4 ms·

This is disappointing. Grove.io was really awesome. IRC channels seem easy, but are (relatively) hard to get going: - Finding a server - Registering it pro

This is disappointing. Grove.io was really awesome. IRC channels seem easy, but are (relatively) hard to get going: - Finding a server - Registering it properly - Explaining it to non-tech people The last one is way harder than you'd think. With Grove, you just send them a URL and it's easy. It's a shame they're shutting down. I stopped using because it was too expensive for a channel with a few friends (a channel with fewer than 10 friends was costing $25/month).

chank 14y ago
Yea, but that last one wasn't worth the cost and the user limit. Most groups using IRC in this fashion probably have a high level of technical experience. Campfire succeeds at this because it wasn't their first product. They essentially brought customers in from their other products and then tied them all together. As a stand alone service, it's fairly useless IMO.
- dasil003 14y ago
  Campfire is the only 37s service that has been sticky for my team.
na85 14y ago
>I stopped using because it was too expensive for a channel with a few friends (a channel with fewer than 10 friends was costing $25/month). Wouldn't it be easier to just register a quakenet channel or even run your own passworded ircd on a spare linux box?
- saurik 14y ago
  That does not solve the "The last one is way harder than you'd think." problem that was mentioned.
smhinsey 14y ago
I set Grove up for my distributed team but it didn't stick. I still think team-level chat is a problem worth solving, but nothing I've tried has gotten any real traction.
- ajtaylor 14y ago
  We've been using HipChat for several months now and have been quite happy with it. I'm using it to manage several remote contractors. The pricing is very reasonable. And it has an XMPP interface should you need it as well.
- saurik 14y ago
  What are you currently using? I didn't use Grove, but I use IRC; I've definitely found that some people really take to it, and some people don't; some people even end up using IRC only to watch what other people are saying, and then send PMs as if they were using instant messenger, but never say things in the channel in public, even if they later talk about the things being said on IRC when we are all at dinner.
  - smhinsey 14y ago
    It tends to naturally revert to gchat or aim, which are not awful, but they seem to make it easier to accidentally exclude people.
- gaoshan 14y ago
  We use standard chat messaging, Skype, Google Hangouts, teleconferencing and a team mailing list. So... clunky, I guess, but it gets the job done. Chat messaging is for quick questions or requests to Skype or Hangout, Skype for 1 to 1 video or extended audio chats, Hangouts for small group video chats (quality is kind of crummy though), teleconference is for larger meetings and the team mailing list is for "hey everybody, check this cool thing out" type stuff. IRC would be too much for our designers and some project managers.
  - ricardobeat 14y ago
    That's why Grove had a (very nice) web interface.
- vida 14y ago
  We use Flowdock at Testive and we _love_ it.

chank 14y ago

Yea, but that last one wasn't worth the cost and the user limit. Most groups using IRC in this fashion probably have a high level of technical experience. Campfire succeeds at this because it wasn't their first product. They essentially brought customers in from their other products and then tied them all together. As a stand alone service, it's fairly useless IMO.

dasil003 14y ago
Campfire is the only 37s service that has been sticky for my team.

na85 14y ago

>I stopped using because it was too expensive for a channel with a few friends (a channel with fewer than 10 friends was costing $25/month). Wouldn't it be easier to just register a quakenet channel or even run your own passworded ircd on a spare linux box?

saurik 14y ago
That does not solve the "The last one is way harder than you'd think." problem that was mentioned.

smhinsey 14y ago

I set Grove up for my distributed team but it didn't stick. I still think team-level chat is a problem worth solving, but nothing I've tried has gotten any real traction.

ajtaylor 14y ago
We've been using HipChat for several months now and have been quite happy with it. I'm using it to manage several remote contractors. The pricing is very reasonable. And it has an XMPP interface should you need it as well.
saurik 14y ago
What are you currently using? I didn't use Grove, but I use IRC; I've definitely found that some people really take to it, and some people don't; some people even end up using IRC only to watch what other people are saying, and then send PMs as if they were using instant messenger, but never say things in the channel in public, even if they later talk about the things being said on IRC when we are all at dinner.
- smhinsey 14y ago
  It tends to naturally revert to gchat or aim, which are not awful, but they seem to make it easier to accidentally exclude people.
gaoshan 14y ago
We use standard chat messaging, Skype, Google Hangouts, teleconferencing and a team mailing list. So... clunky, I guess, but it gets the job done. Chat messaging is for quick questions or requests to Skype or Hangout, Skype for 1 to 1 video or extended audio chats, Hangouts for small group video chats (quality is kind of crummy though), teleconference is for larger meetings and the team mailing list is for "hey everybody, check this cool thing out" type stuff. IRC would be too much for our designers and some project managers.
- ricardobeat 14y ago
  That's why Grove had a (very nice) web interface.
vida 14y ago
We use Flowdock at Testive and we _love_ it.