Sorry, this list just re-hashes the usual talking points and cranks the nerdery to 11. "Reliance on JSON" is just an stupid of an argument as criticizing XMPP for using XML. Saying "the main client uses Electron", presenting it like it is the only alternative (it's not), focusing on a completely secondary platform (pretty much everyone wants to use a messenger on mobile, so why does it matter to have an optimized client on the desktop?) makes this whole thing seem like it was written by a teenager arguing over racing cars.

in theory the iOS XMPP app experience can be improved relatively easily

Then why isn't it?! Why is it that the "recommended" client for iOS looks like something from 2005?

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Then why isn't it?! Why is it that the "recommended" client for iOS looks like something from 2005?

That's like asking why this tractor trailer truck still uses the same old boring shipping containers from 40 years ago.

The reference port is the reference port. When FB did xmpp, Google could read their emoji, for instance. It was a brief window before they both diverged from the standard for enshittification, but in that window it all just worked.

[–] rglullis 1 points 1 day ago

That’s like asking why this tractor trailer truck still uses the same old boring shipping containers from 40 years ago.

My point is that most people in 2025 are expecting a lot more from their communications client than what was available in the "good old days" of Gtalk and FB interoperability, and yet most XMPP advocates just bury their heads in the sand and say "it works for me and does everything I need, so there is no reason to add more features".

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm more concerned with the delays and resource usage, personally.

Then why isn’t it?!

The same reason any open-source project that's community driven isn't as polished as it could be; there's only so many resources and time available to improve things, and much of it is reliant on individuals with the needed skillset taking it upon themselves to improve something that bothers them.

Apparently not enough XMPP developers use iOS for them to focus on polishing up that experience.

[–] rglullis 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m more concerned with the delays and resource usage, personally.

As you wish. But you do understand that you are part of a very tiny minority and that it's completely pointless to try to convince people to switch by basing your arguments on the things that align with your values, right?

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I'm not using resource usage as an argument for an end-user to switch, the end-user usually doesn't care about technical details. That's more for people hosting servers, who are likely to care somewhat.

The message delays would effect an end-user, and they'll determine if that's too much of an inconvenience or not for themselves. I'm pointing to it as an example of a technical problem that impacts users that seems harder to fix compared to polishing the iOS XMPP app, which was what I initially put forward in my first comment.

If I was to make an argument for why someone should switch away from Matrix, I'd just point to how often encryption fails (I've had continual and significant issues with this personally) and how laggy servers can be. If that isn't effecting someone who isn't technically inclined, then they have no real reason to switch if everything is working for them.

[–] rglullis 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That’s more for people hosting servers, who are likely to care somewhat.

The whole argument at the top of the thread is "it doesn't matter how easy/good/performant it is to run a XMPP server, if the people you'll want to talk to do not have a decent client".

If I was to make an argument for why someone should switch away from Matrix, I’d just point to how often encryption fails.

That has stopped for me since I started using the element X client (mobile) and Fractal (desktop), which leads me to my "counter argument", which is: Matrix has always sucked in different ways, and it sucks for everyone equally, but at the least it is slowly and constantly sucking less than it used to. XMPP is adequate (not great) for some (Android, Linux) and disgraceful for others (iOS), but unlike Matrix there is no visible progress for those on the sucky side of XMPP.

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The whole argument at the top of the thread is “it doesn’t matter how easy/good/performant it is to run a XMPP server, if the people you’ll want to talk to do not have a decent client”.

Yes. I don't dispute that an end-user will opt for a more feature-full option regardless of technical problems behind the scenes over a less feature-full option.

My argument is that I think Matrix's fundamental problems that concern the people hosting Matrix servers will eventually, limit its growth, as those problems will be much harder to fix. In contrast; improving an iOS client app is, from a purely technical perspective, much simpler to achieve. I am not making a statement that end-user's will be interested or care about technical details enough to switch their chat platform of choice, unless those details degrade their experience to the point of making them not desire to use it.

I don't use apple products and do not have a good idea of how much progress is being made in that area. It is a legitimate problem that the iOS app is not as polished as other platforms, I do not dispute this. My only point is that it is technically a simpler problem to remedy, were there enough funding or interest by a skilled developer.

If you are not concerned with what I am about the Matrix protocol and its problems, then that's okay. We have differing opinions is all.