[ppjet6]

I want to say "it's complicated".

Probably any single protocol could be used to build a client that Slack or WhatsApp or [insert your target here] users would appreciate with good designers, (and/or with really little to no education.)

Multi-protocol clients are generally not optimal. The set of features that can be used will be the lowest common denominator, and if it's not the case there will be discrepancies in the design.

(Same story for bridges.)

Every protocol has their set of trade-offs, and every developer has their opinion on what's best (or the least worst). Also not every developer work with designers or have designing skills(!)

It's good for developers to be able to write what they want and how they want it. It's fine if their intended target is already with their circle of friends on the platform (if their is a target at all). It's less practical if the target is outside and their circle is not on the platform (network effect/peer pressure etc.).

That's a general "issue" in Free Software, (I'd say in software, maybe anywhere? it's just more visible here.)

Some might say waste of resources, but who gets to decide what to do with others' free time.. no easy answers.

(Sorry to spoil the fun by trying to rationalize :p)

I for one value freedom, through decentralisation (or federation as some like to insist on), and as technicalities I believe standard and extensibility of said standard are necessary. XMPP seems to fit this role ok enough to me.

[rakoo]

Of course I'm not saying that people should stop working on what they want, they are free to spend their time however they want. I'm looking at it the other way: what if I want to create a protocol but can't be bothered to work on the UI, because I'm no designer ?

I'm not even talking about multi protocol clients because, as you said, it tends to level downwards rather than upwards. But if I could "fork" the UI and slap my protocol on it, instead of having to build it from scratch, I'd save a lot of time.