Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- lb:opinion:fediverse.not.email [2025-12-05 13:24:08] – removed - external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1
+++ lb:opinion:fediverse.not.email [2025-12-05 13:24:10] (current) – ↷ Links adapted because of a move operation ninjasr
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+====== The Fediverse is not like E-mail ======
+I've seen comparisons between the [[lb:fediverse]] and email a few times online. So I think I'd like to point out that the analogy doesn't actually fit that much.
+The comparison only fits if you're looking at the theory behind the Fediverse but, in practice, it isn't similar to it at all.
+Email as a protocol is pretty versatile and easy to use. Additionally, the email experience barely changes from client to client.\\
+However, most Fediverse services are super narrow in what they can or can’t do...most of them are a pain to install for the average user((:fn:>You can comparatively set up a mail server pretty easily on any desktop computer; not limited to Linux.))...and the experience can differ quite significantly from service to service.
+Now...[[lb:Mastodon]], Pleroma, Akkoma, [[lb:Misskey]] and GNU Social are all clones of [[lb:Twitter]] and are thus extremely similar to each-other...but they aren't exactly the same. This means that the experience differs slightly from service to service, which can be a bit of a pain when you actually get down to federating. I remember when I was playing around with the Fediverse that inter-service communication was //painfully limited//.((:fn:>It's possible the situation has changed but I seriously doubt it has.))
+The Fediverse //itself// isn't like email, though you can make the argument that each individual component of it //is//. So Mastodon is email within itself, but not when you consider the other Twitter clones. Even then I think that email is far more elegant in how it manifests than Mastodon is.
+{{tag>opinion}}