Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spectrum is joining GitHub

spectrum.chat

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 155 posts

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#81

Post by tracker1 »

brianlovin wrote: post #14
meritt wrote: post #3

This is the first time I've heard of Spectrum, anyone mind summarizing the key features/differentiation? It looks similar to Slack or Discord, with a focus on discoverable open communities as opposed to private organizations, and threaded conversations being a key feature?

Hey, co-founder here. We've really been focused on threaded, public-by-default, search-indexed conversations. We've found this to be super helpful for large, async communities so far, and the search-indexing is really great for organic discovery and preventing too many duplicate questions that someone might ask in a synchronous chat app. But we also support private communities, private channels, direct messages, publ…

OT: My hope here, is that the integration with Github will also, as a side effect allow orgs using MS Teams to bridge the public channels... Letting an org use the more powerful MS Teams client internally, but still integrating with Spectrum without the need for yet another client for public interactions.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#82

Post by maxxxxx »

byproxy wrote: post #78
maxxxxx wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somehow they managed to escape into even more dissatisfaction. At least Time Warner had different plans and didn't spam me several times a week with letters. Now they only have one $70 plan and are sending me a ton of mail with "deals" that aren't deals.

I must've lucked out, then, as I only pay $15 a month for an Internet-only plan through Spectrum. Granted, the speeds aren't anything to write home about (30 Mb/s download), but it's more than serviceable.

Where's that? I have an old $15 plan for 3 mbit grandfathered in but I would like a little more speed. The only plan they are offering to me is $49 for 12 months which then goes up 70.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#83

Post by brianlovin »

zestyping wrote: post #68
L-11 wrote: post #40

To write a dissenting comment: Zeit (the company behind `now`) recently killed their 10,000+ member Slack server in favor of Spectrum. Their reasons were (a) Slack isn't designed to support communities, (b) they were having to answer the same questions repeatedly, (c) those answers weren't being indexed by Google, and (d) there is very little abuse prevention in Slack. Another way of phrasing (d) is that they seemed…

Spectrum has no concept of channels or topics?

We do have the concept of channels within communities. Channels can also be optionally private.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#84

Post by carwyn »

JoshMnem wrote: post #75
carwyn wrote: post #33

I spent a fair bit of time trying out many of the different chat systems out there for our tech community. In particular I looking for solutions that could do a half decent job of combining synchronous as well as asynchronous communication. The main benefit of implementations that manage to pull this off is being able to handle real-time chat but also make it easier to catch up with the conversation history if you've…

> I spent a fair bit of time trying out many of the different chat systems out there for our tech community. Do any of them allow you to see a list of who's online? That feature broke on Slack. I was told it's a known bug and in the issue queue, but it has already been months without a fix. There isn't a way to see who the regulars are, and the community looks somewhat dead without a way to see who is online.

Yes, Discord, IRC, Riot/Matrix and Zulip for example make this very clear. Some of the others have it but not obvious.

One thing that Spectrum has that's similar to forum software is a reputation system. Others have admin/moderator status but nothing further.

Discord's mass concurrent voice chat is very impressive, but then they did hone this in 64 man WoW raids and the like. The new screen sharing they added a while back is nice too. Interesting implementation (you can pick which of the nine to watch at any given time).

Video chat is the latest I've been looking into with Zoom starting to stand out above Hangouts and Skype, especially for one to very many and multiple speakers in turn type arrangements. Zulip can hook into Jitsi and Hangouts.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#85

Post by hasperdi »

edhelas wrote: post #79
Arkanosis wrote: post #12

I didn't know Spectrum until today. It looks similar to Gitter. As I understand it, it means we now have at least three “slack-like”, well-backed, open-source, community-centered chats: - Gitter, now owned by GitLab; - Spectrum, now owned by GitHub; - Mattermost, independent, but fully integrated within GitLab. That's great to have credible alternatives to the proprietary behemots that are Slack, Discord and others,…

Well I'd prefer that all those solutions relies on standards such as XMPP better than having the NIH syndrome. You should check on XMPP web solutions such as Movim https://movim.eu/ (P.S. I'm the author).

Hint: maybe people are not interested in using XMPP anymore and it is time to move on?

It's like gelatine salad. It's food but people these days do not have much appetite for it anymore.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#86

Post by carwyn »

redindian75 wrote: post #19
brianlovin wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, co-founder here. We've really been focused on threaded, public-by-default, search-indexed conversations. We've found this to be super helpful for large, async communities so far, and the search-indexing is really great for organic discovery and preventing too many duplicate questions that someone might ask in a synchronous chat app. But we also support private communities, private channels, direct messages, publ…

Forums?

It's more real-time capable than classical forum software meaning you can use it as a channelized chat system.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#87

Post by jonahx »

bad_user wrote: post #23
Arkanosis wrote: post #12

I didn't know Spectrum until today. It looks similar to Gitter. As I understand it, it means we now have at least three “slack-like”, well-backed, open-source, community-centered chats: - Gitter, now owned by GitLab; - Spectrum, now owned by GitHub; - Mattermost, independent, but fully integrated within GitLab. That's great to have credible alternatives to the proprietary behemots that are Slack, Discord and others,…

I like Gitter, the Scala community is on Gitter. However I wish they'd fix their IRC bridge, which has some issues, like not reporting the full list of users, which is driving me insane. Speaking of Slack-like, the best alternative remains in my opinion good old IRC. I'm a user of https://irccloud.com for always-on presence on IRC and it has better clients than Gitter.

+1 to irccloud.

that said, gitter has many useful features that aren't available on irc: inline code with syntax highlighting, inline images, etc.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#88

Post by sytse »

bad_user wrote: post #23
Arkanosis wrote: post #12

I didn't know Spectrum until today. It looks similar to Gitter. As I understand it, it means we now have at least three “slack-like”, well-backed, open-source, community-centered chats: - Gitter, now owned by GitLab; - Spectrum, now owned by GitHub; - Mattermost, independent, but fully integrated within GitLab. That's great to have credible alternatives to the proprietary behemots that are Slack, Discord and others,…

I like Gitter, the Scala community is on Gitter. However I wish they'd fix their IRC bridge, which has some issues, like not reporting the full list of users, which is driving me insane. Speaking of Slack-like, the best alternative remains in my opinion good old IRC. I'm a user of https://irccloud.com for always-on presence on IRC and it has better clients than Gitter.

Gitter is open source. Do you maybe have a link to an issue about the IRC bridge?

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#89

Post by kajmagnusmobile »

JoshMnem wrote: post #75
carwyn wrote: post #33

I spent a fair bit of time trying out many of the different chat systems out there for our tech community. In particular I looking for solutions that could do a half decent job of combining synchronous as well as asynchronous communication. The main benefit of implementations that manage to pull this off is being able to handle real-time chat but also make it easier to catch up with the conversation history if you've…

> I spent a fair bit of time trying out many of the different chat systems out there for our tech community. Do any of them allow you to see a list of who's online? That feature broke on Slack. I was told it's a known bug and in the issue queue, but it has already been months without a fix. There isn't a way to see who the regulars are, and the community looks somewhat dead without a way to see who is online.

Yes, Talkyard has an online users list. It's a Q&A + HN like forum with chat hybrid oss software (both async and sync communication), https://www.talkyard.io, I'm developing it. But there's no mobile native app.

Re: Spectrum is joining GitHub

#90

Post by kajmagnusmobile »

carwyn wrote: post #35
carwyn wrote: post #33

I spent a fair bit of time trying out many of the different chat systems out there for our tech community. In particular I looking for solutions that could do a half decent job of combining synchronous as well as asynchronous communication. The main benefit of implementations that manage to pull this off is being able to handle real-time chat but also make it easier to catch up with the conversation history if you've…

On the purely async focused side the two standouts where Discourse ( https://www.discourse.org/ ) and Flarum ( https://flarum.org/ ).

Check out Talkyard if you're interested in an async + sync hybrid that takes inspiration from Discourse, HN and Slack. https://www.talkyard.io, I'm developing it.
Post reply on HN