Jami as better communication option for Ubuntu Touch

marlboro50

Ubuntu Touch currently has multiple messaging solutions (FluffyChat, web apps, and Waydroid Android apps). We have come a long way, but these remain application-level solutions rather than a system-integrated real-time communication layer.

There is still no native system-level solution for real-time voice and video communication. Web apps and Android via Waydroid work, but are not integrated into the Lomiri UX.

I believe Jami could be worth exploring as a convergence-native communication stack to potentially fill this gap, with deeper integration into Lomiri.

Moem

@marlboro50 said:

native system-level solution for real-time voice and video communication

I don´t know what that is. I mean the 'system-level' part. What does 'a system-integrated real-time communication layer' mean?

As for native solutions for video chat, have you tried Jitsi and DeltaTouch?

nbdynl

@marlboro50 Hello,

First to understand what Jami is, i watched a video about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Wi99K33qrw&t=9s

So in general, apps like Fluffy, Element, and even Jitsi (for the starter) still need a user account.
Delta chat can be run on your own email server (without notifications).
This on the other hand is peer to peer encrypted without a platform in between.
Meaning when offline, no messages are send to anyone.

Does it sound interesting, yea, but just from this video alone i cant say i investigated it ;-).

So then the question "a native, system-level solution for real-time voice and video communication."

Do we need something like this system wide? and why? why is adding this to the store not enough? like if i have to convince friends to stay off Whatsapp, i kinda have to settle for what the majority of my people use right?
so either signal, delta chat, element, Session, Threema, Jitsi Meet and so on offer tools to chat with friends and family. But if no one in my network downloads the application,
it is kinda useless to have this in my system image.

What is your idea behind integrating it into the system? and what are we going to say to the developers that are building "secure" messaging apps already on our platform?

marlboro50

@nbdynl You’re asking exactly the right hard question here — and it’s also the main reason this topic should get debated.
App-level messaging (what we have today)

What you described is correct:

FluffyChat → Matrix account needed
Element → Matrix account needed
Jitsi Meet → server/session needed
Delta Chat / Signal / Session / Threema → all rely on:
networks
identity systems
other users installing the same app

This is the ecosystem layer

And your conclusion is correct:
If your contacts don’t use it, the app is functionally irrelevant
That is a network effect problem, not a technical one.

marlboro50

@nbdynl We are already using system-level services:
Wi-Fi -> handled by OS
Bluetooth -> handled by OS
Notifications -> handled by OS
Audio -> handled by OS

Now extend that idea:
“Calls and real-time communication become a system service”

Jami is already available for windows, ios, android, linux (as a snap that can install on ubuntu touch but not convergeant)

Moem

@marlboro50 Aren't calls already a system service? As in, telephony.

And doesn't Jami also require an account, and also that the other person has it installed? How is Jami better than, for example, DeltaChat?

marlboro50

@Moem Jami still requires an identity/account and the other party must also use Jami, so it does not solve the network-effect problem. What makes it interesting is its peer-to-peer architecture and lack of dependency on a central service provider. Whether that is an advantage over DeltaChat, Matrix, Signal, etc. depends on the use case.

Jami's main attraction is decentralized real-time communication with integrated voice and video, while DeltaChat builds on email and excels at asynchronous messaging."

Moem

@marlboro50 Okay, so a Jami app would most likely be good to have. I don't feel that there is a real advantage to making it a system service, because of the network effect. But maybe I'm missing something here.

As for DeltaChat, it has voicechat and videochat. I don't really see how it excels at asynchronous messaging any more than Signal does. In fact the usage is rather similar except that Signal is currently better equipped to be used for groups.
It's also decentralised, which Signal isn't.

marlboro50

@Moem That's a fair point. I wasn't trying to argue that Jami is necessarily superior to DeltaChat. DeltaChat is decentralized, supports voice and video calls, and has the advantage of building on existing email infrastructure.

What I find interesting about Jami is its fully peer-to-peer approach and focus on real-time communication without relying on servers operated by a provider. Whether that translates into practical advantages for Ubuntu Touch users is a separate question.

Ubuntu Touch could benefit from a well-integrated, convergence-friendly Jami client. A Jami snap package already exists which sadly lacks the convergency to make it workable on Ubuntu Touch.