That was really biased. They claim that matrix isn’t open spec or open source (both of which are false), not extensible (false), and has no third party clients (false).
I thought as much. There’s a clear bias towards XMPP, though some statements seem objective and factual. Some others are just strange, like the one where it just says “OLM” on a yellow background. Is that good? Bad? Some extra words would have been nice.
This has to be understood with the history of Matrix developers badmouthing XMPPs expandability approach ;) They are basically just turning around the argument to show that there are very much two sides of the coin.
That was really biased. They claim that matrix isn’t open spec or open source (both of which are false), not extensible (false), and has no third party clients (false).
I thought as much. There’s a clear bias towards XMPP, though some statements seem objective and factual. Some others are just strange, like the one where it just says “OLM” on a yellow background. Is that good? Bad? Some extra words would have been nice.
The Matrix side of the “Open, extensible protocol?” is borderline incoherent.
This has to be understood with the history of Matrix developers badmouthing XMPPs expandability approach ;) They are basically just turning around the argument to show that there are very much two sides of the coin.
Huh? None of that is written in that comparison as far as I can tell.