111–120 of 323 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who might be the right entity to take on creating a replacement for XMPP?
https://matrix.org is a promising candidate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Up until something like this happens I guess centralized social networks are going to rule the roost since the value of networks is almost always in their reach/size. This is a group chat. It's value is in being restricted in reach and/or size to the group (team, startup, enterprise) deploying a version of it.
There's no benefit to it only being able to reach some small group of people. There is benefit in being able to include only a small group of people in a particular conversation, but that does not require no interoperability, only a concept of groups and permissions and access controls. In fact, it is completely orthogonal to the lack of interop.
If something can just be locked to only talk inside the intranet/VPN it's better from something that can talk to arbitrary people the world over and is only configured not to via its own groups and permissions inside.
No linux client? That's a deal breaker for us right there... Pity, looks interesting otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sad as it may be, it's pretty clear at this point that XMPP won't be the communication protocol of the future. Everyone who ever seriously worked on it seem to have come out of the experience a broken man. Setting it up requires pretty deep knowledge and the promises of compatibility with most XMPP servers break down pretty fast unless you know which extensions to support. All these problems are fixable but I don't s…
>Setting it up requires pretty deep knowledge Not even remotely true! Prosody on Debian works out of the box, including federation. You just have to configure the domain name. It's not hard to set up an XMPP server. It's hard to set up Ejabberd. Ejabberd is not the only XMPP server. Prosody is very easy to set up. Honestly, people, think before you speak...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only Slack and Zulip are for specific teams/companies, not for the public at large. So there's no "fragmentation" issue, any more that there's one when a company uses Bugzilla and the other uses JIRA.
This is a very short sighted view. There is a real need for an alternative to IRC - and closed source products do not cut it when we are talking about communication. What parent is talking about is a real problem. There's micro-ecosystems out there around specific closed source products, all of them centralized, none of them compatible... and in the mean time, the only real decentralized, open source group chat solut…
There might be one -- but this is absolutely not what this and Slack are aiming to do.
>and closed source products do not cut it when we are talking about communication.
Not sure about that. As it seems, for 99% of the world who only uses "closed source products" for chat, they do cut it. (Interoperability is orthogonal of course).
Slack, Zulip, this feels like we are back in 1999, when the internet was divided by ICQ, AOL Instant Messanger, Windows Live Messanger, and Yahoo Messanger. (Instant/Live was a plus back then). And the only innovation over IRC was a backlog and buddy list. I wonder when the Trillian of Slack+Zulip will come out. I hope Trillian (which still exists) is already working on it.
This is not our main feature, just something like side project.