[buttocks]

I always liked XMPP and SIP as messaging protocols. So easy to read and understand and implement. Both are extensible and can be made secure.

[rootnod3]

Yes. Unfortunately it seems that Matrix is the winner, but I think Matrix is over-engineered.

XMPP was nice. Especially in the old times when Google Hangouts and Facebook Chat were also XMPP based. Being able to talk to people on another service without needing an account there was a nice thing to have for a few months.

[ge0rg]

The interop was a nice feature implemented by their engineers, but it violated the lock-in operational principles of the gatekeeper services, so it had to be abandoned. Let's see if the EU Digital Markets Act will bring back XMPP interfaces to the big ones... ;)

[tcfhgj]

So far it looks more like walled gardens are the real winners.

What you maybe see as overengineering, I see as a prerequisite for wider adoption.

These days aren't the old days any more, when you only ever used a native app without e2ee on a computer.

[Lammy]

Pardon my pedantry, but Facebook Chat was never XMPP-based. They ran an XMPP gateway into their proprietary messaging system, but there was no S2S.

[RadiozRadioz]

What are the reasons Matrix is the winner? Are they inherent to the protocol itself or something else?

[syhol]

My main problem with matrix is that it feels sluggish. I'm told the experience can be improved by running your own homeserver so I'll be trying that sometime this year.