> Has anyone had success running video calls over Matrix without Element?
fwiw if you use the Jitsi widget, you can share the URL to your Jitsi room with anyone and they do not need Element or Matrix to join.
The whole voice/video thing is a design problem as protocols like Matrix or XMPP are designed for non-realtime communication, while voice/video is very much realtime. You cannot possibly federate a video stream, so Matrix or XMPP can, by design, only supply the routing (i.e. connecting the people who want to participate in a realtime chat) and the participants then need to agree on some server/software combo that provides the actual video conferencing.
> It's very handy to have shared calendars across multiple devices.
CalDAV should have you covered there. While the need for a server may be a bit inconvenient, I doubt that usability would be on par with it when you just copy the files instead (think of alerts, sharing calendars with others, etc). Also, there is no iOS Syncthing client when your phone probably is the most important device to have your calendars on.
This whole page is basically insulting the intelligence of users.
> It's about time you try Linux
implying that while you did have heard of Linux, you misjudged it.
> Unlike Windows and MacOS Linux gives you options
This is factually wrong, anyone knows that both Windows and macOS give you a lot of options.
> The major operating systems put their users in a box, while Linux allows you to choose an OS that fits your needs and skill level.
implying that you can't run macOS or Windows by choice. No, obviously zombie Steve Jobs forced you to buy a Mac for a lot of money.
> and "free" here refers not to the cost of the software but to its liberty—as no one entity owns the software it essentially belongs to everyone, without restriction
This is factually wrong but okay, copyright law is a complicated thing and it wouldn't make much sense to discuss that here.
> So, in part, making the switch to Linux is an ethical decision about the software you use on a daily basis, and the rights you and others have to the information and things you use.
implying that if I choose to buy a software for money to support its developers because I think they're doing a good job, this is somehow unethical. Actually, there were no ethics discussed in the previous paragraph, so this is a conclusion without foundation.
> Most open source operating systems are completely free both in price & licensing. There are typically no upfront fees, lengthy legal agreements, or restrictive copyright protections.
Um, did they ever see the GNU GPL?
> Free software is developed completely transparently which means the source code is out there in the open for anyone to look at. This means, if you wanted to, you can have a meaningful influence over the software development process.
That is not generally true. If you look for example at SQlite, you'll find that while this is a piece of free software used by millions, they generally don't accept patches or any other kind of influence.
> There are thousands of free software applications available to install without the need to browse the web. All this software undergoes scrutinous review before it reaches you, so you can find and use what you like with confidence.
implying that either non-free software isn't reviewed or that somehow I should trust people I don't know that review free software, but not people I don't know that review non-free software.
> With LibreOffice, you can also open and edit any Word, Powerpoint, or Excel files you may already have.
Anyone who ever tried opening a non-trivial Excel sheet with LibreOffice would disagree on that.
> On other platforms, the creative field is dominated by proprietary applications, but there are several capable free and open source alternatives.
… which also run on Windows and macOS.
---
There are a lot of good arguments you can make in favor for Linux. This page totally botches it.
fwiw if you use the Jitsi widget, you can share the URL to your Jitsi room with anyone and they do not need Element or Matrix to join.
The whole voice/video thing is a design problem as protocols like Matrix or XMPP are designed for non-realtime communication, while voice/video is very much realtime. You cannot possibly federate a video stream, so Matrix or XMPP can, by design, only supply the routing (i.e. connecting the people who want to participate in a realtime chat) and the participants then need to agree on some server/software combo that provides the actual video conferencing.