Remix.run Logo
dannersy 3 hours ago

I am genuinely interested in hearing why we collectively ditched XMPP. I would love to hear someone who has been in the weeds on the development or even just following closely.

Edit: Seems someone beat me to it with a good reply.

zajio1am 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

XMPP had rather bad name. Well-known design issues causing message losses, fractioned ecosystem due to varying implementation of extensions, unsuitability for mobile clients, absence of synchronization between clients, absence of end-to-end encryption. Most of these issues were (much) later fixed by extensions, but Matrix (or Signal for those who do not require federated one) was already there, offering E2EE by default.

Even today, E2EE in XMPP is rather inconvenient compared to Matrix due to absence of chain-of-trust in key management.

singpolyma3 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I am genuinely interested in hearing why we collectively ditched XMPP

We didn't. It was never very popular, and is today more popular that it has ever been.

zadikian an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Depends if you mean just the technology or using it in the small federated spirit. Google Talk and Facebook Messenger were XMPP all the way through and worked with vanilla XMPP clients. Slack wasn't XMPP but supported it via a gateway until it was dropped.

Not sure how popular the small federation was back then, but I know Mac OS X Server touted an XMPP server and that was a first-class feature of iChat.

WD-42 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It wasn’t popular? I remember using pidgin to talk to friends on google chat, facebook and my work contacts. It was glorious.

I haven’t had a reason to use an xmpp client in over a decade.

kombine 38 minutes ago | parent [-]

Same! Pidgin was such a great piece of software

toastal 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Decent overview (& more broadly but the heart is about XMPP & good ol’ capitalist corpo greed): https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-netwo...