4 ms·
> To offer a different point of view: If I were to create my own chat protocol, I would actively try to make it next to impossible to implement it on mobile and
by daenney 5y ago
> To offer a different point of view: If I were to create my own chat protocol, I would actively try to make it next to impossible to implement it on mobile and consider this a feature. Nothing is gained by mobile users.
I can understand where you're coming from, but it's also important to note that a huge part of this planets population doesn't have access to a computer. Many folks, if they have internet access at all, only have access to it through (cheap) mobile devices. A protocol that's explicitly designed to be impractical/hard/impossible to support on mobile would exclude large swaths of people from ever being able to participate.
- Wxc2jjJmST9XWWL 5y agoSo what? How come it should be my concern to include everyone, as if everyone was entitled to use my service? A russian only IRC channel excludes everyone not speaking the language. A Playstation exclusive game title excludes Xbox owners. An OS only targeting x86_64 excludes people with only ARM and i386 machines. An Android only app excludes iOS users. An OS without certain drivers excludes tons of users and use cases. If I purposefully want to target Desktop users, so what?
- daenney 5y ago>> If I were to create my own chat protocol, I would actively try to make it next to impossible to implement it on mobile and consider this a feature. > So what? How come it should be my concern to include everyone, as if everyone was entitled to use my service? You weren't talking about a service, you were talking about designing a protocol in such a way that it wasn't usable for mobile users. That's a very different thing. I'm saying we shouldn't be designing protocols in such a way as to ensure folks can't implement it in certain settings. If you want to set up an IRC network with a ToS that says "no mobile users" go right ahead.