4 ms·

If you read the article, it's clear the user limit was a technical limit and not a freemium limit. So even if they did pay, Slack would still not have been abl

by Svip 10y ago

If you read the article, it's clear the user limit was a technical limit and not a freemium limit. So even if they did pay, Slack would still not have been able to accommodate all their users. Which leads me to my old-timer question: What's wrong with IRC?

erelde 10y ago
No history by default, in fact there's only text by default. I like IRC, but newer generations are used to having "full-featured" chats without setup (beauty is in the eye of the beholder). I also like being able to do some simple markdown in my messages.
- Insanity 10y ago
  I like IRC, recently started using irccloud. That makes sharing files easier, also keeps a history of the irc channels you are in, and makes it look more pretty. It's a combination of both worlds I suppose. So far I am enjoying it.
dagenleg 10y ago
IRC doesn't have cool stickers?
onion2k 10y ago
There's nothing wrong with IRC except for the fact that the user experience in an IRC client is generally horrible. They're not pretty, there's no good account system so users can easily spoof being someone else, the logging isn't great by default, sharing files is hard, and whether or not you can do media embedding depends on the channel setup. There's a reason why companies like Slack have built billion dollar businesses doing ostensibly the same thing as IRC, and it's because IRC doesn't offer enough value even if it's free.
- cholantesh 10y ago
  > there's no good account system so users can easily spoof being someone else Probably the big one for me; I know my previous boss was asking if there was a SSO option because that would be the only thing he saw as limitation in IRC.
- Svip 10y ago
  I contend that my question was slightly snarky. As someone who moves from computer to computer a lot, having a unified client is quite critical. With IRC and Bitleebee, I can combine a lot of protocols in one client, keep it running in a screen, and access it via SSH. I realise my setup is hardly common, and I contend that the main issues with IRC are the clients and the account systems. However, both those issues (among other issues) could be resolved with the IRC protocol, allowing people preferring other clients to continue to user their clients. Message logging and account management can be done server-side (e.g. closing connections on users if they don't log in), and with a dedicated client to this server, the logging in-part could be done rather seamlessly, even if posing slightly more 'troubles' for other IRC clients. But as implied in the other replies to my post, but is there any money in that? Maybe licencing the servers? I dunno. I'd love to do something like that, but it would be a full time effort, I fear.
  - lmm 10y ago
    > With IRC and Bitleebee, I can combine a lot of protocols in one client, keep it running in a screen, and access it via SSH. At which point you're not really using IRC. You're using the Bittleebee-commands-over-SSH protocol. This protocol has a number of issues: it requires having a server with a unix user account running on it (which is a massive attack surface, no-one can offer a server like that for free or it will be used to DDoS other people etc). Its phone apps are poorly integrated and drain battery. Its UI in general is very undiscoverable; the logging interface is still pretty awful (e.g. tracking of how far you've read is pretty poor). Sending files or voicechatting is even harder than it is in vanilla IRC. > both those issues (among other issues) could be resolved with the IRC protocol, allowing people preferring other clients to continue to user their clients. Slack offers an IRC gateway, which gives about as good an IRC experience as any extended-IRC protocol ever could.
    - Svip 10y ago
      I apologise, I wasn't clear. I primarily use IRC, but I also use Bitleebee, but it isn't my primarily protocol(s). I just meant that I could combine all these protocols in one client. As for Slack's IRC gateway, I think it's pretty decent, yes. I personally prefer it to Slack's own client (again, that's just me). But this is what bothers me about Discord, because that doesn't offer an IRC gateway, and I am forced to use their client(s). And if you're like me - which apparently few are - and you are in many different communities, that use different protocols to communicate, having a bunch of different clients just means more hassle.
- SeeDave 10y ago
  > They're not pretty It's an open protocol. Check out Kiwiirc, it's pretty good looking! A decent front-end team could build a nice interface. > There's no good account system so users can easily spoof being someone else. I believe that NickServ takes care of this. As far as logging, and file-sharing. Yeah you're onto something. IRC isn't as bad as people make it out to be :/
  - Karunamon 10y ago
    NickServ (and all services packages for that matter) are basically hacks. They create god-clients on the server which have special rights. Personally, I'd rather have accounting and permissions be a core part of the protocol, not a bolted on afterthought.
  - onion2k 10y ago
    Check out Kiwiirc, it's pretty good looking! A decent front-end team could build a nice interface. Of course. But they haven't. Kiwi isn't bad for an IRC client, but it's way behind Slack. I believe that NickServ takes care of this. Nickserv is hard for a typical user to understand. The number of times someone thinks they've registered a name when they actually haven't demonstrates that. Ghosting makes it harder too. I used IRC for about a decade. I used even more esoteric online chat services like telnet talkers and MUSHs too. They're great if you learn how to use them. But that's the key difference - you don't need to learn Slack. It works how you'd expect it to work. A user can just pick it up and do things with it. That's a massive difference, and possibly the main reason why Slack can charge a decent price for their product.
- Tloewald 10y ago
  There are some very nice irc clients out there. Pick one? But the best thing is you can pick one.
  - Karunamon 10y ago
    Slack has IRC and XMPP gateways if you really must use some ancient client where half the features that make Slack desirable won't work.
csomar 10y ago
IRC lacks a well designed UX that works cross platform (desktop cross os, mobile, web) and an easy API to integrate and play with other services like Github.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
johannes1234321 10y ago
Aside from what others already mentioned: One key issue with IRC is the mobile or multiple device story.
- Insanity 10y ago
  Only if you use plain IRC. If you use something like irccloud, that is prevented. Which can be thought of as a "webwrapper" for IRC. I have been using it for some time now and I enjoy it. (I'm not affiliated with irccloud in any way)
  - johannes1234321 10y ago
    Well, then you're not using IRC anymore, but some service which by chance uses IRC as Backend
  - lmm 10y ago
    IRCCloud's free plan is much worse than even Slack's, their paid tiers are more expensive per-user IIRC, and their UI isn't quite as polished.
    - Insanity 10y ago
      I was not trying to compare it to slack. I was merely pointing out that IRC does not need to mean "plain IRC". I have been using Slack for about a year now at work and I think it's great. I don't think irccloud would be a suitable replacement either :-)
- lorenzhs 10y ago
  I use WeeChat (https://weechat.org/ https://weechat.org/, running on my server) and Glowing Bear (https://github.com/glowing-bear/glowing-bear https://github.com/glowing-bear/glowing-bear) to connect to it from wherever I am (desktop or mobile), it works very nicely. Because it's self-hosted, it has higher setup overhead than signing up to slack, of course. But it does solve IRC's mobile and multi-device problems for me wonderfully. (I'm one of the Glowing Bear developers)
jorge-fundido 10y ago
All the yak shaving around: room history, notifications, security.

by Svip 10y ago

erelde 10y ago

No history by default, in fact there's only text by default. I like IRC, but newer generations are used to having "full-featured" chats without setup (beauty is in the eye of the beholder). I also like being able to do some simple markdown in my messages.

Insanity 10y ago
I like IRC, recently started using irccloud. That makes sharing files easier, also keeps a history of the irc channels you are in, and makes it look more pretty. It's a combination of both worlds I suppose. So far I am enjoying it.

dagenleg 10y ago

IRC doesn't have cool stickers?

onion2k 10y ago

There's nothing wrong with IRC except for the fact that the user experience in an IRC client is generally horrible. They're not pretty, there's no good account system so users can easily spoof being someone else, the logging isn't great by default, sharing files is hard, and whether or not you can do media embedding depends on the channel setup. There's a reason why companies like Slack have built billion dollar businesses doing ostensibly the same thing as IRC, and it's because IRC doesn't offer enough value even if it's free.

cholantesh 10y ago
> there's no good account system so users can easily spoof being someone else Probably the big one for me; I know my previous boss was asking if there was a SSO option because that would be the only thing he saw as limitation in IRC.
Svip 10y ago
I contend that my question was slightly snarky. As someone who moves from computer to computer a lot, having a unified client is quite critical. With IRC and Bitleebee, I can combine a lot of protocols in one client, keep it running in a screen, and access it via SSH. I realise my setup is hardly common, and I contend that the main issues with IRC are the clients and the account systems. However, both those issues (among other issues) could be resolved with the IRC protocol, allowing people preferring other clients to continue to user their clients. Message logging and account management can be done server-side (e.g. closing connections on users if they don't log in), and with a dedicated client to this server, the logging in-part could be done rather seamlessly, even if posing slightly more 'troubles' for other IRC clients. But as implied in the other replies to my post, but is there any money in that? Maybe licencing the servers? I dunno. I'd love to do something like that, but it would be a full time effort, I fear.
- lmm 10y ago
  > With IRC and Bitleebee, I can combine a lot of protocols in one client, keep it running in a screen, and access it via SSH. At which point you're not really using IRC. You're using the Bittleebee-commands-over-SSH protocol. This protocol has a number of issues: it requires having a server with a unix user account running on it (which is a massive attack surface, no-one can offer a server like that for free or it will be used to DDoS other people etc). Its phone apps are poorly integrated and drain battery. Its UI in general is very undiscoverable; the logging interface is still pretty awful (e.g. tracking of how far you've read is pretty poor). Sending files or voicechatting is even harder than it is in vanilla IRC. > both those issues (among other issues) could be resolved with the IRC protocol, allowing people preferring other clients to continue to user their clients. Slack offers an IRC gateway, which gives about as good an IRC experience as any extended-IRC protocol ever could.
  - Svip 10y ago
    I apologise, I wasn't clear. I primarily use IRC, but I also use Bitleebee, but it isn't my primarily protocol(s). I just meant that I could combine all these protocols in one client. As for Slack's IRC gateway, I think it's pretty decent, yes. I personally prefer it to Slack's own client (again, that's just me). But this is what bothers me about Discord, because that doesn't offer an IRC gateway, and I am forced to use their client(s). And if you're like me - which apparently few are - and you are in many different communities, that use different protocols to communicate, having a bunch of different clients just means more hassle.
SeeDave 10y ago
> They're not pretty It's an open protocol. Check out Kiwiirc, it's pretty good looking! A decent front-end team could build a nice interface. > There's no good account system so users can easily spoof being someone else. I believe that NickServ takes care of this. As far as logging, and file-sharing. Yeah you're onto something. IRC isn't as bad as people make it out to be :/
- Karunamon 10y ago
  NickServ (and all services packages for that matter) are basically hacks. They create god-clients on the server which have special rights. Personally, I'd rather have accounting and permissions be a core part of the protocol, not a bolted on afterthought.
- onion2k 10y ago
  Check out Kiwiirc, it's pretty good looking! A decent front-end team could build a nice interface. Of course. But they haven't. Kiwi isn't bad for an IRC client, but it's way behind Slack. I believe that NickServ takes care of this. Nickserv is hard for a typical user to understand. The number of times someone thinks they've registered a name when they actually haven't demonstrates that. Ghosting makes it harder too. I used IRC for about a decade. I used even more esoteric online chat services like telnet talkers and MUSHs too. They're great if you learn how to use them. But that's the key difference - you don't need to learn Slack. It works how you'd expect it to work. A user can just pick it up and do things with it. That's a massive difference, and possibly the main reason why Slack can charge a decent price for their product.
Tloewald 10y ago
There are some very nice irc clients out there. Pick one? But the best thing is you can pick one.
- Karunamon 10y ago
  Slack has IRC and XMPP gateways if you really must use some ancient client where half the features that make Slack desirable won't work.

csomar 10y ago

IRC lacks a well designed UX that works cross platform (desktop cross os, mobile, web) and an easy API to integrate and play with other services like Github.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

johannes1234321 10y ago

Aside from what others already mentioned: One key issue with IRC is the mobile or multiple device story.

Insanity 10y ago
Only if you use plain IRC. If you use something like irccloud, that is prevented. Which can be thought of as a "webwrapper" for IRC. I have been using it for some time now and I enjoy it. (I'm not affiliated with irccloud in any way)
- johannes1234321 10y ago
  Well, then you're not using IRC anymore, but some service which by chance uses IRC as Backend
- lmm 10y ago
  IRCCloud's free plan is much worse than even Slack's, their paid tiers are more expensive per-user IIRC, and their UI isn't quite as polished.
  - Insanity 10y ago
    I was not trying to compare it to slack. I was merely pointing out that IRC does not need to mean "plain IRC". I have been using Slack for about a year now at work and I think it's great. I don't think irccloud would be a suitable replacement either :-)
lorenzhs 10y ago
I use WeeChat (https://weechat.org/ https://weechat.org/, running on my server) and Glowing Bear (https://github.com/glowing-bear/glowing-bear https://github.com/glowing-bear/glowing-bear) to connect to it from wherever I am (desktop or mobile), it works very nicely. Because it's self-hosted, it has higher setup overhead than signing up to slack, of course. But it does solve IRC's mobile and multi-device problems for me wonderfully. (I'm one of the Glowing Bear developers)

jorge-fundido 10y ago

All the yak shaving around: room history, notifications, security.