Jami is p2p, it just cuts the middleman. Is it bad concept? I haven’t had the chance to test Jami or Signal, no adoption from my contacts. But, as from a federation and anti centralized services, Jami should be the better alternative, right?

  • Fuzzypyro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    I love Jami, that being said it has one massive problem. In order for it to be usable on local networks you need to either port forward the peer to peer port, set up a proxy relay or use the proxy relay that Jami provides. That’s not a big deal to set up or make any of those changes but they are things that need to be done. There is no real warning about it and when you are using mobile it works just fine due to cg-nat so the problem ends up seeming intermittent. Like I said I love Jami but I don’t think it will ever really be a contender for a mainstream chat platform unless they make some pretty big changes to how relays are handled or become more transparent about this particular problem in the setup process.

    That being said… Matrix is pretty rad. Like really really rad. Go look at that. It feels a lot more like a federated chat service because it is designed from the ground up to be that. Plus interoperability with clients is cool. Plus if you set up your own server then you can add bridges to sync all of your accounts to use matrix so that you don’t have to force anyone to leave their respective platforms and you can have one unified repository for all of your messaging. Basically means you get to use what you want and other people can use what they want. Go look at it now. Go on git.

    https://matrix.org/