this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2026
87 points (98.9% liked)

Open Source

47942 readers
293 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Which is your preferred messaging app? I just want some insights about these two.

You may share other messaging apps too.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jaykrown@lemmy.world 1 points 4 minutes ago* (last edited 4 minutes ago)

I created this to help find active matrix rooms https://activematrixrooms.com/

[–] lionel@lemmy.coupou.fr 2 points 1 hour ago

I prefer matrix for two main reasons:

  • I can host my own server (and I do)
  • It's not centralized

As a bonus it has briddes for almost anything you can think of, so I use the signal bridge.

[–] ignominous_wombat@lemmy.ml 7 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

I actually prefer XMPP. It's also less of a hassle to set up than Matrix and the protocol is much more mature. There are still issues, but it's rather functional for audio and video calls (if you're using a supported client).

Edit: For clients, I use Cheogram on Android and Profanity (which is a TUI) or DinoX (for calls) on Linux.

[–] Goodlucksil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 7 hours ago

I use both. No, really.

If one's intent is to connect with as many people as possible, having as many messaging/real chat apps as possible is a good idea (imo).

That's why I have WA, DC, Stoat, Signal, Matrix and IRC.

I use matrix with a bunch of my friends to replace discord and and it is quite good. The main draw for me was the awesome client options like fluffy chat, commet, and sable.

[–] BladeFederation@piefed.social 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Signal is more stable & simple to set up. So for its intended use, getting people to actually talk to me on it, it's better.

Matrix is obviously better as a Discord replacement. It doesn't require a phone number which is also good. Not centrally managed so easier to decouple from big tech corruption. So it is better in those ways.

[–] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago

I agree. Signal is easier to use and to get people switch to it since the UI/UX are vey similar to other big platforms.

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 11 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Signal is a centralized, US-based service which requires your phone number (thus your real identity, IE name and address), has social networking graphs of everyone you talk to, and must forward that information to the US government when asked, as well as (by law) not tell you that they've been asked to do so. During the Obama era, 60 NSLs were issued for this private information every single day.

People overlook its privacy concerns for the same reason they do with apple: it has a shiny interface and is easy to use, and makes people very attached to it. Behind all that, is a surveillance network that its creators have explicitly said they do not want it to be able to run in a decentralized, private manner.

It has a long history of privacy offenses below (such as refusing to publish its server's source code for years, its reliance on other US tech services (amazon, google), US-government funding, and a US-defense-tank friendly administration) which get ignored or shouted down by many of those above. See the article below.

Why not signal.

Pretty much any alternative is better, as long as its not hosted in a five-eyes country, and especially if it doesn't require phone numbers or real identities like signal does.

I personally have been using SimpleX for friends and real life contacts, and Matrix for larger more anonymous group chats.

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

has social networking graphs of everyone you talk to

Source?

US government funding does not mean it's immediately bad... The internet, thr flu vaccine, closed captioning, and wheather radar were all funded by the US government. A truly secure messaging encryption is beneficial to the United States, and is evem good enough for the president apparently.

Since their messages are truly secure, it wouldn't matter where you store them. Just store them in the cheapest places possible. It being centralized makes it far more usable to the average person, making it much more likely for them to use.

[–] FrugalBlue@discuss.online 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Good question. I looked in the attached essay source, and he covers this there https://dessalines.github.io/essays/why_not_signal.html#social-network-graphs

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

This is my comment to the other person, I just don't want to type the same ideas out a second time:

I read it. They also have no source or evidence.

Signals database, which we must assume is compromised due to its centralized and US domiciled nature, has a few important pieces of data;

You can't simply say "we must assume" as evidence. In fact, they implemented "Sealed sender" in 2018 where they are not able to see who the message is being sent to.

They are also legally required to provide all information they have on users for warrants and subpoenas. Any time they do that, they post the (slightly redacted) document they provided to the courts. See the list here: https://signal.org/bigbrother/ This confirms they did not have any metadata on those users. The only info they have is what they openly state (phone number, date of registration, and last time a message was sent).

While there may be other US government requests they are not alllwed to disclose, they were legally required to provide the same information to the courts, and we can see what they provided.

And sure, while the US government funds Signal, you know who else endorses it? Edward fucking Snowden. If anyone knows about secure messaging, it's the man that physically removes the microphone and camera from his phones before using them.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 2 points 12 hours ago

Insightful! Thanks. I agree and I'll give SimpleX a try as others suggested.

[–] BaraCoded@literature.cafe 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I feel uneasy about Signal being an app centralized in the USA, but it is the only one streamlined enough to be usable by non tech-savvy friends and family. I wonder if it will fall prey to Chat Control in Europe, so the time to explore alternatives will soon be upon us.

So far, I have heard of XMPP, Matrix, Delta chat and SimpleX. Never got friends to switch to XMPP or Matrix for more than one conversation, so I guess we're just f*cked.

[–] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago

Me neither. In fact, all my friends and almost all people here are only using Messenger and Telegram.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Signal. Matrix was made by Israeli spyware company Amdocs and when an employee was asked about it after the split to a UK company they pretended like Amdocs wasn't caught in multiple global spyware scandals already.

[–] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 hours ago

But they say Signal is centralized, and hosted in the US.

[–] derin@lemmy.beru.co 4 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

Matrix is literally an open standard, use a server and client written by people you trust, or write your own.

Signal is literally made by a private company and is completely closed source.

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Signal is open source but it's hosted centrally. So you're trusting their server.

Matrix is a protocol it's not hosted anywhere. But the primary developer and host instance now called Element.

But it being created and initially bankrolled by an Israeli spyware company known for creating backdoors, and the lead devs still refusing to acknowledge that doesn't inspire me much more confidence.

If you want privacy SimpleX seems like better option than Matrix.

[–] derin@lemmy.beru.co 2 points 5 hours ago

You can host a server which uses software not written by Element. Same for the client.

I don't trust the Signal devs because I have no reason to. I don't want to use anyone else's servers unless I'm paying them or they're paying me 😅

And I love swapping/trying new clients.

[–] minty@aussie.zone 7 points 13 hours ago

Signal. Requires little technical knowledge, other then knowing about end to end encryption and why its important

I would like to use matrix since if anything, I think its cool. But noone I know would be remotely interested.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

well what are your criteria? Asking for advice without saying what you need isn't tremendously useful and, as has happened, mostly just results in people recommending whatever they personally use for whatever reasons.

[–] nitroemdash@lemmy.wtf 9 points 15 hours ago

Signal requires your phone number, which is not only quite bad for privacy, but also easy to block 2FA for your government if it decides it doesn't like private chats.

[–] roundabout@lemmy.zip 3 points 12 hours ago

From purely a user perspective, because I haven’t dug into the tech behind either, I’d probably vote Matrix. Signal is nice but personally I find matrix easier to use for group chats and bigger rooms. I only have 4-5 people on signal and it’s useful for those moments but on Matrix I can find bigger chats to join and jump in and just talk with a handful of people.

[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 8 points 15 hours ago

Both ! Use Matrix with tech savy friends and Signal with your family

[–] listless@lemmy.cringecollective.io 31 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Do you want it to be so complicated that no one you know in real life is able to use it for more than two weeks before they make some kind of mistake or change that deletes their entire message history and identity? Matrix

Do you want a slim chance that friends and family might use it, but you have to listen to privacy nutjobs tell you your app is a CIA NSA PsyOp and you might as well cc: potus(at)whitehouse(dot)gov all your messages, it's run by an american non-profit obviously it can't be trusted? Signal

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 13 hours ago

Beeper which runs over Matrix (with bridges) has been pretty good and straightforward.

It's setup like a chat app rather than a slack/discord lookalike so its easier for usual folks to get used to.

[–] Tealk@rollenspiel.forum 9 points 16 hours ago

I'd go with Matrix. I use it as my main messenger and I've actually set up my own self-hosted instance. It works perfectly for both 1:1 conversations and managing my tabletop RPG groups. Voice chat through Element Call is fantastic – honestly, it's a solid alternative to Discord.

What I really appreciate is the control I get from self-hosting: I have complete autonomy over the server and data for both my personal messaging and community spaces. For RPG campaigns, the room structure and customizable permission system are ideal. The voice quality is reliable enough for long gaming sessions, and everything feels more private and independent compared to relying on Discord.

[–] Hund@feddit.nu 7 points 15 hours ago

I've been using XMPP the past two decades. I use it because I haven't found something that's better.

[–] Kirk@startrek.website 2 points 11 hours ago

Signal is more like WhatsApp, Element/Matrix is aiming to be more like Telegram or Discord.

[–] squirrel@cake.kobel.fyi 8 points 16 hours ago

Both. Signal for friends and family. Matrix for fedi friends.

[–] phanto@lemmy.ca 24 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

This is how I explained Matrix to my mom: its like an email address, but for chat. You can chat at me, even if we aren't using the same server, like someone can send an email from Gmail to Hotmail. She got set up and promptly went back to texting me every dang time.

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

That is where signal once shined before they removed the capability of being default sms app

[–] BladeFederation@piefed.social 4 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

That's why the removed it actually, people think being the default SMS app means you're actually sending encrypted messages now. Nope, it just means you're sending regular old SMS but with thr Signal app.

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

That's an extreme minority though. The only people who use Signal are privacy and security conscious people and the people who those people forced to use signal. For the second group, they couldn't care less if it's encrypted or not, for the first group, they will make sure what's a Signal message and what's a regular SMS message.

This mythical user that accidentally sends an SMS message when they meant to send a Signal message doesn't exist.

[–] BladeFederation@piefed.social 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

But then the only use case is if you literally take someone's phone, switch the default SMS app to Signal, and they don't know how to switch it back themselves. If they're that tech illiterate, they'll probably call you for tech support as to why text isnt working, instead of switching to Signal. And even if they then agree to do it your way, the mythical user you described is no longer mythical, it is easier to make a mistake in the Ui for someone tech illiterate. You will often see a person's phone number in their Signal profile, after all, it's not unthinkable.

Also, as time goes on, more people start using Signal as more people see how fascist some governments are getting and how intense social engineering is with spam calls/texts/whatnot. I know a random 60 year old bus driver who switched to Signal and made other privacy changes like turning on Safari's relay because her accounts got hacked and she was using the same password for everything. To someone that is blind Googling something they don't have context for, Signal is a trusted encrypted app, therefore anything I send through Signal should be trusted. I don't think it is as impossible as you think. And again, to what benefit? There is some benefit to prevent Google possibly scanning your messages, but there are also plenty of other SMS apps which can avoid this, if it is avoidable at all.

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 6 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Currently using Signal. If Canada passes Bill C-22 Signal will leave so I'll have to find another messenger app.

SimpleX seems like a good one. Doesn't use Google notifications which is great for degoogled devices. Set it to check every 10 minutes instead of constantly and it's very easy on the battery. Messages come in right away if the app is open, such as when having a conversation with a contact.

Edit: SimpleX is also very easy to use, as simple as Signal. This is important to get non-tech people on-board.

[–] Midnitte@beehaw.org 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Think its relatively new, but theres also chatto

[–] jksalcedo@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Interesting...

So it's against federation

[–] Midnitte@beehaw.org 1 points 6 hours ago

Think its just built in such a way that federation isn't needed. Your server data is just your server.

Like ventrilo or teamspeak

[–] ByteMe@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

Signal. The app is miles better. I do use matrix too tho for some communities and for keeping an eye for the development

load more comments
view more: next ›