4 ms·

You're like that person who laughed about Hotmail when it came out, because why would you want someone else to host your e-mail, and why would you want to acces

by hnarn 9y ago

You're like that person who laughed about Hotmail when it came out, because why would you want someone else to host your e-mail, and why would you want to access it in a browser instead of via a full-featured client? There's a difference between being "wrong" (which you're not), and realizing that 99,9% of people in the world aren't you. IRC will never be used for corporate communication. IRC usage has been declining steadily since 2003[1]. It's over. Facebook solved a problem that many people had, despite the fact that Myspace, group e-mails, real-time chat and online photo sharing already existed. That's why they today have a market cap of over 500 billion US dollars. Slack made the concept of IRC usable for "normal people". You're not normal people (that's meant as a compliment), so your capabilities aren't really relevant when looking at why things succeed or fail on a larger scale. [1]: http://royal.pingdom.com/2012/04/24/irc-is-dead-long-live-irc/ http://royal.pingdom.com/2012/04/24/irc-is-dead-long-live-ir...

u801e 9y ago
> You're like that person who laughed about Hotmail when it came out, because why would you want someone else to host your e-mail, and why would you want to access it in a browser instead of via a full-featured client? And, to this day, Hotmail is still significantly slower and harder to use compared to Thunderbird. The only advantage is that it still has emails that I received almost 20 years ago. > IRC will never be used for corporate communication. As recently as last year, we were using IRC for corporate communication where I work. Fortunately, I'm still able to use the IRC gateway with Slack, but I really don't see any real advantage to using Slack over IRC on a work computer that's always connected. My client's logging easily beats what Slack provides. > That's why they today have a market cap of over 500 billion US dollars. I don't think it's because it solved a problem about keeping in touch. It's just an advertising platform and the reason why it has a market cap of that value. > Slack made the concept of IRC usable for "normal people". A decade or so ago, I communicated with many normal people over IRC and Usenet. More normal people were able to use chat clients like ICQ, and the various messenger clients (AOL, MSN, Yahoo, Google). I simply don't see why people keep saying that Slack and hosted chat providers like it are some new innovation that people can finally use when they've been able to do so for the last several decades.
- Can_Not 9y ago
  Slack is a quick sign up, and pay if you want history over 10,000 messages, all on day one less than five minutes. IRC, possibly available by hacks/add-ons and not by default or available via quick button, is missing chat history, loses messages when offline, doesn't support uploads, I'm not sure if there's any good mobile apps, but without some of the above, they'd be broken anyways. IRC's only real advantage over slack is that it's not Electron/Cordova based.
  - u801e 9y ago
    > Slack is a quick sign up You don't even have to sign up to connect to IRC (though you can register with a nickserv if you want). > and pay if you want history over 10,000 messages IRC is only limited by disk space on your local machine. > IRC, possibly available by hacks/add-ons and not by default or available via quick button, is missing chat history I'm not sure what you're referring to, but pretty much every client can keep a log of messages sent and received separated by channel/dcc session. > doesn't support uploads You can send files to others via DCC. In any case, the other messenger services I mentioned did not have a long sign up process either. Creating new accounts for AOL instant messenger didn't require much effort at all, for example. Their clients also handled logging much like an IRC client would.

by hnarn 9y ago

u801e 9y ago

> You're like that person who laughed about Hotmail when it came out, because why would you want someone else to host your e-mail, and why would you want to access it in a browser instead of via a full-featured client? And, to this day, Hotmail is still significantly slower and harder to use compared to Thunderbird. The only advantage is that it still has emails that I received almost 20 years ago. > IRC will never be used for corporate communication. As recently as last year, we were using IRC for corporate communication where I work. Fortunately, I'm still able to use the IRC gateway with Slack, but I really don't see any real advantage to using Slack over IRC on a work computer that's always connected. My client's logging easily beats what Slack provides. > That's why they today have a market cap of over 500 billion US dollars. I don't think it's because it solved a problem about keeping in touch. It's just an advertising platform and the reason why it has a market cap of that value. > Slack made the concept of IRC usable for "normal people". A decade or so ago, I communicated with many normal people over IRC and Usenet. More normal people were able to use chat clients like ICQ, and the various messenger clients (AOL, MSN, Yahoo, Google). I simply don't see why people keep saying that Slack and hosted chat providers like it are some new innovation that people can finally use when they've been able to do so for the last several decades.

Can_Not 9y ago
Slack is a quick sign up, and pay if you want history over 10,000 messages, all on day one less than five minutes. IRC, possibly available by hacks/add-ons and not by default or available via quick button, is missing chat history, loses messages when offline, doesn't support uploads, I'm not sure if there's any good mobile apps, but without some of the above, they'd be broken anyways. IRC's only real advantage over slack is that it's not Electron/Cordova based.
- u801e 9y ago
  > Slack is a quick sign up You don't even have to sign up to connect to IRC (though you can register with a nickserv if you want). > and pay if you want history over 10,000 messages IRC is only limited by disk space on your local machine. > IRC, possibly available by hacks/add-ons and not by default or available via quick button, is missing chat history I'm not sure what you're referring to, but pretty much every client can keep a log of messages sent and received separated by channel/dcc session. > doesn't support uploads You can send files to others via DCC. In any case, the other messenger services I mentioned did not have a long sign up process either. Creating new accounts for AOL instant messenger didn't require much effort at all, for example. Their clients also handled logging much like an IRC client would.