4 ms·
> > that's just degrading the experience... > Uhhh yes? That's the point? The alternative to this degraded experience is no experience at all. so basically it'
by kmlx 5y ago
> > that's just degrading the experience...
> Uhhh yes? That's the point? The alternative to this degraded experience is no experience at all.
so basically it's either degraded experience but w/ interoperability or great experience but w/o interoperability?
that doesn't really make sense. why not a third way with great experience and great interoperability?
i'm asking because i can guarantee that no one will use clients that provide a degraded experience when you've got the established players providing a great experience.
- grishka 5y agoIt's important for the capability to be there. The issue is that currently "established players" control that experience. In a saner world, experience needs to be decoupled from infrastructure. Somehow, ICQ worked wonderfully despite everyone I knew using an unofficial client. The official client (at least Windows one) was a terrible mess. It had ads and all those features no one ever asked for, like games and and news and an entire picture-based language (I'm not joking). But QIP, the client I used, only did the things I needed an ICQ client to do, and nothing more. It also had no ads.
- Jenk 5y agoI used to use slack-term and/or Ripcord specifically I wanted the "degraded" experience - i.e., smaller resource footprint and none of the gimmicky nonsense.