this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
261 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37716 readers
323 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I was on the beta testing team and have been using Beeper for a little over two years now.

The convenience of having an application to house all of your chat networks is amazing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PupBiru@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

their clients are proprietary but it’s built on matrix (federated chat kinda like xmpp) and their bridges (things that connect matrix to other protocols) are open source

they say you can use any matrix client, and that you can host your own home server with their bridges

[–] Cerothen@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I have my own matrix server that I primarily use like beeper and bridge all my chats together. Even using some of their bridges, it's been pretty reliable for years.

I know that a few people are hating on the closed source client, but that feels unfair to me. They provide lots of open code in the form of bridges which is really the meat of the offering. Their client just makes using the bridges easier for the lay person. The bridges are super easy to use without it, invite the bridge bot to a chat room, type login and do what it says, then type login-matrix and your pretty much done.

The I suspect that the same people who are displeased about the closed client also like using tailscale which is generally pretty popular but has closed source clients on Windows and Mac as well as the server (though all support the open source headscale server)

[–] PupBiru@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

yeah... pragmatism beats purity every time: they're doing some great work, but to do that great work they have to fund it somehow... i think that open sourcing all of the functional components (the bridges) and keeping the shiny UI closed is a pretty good way of doing that!

i guess i get not wanting to used closed source clients too, but it's shades of grey: people shouldn't hate on them for keeping 1 part closed source!

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Only problem is, the average user gets hooked to the shiny UI, not to the invisible backend.

When Microsoft bought Skype, they switched from a secure P2P network to a server-centered network easy to mitm... and the majority of users said nothing. Later on, they switched a few UI elements, and suddenly there was a user uproar.

If Beeper gains any traction, a shiny privative UI is their out to monetize/enshittify the service.