Meta to retire messenger desktop app and messenger.com in April 2026

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Nostalgia for Open, Multi‑Protocol Messengers

  • Many recall Pidgin, Adium, Trillian, Miranda, Kopete, mIRC, and Bitlbee as a “golden age” of messaging:
    • One client for many networks, native desktop UI, low RAM use, persistent logs, heavy customization, and fun theming.
    • Plugins like OTR provided end‑to‑end encryption even over Facebook’s old XMPP gateway.
  • These clients faded as platforms blocked third‑party access, citing spam/security; some tools (Pidgin, Bitlbee, Beeper) still exist but have patchy support for modern closed networks.
  • Commenters lament that email is one of the last universally interoperable protocols and wish chat had similar openness; EU regulation is mentioned but seen as stuck in “malicious compliance.”

Reaction to Messenger.com and Desktop App Retirement

  • Many use messenger.com specifically to avoid the main facebook.com feed, dark‑pattern notifications, and corporate/school blocking of facebook.com.
  • facebook.com/messages is seen as functionally similar but with more distraction and forced linkage to a full Facebook account.
  • Several interpret the move as a push to:
    • Drive traffic and ad exposure back to facebook.com.
    • Tighten control and reduce security loopholes used by automated scam systems (though some are skeptical this is the primary motive).
  • Some are surprised Meta is dropping native desktop clients just as desktop messaging and AI chat integrations are becoming more central.

Impact on Users and Workarounds

  • Edge case: users with deactivated Facebook accounts could still use Messenger via messenger.com; facebook.com/messages would reactivate their accounts or force consent/payment flows (especially in the EU), pushing some to finally quit.
  • Non‑smartphone or phone‑averse users relied on the web interface; they dislike being pushed to mobile apps.
  • Workarounds discussed: user‑agent spoofing to get desktop web on mobile, mobile emulators, phone mirroring, browser extensions to hide feeds while keeping messages.

Broader Critique and Alternatives

  • Strong resentment toward Meta/Facebook’s history of user‑hostile decisions, surveillance, and clunky cross‑app flows (e.g., video playback jumping between Messenger and Facebook).
  • Some argue that rolling your own messaging on open protocols is trivial; others respond that network effects, legal pressure, and user trust in big platforms are the real barriers.
  • Ideas like a neutral, public, ad‑free messaging service (analogous to a postal service) are floated but left speculative.