The only thing I find is that it's such a moving target. I was trying Element X last week which is now meant to be the new client to be. But I wasn't able to set up the encryption with my recovery key, there was only the online validation which I couldn't use because I was on the go and didn't have access to my desktop. It's supposed to be better but still lacks such basic things (also seems to still lack TOFU for my private server)
The same with the homeservers, there's synapse and dendrite is supposed to take over at some point but that point is forever far in the future. And then there's conduit, so which one is it? I understand this is a fully open multi-server multi-client platform but I kinda expect the "stock" ones to be clear in their strategy :)
The strategy doesn't really feel well thought out in that sense. I really like Matrix and am rooting for it but such things undermine my confidence in recommending it to others.
I'm sure the questions I ask are crystal clear to the matrix in-crowd but to me they're not. In that sense it feels a bit like recommmending arch Linux to a beginner, the first thing they have to do is choose a partition scheme, a network management stack, a desktop environment etc etc. This just doesn't work for those that aren't already deeply in the know :)
Matrix has a radically different threat model than Signal. They aren't replacements for each other. I think they'd be happy to tell you that if you asked them. I like Matrix too, but it's not going to save you from many of the decisions Signal made that you don't like; Matrix avoids those decisions by avoiding those issues.
Matrix itself is a big messy thing, much like the Web - this is both its power and a potential weakness.
Element X is indeed a fancy new client - but it hasn't hit a 1.0 yet. Think of it a lot like Firefox was pre-1.0; it's unrecognisably faster and better than the previous generation... but not all features are there yet. Meanwhile, there are loads of entirely unrelated independent excellent clients out there too; it's not just about Element v Element X.
> But I wasn't able to set up the encryption with my recovery key, there was only the online validation which I couldn't use because I was on the go and didn't have access to my desktop.
This bug is an accidental thinko however: it's placeholder UI which is about to be replaced by implementing login-via-scanning-QR-code (which is almost there), but obviously that also needs the ability to enter recovery keys too. Eitherway, it's being fixed: https://github.com/element-hq/element-x-ios/issues/2424
> also seems to still lack TOFU for my private server
Yup, sorry, TOFU for TLS isn't implemented yet in EX.
> The same with the homeservers, there's synapse and dendrite is supposed to take over at some point but that point is forever far in the future. And then there's conduit, so which one is it?
Synapse is a stable server where the core team is putting its effort currently. Dendrite is a 2nd gen server from the core team, but is beta and a) ended up being focused on P2P and embedded homeservers and experimental MSCs, b) is starved of resource atm due to funding pressure (c.f. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5BrVVf0B1I&t=316s). Conduit is an independent server implementation in Rust, which is promising but beta.
It's like asking whether you should use Apache httpd or beta versions of nginx or lighttpd in the early days of the Web.
> The strategy doesn't really feel well thought out in that sense.
The strategy at Element (which employs most of the Matrix core team) is pretty clear right now:
1. Improve Synapse as the most mature and stable server implementation (and package it in Element Server Suite for those needing an enterprise Matrix distro: https://element.io/server-suite)
2. Finish implementing sufficient features in Element X that it can replace the old classic Element mobile apps asap - converging on a single Rust codebase, so that bugs & audits & new features can all land in one place.
3. Keep building Element Web/Desktop and Element Call.
...and that's it.
If it seems confusing, that's either because we're in the middle of the Element -> Element X shuffle... or because the nature of Matrix is that there's loads of other independent implementations running around too. But that's what makes it fun, too :)
The only thing I find is that it's such a moving target. I was trying Element X last week which is now meant to be the new client to be. But I wasn't able to set up the encryption with my recovery key, there was only the online validation which I couldn't use because I was on the go and didn't have access to my desktop. It's supposed to be better but still lacks such basic things (also seems to still lack TOFU for my private server)
The same with the homeservers, there's synapse and dendrite is supposed to take over at some point but that point is forever far in the future. And then there's conduit, so which one is it? I understand this is a fully open multi-server multi-client platform but I kinda expect the "stock" ones to be clear in their strategy :)
The strategy doesn't really feel well thought out in that sense. I really like Matrix and am rooting for it but such things undermine my confidence in recommending it to others.
I'm sure the questions I ask are crystal clear to the matrix in-crowd but to me they're not. In that sense it feels a bit like recommmending arch Linux to a beginner, the first thing they have to do is choose a partition scheme, a network management stack, a desktop environment etc etc. This just doesn't work for those that aren't already deeply in the know :)