XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging • Hacker News Board

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#61

Post by ensignavenger » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:05 PM UTC

pixelatedindex wrote: post #10

arcbyte wrote: post #6

XMPP lost because the spec is overcomplicated and hard to implement. As a result, good clients never materialized and innovation was really hard to do. Everything in this article is an offshoot of the overcomplicated spec.

Is there a “modern” equivalent to XMPP? How does it compare to the matrix protocol?

Based on my research, but no deep implementation experience with either:

XMPP continues to advance, so could be considered modern if you use the latest versions.

Matrix is more of an event sync protocol, consisting of a server to server sync protocol and a client to server protocol (sort of like email). It is mostly used for chat, but appears to be more flexible. Matrix uses JSON and HTTP.

XMPP is focused on chatmessages. In many ways XMPP and Matrix are similar. XMPP is based on XML and originally used TCP as the transport protocol, but has been extended to use HTTP now as well.

EDIT: I think a clearer way to describe the basic difference is that Matrix syncs Matrix Events across servers, whereas XMPP facilitates exchanging messages with clients. Most folks use the protocols to exchange chat messages. It is the way this is accomplished by the corresponding servers that differs significantly.

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#62

Post by AshamedCaptain » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:05 PM UTC

shadowgovt wrote: post #49

ValleZ wrote: post #46

XMPP was not a mobile friendly protocol for a while, had efficiently no security out of the box and lacked simplest things like image or other file transfers.

And nowadays it faces a marketing issue because it's extensible, so none of those problems go away because a solution exists somewhere. "Hey, I want to set up a modern messenger." "Sure! Here's XMPP, the ten extensions you need to enable and configure (problem left as an exercise for the reader), and the seven ports you need to open!" "... Okay? A Matrix node is apparently a drop-in solution; I'm gonna use that." XMP…

Ironically I think the absolute opposite. An XMPP server is something I can install on my ten year old home server without a second thought ( you have several to choose from even in debian's repositories) and expect it to work with minimal config.

Matrix servers? You have mostly one implementation to choose from and it comes "packaged" as a monster container with several python modules likely already with CVEs and god knows what else. And then the resource usage...

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#63

Post by shortrounddev2 » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:05 PM UTC

plussed_reader wrote: post #39

jeffnappi wrote: post #8

XMPP and specifically ejabberd are what made WhatsApp possible to build with ~50 people at absolutely massive scale (~400M MAU @ 2014 acquisition).

So really it's just about ZuckBook not paying forward via OSS?

Zuck didn't create whatsapp, he only bought it

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#64

Post by darreninthenet » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:07 PM UTC

IshKebab wrote: post #37

WD-42 wrote: post #9

I really miss the days of being able to use pidgin to talk to everyone

Well, most countries have a single instant messaging app (usually WhatsApp) that's dominant now so there's no big need for it I guess.

But dominant doesn't mean it's the only one... most of my friends are on WhatsApp, but I use iMessage to talk to my wife (unless it's a group of friends then it's back to WhatsApp), apart from one or two friends who aren't o ln WhatsApp and then I use FB messenger... we have one gaming group with one guy not on FB and one guy not on WhatsApp, so I'm the meatware bridge between them.

And then I have people who only use Discord...

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#65

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:07 PM UTC

righthand wrote: post #16

arcbyte wrote: post #6

XMPP lost because the spec is overcomplicated and hard to implement. As a result, good clients never materialized and innovation was really hard to do. Everything in this article is an offshoot of the overcomplicated spec.

Ah yes, because developing tech is about winning marker-share only. That’s exactly why XMPP was developed in the first place.

Market share matters for a communication system though.

Why bother to run a server or install a client if there's nobody to talk to?

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#66

Post by zaik » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:08 PM UTC

dogleash wrote: post #51

arcbyte wrote: post #6

XMPP lost because the spec is overcomplicated and hard to implement. As a result, good clients never materialized and innovation was really hard to do. Everything in this article is an offshoot of the overcomplicated spec.

There are good clients. Whatsapp, Grindr, Kik, League of Legends, Fortnight, Eve Online. They have something in common though: not letting users communicate outside their own ecosystems.

Good clients which let users communicate outside their own ecosystems: Gajim, Dino, Conversations, Monal, Movim, ...

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#67

Post by zaik » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:12 PM UTC

rom1v wrote: post #33

Mandatory blog post on XMPP and decentralized protocols: https://signal.org/blog/the-ecosystem-is-moving/

Mandatory objection to this blog post: https://gultsch.de/objection.html

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#68

Post by zaik » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:13 PM UTC

aidenn0 wrote: post #5

We evaluated some options at work for self-hosted chat about a decade ago. XMPP lost out due to the lack of a good iPhone client. Not sure if things are any better now.

Monal on iOS is making a lot of progress recently.

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#69

Post by xorcist » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:13 PM UTC

arcbyte wrote: post #6

XMPP lost because the spec is overcomplicated and hard to implement. As a result, good clients never materialized and innovation was really hard to do. Everything in this article is an offshoot of the overcomplicated spec.

Compared to what? Compared to IRC, yes, but it's not really comparable.

The closest comparison is probably Matrix and that is a pretty complex protocol too.

Re: XMPP: The Gem of Instant Messaging

#70

Post by dingnuts » Thu, Nov 07, 2024, 5:14 PM UTC

SamWhited wrote: post #40

pixelatedindex wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a “modern” equivalent to XMPP? How does it compare to the matrix protocol?

Matrix and XMPP operate in very different ways Matrix is a graph database synchronization protocol, whereas XMPP is event based. Let's use group chats as an example: with Matrix if you join a group chat hosted on another server, the entire history of the chat gets synced to your server. This means it's very resource intensive to scale, but very reliable since you pretty much always have chat history available and if…

The real difference between XMPP and Matrix is that I can read the discussions about XMPP on this site without the CEO of the company that pretends not to own it, but does de facto own it through some kind of wannabe Sam Altman "it's actually a non profit that happens to be controlled by my for profit company" move, coming into the comments to denigrate anyone with an ounce of criticism for his product