I’m looking into hosting one of these for the first time. From my limited research, XMPP seems to win in every way, which makes me think I must be missing something. Matrix is almost always mentioned as the de-facto standard, but I rarely saw arguments why it is better than XMPP?

Xmpp seems way easier to host, requiring less resources, has many more options for clients, and is simpler and thus easier to manage and reason about when something goes wrong.

So what’s the deal?

  • kevincox@lemmy.mlEnglish
    22·
    2 years ago

    I don’t think you can pick out any one reason. XMPP is very old and has extensions for a huge variety of features. Many people have experience with older versions which had many major missing features (such as strong multi-device with offline support and server-side history) and a lot of the “hype” has died out long ago.

    Matrix is new and made a lot of decisions that really helped its popularity.

    1. Having a HTTP-based client-to-server protocol makes web clients very easy to make.
    2. It is based on sync and merging rather than messages which moves some difficult problems (like multidevice and server-side history) into the core protocol meaning that it works well out of the box.
    3. Having HTTP based protocols make hosting it familiar for many people.
    4. The “default” Element clients have lots of features out of the box, features that for a long time were not always present on XMPP servers or clients. This gives a more consistent experience.

    We will see what the history holds. Matrix is still very new and maybe the hype will die out and we end up moving back to XMPP. Or maybe something new. Overall I don’t think there are major fundamental differences. I think Matrix making graph sync the core primitive to build off of was a good idea, but in practice I don’t think it matters much.

    You say that XMPP is much lighter. But I think that is mostly due to Synapse not being very efficient. Other implementations are fairly light. Even then my Synapse is using fairly small amounts of resources. You should also check that you are making an apples-to-apples comparison with large rooms, media and message history like you would typically see in a common Matrix server.

  • Samsy@lemmy.mlEnglish
    101·
    2 years ago

    Show me a docker compose file which I can simply start and don’t have to mess around more than deploy it, and I will discuss xmpp more often.

  • onlinepersona@programming.devEnglish
    94·
    2 years ago

    Matrix clients are simple, easy, and nice to look at. The matrix server might need more resources, but it comes with everything out of the box. There’s no need to fiddle with extensions and their weird naming, and hope that the other server/client also supports the extension. Also, are there bridges to other protocols?

    I remember trying to get encryption working on Pidgin and it was all around a bad experience.

    XMPP might be as powerful or more powerful than matrix, but nothing about it screams modern. It’s like IRC for Gen X’ers.

    Anti Commercial-AI license

  • Brad Boimler@startrek.websiteEnglish
    4·
    2 years ago

    I think it has more to do with Matrix is kinda becoming the standard for secure open source messaging server but I do agree with you I would just use what works for you personally.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.caEnglish
    41·
    2 years ago

    I’m not sure if you noticed this, but Matrix is newer. And, as Barney Stinson will tell you, “Newer is always hotter”.

    STD: Shiny Things Disease.

    They’ll find something newer soon. And, if it uses some loose install method with performance or security concerns but installs with a negligent curl|sh, they’ll be all over it.

  • adr1an@programming.devEnglish
    42·
    2 years ago

    Tinode and Snikket should be discussed too. They’re server and clients, built upon XMPP and including the many extensions, “XEPs” that an admin would want in order to give their users a modern experience.

  • ericjmorey@programming.devEnglish
    31·
    2 years ago

    I’m going to throw this out there not being sure how true it is, but I find it interesting to think about.

    XMPP is much more widely used than Matrix if you count WhatsApp (Meta/Facebook). ActivityPub is much more widely used than AT Protocol and nostr combined if you count Threads (Meta/Facebook). So reasons why people aren’t talking about XMPP include not wanting to recognize that Meta is hugely influential in this space and that most people don’t talk about the underlying protocols of the services and tools they’re use at all leaving a self selected group of people looking for alternatives with traction that don’t depend on Meta. Outside of WhatsApp, there’s not a lot of traction with any particular XMPP implementation. And none of the XMPP implementations have a Discord-ish organization of chat rooms that’s popular and familiar right now. Matrix has both right now (although I don’t think it will ever be more than a small niche in the mobile messaging space).

    I’m fine with using Matrix for what it is. There are programming language communities that have been very helpful for me and a number of Lemmy related communities that have been nice to be a part of.