When comparing Zulip vs Matrix, the Slant community recommends Zulip for most people. In the question“What are the best on-site Slack alternatives?” Zulip is ranked 2nd while Matrix is ranked 3rd. The most important reason people chose Zulip is:
Instead of rooms or channels Zulip is built around topics. This allows you to have multiple conversations at the same time without conversations interfering with each another. It also allows you to reference conversations without clutter.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Helps keep track of different conversations
Instead of rooms or channels Zulip is built around topics. This allows you to have multiple conversations at the same time without conversations interfering with each another. It also allows you to reference conversations without clutter.
Pro Free and open source software
Zulip is free and open source under the Apache 2.0 license.
Pro Easy asynchronous conversations
Its threaded model helps people working in different timezone's communicate effectively.
Pro Apps for every platform
Pro Hosted or on-premise
With data export tools so you can migrate.
Pro Intuitive interface
I struggled with Slack, never finding the settings I like to adjust. With Zulip never had such issues.
Pro Built on an open standard
Matrix is an open standard, defining simple HTTP APIs so that devs can easily write their own clients, bots, bridges or servers. You're not locked into a specific set of implementations.
Pro Bridges other networks into a single decentralised network
Matrix has bridges to IRC (freenode, moznet, oftc, snoonet etc), Slack, Gitter, Rocket.Chat, XMPP, SMS, SIP and others. The point is to 'matrix' all the different networks out there into one single decentralised network.
Pro Has an easy to use client called Riot
Riot.im is the easiest way to use Matrix, with great clients for Web, iOS and Android (and Fdroid).
Pro Does not require a centralized server to establish a connection between two users
Matrix is decentralized, there's no one central point that the information goes through and so no once central point of failure or control.
Pro Matrix prioritizes direct messaging with people the same as Slack-style groups
Matrix aims to "provide an analogous ecosystem to email - one where you can communicate with pretty much anyone, without caring what app or server they are using" using a neutral identity system.
Pro Supports different kinds of communication
Matrix is designed to support Instant Messaging, VoIP/WebRTC signalling (voice and video) and Internet of Things communication.
Pro Has an app store for 3rd party integrations & bots
Riot.im includes an app store with integrations for Github, JIRA, Jenkins, Giphy etc - and anyone can add more via Matrix.
Pro Offers choice of clients
Which can be found here.
Pro Maintains full conversation history
Pro Has an active community behind it
Pro Can be integrated with existing communication services
Matrix is designed to support Instant Messaging, VoIP/WebRTC signalling and Internet of Things communication and allows cross-communication between those services. Meaning one person could be using IRC and another Slack for IMs, or one person could be using Skype and another Google Hangouts for videoconferencing.
Pro End-to-end encryption
Matrix features end-to-end encrypted chats which are syncronized accross all your devices.
E2E is implemented in the matrix-js-sdk library and Riot.im client.
Cons
Con No End-to-End Encryption
Not even for private one-to-one messages, let along group chats.
Con Takes some getting used to
As most chat software uses the concept of channels or rooms, getting in the habit of splitting each topic off in a separate category can require some getting used to and discipline.
Con Keys cannot be checked automatically
You cannot automatically check keys of your recipients. Only manually.
