Matrix v1.15

101 todsacerdoti 28 6/26/2025, 8:01:28 PM matrix.org ↗

Comments (28)

fishgoesblub · 3h ago
Every new release or "This week in Matrix" post I check to see if Discord style detailed permissions and voice channels get added and every time I get disappointed. I fear it'll never be added at this point due to the funding issues. I hyped it up to all of my friends who stick to Discord that "One day" it'll compete with Discord and we, and millions of others can all finally be happy. I hope that day will come, but my hope is fading.
Arathorn · 3h ago
What would you say the delta is between Element's current video-rooms and Discord-style voice-rooms (if you go and mute video for everyone), ooi? The only reason Element hasn't implemented precisely the same UI as Discord is because it's not (currently) trying to be a Discord competitor, but more a "run your own encrypted Teams alternative", given that's what Element customers are asking for right now, and we're having to follow the money to try to get sustainable. However, what we're trying to do is to ensure that Discordish features still work, despite having to focus more on Teamsish features.

In terms of permissions: I'm a bit surprised that folks feel limited by Matrix's freeform hierarchy of permissions. Every user can have a 'power level' from 0 to 100, and you can then customise the threshold required for literally permission (e.g. you need power level 54 or higher to kick users, or whatever). The only difference with Discord is that Discord lets you pick entirely arbitrary combinations of permissions (e.g. have one user able to kick but not ban, but another user able to ban but not kick, or whatever). How useful really is this in real life usage though?

I'm trying to work out whether the problem is if Element's UI for configuring permissions is too basic, or whether folks really do need a full RBAC permission matrix, and if so, for what use case?

have_faith · 1h ago
The power level model of permissions feels to me a bit overly simplified. It’s so easy to imagine scenarios where you need exceptions to the rule of permissions existing on a single axis that it seems very limiting from the outset.

The idea of ever increasing and overlapping scopes I don’t think maps well to most people’s mental model of who should be allowed to do what. People mostly want to define an arbitrary role; admin, user, team leader, whatever, and just pick what that role is allowed to do in isolation. It’s marginally more work to setup initially picking all of the permissions again, but it removes all of the overhead of having to monitor what permissions are being adopted from lower scopes on the power level axis.

I also think the power level system makes it much harder to “refactor” permissions for specific roles without affecting permissions for everyone “above and below”

em-bee · 1h ago
the discord style permissions are simply easier to understand. it's classic role based. you define the roles, and assign the roles to users. matrix permissions forces a hierarchy that is awkward and more difficult to apply because i have to force permissions into a hierarchy. on discord i don't have to think about the hierarchy.
cwillu · 1h ago
Real life usage is messy.
switknee · 2h ago
Smells like baby duck syndrome. You're used to what you're used to, and you'll never get used to anything else if you don't switch.

I do see what people are talking about in reference to the voice channels though, even though I can't stand them.

paulryanrogers · 1h ago
Why don't we all speak Esperanto? Inertia.

I think hierarchical permission systems are awkward. Role based is easy to understand and setup, even if more complex technically.

sampl3username · 1h ago
We don't speak Esperanto because constructed languages work against human nature.
jimbob45 · 1h ago
Why don't we all speak Esperanto? Inertia.

Well, also because Ido is the superior language. But also inertia, yes.

waymon · 3h ago
I'm running matrix with jitsi for voice. No one is gonna leave discord for it though....not yet in my circles at least.
luqtas · 3h ago
if people actually cared about freedom/privacy, Discord wouldn't be a thing, right?

and even harder to leave Discord now when a lot of users invested in Nitro fancy emoticons and profile enchantments

7bit · 3h ago
I care for privacy. But there has to be a compromise between privacy and socializing otherwise we would all use letters with encrypted text, no?
spencerflem · 3h ago
Even without that, its just a much slicker and more useable system.

I really want to love matrix but at least last time I tried it, the app was very noticeably more clunky and featureless.

jedahan · 3h ago
Can't wait until MAS is just part of synapse/dendrite, will be a lot easier to install and maintain than the extra moving parts.
DoctorOW · 2h ago
I kinda like the extra moving parts, it makes it easier to scale away from the slow Python parts.
lousken · 2h ago
custom emojis still didn't make the cut?
sneak · 2h ago
None of these things are why I and everyone I know doesn’t use Matrix.
cpfiffer · 2h ago
Why exactly don't people use matrix that much? It strikes me as a reasonably good open, secure comms protocol.
Arathorn · 34m ago
One of the big problems is that folks judge Matrix based on the legacy Element apps, which have now been succeeded by Element X: https://element.io/blog/we-have-lift-off-element-x-call-and-... etc. Element X kicks ass, in my (very biased) opinion: it's a super-speedy Rust core with fancy SwiftUI and Compose native UI layered on top. It radically outperforms any other encrypted messenger i've used in terms of UI perf and usability.

However, because it's a rewrite, it doesn't quite have feature parity with the old apps, which are now over 10 years old: Threads is in beta; Spaces haven't landed yet, and Widgets aren't implemented yet. Therefore, we have to keep the old app around for users/customers who depend on those.

As a result, >80% of the people who say "Matrix sucks" are actually talking about bad experiences on the old Element mobile apps - rather than better client Element X or indeed Matrix clients from other folks.

There's also a large set of people who got bitten by encryption problems, almost all of which were fixed by Sept 2024.

Finally, there's folks who got bitten by the sad history of bridging in Matrix: IRC bridging used to be relatively okay; the team then got very stretched due to lack of funding; we tried to land a major PR to improve its architecture; the PR introduced bugs; Libera got very upset; we tried to fix things but failed to do fast enough. As a result, bridging to Libera in particular is awful these days, using adhoc bridges which funnel all traffic through a single user, with no ability to join arbitrary IRC channels on demand or use Matrix as a bouncer.

These days, the priority at Element is providing a self-hosted, decentralised WhatsApp and Teams replacement for governments... and once we get sustainable doing that, we'll be able to spend time building community features once again.

throwaway98334 · 23m ago
> One of the big problems is that folks judge Matrix based on the legacy Element apps, which have now been succeeded by Element X

Which is mobile-only. Element's UX on desktop is still a joke.

> These days, the priority at Element is providing a self-hosted, decentralised WhatsApp and Teams replacement for governments... and once we get sustainable doing that, we'll be able to spend time building community features once again.

In other words, you don't have the community's best interests in mind, but we should rest safe because you'll have their best interests in mind at some point in the future, maybe.

Not very reassuring.

hashworks · 2h ago
The official client is clunky and being electron on the desktop doesn't make it better. Messengers live and die on UX. Since it's an open protocol alternative clients exist of course, but are often not feature complete. Things are often slow, especially with large group channels with lots of messages.

If you host a server yourself - it's great that you can! - you'll try the official implementation, synapse — ...and discover that it's a resource hog. Things got a bit better with some streaming sync protocol or something like that, but last time I looked it up that was still experimental and the server is still a chonker. Again, alternative servers exist, again the problem with feature parity.

I feel like the protocol is bloated as well, but I didn't dive into it too much to have a good opinion on that.

When choosing a messenger, I go to Signal for security, to IRC for simplicity and to Telegram for UX. I never thought "Oh let's use Matrix"...

ElijahLynn · 41m ago
"Messengers live and die on UX" - THIS
encom · 52m ago
From time to time, I go and check if there's a stable non-Electron Matrix client available - Qt would be nice. Thus, I'm still on IRC. I've tried participating in some bridged Matrix channels, but the IRC bridges I've encountered were super annoying. All messages come from one user, the bridge. Very often, the same message gets repeated twice or more, for some reason. I guess Matrix has no limit on usernames, so some users have names that are more than a line long. It's all very tedious.
WD-42 · 38m ago
The QT client for Matrix is called Nheko: https://nheko-reborn.github.io/ There's a client in just about every toolkit. Just takes a cursory internet search...
VariousPrograms · 46m ago
No one is going to use Matrix that doesn't have privacy-focused contact forcing them to because the privacy benefit of the slight inconvenience is something almost nobody cares about. Things that are non-issues to someone who read the online Matrix documentation becomes a mountain to a middle aged mom who taps through errors without reading them and is used to things "just working" in the way Apple products just work, not the way Linux just works.

If you log into multiple devices, you have to go through a verification process to verify the new device. You may need to backup and restore your encryption keys manually or all your messages will be "Unable to decrypt message". Keeping multiple clients open simultaneously is supposed to have one client request the keys from the other client, but this either takes a while or doesn't always work. I have a contact with an unverified device (so all his messages show up with a warning) who refuses to fix it because all the other messengers just work by logging in. This is on top of people being upset that you're adding one more app to their menagerie of texts, Facebook, Whatsapp, Telegram, Discord, etc.

I use Matrix with my close contacts but I can't imagine anyone ever saying "Damn, I'm going to use this instead of Discord now!"

panki27 · 2h ago
Because it entails getting people away from WhatsApp/Telegram/etc. - I speak from experience.
jacooper · 27m ago
That's why bridges exist.
sneak · 57m ago
Because the product design people there seem to focus on an enterprise use case where the client is pushed out with a custom config to devices, instead of catering to end consumer usages.

I assume this is caused by the company that does the Matrix development getting its revenue from such customers.

I get the impression it is more designed to be a Slack replacement than a Signal or WhatsApp replacement, which is a shame.