Re:Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix
by xorcist on Thursday September 21, 2023 @02:32PM
(#37601953)
Is it really that simple though? Jabber tried to be smart about which device to ring, and sometimes someone ended up with a missed notification. I always felt gutting that complexity and ring all instead would have been the more robust way.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
So you consider your phone vibrating loudly on your desk for every recieved message while you're actively chatting and reading the same message on your desktop a correct implementation?
Well, it's not great, but could be a viable solution until a scheme is devised that is guaranteed not to lose any notifications, which would be worse.
It's "good enough", especially if the alternative is my phone not vibrating when I get a message and I'm not at my desktop.
Re:Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix
by cycomanic on Thursday September 21, 2023 @09:46PM
(#37606913)
Well slack doesn't even send me the messages to my desktop continuing to send to my phone (which continues to buzz) despite me writing on the desktop, just because I send a message on my phone 10min ago.
So it might not be that easy (if even slack with their funding can't get it right).
Yes, I don't want any clever tricks from my chat clients. I dislike this kind of under-the-hood magic. Client should just receive the message and send a notification if it's not silenced.
Re:Matrix 2.0: The Future of Matrix
by eternityforest on Friday September 22, 2023 @01:43PM
(#37615132)
What about P2P multicasting between devices? Delay for 1 second, if you get an "I did the beep for message hash X" notice in that time from a higher priority device that is currently being looked at, don't.
A bit of a privacy leak on shared networks revealing which IP is doing messaging, but it should be fast and reliable.