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

Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

gultsch.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 183 posts

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#171

Post by account42 »

pkulak wrote: post #167
pixelschubsi wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Matrix doesn't even support server-to-client message pushing, only polling. Which means, if you want your phone to receive a message while your client is in the background, you have to use a non-Matrix protocol to receive those. This protocol is XMPP in 99% of the time, both Apple and Google use XMPP to connect the phones to their push notification service. On Android, some Matrix clients offer the option to use non-…

What mobile OS do you use that allows an app to maintain a persistent TCP connection forever? Honest question. Last I checked, even Lineage/Graphene/etc will kill a background app after some amount of time. Doesn't matter if it's an hour or three days; if it ever happens, that's a deal breaker. I think the right solution is to use a different notification service, not controlled by Google or Apple, not to get rid of…

I've not had any issues with my Samsung Android killing the Conversations client. It does have a persistent notification which is probably needed for this.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#172

Post by account42 »

agile-gift0262 wrote: post #99
pkulak wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah yeah yeah. I’ve heard this for 8 years. And yet, everyone can talk a great game, no one can build a mobile client that is anywhere near the quality of any other chat platform. And here I am, hosting a Matrix server for my family for 6 years now, with no issues and an amazing experience, from the backend to the huge variety of mobile clients, a mature Rust sdk that I can hook bots into with ease, etc.

Not sure about iOS, but for Android Conversations is great

Yes. The only feature I'm missing is to show linked images inline. But that's a matter of taste.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#173

Post by account42 »

PunchyHamster wrote: post #46
fishgoesblub wrote: post #21

I love XMPP and am hopeful for its future with what the teams behind Movim[0], and Fluux[1] are doing. It was a tremendous shame that Matrix didn't improve upon XMPP and instead did their own thing. I continuously wonder what would the XMPP ecosystem look like, if the millions of dollars of funding Matrix initially had (what a waste) went to XMPP instead? [0]: https://movim.eu/ [1]: https://github.com/processone/fluu…

It makes sense. It's old, crufty mix of extensions, which nobody actually wants to be that modular for a chat client, because that just gets you into mess of what server/client supports

That just means the protocol is old enough to have accumulated that much technical debt, which is a sign of resilience.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#174

Post by account42 »

dewey wrote: post #145
liotier wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existence of "XEP-0365: Server to Server communication over STANAG 5066 ARQ" suggests military usage. Isode advertises XMPP as "The NATO Standard for instant messaging" ( https://www.isode.com/secure-xmpp/ ) and it is one of their core offerings. I remember seeing NATO command posts using IRC long ago - makes sense because it is ultra light, and therefore usable on extremely low bitrate degraded links... XMPP see…

Thanks! That was exactly the kind of "hidden usage" I was interested in as it seems to not be publicly used by a lot of people these days (As you can see by the user numbers on https://search.jabber.network/channels/1 ).

Spam is an issue which also drives people off public federation.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#175

Post by account42 »

alex1138 wrote: post #43
iamcalledrob wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WhatsApp is still based on XMPP unless things have changed a lot recently.

I don't consider WA a product. I don't consider it a viable product. Post-2014/Zuckerberg. Who cares if it's XMPP, it didn't federate

Unfortunately it's the de-facto messaging app for normies here, most of whom won't be willing to install another app for just that one weirdo.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#176

Post by account42 »

writtenone wrote: post #20
pantalaimon wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://dino.im/

Thanks! Any good Android clients? "Conversations" seems to be the best and it's nowhere near the polish of Signal & Co. crashes often, UX is clunky, family will never stick with it.

Conversations doesn't crash at all for me.

And I moved to Conversations because I needed a client that wasn't as crashy as Xabber was for me.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#177

Post by dewey »

delduca wrote: post #10

It was so cool when facebook, google and others used to use xmpp, at that time I used a single IM client https://adium.im

Loved Adium and the community was great in building custom smileys (For the young people, that's how we called Emojis back in the days!), themes and dock icons.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#178

Post by spystath »

writtenone wrote: post #20
pantalaimon wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://dino.im/

Thanks! Any good Android clients? "Conversations" seems to be the best and it's nowhere near the polish of Signal & Co. crashes often, UX is clunky, family will never stick with it.

Seriously? I'm not saying it's the best app around but the family uses Conversations and we never really have any real issues. Even for the septuagenarians in the family I just set it up once like 7 years ago and they still use it all the same.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#179

Post by account42 »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #36
seba_dos1 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Talk - and it was an actual federating XMPP server, in contrast to Facebook which merely allowed you to login with an XMPP client.

There was a point where Google and Facebook supported external clients, and then within the same year both Google and Facebook closed up to any external clients, then ultimately ditching XMPP.

It's a shame that we didn't get antitrust enforcement imposing interoperability requirements on them back then.

Re: Jabber/XMPP: 25 Years of Digital Independence

#180

Post by regularfry »

singpolyma3 wrote: post #147
lxgr wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> XMPP support isn't common in claw-type agents so I've had to patch it in. I found this pretty baffling/sad. Why do these agent harnesses have messaging plug-ins for the most obscure messaging platforms but not XMPP? It seems like a no-brainer! People would apparently rather pay for a second number/SIM/phone dedicated to Openclaw on WhatsApp and suffer periodic outages due to Meta actively discouraging automation us…

Submit patch?

I did this on one project but things moved fast enough (and I've had too much going on) that I couldn't go round the review cycle fast enough and keep it architecturally aligned to get it merged.
Post reply on HN