[kwlug-disc] Skype (replacement)

Tue Nov 28 16:26:29 EST 2017

> Matrix has been open and federated from the beginning, whereas Wire
> only recently open sourced their server code, and as far as I know,
> they still don't support federation. 

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Wire has laid plans
publicly for self-hosting and federation, and is *now* fully open-
source; for whatever reasons (I suspect code-quality or readiness to
publish since it was in beta until recently) it was kept behind closed
doors. What makes software philosophically superior depending on when
it was open-sourced? Linux didn't start out as FLOSS for instance.

I think we're comparing apples to oranges here...

> Looking at Wire's features page, it looks like it has several
> limitations that Matrix does not have.  For example, it only supports
> 128 members in a group chat (one (unencrypted) Matrix room I'm in has
> over 11,000 members, and the largest encrypted Matrix room I'm in has
> 172 members), which means that Wire can't be used as an IRC
> replacement,

Skype and most other video-first platforms don't support that many
users in a group at a time. Wire makes for an acceptable Skype
replacement, but I never said anything about replacing IRC? What's
wrong with IRC? Long live IRC!

> Matrix is also currently missing some features that Wire has, such as
> message editing, likes, voice/video messages, self-destructing
> messages, and sketching.  Although all of those are planned features
> for Matrix ... and there are features that Matrix has that Wire
> doesn't have.

I think this is simply because the two platforms have different aims;
one is not more valid to use than the other, and I for one use both. If
Wire's goal is to provide a FLOSS-y user-first alternative to Skype (it
was created by the original developers of Skype after all), that
delivers respectably well on video and audio quality, I don't see a
problem with that, even if it's "missing" features.

--
Cheers,
Keefer Rourke

https://krourke.org

On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 13:12 -0500, Hubert Chathi wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 16:35:04 -0500, Keefer Rourke <mail at krourke.org>
> said:
> 
> > I'm not totally sure how they compare. IMHO Matrix is a superior
> > communication protocol, but perhaps less friendly to non-technical
> > users who just want one-to-one video chat or group calling. Probabl
> > just issues of marketing to various user groups, but I've had more
> > luck getting people to use Wire than to use Matrix/Riot.
> 
> I've never tried Wire, but from a philosophical level, I prefer
> Matrix.
> Matrix has been open and federated from the beginning, whereas Wire
> only recently open sourced their server code, and as far as I know,
> they still don't support federation.  As well, Matrix has had a
> published client API (for building bots/clients/etc) at least for as
> long as I've been following it.  In general, my impression is that
> Matrix seems to be more open and community-minded than Wire.
> 
> Looking at Wire's features page, it looks like it has several
> limitations that Matrix does not have.  For example, it only supports
> 128 members in a group chat (one (unencrypted) Matrix room I'm in has
> over 11,000 members, and the largest encrypted Matrix room I'm in has
> 172 members), which means that Wire can't be used as an IRC
> replacement,
> and may even have problems being used for a company-wide group chat
> for
> a moderately-sized company.
> 
> I think that one of the main problems with Matrix is that the
> existing clients are either incomplete, and/or could use more polish
> with respect to usability.  The flagship client, Riot.im, is pretty
> good, but is currently optimized for IRC-like or Slack-like uses, and
> 1:1 chats are a bit clunky.  (That said, I personally find Riot more
> usable than say, Hangouts, which we use at my work.)  I've heard that
> there are planned improvements for 1:1 chats in Riot.
> 
> Matrix is also currently missing some features that Wire has, such as
> message editing, likes, voice/video messages, self-destructing
> messages, and sketching.  Although all of those are planned features
> for Matrix (except maybe for sketching, though it would probably be
> possible to do a sketching widget in Matrix), and there are features
> that Matrix has that Wire doesn't have.
> 
> > On November 26, 2017 4:01:40 PM EST, Andrew Sullivan Cant
> > <acant at alumni.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> > > How does wired compare with matrix.org?  I have used matrix
> > > successfully for 1-1 video, which are WebRTC I
> > > believe.  Apparently the riot.im service supports group
> > > video/audio chat, but I have not tried it.
> > > 
> > > Somethings that stand about for Matrix:
> > > * you can already self-host
> > > * supports and already has multiple clients 
> > > * explicitly supports bridging to other networks
> > > 
> > > This page lists the cilents and bridges which currently exist,
> > > with various levels of done-ness.
> > > https://matrix.org/docs/projects/try-matrix-now.html
> > > 
> > > Looks like bridges to SMS already, but both are Alpha:
> > > * 
> > > https://matrix.org/docs/projects/as/matrix-appservice-twilio.html 
> > > *
> > > https://matrix.org/docs/projects/other/SmsMatrix.html
> > > 
> > > But I still do not see anything for going out to the PSTN.  I am
> > > guessing that bridges from WebRTC to SIP/VoIP probably already
> > > exist?
> > > 
> > > Andrew
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 26/11/17 15:24, Bob Jonkman wrote:
> > > > We were just talking about Wire at the KWVoIP meeting last
> > > > Thursday
> > > > (hi Ron!). When I announced on Twitter that we'd be discussing
> > > > Wire[1], @Wire immediately offered to provide
> > > > support. Unfortunately, the conversation at KWVoIP was so
> > > > interesting that we didn't actually get around to using Wire at
> > > > the meeting.
> > > > 
> > > > Wire is at least as good as Skype, since it was created by the
> > > > original two Skype developers.  There are some quirky UI
> > > > choices tho, including some mystery-meat navigation (onscreen
> > > > widgets are invisible
> > > > until you hover the mouse over them -- but how to find them in
> > > > the first place?) There's no integration with the PSTN (yet).
> > > > 
> > > > I'm using Wire, my userID is @BobJonkman -- feel free to add me
> > > > to a conversation group. I'm currently in groups with people
> > > > from KWVoIP
> > > > and the !Fediverse
> > > > 
> > > > Source code for many client platforms and the server is
> > > > available at https://github.com/wireapp although a blog post[2]
> > > > indicates that self-hosting isn't available yet (I haven't
> > > > tried). Federation is promised for early in 2018, where one
> > > > server instance can connect to another and everyone can run
> > > > their own. Perhaps what they meant is that self-hosted
> > > > instances can't yet communicate with others.
> > > > 
> > > > --Bob.
> > > > 
> > > > [1] https://twitter.com/wire/status/933819857916874752
> > > > 
> > > > [2] https://medium.com/@wireapp/open-sourcing-wire-server-code-
> > > > ef7866a731d5
> > > > 
> > > > 
> _______________________________________________
> kwlug-disc mailing list
> kwlug-disc at kwlug.org
> http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://kwlug.org/pipermail/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org/attachments/20171128/5e5dc18b/attachment.sig>