131–140 of 624 posts
Is Mattermost a viable alternative, and is it possible to bridge it with IRC and XMPP?
Mattermost has bridges[1]. There's also Matrix[2] which is decentralised and has bridges for almost everything. [1]: https://github.com/42wim/matterbridge [2]: https://matrix.org/
Have you tried running your own home server and then bridging your irc network to it?
It's not simple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I don't want to be a downer, but this is pretty much the exact definition of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...
Did Slack ever really embrace and extend IRC and XMPP though? It always seemed to be some kind of hack to get your messages there to begin with.
Slack advocates could say, "Don't worry, you don't have to switch. You can just keep using your IRC client with Slack. Everybody else will have a web UI, which they prefer, and you can keep using Irssi. Everybody wins."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What did everyone expect? Slack is a proprietary protocol created to make money on its proprietary service. I am glad they are making it more closed as then maybe more people realise that centralising your communications on top a VC funded, for-profit company is not a good idea.
Why is it a bad idea? And I doubt _any_ business has centralized their communications with Slack. I’m sure they are still using phones, and email and face to face communication.
Slack's rise continues to baffle me. It's not good or widespread enough to replace email, Skype messenging, SMS or phone calls - so it's yet another thing I have to stay on top of at work. My life would honestly be easier without Slack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most accessible users use JAWS on windows. I focus on accessibility a lot for my job. In fact, we have an entire department dedicated to accessibility design, implementation, and testing. The reason why accessible users use JAWS is that it works across the entire OS and all the programs you have installed; start menu, PowerPoint, web browser, control panel, Google, etc. etc. The problem with the native accessibility…
I find it unbelievable that a software costing $1000 is the de facto standard. What is their moat, what exactly does it offer that it's impossible to replicate using existing libraries and APIs?
Is there a specific list of IRC's deficiencies somewhere? Could we start on an IETF draft to address some of those rather than throw our hands in the air and build yet another walled garden?
The "value" is the persisting storage and maybe the integration with bots (which IRC had first anyway) and Markdown, which is a really low barrier to entry.
So it feels to me like (and I speak as one who often says others can do it, but with no intent to do it myself so be warned) its a low bar implementation goal to do an IRC backed open slack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most accessible users use JAWS on windows. I focus on accessibility a lot for my job. In fact, we have an entire department dedicated to accessibility design, implementation, and testing. The reason why accessible users use JAWS is that it works across the entire OS and all the programs you have installed; start menu, PowerPoint, web browser, control panel, Google, etc. etc. The problem with the native accessibility…
I find it unbelievable that a software costing $1000 is the de facto standard. What is their moat, what exactly does it offer that it's impossible to replicate using existing libraries and APIs?
Their moat is that the addressable market is too small for investors to bother investing in.