|
|
|
|
|
by zanny
1615 days ago
|
|
If XMPP and Matrix were based on the same protocol stack arguments to keeping XMPP this whole time would have made sense. But they aren't. Matrix is http and json while XMPP is tcp and xml. Protocol extensions to xmpp have added http transports - but thats just wrapping non-http requests in http and making processing harder. I think a good comparison is X11 vs Wayland. X11 was retrofitted with all the functionality Wayland has natively - "why switch" is a legitimate question. But we will see in the next 20-30 years how the maintenance burden of X protocol legacy means we will see any new development using Wayland because its so much easier to do. In the same sense, chat apps will probably favor Matrix over XMPP because of the protocol maintenance burden - even when drop in libraries exist that implement XMPP, the inherent complexity makes them buggier, slower, and requires a lot of developer nuance to get right and its all due to legacy cruft you have to accommodate on an old standard. Its also like how more modern kernels stopped trying to be Unix compatible. Trying to meet the POSIX standard in the 21st century is kinda a waste of effort when a lot of it is unnecessary. The model is sound, its just adhering strictly to the eccentricities of it is just unnecessary headache. |
|
It’s actually easier to use by hand than IRC which requires holding an open connection and quickly responding to pings.
It becomes a little harder when end to end encryption is on but you just import the library they supply for almost every language and then e2e becomes transparent.