4 ms·

Looks exactly like IRC.

• Xylakant 13y ago
  you just can't connect an IRC client to it. Which is sad, since IRC clients are pretty mature nowadays.
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
    • akx 13y ago
      https://grove.io/ https://grove.io/ exists. Also on what do you base "no one uses it"?
      • Xylakant 13y ago
        well, I do use it. That makes us two ;) I prefer grove over all other hosted chat services since it pretty much is IRC with archiving and "private". Works with any IRC client, so everyone can use the client he prefers - web, CLI, ... The protocol is simple and open and there's a ton of services that can actually integrate into IRC.
        • akx 13y ago
          Yeah, I don't personally use Grove.io, I've just heard of it, but I am active daily on four or five different IRC networks (and tens of channels altogether).
      • davidfowl 13y ago
        Grove looks good (I just tried it out) but looks kinda expensive...
    • masklinn 13y ago
      > IRC is old Probably a positive > and no one uses it What in the fucking what? > it's clumbersome to use in a browser too. Not really, there are plenty of web-based IRC gateways. Hell, JabbR could pretty easily be an IRC gateway/interface. > JabbR > IRC assertion error: baseless There are plenty of valid criticisms of IRC, but you're completely clueless about them. And it.
    • adlpz 13y ago
      Wait what? Have you been to any IRC channel in the last ten years? IRC is a well-supported, still widely used, open standard for real-time communication. It can work just as fine on the browser with any of the hundreds of browser-based IRC clients. Heck, you could probably hook this Jabbr front-end to an IRC server without much pain. Jabbr looks nice, but it's just a cute IRC reimplementation.
      • dgesang 13y ago
        You're right about IRC, but totally wrong about Jabber/XMPP. It's much more than a 'cute IRC'. Edit: Oh, nevermind, I just saw you wrote 'jabbr', not 'Jabber'. See, the confusion already started. Bad product name. :)
        • adlpz 13y ago
          Yeah, that too, really, calling it jabbr... Not very nice.
    • earnubs 13y ago
      > it's clumbersome to use in a browser too. http://irccloud.com http://irccloud.com (Although, lot's of downtime recently / growing pains.)
• joshthewanderer 13y ago
  My first thought was that it looks exactly like HipChat. Then I checked the HipChat web client, and it's pretty damned close: http://cdn.userstyles.org/style_screenshots/84237_before.png http://cdn.userstyles.org/style_screenshots/84237_before.png
  • adlpz 13y ago
    Whoa, I don't know which one came first, but this is blatant UI plagiarism right there.
    • mnicole 13y ago
      Let's not go overboard; chat interfaces have looked very similar to this in the past, but it's so easy to tweak the CSS to make it look different enough that not doing so is pretty lazy and makes it obvious who they're trying to compete against.
• dreen 13y ago
  Because to get it 'right' you have to emulate (usually poorly) IRC, since it has had decades of work put into it. That being said if this could connect to IRC in a way transparent to the user it would actually be really useful