Why not XMPP?
discuss.privacyguides.net
To be honest, I don’t quite understand why Matrix passes this hurdle and XMPP does not. Matrix is just as little designed for privacy as XMPP. Metadata is also generated, is also not E2EE (as far as I know) and is also distributed further by federation than in XMPP. The quality of the clients is also very differing. I also see the advantages of Matrix and use it myself, but I find it quite interesting how an extra category was recently created to keep Matrix in the recommendations, although it...

Matrix is going Freemium and WhatsApp is adding ads, which is sparking the annual “time to leave [app]” threads.

Users don’t care that much about privacy, but they do care about enshittification, so XMPP not being built for it shouldn’t be a problem.

Meanwhile, I’ve heard for years that XMPP has solved a lot of the problems that lead more popular apps to fail.

Is it really just a marketing/UX/UI problem?

If XMPP had a killer app with all the features that Signal/Whatsapp/Telegram has, would it have as many users?

If not, why does it keep getting out-adopted by new apps and protocols?

  • wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works
    61·
    3 days ago

    XMPP has most of the features Signal offers, and then some, and has had for a long time. In fact Signal’s encryption scheme is derived from OTR which was pretty iniquitous on XMPP at the time. With the addition of key ratcheting, which was added with OMEMO. XMPP has groups, and video, and has had those for far longer than Signal. What Signal lacks is roster privacy. But for the longest time that was really very weak if your adversary was a Five Eyes state.

    As for UI/UX, check out Dino. It’s really nice.