6 ms·

Given that Matrix seems to be quite successful these days, and afaict is basically a next-gen IRC, is there any compelling reason to push IRC?

by Yoric 5y ago

floren 5y ago
Because Matrix basically has one decent server implementation and one decent client, both provided by the same company, and even that client is some godawful Element thing. I run a Matrix homeserver and use it daily but frankly, I prefer IRC.
- Kudos 5y ago
  I use Fluffychat on mobile and Fractal on Gnome. Fluffychat is excellent, but Fractal is still lacking e2ee support (there's a rewrite on the way with support already in place).
- gpanders 5y ago
  > Because Matrix basically has one decent server implementation and one decent client, both provided by the same company, and even that client is some godawful Element thing This is a fair criticism, but IRC is decades old while Matrix is what, 3-5 years old? Give it time and choice of clients and servers will only improve.
  - badsectoracula 5y ago
    And by "improve" everyone understands "get more complicated and bloated" :-P
    - azinman2 5y ago
      Yes, by innovating and giving people the user experiences they want. IRC is a joke once you’re used to Slack, especially in an organization that uses it well.
      - nirvdrum 5y ago
        I appreciate having a streamlined chat application, but understand that others feel differently. IRC applications are much better on resource consumption and snappier in my experience, but aren't all that practical on a mobile device. Naturally, how each of us feels about that experience is subjective. So setting that aside, the part about IRC that I haven't seen handled with Slack is being a one-stop shop. With IRC, I can discover and access multiple communities within a single server at once. The most popular servers can be connected to and browsed with a click in most IRC applications. With Slack, I need to find a project's Slack workspace, request an invitation, then go through the process of adding it to each of my clients. I'd love to see the equivalent of a FreeNode workspace where I can join an OCaml channel and a Ruby channel without going through all of the above and dealing with walled-off communities. Revisiting resource consumption, I've opted out of communities that moved to Slack because once I hit around 10 workspaces, the Slack app slowed to a crawl and guzzled RAM. To be fair, that's gotten a lot better in recent years, but I still find managing several workspaces to just be too much cognitive overhead. I may only be in one channel on each workspace, but I can't easily switch between them. With IRC, doing a "/join ##ocaml" is super fast, barely consumes additional resources, and adds a new tab to my main interface for fast switching between channels.
        arp242 5y ago
        The big thing I miss in IRC is that I can't just open my IRC client, connect to a channel, type a few messages, close the client again, do other stuff, come back a few hours (or even days) later, and see if there are any replies to it. I know about IRC bouncers and all that, but I don't want to set up a server just for that, and managing them is a pain as well. I know about IRCCloud too, but I don't use chat often enough to justify $5/month (I'm poor, and I just want to chat occasionally). I don't care much for Slack for many reasons, but at least I can actually use it. I find IRC to be functionally unusable because of this. From a quick glance, it looks IRCv3 solves this with the chathistory extension/specification.[1] But AFAIK most (no?) servers implement this (yet) and the specification isn't finished either. https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory
    - selfhoster11 5y ago
      Features desired by modern users have a minimum complexity to them. It's just unavoidable. Classic IRC has many drawbacks and missing features: - messages sent to you while logged out are lost - no support for videos, images and GIFs - (usually) not great support for emoji - no support for file attachments - no useful mobile clients unless with support from the server Yes, those can be considered frivolous features, but they are used by people to express themselves (which is, in essence, what a chat protocol is used for), they are expected because IRC's competition has them, and some of them are an objective usability improvement that I'm not willing to go back on.
      - MaxLeiter 5y ago
        fwiw, these are all addressed by IRCCloud or The Lounge (and some others to varying degrees)
      - u801e 5y ago
        A lot of these features are normally handled by other services. So for videos, images, and gifs, these can be represented by a URL that's pasted in the channel that you can view with a web browser. The advantage of doing it this way actually makes it easier to scroll back in the chat history when you're searching for something that was posted.
- jszymborski 5y ago
  Have you tried the CLI clients like gomuks[0]? They give a very IRC feel to Matrix imo. [0] https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/gomuks https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/gomuks
- diragon 5y ago
  gomuks is pretty good these days.
alekratz 5y ago
It helps that IRC is extremely simple. Most servers you can connect to and chat using telnet if you're so inclined.
- Arathorn 5y ago
  Matrix is pretty simple too; one HTTP hit to send a message; one HTTP hit to receive a message. c.f. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20949477 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20949477 As others have pointed out, there's also a pretty decent range of very usable "daily driver" clients these days (Element, weechat, FluffyChat, nheko, Quaternion, NeoChat all spring to mind). 2nd generation servers are also progressing well (Dendrite in Go & Conduit in Rust).
  - rendaw 5y ago
    I've been interested in reading more about the Matrix client protocol, is there documentation anywhere? At least as far as sending/receiving text messages and maybe threading. That linked message has a lot of good information though.
    - gangohango 5y ago
      https://matrix.org/docs/guides/client-server-api https://matrix.org/docs/guides/client-server-api
      - rendaw 5y ago
        Thanks! I did look around the site quite extensively. That page says > this is specific to a homeserver implementation which suggests that it's not documenting a Matrix protocol. Unless Matrix has no standardized client protocol? Are all clients going to be homeserver-specific? Even so I'd hope there's some document that says "Matrix standardizes server-server communication, client-server communication is out of the scope of this standard and is left to individual implementations" or something like that.
        5y ago
GekkePrutser 5y ago
Matrix seems to lack a good high density client. The only one that's really full featured is Element but it's very consumerish and uses lots of screen space. As soon as you bridge multiple IRC networks and have lots of other chats open, the chat list becomes really messy imo.
- Arathorn 5y ago
  Element Web has various high density modes including a dedicated IRC style mode which looks and behaves like xchat?
  - GekkePrutser 5y ago
    Oh it does? I try Matrix on a yearly basis with all the bridges and I didn't see it last year. I'm giving it another try in the next month or so. Last time the bridges weren't stable enough yet. I didn't notice this feature that time. Thanks for pointing it out! I'd prefer a light desktop client though. I didn't spend much time with the web version, perhaps this is why I missed it. But I will definitely give it a try! By the way I understand the focus on consumer usability, as it's needed for wider adoption. I'd really love for matrix to become mainstream.
  - GekkePrutser 5y ago
    Thanks Arathorn, I've now given this a try. However it's not nearly as compact as I would want. Especially the room list on the left, as it still uses the room avatars in this mode it will only show a pretty small number of rooms there. Making the font smaller won't fix that. When I move everything to Matrix I will have at least 50 rooms open at any one time (different IRC servers, whatsapp bridged, telegram etc etc) and I don't want to scroll too much. Also, every time I have to expand the "Show xxx more" ones for each section, I can't just scroll to the bottom of the list. So that's an extra click. When I mean a high density look I mean without avatars etc :)
- Nasreddin_Hodja 5y ago
  > The only one that's really full featured is Element but it's very consumerish I heard that server is very consumerish too.

Given that Matrix seems to be quite successful these days, and afaict is basically a next-gen IRC, is there any compelling reason to push IRC?

by Yoric 5y ago

Given that Matrix seems to be quite successful these days, and afaict is basically a next-gen IRC, is there any compelling reason to push IRC?

floren 5y ago

Because Matrix basically has one decent server implementation and one decent client, both provided by the same company, and even that client is some godawful Element thing. I run a Matrix homeserver and use it daily but frankly, I prefer IRC.

Kudos 5y ago
I use Fluffychat on mobile and Fractal on Gnome. Fluffychat is excellent, but Fractal is still lacking e2ee support (there's a rewrite on the way with support already in place).
gpanders 5y ago
> Because Matrix basically has one decent server implementation and one decent client, both provided by the same company, and even that client is some godawful Element thing This is a fair criticism, but IRC is decades old while Matrix is what, 3-5 years old? Give it time and choice of clients and servers will only improve.
- badsectoracula 5y ago
  And by "improve" everyone understands "get more complicated and bloated" :-P
  - azinman2 5y ago
    Yes, by innovating and giving people the user experiences they want. IRC is a joke once you’re used to Slack, especially in an organization that uses it well.
    - nirvdrum 5y ago
      I appreciate having a streamlined chat application, but understand that others feel differently. IRC applications are much better on resource consumption and snappier in my experience, but aren't all that practical on a mobile device. Naturally, how each of us feels about that experience is subjective. So setting that aside, the part about IRC that I haven't seen handled with Slack is being a one-stop shop. With IRC, I can discover and access multiple communities within a single server at once. The most popular servers can be connected to and browsed with a click in most IRC applications. With Slack, I need to find a project's Slack workspace, request an invitation, then go through the process of adding it to each of my clients. I'd love to see the equivalent of a FreeNode workspace where I can join an OCaml channel and a Ruby channel without going through all of the above and dealing with walled-off communities. Revisiting resource consumption, I've opted out of communities that moved to Slack because once I hit around 10 workspaces, the Slack app slowed to a crawl and guzzled RAM. To be fair, that's gotten a lot better in recent years, but I still find managing several workspaces to just be too much cognitive overhead. I may only be in one channel on each workspace, but I can't easily switch between them. With IRC, doing a "/join ##ocaml" is super fast, barely consumes additional resources, and adds a new tab to my main interface for fast switching between channels.
      - arp242 5y ago
        The big thing I miss in IRC is that I can't just open my IRC client, connect to a channel, type a few messages, close the client again, do other stuff, come back a few hours (or even days) later, and see if there are any replies to it. I know about IRC bouncers and all that, but I don't want to set up a server just for that, and managing them is a pain as well. I know about IRCCloud too, but I don't use chat often enough to justify $5/month (I'm poor, and I just want to chat occasionally). I don't care much for Slack for many reasons, but at least I can actually use it. I find IRC to be functionally unusable because of this. From a quick glance, it looks IRCv3 solves this with the chathistory extension/specification.[1] But AFAIK most (no?) servers implement this (yet) and the specification isn't finished either. https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory https://ircv3.net/specs/extensions/chathistory
  - selfhoster11 5y ago
    Features desired by modern users have a minimum complexity to them. It's just unavoidable. Classic IRC has many drawbacks and missing features: - messages sent to you while logged out are lost - no support for videos, images and GIFs - (usually) not great support for emoji - no support for file attachments - no useful mobile clients unless with support from the server Yes, those can be considered frivolous features, but they are used by people to express themselves (which is, in essence, what a chat protocol is used for), they are expected because IRC's competition has them, and some of them are an objective usability improvement that I'm not willing to go back on.
    - MaxLeiter 5y ago
      fwiw, these are all addressed by IRCCloud or The Lounge (and some others to varying degrees)
    - u801e 5y ago
      A lot of these features are normally handled by other services. So for videos, images, and gifs, these can be represented by a URL that's pasted in the channel that you can view with a web browser. The advantage of doing it this way actually makes it easier to scroll back in the chat history when you're searching for something that was posted.
jszymborski 5y ago
Have you tried the CLI clients like gomuks[0]? They give a very IRC feel to Matrix imo. [0] https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/gomuks https://matrix.org/docs/projects/client/gomuks
diragon 5y ago
gomuks is pretty good these days.

alekratz 5y ago

It helps that IRC is extremely simple. Most servers you can connect to and chat using telnet if you're so inclined.

Arathorn 5y ago
Matrix is pretty simple too; one HTTP hit to send a message; one HTTP hit to receive a message. c.f. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20949477 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20949477 As others have pointed out, there's also a pretty decent range of very usable "daily driver" clients these days (Element, weechat, FluffyChat, nheko, Quaternion, NeoChat all spring to mind). 2nd generation servers are also progressing well (Dendrite in Go & Conduit in Rust).
- rendaw 5y ago
  I've been interested in reading more about the Matrix client protocol, is there documentation anywhere? At least as far as sending/receiving text messages and maybe threading. That linked message has a lot of good information though.
  - gangohango 5y ago
    https://matrix.org/docs/guides/client-server-api https://matrix.org/docs/guides/client-server-api
    - rendaw 5y ago
      Thanks! I did look around the site quite extensively. That page says > this is specific to a homeserver implementation which suggests that it's not documenting a Matrix protocol. Unless Matrix has no standardized client protocol? Are all clients going to be homeserver-specific? Even so I'd hope there's some document that says "Matrix standardizes server-server communication, client-server communication is out of the scope of this standard and is left to individual implementations" or something like that.
      - 5y ago

GekkePrutser 5y ago

Matrix seems to lack a good high density client. The only one that's really full featured is Element but it's very consumerish and uses lots of screen space. As soon as you bridge multiple IRC networks and have lots of other chats open, the chat list becomes really messy imo.

Arathorn 5y ago
Element Web has various high density modes including a dedicated IRC style mode which looks and behaves like xchat?
- GekkePrutser 5y ago
  Oh it does? I try Matrix on a yearly basis with all the bridges and I didn't see it last year. I'm giving it another try in the next month or so. Last time the bridges weren't stable enough yet. I didn't notice this feature that time. Thanks for pointing it out! I'd prefer a light desktop client though. I didn't spend much time with the web version, perhaps this is why I missed it. But I will definitely give it a try! By the way I understand the focus on consumer usability, as it's needed for wider adoption. I'd really love for matrix to become mainstream.
- GekkePrutser 5y ago
  Thanks Arathorn, I've now given this a try. However it's not nearly as compact as I would want. Especially the room list on the left, as it still uses the room avatars in this mode it will only show a pretty small number of rooms there. Making the font smaller won't fix that. When I move everything to Matrix I will have at least 50 rooms open at any one time (different IRC servers, whatsapp bridged, telegram etc etc) and I don't want to scroll too much. Also, every time I have to expand the "Show xxx more" ones for each section, I can't just scroll to the bottom of the list. So that's an extra click. When I mean a high density look I mean without avatars etc :)
Nasreddin_Hodja 5y ago
> The only one that's really full featured is Element but it's very consumerish I heard that server is very consumerish too.