simple fix. [1] https://github.com/vector-im/element-meta/issues/360

Multiple accounts also https://github.com/vector-im/element-android/issues/26 and they closed the issue for it in the Element X https://github.com/vector-im/element-x-android/issues/190

A pretty basic functionality which even Messenger supports....

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#275

Post by brokenmachine »

kasdi wrote: post #268
freilanzer wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the project for me.

The project is a mess, which is obvious if one follows it. There is only slow progress. Instead of focusing everyone on one thing to do it right, they focus on multiple things that remain half-baked forever, e.g. multiple concurrent implementations like Synapse and Dendrite, Element and Hydrogen, Element and Element X, etc. pp. They seem to have organizational challenges, stemming from technical founders who didn’t k…

>Element’s UI has always been crap

I use Element after switching from Google Hangouts/Chat/$LATEST_NAME$ a long time ago.

What, specifically, are you saying has always been crap about it?

Personally, I have no complaints about Element's UI. It works great IMO.

And I consider myself pretty hard to please and easy to irritate.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#276

Post by brokenmachine »

Arathorn wrote: post #144
xorcist wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The gist of it seems to be that Synapse/Dendrite calls home to the Matrix Company, which in turn pays Google to send a notification. That's awfully nice of them, but does not really leave any room for success. I take it larger clients with security requirements roll their own clients, and this is part of the business case?

It’s more that “whoever built your client has the keys to send push to it, so your synapse calls home to them.” And yes, that means that paranoid types need their own clients, and that is indeed a service that Element offers.

Just to clarify that... I'm pretty sure the notification doesn't actually contain any of the message though, it's just a notification to check the server for new messages.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#277

Post by brokenmachine »

brokenmachine wrote: post #275
kasdi wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The project is a mess, which is obvious if one follows it. There is only slow progress. Instead of focusing everyone on one thing to do it right, they focus on multiple things that remain half-baked forever, e.g. multiple concurrent implementations like Synapse and Dendrite, Element and Hydrogen, Element and Element X, etc. pp. They seem to have organizational challenges, stemming from technical founders who didn’t k…

>Element’s UI has always been crap I use Element after switching from Google Hangouts/Chat/$LATEST_NAME$ a long time ago. What, specifically, are you saying has always been crap about it? Personally, I have no complaints about Element's UI. It works great IMO. And I consider myself pretty hard to please and easy to irritate.

Actually, thinking about it now, the one thing I would prefer is if you could, in a 2-person room, have one participant's messages come up on the left while your own were on the right, or vice versa.

Then it would be more obvious who said what.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#278

Post by brokenmachine »

sneak wrote: post #189
inhumantsar wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Security, Convenience, and Speed will always be in constant tension. If you start by assuming that a perfect solution will always be unattainable, deciding on what tradeoffs are acceptable becomes easier. Imho it almost always going to be worth trading the large PITA of self-managing APNS infra for the small surface area that routing push notifications through Elements systems.

This comment makes it seem like Apple's anticompetitive stance on sideloading is a basic force of nature instead of something dreamed up by control freak hippies and implemented deliberately in code. The problem is iOS's privacy-hostile design (in service of their locked down revenue model), not some unbreakable iron triangle. On Android, messaging apps can run in the background and periodically talk to their homeser…

Agree 100% about Apple being anti-consumer, but the Android thing is not quite that simple.

Background tasks on Android can pretty much be killed at any time. I believe only apps with a persistent notification and the native google notification service can remain active at all times. But yes, they can connect to any server while they are running.

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#279

Post by chagaif »

geek_at wrote: post #43
rabbitofdeath wrote: post #35

I love matrix - I've been running a Synapse homeserver for over 2 years now for friends and family. We love it. Despite minor problems (upgrading postgres for example) it has been smooth sailing. I really want to stay up to date but they don't make it easy! I'd love to add sliding-sync to my existing docker stack, but I feel like I'm in way over my head!

I love the idea of matrix (synapse + element + mobile apps) and I have started moving my family there too but we had so many problems with notifications not being sent to the phone unless you actively open the app. There is a huge discussion about that on git and some can't reproduce, some can't get a single notification even though the apps notification checkmarks were all green. So it had a very very low WAF [1] an…

You probably just need to change the settings to battery saver - no restrictions for Element. Your OS is probably killing the app aggressively (I've seen this with telegram a lot as well with many people).

Re: Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix

#280

Post by zaik »

czard wrote: post #260

Honestly what's the point given XMPP? Tried setting up Matrix, was a pain, went for ejabberd and it was a breeze. Gajim and c0nnecteasy work perfectly. Can't help but feel like if half the efforts of building Matrix went into XEPs or something we would have a rock solid IM alternative and clients by now. And tbf, can Matrix do group video calls? That's the only really useful feature missing from XMPP now, for which t…

Dino the XMPP client can do group video calls.
Post reply on HN