3 ms·

I really think one of the things that Flowdock nailed was their threading implementation - it took a little bit of getting used to, but not much, and allowed co

I really think one of the things that Flowdock nailed was their threading implementation - it took a little bit of getting used to, but not much, and allowed contextual conversation without feeling like the conversation was buried in a thread somewhere (as this implementation does). For people interested in the thread, you could focus on just that, but for everyone else, it just acted like a normal chat room. Considering how long Slack has been promising threading, this seems really half baked and poorly thought out.

rasjani 10y ago
Came to mention Flowdock and ask for comparison. On busy channels 'flows' where really good feature. Too bad the product is not that known.
arjie 10y ago
FlowDock's threading is vastly superior, in my opinion. Everyone can see progress along threads, and conversations can stay separate.
truebosko 10y ago
Never heard of Flowdock but it sounds very compelling. We're currently looking to get our enterprise on Slack and the costs seem .. unreasonable, and I feel that's because Slack is the top player in the game and can ask for such pricing. Hmm.
- ryanbrunner 10y ago
  Don't choose Flowdock. It was an amazing tool, but since they were acquired, development has completely halted and it's unfortunately stagnating. I still think it beats Slack in many ways, but it doesn't appear to have much of a future.
graphememes 10y ago
Yep, flowdocks implementation of this feature blows the slack variant out of the water and into space. I seriously wish companies would go back to flowdock.
maknz 10y ago
Flowdock was great until CA bought it. Now it's pretty much on life support. No support (it's all 'community' now, whatever that means), buggy as heck, no updates in years, the Twitter account is dead.
- brazzledazzle 10y ago
  CA makes me wonder if they have a strategy in mind for acquisitions or if the plan is to put them on life support collecting fees from customers too invested to switch.

rasjani 10y ago

Came to mention Flowdock and ask for comparison. On busy channels 'flows' where really good feature. Too bad the product is not that known.

arjie 10y ago

FlowDock's threading is vastly superior, in my opinion. Everyone can see progress along threads, and conversations can stay separate.

truebosko 10y ago

Never heard of Flowdock but it sounds very compelling. We're currently looking to get our enterprise on Slack and the costs seem .. unreasonable, and I feel that's because Slack is the top player in the game and can ask for such pricing. Hmm.

ryanbrunner 10y ago
Don't choose Flowdock. It was an amazing tool, but since they were acquired, development has completely halted and it's unfortunately stagnating. I still think it beats Slack in many ways, but it doesn't appear to have much of a future.

graphememes 10y ago

Yep, flowdocks implementation of this feature blows the slack variant out of the water and into space. I seriously wish companies would go back to flowdock.

maknz 10y ago

Flowdock was great until CA bought it. Now it's pretty much on life support. No support (it's all 'community' now, whatever that means), buggy as heck, no updates in years, the Twitter account is dead.

brazzledazzle 10y ago
CA makes me wonder if they have a strategy in mind for acquisitions or if the plan is to put them on life support collecting fees from customers too invested to switch.