4 ms·
While I'm with you on xmpp, calling Conversations "great" is dishonest. While the foundation is good and the xep support is great, the developer refuses to adap
by f1refly 5y ago
While I'm with you on xmpp, calling Conversations "great" is dishonest. While the foundation is good and the xep support is great, the developer refuses to adapt the client to any conventional design standard, requiring the users to use either blabber or monocles to achieve some familarity. Besides that, message search is not able to link the message into context, while showing both timestamp and associated chat, requiring the user to go into the chat himself and scroll up until the message in question shows up.
- nicoco 5y agoI never use the search feature, so I believe you if you think it's bad. What are blabber's or monocles' selling points compared to Conversations? I couldn't find with a quick search, but I'm open to suggesting them instead of Conversations if their UI is better.
- f1refly 5y agoI do not claim to be an export on this topic, but afaik blabbers initial selling point was to sort the settings in a way more accessible menu and overall adapt the app to the other messengers that dominate the market: Rounded, more bubbly text displays, more sensible menu integrations, the ubiquos little checkmarks to display delivery/read status etc. monocles started as a project to reverse/refine some features like the auto-link preview the blabber guy added which isn't necessarily wanted when in unknown group chats, because previewed links might be illegal in the users jurisdiction. Overall both are very frontend centric modifications, focusing on user comfort.