> we have zero fragmentation so far. some clients implement more features than others
The Matrix spec has many versions and many features. Clients implement and keep up with varying parts of it due to varying reasons usually involving varying amounts of manpower and funding. Same as with XMPP. I don't see the difference.
Pretty sure I remember the AP spec author saying the whole thing works very much like XMPP. But they couldn't have built on top of XMPP for some unspecified reason.
Pretty sure the client feature parity problem is inherent to open ecosystems with many vendors with varying priorities and budgets. Just look at the web back when there were more browsers in the game, or email clients etc.
XMPP simply does not have enough Hype, it's just boring old technology that keeps working and getting better over time despite lack of funding and startups.
But most of all, users care about talking to their friends. You could have all the features and amazing UX but if their friends are using tin cans and wet wire, that's what they will turn to. Network effect trumps all. Features and UX are marketing, which at most can help you bootstrap to the point where network effect kicks in.
DNSSEC-secured DNS with PowerDNS
Federated XMPP chat with Prosody
Email with Postfix and Dovecot
Prometheus keeping track of it all
and Grafana to draw some pretty graphs for how it's all going
The Matrix spec has many versions and many features. Clients implement and keep up with varying parts of it due to varying reasons usually involving varying amounts of manpower and funding. Same as with XMPP. I don't see the difference.