Matrix 2.0 Is Here!

submitted by

matrix.org/blog/2024/10/29/matrix-2.0-is-here/

437

Log in to comment

59 Comments

I would like to enter the Matrix.

What is an MSC?

Matrix Spec Change. It's how the Matrix protocol evolves, similar to the RFCs (requests for comments) used by Internet Engineering Task Force protocols.

Matrix spec change

Think RFC

Will regular Element support it soon? Or am I expected to install a new app?

It will, no need to install anything new

Hopefully the clients get much better. I convinced a few friends to get on Matrix last year... and... boy... it was a terrible experience. Everyone ended up going back to Discord and they probably won't trust another recommendation from me.

UX is very difficult, unfortunately, especially for open-source projects where the contributors are usually programmers and not so much UX/product managers.

Yeah, but repeated "This message cannot be decrypted" breaks its primary function as a chat app.

It's getting harder and harder to disable their broken end to end encryption by default too.

Look at the telegram client, which is open source and has the best UX for a messenger I know

Isn't telegram a for-profit company?

The telegram apps are open source

I've been very mindful not to recommend Matrix until the clients and protocol become much more stable. When you're recommending platforms to average users you really need to jump in and try it yourself. If too many problems come up just don't recommend. Or alternatively do recommend if you want them to leave you alone :3

Yes I'm waiting until it's ready for the average user before I recommend it to anyone.

But I haven’t even escaped the original matrix. Or the matrix reloaded.

great project getting better all the time!

Deleted by moderator

 reply
17

Looks like someone didn't read the article. See part 4: Invisible Encryption. (Also note the Conclusion paragraph that explains the new functionality is only just starting to appear in clients.)

Deleted by moderator

 reply
-3

So you were aware that this announcement includes fixes for the encryption issues, yet you decided to post a comment complaining about them anyway, ignoring the point of this post and giving readers the false impression that the issues are unaddressed.

And you did it just to contradict someone who finds the project useful.

That's not helpful to anyone. Quite the opposite, I'd say.

Too much in the open source community is people saying this is great! Always has been. You shouldn't crap on people being honest about the problems that have existed, because track record is important

You shouldn’t crap on people being honest about the problems that have existed,

I haven't "crapped on" anyone. I just pointed out that a comment, which was an absolute declaration in present tense, is misleading, poorly informed, and needlessly quarrelsome. Because it is. And the author then tried to justify it by putting words ("has always been") in someone else's mouth. None of that is honest. It was arguing in bad faith, and it's important to call that sort of thing out, because letting it go is how misinformation spreads.

If they had instead just presented their view as historical experience to help inform about track record, I wouldn't have taken issue with it.

Too much in the open source community is people saying this is great!

Perhaps, although that's common around proprietary software as well.

Great is subjective. Matrix has struggled with some problems that rightly frustrated people, but it also has accomplished some things that no other messaging platform has. By that measure, it *is* a great project. And the announcement we're all discussing here demonstrates that it *is* getting better. Just as barkingspiders said.

Honestly in my experience all issues with decryption have been solved for more than a year. No matter if im using android, web or desktop. Idk about apple shit but thats just not a priority probably.

Todays desktop release finally enables the new voice/video calls/rooms feature which was the last serious complaint i had.

Even this week I still had the issue where I couldn't decrypt messages in Element on android.

Awful to self-host (resources, administration) and rolling their own crypto

On the UX-Side it's too complicated to explain to my parents.

I'd love for it to succeed, but for now I'll just stick woth Signal

rolling their own crypto

No, it uses well-known, well-proven, standard crypto.

It also uses double-ratchet key management, much like what Signal does.

The reference server is a bit heavy if you're federating with large public rooms, but lighter alternative servers are available.

they do have a special crypto usage which they have sensibly rewritten in Matrix 2.0

It’s been here since 2003

I laughed a bit. Thanks.

i'm guessing they'll actually be done in 6 months or so

I tried running a matrix server last year. I guess I will try again and see if a normie like me can make it somewhat usable.

With docker it's quite easy (assuming you are familiar with docker)

But docker / containerization is a skill that becomes really really helpful to learn if you are interested in this type of thing.

What was difficult was the constant security checks, it happened like every time I changed devices and occasionally things were encrypted and unable to be read, it felt totally unusable. It's true that I don't quite get docker, I have a few services that run on dcker, but most of them run straight on arch. Yes I know arch isn't ideal for servers, I'll fix it next summer during school break

Could someone smarter than me explain Matrix to me? In particular,
- What would be the utility for someone, who cares about privacy and currently uses Signal and email for communication?
- What advantage would it give me over other services?
- Is Matrix anything good already, or is it something with potential that's still fully in development?
- How tech savvy does one need to be to use Matrix?

Could someone smarter than me explain Matrix to me?

I wouldn't assume that I'm smarter, but I do have more than a little experience here, so I'll try to answer your questions. :)

It's a real-time messaging platform. The most common use for it is text chat, both in groups (like Discord or IRC) and person-to-person (like mobile phone text/SMS). It supports other uses as well, like voice chat, video conference, and screen sharing, although much of that is newer and gradually showing up in clients.

What would be the utility for someone, who cares about privacy and currently uses Signal and email for communication?

Compared to Signal:

  • Matrix doesn't require a phone number, or even an email address (although some public homeservers want an email address these days, as a recovery method in case you forget your password).
  • Matrix has a variety of clients, so it's more likely that an app fitting your needs exists.
  • Matrix clients typically don't require Google services at all; neither to get the software nor to receive notifications.
  • Matrix cannot be monitored at any single location, so it's more resistant to meta-data tracking at the network level.
  • Matrix cannot be shut down by any single organization, so it's more resistant to censorship and denial-of-service attacks. If a homeserver is ever forced offline, only the accounts on that homeserver go away; all your other contacts remain intact. Same thing if a service operator changes its policies or goes out of business.
  • Matrix (last time I checked) had better support for using multiple devices on the same account. Phone, laptop, and office computer, for example.
  • Matrix homeservers can be self-hosted by anyone, and still participate in the global network.
  • Signal's encryption covers more meta-data at the application level than Matrix currently does. This might be important if you're a whistleblower or journalist whose safety depends on hiding your contacts from well-positioned adversaries.

Compared to email:

  • Matrix has end-to-end encryption, with forward secrecy, built in. It's generally better for privacy than bolting PGP onto email, and it's far easier.
  • Matrix is well suited to instant messaging.
  • Matrix supports features that people have come to expect from modern chat platforms, like reaction emoji and editing after sending.
  • Email has a greater variety of servers and clients.
  • Email apps often have more composition features to support long-form writing.

What advantage would it give me over other services?

We already covered Signal, and there are too many other services to compare every difference in all of them, but here are some more common advantages:

  • Matrix is a completely open protocol, developed through a public and open process, with open-source servers and client apps. This is important to people who care about privacy because it can be scrutinized by anyone to verify that it operates as it claims to, and can be improved by anyone with a good idea and motivation to participate. It's important to people who care about longevity because nobody can take it away.
  • Matrix has multiple clients for every major platform: desktop, mobile, and web.
  • Matrix handles groups of practically any size (including just one or two people).
  • Matrix messages are delivered even when you're offline.

Is Matrix anything good already, or is it something with potential that’s still fully in development?

Until recently: Ever since cross-signing and encryption-by-default arrived a couple years ago, it has been somewhere between "still rough" and "pretty good", depending on one's needs and habits. I have been using it with friends and small groups for about five years, and although encrypted chats have sometimes been temperamental, they have worked pretty well most of the time. When frustrating glitches have turned up, we sorted them out and continued to use it. This has been worthwhile because Matrix offers a combination of features that is important to us and doesn't exist anywhere else. I haven't recommended it to extended family members yet, because not everyone cares as much about privacy or has the patience for troubleshooting in order to get it. However...

Recently: The frequency of glitches has dropped dramatically. Most of the encryption errors have disappeared, and the remaining ones look likely to be solved by the "Invisible Encryption" measures in Matrix 2.0. Likewise with things like sign-in lag and client set-up.

If you're considering whether it's time to try it, I suggest waiting until Matrix 2.0 features are formally released in the clients and servers you want to use, which should be very soon for the official ones. I wouldn't be surprised if I could confidently recommend it to family members in the coming year.

How tech savvy does one need to be to use Matrix?

If you just want to chat, not very. Even one or two of my friends who can barely use email got up and running pretty quickly with a little guidance. Someone who can get started using Lemmy by themselves can probably handle it on their own.

If you want to host your own server, moderately tech savvy.

I've used Matrix since the app was called Riot.im and there was no encryption

I didn't realize once encryption was added, that there were still metadata leaks as compared to Signal

Could you give me some information on what metadata is unencrypted, or point me towards documentation about that?

Room membership and various other room state events are not currently end-to-end encrypted, which means a nosy admin on a participating homeserver could peek at them. (They're still not visible on the wire, though, nor on homeservers whose users haven't been invited.)

I don't know if Signal is actually much better here, since I haven't looked at their protocol. They hyped their Sealed Sender feature as a solution to some of this, but it can't really protect from nosy server admins who are able to alter the code, and they fundamentally cannot hide network-level meta-data like who is talking with whom. There's a brief and pretty accessible description of why in the video accompanying this paper.

I don't have a list of Matrix events that remain unencrypted in encrypted rooms. You could read the spec to find them if you're motivated enough to slog through it, but be warned that network protocol specs tend to be long and boring. :) Unfortunately, the few easy-to-digest blog posts about it that I've encountered have been both alarmist and inaccurate on important points (one widely circulated one was so bad that the author even retracted it), so not very useful for getting an objective view of the issue.

However, the maintainers have publicly acknowledged the issue as something they want to fix, both in online forums and in bug reports like this one:

https://github.com/element-hq/element-meta/issues/1214

What would be the utility for someone, who cares about privacy and currently uses Signal and email for communication?

Matrix is more like discord, no phone numbers, just email, and you can make big groups with different channels within. More meant for communities then something like Signal, that's mostly for 1:1 conversation or small groups

What advantage would it give me over other services?
Keeping the discord example i said above, no tracking, possibility to have end to end encryption, and open source code, along with the ability of having different instances that can communicate to each other, just like here on lemmy, so if you don't trust anyone else you can run your own instance

Is Matrix anything good already, or is it something with potential that's still fully in development?

It's *mostly* good already, but as with many other privacy focused services it lacks a wide adoption, so most of the communities there are about privacy, Linux and that type of stuff.

How tech savvy does one need to be to use Matrix?

The most used client, Element, is IMO very easy to use, you can directly register through there, and you get the choice of choosing between the official matrix.org instance (which on certain occasions is laggy due to the many people using it), or other instances

What would be the utility for someone, who cares about privacy and currently uses Signal and email for communication?

Your organization can't host a federated Signal server, and email isn't private.

Is Matrix anything good already, or is it something with potential that's still fully in development?

My previous organization has used it for over 4 years without issues, however mostly limited to text.

How tech savvy does one need to be to use Matrix?

Simply using? Not very much, basically like Lemmy.

matrix is for chat rooms full of strangers. signal is for talking to your friends

  • What would be the utility for someone, who cares about privacy and currently uses Signal and email for communication?

None? Use signal, as long as it works. If the Signal server goes down tho, you could selfhost Matrix.

Its slack but it can be more secure (e2ee DMs).

Its good already and used as a public channel for most popular Foss projects' chats

Is it an improvement over xmpp ?

If the Matrix Foundation can deliver on all the points of this blog post then Matrix will take off as a platform. The problem I have is that in the past they've been poor at handling issues in any sort of reasonable time frame, or at all.

Hoping they'll eventually turn over a new leaf.

I need to give Matrix another try

Epic timing, I want to dive in and see if I can mirror setting up Discord communities in the most painless way possible. This seems to be a great step in the right direction. Imagine a place.. where you get the best of both worlds and we can leave Discord behind.

i guess they'll actually be done Summer next year

I interviewed with them and wanted to work for them. They said I wanted too much money :(

How much did you ask for?

I asked for an American tech worker salary, and they’re British so they thought it was preposterous

What is it?

I like this reddit comment's explanation:

As someone said before, compare it to E-Mail.

Matrix \~ smtp/pop3/imap (protocol layer)

synapse \~ sendmail/postfix/dovecot/exchange/... (server)

element, fluffy, ... \~ thunderbird, outlook, pine, elm, ... (clients)

Everyone can host it's own server and have it's on private chat cloud. Thats like E-Mail and other opensource chat servers like Rocket.Chat, Mattermost and so on.

But like for E-Mail, it is easy possible to federate with others (like mail: "talk" to other mailservers), to be able to chat with people on other Matrix Servers. That's the difference to most of the other opensource chat.servers, which are stuck to their cloud.

As for EMail: Choose your best weapon, will say, client or server software. The protocol is free and will stay free. At this time, there's mainly synapse as the reference implementation from matrix.org and upcoming dendrite, but more servers will be available in future I think. At client side, theres element as the reference implementation and also some others, for example fluffy.chat.

Another cool feature ist bridging. The protocol specification allows bridges to other chat-systems, so you are for example able to talk to IRC-Servers or XMPP-Servers too. Many bridges are in development, less are stable. But more to come in future.

Matrix.org is "outsourced" from university and responsble for developing the specs. They are the big brain behind. They also server matrix.org as free service for people to test matrix or use it without having their own servers.

Element.io is also an outsourced company, which is developing element (reference clients). They are also selling hosted solutions to get money to the project.

Both are under the roof of the new Vector limited.

Because the Api is free, everyone can produce own servers an clients and (in theory) no one can take the whole network over. (in practice: if a big company does its own "cool" non open addons and has enough users, the same shit as for xmpp and WhatsApp could happen...)

Because everyone can host its own servers *and* optionally federate, the same product can be used for high secure private chat-clouds, for example in hostpital, military, schools, whatever, but it can also be uses to talk everyone like e-mail or phone. *And* no one has the masterhost, so no one has all data and no one can change the rules overnight to get money, more data or whatever.

From functional side: Matrix is what some people call "modern", it has text chat, you can send files, you can do voice- and video-calls (in element: 1:1, for groups with jisi as backend) and send voice-messages (at least in fluffy.chat, upcoming in element also). You can also plugin things like etherpad or BigBluButton and send cute stickers if needed. You can structure your contacts with "spaces" (beta).

Element got better and better in the last year and is imho very easy to use for now, but with some last edges. Fluffy is somewhat easier some users as far as I've heared but not feature complete.

I hope, Matrix will be the E-Mail-Version of Chat in the future. I have reviewed some systems for my university and it was the only one from which I think it has the potential to do so. So, give it a try. It's great.

Also on niche side because it's a realtime encrypted data server you can also use it for transferring ANY realtime data, such as games and VR (see https://thirdroom.io/landing).

It really sets it apart to other federated systems like ActivityPub, or email to me, which those systems are better for eventually consistent data federation.

Great because I hated matrix 1, hopefully two will be better

Do you like fight scenes on moving cars?

I loved the one with downloading martial arts directly into your brain

Oh look, the version number match the number of users. ;)

Matrix is like one of the most popular apps. I don't love it, but I use it because there's more users there than Wire or Threema or XMPP.

Comments from other communities

What's going on with dendrite?

No funding, no working on it besides on a voluntary basis

Will synapse have these changes soon?

If i'm reading right, synapse already has these changes, the problem is that the only client that supports them is element X

Ah, IIRC Element X was the only client that supported sliding sync previously; That makes sense

Simplified Sliding Sync is now implemented natively in Synapse as of 1.114, and so there is no longer any need to run a Sliding Sync Proxy in order to use the API.

Nice, setting up the old sliding sync server was a pain.

Huge!

Ensuring that Unable To Decrypt (UTD) bugs never happen. Huge amounts of work has gone into this over the course of the year, especially via complement-crypto as a comprehensive end-to-end-test suite for both matrix-rust-sdk and matrix-js-sdk based Matrix clients. We are finally at the point where UTDs are so rare that most people simply never see them.

I'm very excited for this! Granted, I do wish they'd stop "announcing" Matrix 2.0, but I think the release of SSS alone is reason enough for celebration.

I have sync issues with even Slack or WhatsApp when I use an old device that hasn't updated in a while - Matrix's new sync scheme is genuinely fantastic and fixes all the issues my aging synapse server was having (4+ year server means those initial syncs on log-in could tak upwards of 10 minutes).

Now I just want Element Call to work with my pre-existing accounts and then I'll be ready for the next Matrix 2.0 announcement 😂

All I need is a client that looks and feels like discord to replicate voice channels and I will switch to matrix and host my own instance

FWIW it’s being worked on https://commet.chat/

I really like their permissions system

This looks so nice and very promising. You've raised my hopes

It's not exactly like discord but cinny looks nice imo

Yep, need a fork of revolt that uses Matrix 2.0 as a backend and I can get my friends to switch

Matrix 2.0 ActivityPub

Point proven before i could add: The chats should be encrypted (there's an FEP somewhere)

Edit: now they made my point look wrong (it's actually right), heres the sup server source code on how they implement it themselves: https://github.com/thesupapp/server

They're two different protocols built for two very different forms of communication.

But it does support chats/DMs, and there was an FEP for chat encryption

Sup software does this: https://github.com/thesupapp/server

why do you want terrible ui

Old discord when it first came out was nice

Push-To-Talk when?

That's up to clients to implement, not part of the protocol.

But yeah its kinda dumb its not a thing in element

That would be huge and would make me and my friends switch from mumble/discord to matrix.
However, i fear that high latency may be an issue.

What's push to talk and why is it such a great feature?

It's for voice, so that your mic is only active when you press an activation button. It's how most PC games do it, and I would say it's how most folks on PC use voice. It's honestly a pretty basic feature, and super frustrating that it seems not to be a priority.

I'm ignorant about matrix, what is better in matrix than xmpp?

In XMPP, e2e encryption (just like everything else) is an optional extension. So in practice half the clients don't support e2ee, half support different version of e2ee (can't talk to each other) and pretty much all e2ee are likely full of holes since there are too many implementations to review.

In Matrix, e2ee is in a library that all clients can use, so while it is not Signal, it provides decent security.

I'd use Matrix but the last time I jumped on all the chats were dead and the ones I had joined had all been spammed with CSAM.

Might need to find more active communities?

The spam thing is annoying, but is a result of anyone being able to join a room and just upload images.

Really wish the large rooms would just disable image uploads, or use a bot to police new users a bit.

I'm pretty much since the beginning on Matrix. I have never experienced any questionable content. Large chats (thousands of users) have some spam problems, but the spammers banned quickly and the posts are being removed.

What am I doing right?

Not joining the rooms Element suggests on its own client? Element will show you a list of suggested, popular rooms to join, and a fuckton of these are overrun by spammers and worse. If Matrix has basically zero ability to curate these rooms outside of "here's what's got the most members", then it absolutely should not in any capacity be recommending them, let alone as a way to get started for new users. It's fucking ridiculous, and before you say "Well why should they be expected to curate the rooms they suggest?", imagine the fucking disaster Discord would have on its hands if it started recommending servers, and several of its top 100 claimed to be related to popular FOSS applications but were actually completely unmoderated and filled with CSAM and Bitcoin scams.

just this week I've had multiple random matrix accounts start a chat with me to post an Imgur link with some Hitler bs. I assume they just chose random members of one or more fediverse related public matrix rooms to send that to. they probably just do this with random public rooms and the fediverse relation didn't matter.

Yeah, "Matrix as IRC" with general interest rooms is an unmonitored cesspool. "Matrix as IM" for staying in touch with mates is doing just fine.

But then what's the benefit to Signal? Just that it's decentralized?

Some advantages are listed in this /c/Technology comment:

https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/15398090

That is certainly an improvement over Signal, yeah.

Decentralization actually can be really powerful to give you a backup even if you prefer Signal; Signal's servers very infrequently go down, but when they do, you entirely lose that channel for an unpredictable amount of time.

You can't know with certainty on Signal that the client and the server are actually keeping your messages encrypted at rest, you have to trust them.

With Matrix, if you self host, you are the one in control.

Isn't Signal E2E encrypted? How would it be able to decrypt them?

You can’t know with certainty on Signal that the client and the server are actually keeping your messages encrypted at rest, you have to trust them.

This is untrue. By design, messages are never decrypted on servers when end-to-end encryption is in use. They would have to break the encryption first, because they don't have the keys.

I assume you also have to trust the servers which the accounts you're messaging are stored on. (Although there are real situations where all users will be on the same server, where this is obviously a great benefit.)

Wow you weren't kidding lol. I watched the 2.0 demo and at this timestamp there's a CSAM-related room title that Matthew was invited to (at the top of the right window). Granted it's probably someone stream-sniping, but it goes to show that there's apparently active bad actors trying to interfere.

Still don't understand the need for matrix when xmpp is a much more battle tested standard, far more lightweight, way less complex, and easier to make clients for.

It's the issues with XMPP's spec: you don't just use XMPP, you use XMPP + your favorite optional spec implementations.

If your friends aren't on the same server/client combo then you won't be able to communicate with them (effectively).

I loved XMPP, still do, but haven't used it in years. If it were to get a single, matrix-style "spec release" (think an aggrgation of existing features into one collection) that contains/requires a bunch of modern chat features I've come to expect from programs, then I could see it potentially having a resurgence.

It's the issues with XMPP's spec: you don't just use XMPP, you use XMPP + your favorite optional spec implementations.

Sorry, what's the issue exactly? You called it an issue and I fail to see the problem. The X in XMPP stands for "extensible", so it is being used precisely as intended, so that is still XMPP.

You could use your favorite extensions if you want, but all up-to-date implementations follow the standard defined by XMPP, and it includes all features of a modern messaging experience

If your friends aren't on the same server/client combo then you won't be able to communicate with them (effectively).

You have to be going out of your way to have a non-compliant server or client. This isn't really an issue that happens.

If it were to get a single, matrix-style "spec release" (think an aggregation of existing features into one collection) that contains/requires a bunch of modern chat features I've come to expect from programs

That's how it is today though! I see the issue, you said you haven't tried it in years. Admittedly, I only started with XMPP 2 years ago but haven't had any of the issues you mentioned. Not sure when this became the status quo, but it is pretty awesome. Maybe it is worth trying again :)

You should try it again instead of spreading very outdated info about it. All major clients and server implementations have more or less feature parity and interoperate fine these days (and yes there are yearly complicance suites for XMPP that are exactly what you are asking for). What you are saying was true 10+ years ago when Matrix didn't even exist yet, and Matrix has very similar issues with different client and server combinations these days.

XMPP Works fine when it's setup or when you don't manage the hosting, but God is it painful to self host an xmpp server. Then you have the clients that are all basically 10 years old at this point, except maybe Dino for linux. It even needs a special setup to work on restricted networks via port 80/443 because it wants port 5222 and 5223, and let me tell you, I've spent over a week trying to setup that reverse proxy, it was hell. I've never Hosted matrix so maybe it's worse, but this isn't the end of my gripes with xmpp. Most basic communication features in 2024 such as replies reactions quoting threads etc.etc. are unsupported ootb, and you need both a client that supports the extensions (often very slow to adapt "new" standards AND a server that has enabled the plugin for that feature.

Xmpp is plain old, and like many like to think, no xmpp was not "triple-E'd", people simply stopped using it because it's really inconvenient and the UX is horrible.

XMPP Works fine when it's setup or when you don't manage the hosting, but God is it painful to self host an xmpp server.

I recommend you use snikket if you're having trouble selecting plugins, because it has everything you need out of the box and its super easy to setup.

It even needs a special setup to work on restricted networks via port 80/443 because it wants port 5222 and 5223,

Isn't that just a configuration in prosody / snikket? What implementation did you use that didn't let you configure this? Or are you expecting major implementations to default to port 80/443? Because that would be quite problematic.

Most basic communication features in 2024 such as replies reactions quoting threads etc.etc. are unsupported ootb, and you need both a client that supports the extensions (often very slow to adapt "new" standards AND a server that has enabled the plugin for that feature.

This is already supported by the major clients. I know for sure that conversations on android (and I suppose the many clients based on it) supports it. For server implementations, it is available out of the box on snikket, and it is a plugin you have to enable on prosody.

but God is it painful to self host an xmpp server

You are in for a world of pain regarding Matrix if you think xmpp is painful to host. Compared to hosting a Matrix server, XMPP is very pain-free to host. Sure, it takes a slight bit of effort to understand that there are other protocols than HTTP, but beyond that that initial learning curve, XMPP servers are extremely hassle free.

And you must have used extremely outdated clients. All the modern ones (which there are plenty) support replies and reactions etc. ootb. Let me guess, you only tried Pidgin? That client hasn't been updated for xmpp in 15 years or so, and is by far the worst.

And to use it with a similar feature set, everyone is using different extensions which also have to be supported by the clients. I know there is this one server implementation (name escapes me at the moment) and Conversations on the client side, but it's hardly the standard and we're not really talking about plain XMPP then anymore.

Have you used XMPP recently and ran into the issue of non-obscure servers, clients, or self-hostable implementations using different extensions or not supporting them? (I actually haven't experienced this even on the obscure ones, but can't confirm for all of them). Please do not make that accusation, because that I'd really not what happens in reality.

it's hardly the standard

Why not when... It literally is? And all major implementations follow it? That is by definition a standard.

and we're not really talking about plain XMPP then anymore.

Why not? "extensible" is in the name. It is meant to be extended. The protocol is being used exactly as planned and intended.

The same is true if you use a Matrix server other than Synapse and a client other than Element. If fact these days the spec incompatibilities are way worse on Matrix than on XMPP.

way less complex

I don't agree with this.

Can you please explain why? A quick look at the spec for both protocols shows you that matrix is literally a hundred times more complex, so I don't understand the basis of the contrary. The matrix creators have shown they are okay with increased complexity under the pretext of a more complete experience, but in reality, XMPP has achieved the same features with far less complexity.

If you're speaking about self hosting, again, I don't see how, as matrix is notorious for self hosting issues. XMPP's snikket works out of the box and has all the commonly used features and plugins pre-baked. The underlying prosody implementation is a step down, but is also quite easy as long as you know what plugins and options to activate (and if you don't, then use snikket).

I don't want to defend Matrix. I agree that it is not stable and lightweight. However, I believe it is simpler than XMPP. Wanna set up a server? Synapse. Need a client? Element. The default softwares are easy for new users to discover.

Also, the fact that Matrix has a single protocol means that in theory all servers and clients can work with each other (Although I know we are far from that at the moment). It is much better than XMPP's XEPs in terms of simplicity.

It's not that I don't like XMPP. I want a stable, encrypted, federated messaging platform. However, in terms of money and motivation, Matrix seems to be closer to that right now.

With all due respect, this is a very biased view

Wanna set up a server? Prosody (which has a hassle free out of the box experience through snikket)

Need a client? Conversations

The default softwares are easy to use for new users.

For matrix, however, you are forced to use synapse. You complain that xmpp is not a single protocol, but in reality, all the major implementations are compatible. Can you say the same about matrix? The other implementations aren't even close to achieving this.

Xmpp's extensions are a powerful feature, and the issues you think it presents do not exist with xmpp anymore, but is actually the status quo for Matrix.

When I decided to try XMPP, I had to do a lot of research to decide which applications I should use for the server and client. I did not experience this in Matrix. And yes, I know Matrix is ​​not stable. I am not against that. It's just easier to get on board.

If we told two people to use these two software independently, they would start using Matrix much more faster than XMPP. I think this is enough to call it uncomplicated.

Also, would you recommend Snikket server (or Prosody) for 1:1, group calls and screen sharing?

would you recommend Snikket server (or Prosody) for 1:1, group calls and screen sharing?

Answering this first so it doesn't get buried down. Screen sharing wouldn't be supported by xmpp since its just messaging, but I believe Jitsi has that feature. But for the rest, snikket and conversations (for android) I would recommend, yes.

When I decided to try XMPP, I had to do a lot of research to decide which applications I should use for the server and client.

Whatever is the first answer you get from a web search should be fine. Most sources recommend conversations for client, but all the other recommendations you'll see are good too. For server, the easiest to setup is snikket, but all the other and up to date implementations should work okay, although they might need some configuration if you want all the modern messaging features.

If we told two people to use these two software independently, they would start using Matrix much more faster than XMPP.

Why do you think so? Let's assume a user who doesn't self host. XMPP clients are far more stable and error free, whereas matrix has random issues every now and then, especially with encryption and public groups.

XMPP clients are a lot more customizable and come in different models. Matrix has only one client that works well (and some forks of it that look roughly the same). I'd say that's a win for XMPP for new users.

Now let's say it's a self hosting user. I don't need to say much here, matrix is notorious for self hosting issues, and being a massive resource hog. XMPP, you have snikket, which works out of the box without issues and can be hosted on a raspberry pi even.

I may be biased here, so I urge you to tell me, in what way would a new user adopt matrix faster? I can tell you one. Matrix has corporate funding and has managed to advertise better. That's their only win.

twice the nazi pedophiles as before

We mostly use it privately, there are also a handful of software communities too that takes advantage of bridging.

Personally, I don't care about Nazis, they come for the same reason I do, privacy and place to speak. I don't have to let there negative disposition color the software.

We need to ban spoons because they are nazi pedophiles' preferred tool for eating soup.

It's software.

You could install it on a server and run a private room for your family(my usecase).

Nazis also meet in dark alleyways. Should we ban dark alleyways? No, we should probably illuminate them and decorate them a little.

no it's not lmao none of the mentioned mscs are merged (maybe except for one?)