131–140 of 236 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oof, I feel like just one of those would be a deal breaker for most, but all those missing together makes it feel more like a proof of concept than anything else. A $20 proof of concept.
Gotta start somewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why isn't it fair? They run the service. What gives other people the right to tell them how to run it? If you don't like their terms, there are about 100 alternative projects you can use. There are pretty clear, practical reasons you might want to control the client of a commercial network service.
There are reasons, but it's also not smart. Organizations that pay for Slack pay for the service, not the shitty client.
Maybe I'm just jaded but as someone that used to be gungho about alternative, native clients like these. I've just given in and used the official clients. I'm tired of being the person who doesn't have specific feature or w/e. Anyone else in a similar boat?
It looks nice, but if you plan to try it as you default Slack client be aware it is lacking many features: - Edit posted messages (big one, TBA) - Authentication w/ XOXC tokens - Loading older messages - Typing indicators - Starring & Pinning things - Search - Sharing messages - Screensharing and Calls (aka Screenhero) - Joining and creating channels
Yeah, but multiple windows! OMG! I find managing multiple conversations with Slack so incredibly challenging. Having multiple windows open for active conversations is sooo good.
Maybe I'm just jaded but as someone that used to be gungho about alternative, native clients like these. I've just given in and used the official clients. I'm tired of being the person who doesn't have specific feature or w/e. Anyone else in a similar boat?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but multiple windows! OMG! I find managing multiple conversations with Slack so incredibly challenging. Having multiple windows open for active conversations is sooo good.
It's funny to see how basically all the official mainstream IM clients like AIM, MSN, ICQ, etc. used to be 1-window-per-conversation, but then in some odd wave of "modernity" (for lack of a better term) that was all dispensed with, and then now, multiple windows is somehow heralded as a new feature again. To me, it's just common sense that each conversation should be in its own window, instead of stuffing them all in…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, but multiple windows! OMG! I find managing multiple conversations with Slack so incredibly challenging. Having multiple windows open for active conversations is sooo good.
If you use a browser as your client, this can be done. No need for electron either :)
Firefox devs removed its PWA / "site-specific browser" support in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1682593 .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you use a browser as your client, this can be done. No need for electron either :)
On Macos Chrome you can still do hamburger menu -> More Tools -> Create Shortcut... and enable "open as window", and Chrome will create a .app file that, when you run it, opens that site as a PWA. Additionally it gets the favicon of the site by default as its app icon (you can change that) and then it shows up in the cmd-tab list as an app completely separate from Chrome. This works really nicely with Slack, especial…
Disclaimer: Haven't tried it out myself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From this user's top post on HN: > Over the years I've found writing on HackerNews, Reddit and other online sites has given me an outlet to get creative and engage with folks in a way that will shift discourse towards something I'm more interested in. I regularly lie and pretend I know about topics and areas I have zero experience in. I began noticing I received more upvotes and engagement
How do you see top posts?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it sucks that you could be sued if you are using a "public" api like this to write a client. I would like to think that as long as you do not brand yourself as slack or violate any trademarks, you should be able to write an app like this. Things like email clients would fall into this category.
It's not public as in an utility. It has its own Terms of Service.
And I think the advantages of such a law are very clear: More competition on front-ends could very likely create much better user experience (better organization of chats, better message and image editor, better notifications, show users whether messages have actually been sent).
Laws are made to serve the public [1]. Being nice to companies is a means to an end, not the goal itself, and the discussion about whether API should be legally accessible to third party vendors (or devices/cars/… should be legally repairable by third party repair shops) should focus on whether we get better user experience, service, and so on, and have the question of whether companies will still want to offer backend-service like Slack under such a law as a facet.
[1] At least they should be and everybody complaints when they aren't.