I've been using and enjoy it. Points raised here seem valid ( and I wonder if it's worth self hosting and moving to with E2EE (encryption)?

Lots of schooling happened here. For now, the only contact I spoke with on Matrix is now with me on Signal (we both were active on it already, least resistance), but I'm looking at this for the future...

Show thread

Also, fascinating results. On fedi, I expected XMPP to be a clear winner.

Show thread

@celia It's worth taking a look at @snikket_im as a self-hosting solution 👍


> The Matrix allows you to create small closed gardens, not a real federal system.

No? Almost every Matrix server talks to all others

> There are no large independent matrix servers because the system is dependent on
a monopoly developer center.

There are thousands of Matrix servers hosted by people like you and me.

> The success of the matrix is largely due to a good advertising campaign


@celia Frankly, that is a bad comparison and many of the points made ignore the circumstances surrounding both protocols. Following is a deconstruction of their arguments against Matrix, in the order presented in the table:

Matrix is a commercial project but is fully FOSS (afaik) and you can make your own client and server if you want, even if you choose to only implement some of the features of the protocol (you could leave out voice/video chat capabilities if you wanted to).

Why is government sponsorship bad? OLM encryption is just as good as OMEMO so I don't understand this point about the French government banning OMEMO but supporting Matrix development.

Many users only use and the Element client because:
1. The only stable server implementation (the reference one) is trash so nobody wants to host with it
2. The only stable and realtively fully-featured client is Element

The fault tolerance section of that comparison makes no sense: why are they comparing resource usage? That's not what fault tolerance is.

I challenge the validity of their service cost amounts; those seems like numbers pulled out of thin air.

The only reason why a "supercomputer" is needed to make a big Matrix server is because the current reference server implementation is garbage which doesn't scale well because it's written in Python. The only reason there is only one client is because development of new clients is quite slow because Matrix is needlessly complex. You can easily host your own Matrix server just for yourself if you want to.

> The Matrix allows you to create small closed gardens, not a real federal system.

What? Did they immediately ignore the point they made about large XMPP deployments (Google, Zoom, etc) being closed and not federating? The capability of matrix to federate and create a large open network is exactly the same as XMPP, we just need better servers and clients.

> There are no large independent matrix servers because the system is dependent on a monopoly developer center.

No, it's not. There are no large independent matrix servers because the reference server is garbage and nobody wants to host it. A new server, Dendrite, is now in Beta and aims to fix this.

> Matrix is ​​a poor and impractical protocol for federated communication.

This is perhaps the only point I kind of agree with. I don't really know all the ins and outs of the Matrix protocol, but I do know that it's far more complicated than it needs to be. It still works just fine for federated communication and I think it's the best we have at the moment for strongly encrypted communication given that the XMPP ecosystem is a mess.

@celia the author is spreading lies and misinformation.
E.g. the references supposed to backup the claims about sponsorship, actually do not backup the claims at all.

Then OLM is yellow for no reason, not mentioning MEGOLM, and making the collection of incompatible encryption protocols green.

It is wrong that Matrix cannot be extended: indeed you can add any message type you like without any approval.
This point also ignores the many incompatible XEPs of XMPP, which are painful for users

@celia I don't think these are good comparisons of the two. They are for very different use cases, and the server in matrix does a LOT more, hence the higher resource requirement. However, this makes it much better for mobile devices. Also, see the replies from other users about how matrix is quite new and un-optimised.

@celia if you want me to fetch more lies and misinformation, please ping me.
There is stuff remaining.

Anyways: If it's worth self hosting, depends on your aims and values.

@celia, I guess part of it is that New Vector seems dedicated to making Matrix and its ecosystem FOSS. Unless I’ve missed where they made something proprietary.

Also, bridges are really convenient because using Matrix doesn’t lock you out of established communities.

@celia I honestly think there's a big difference between the two. At least in how i would use it. XMPP and the software using it, is something I would use instead of Facebook Messenger. Where Matrix is something I consider an alternative to Discord or IRC.

@celia That page seems to be full of incorrect FUD. Better check the facts from other sources.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.