Unfortunately IRC has failed to keep up with the U/X of centralized chat services like discord which is a shame because an open protocol chat seems needed for the internet.
I would say the opposite rather, the UX of IRC clients (eg, HexChat) is so polished and refined, it puts all the proprietary chat services (and their clients) to shame.
> Why does open protocol usually mean crippled U/X?
Open is entirely unrelated to that, but optional features means crippled UI/UX in the long run. Some server won't support it so users can't use it, or some client won't support it so they will see garbage/nothing when others use that feature.
XMMP showed that well enough and it seems IRCv3 follows suit.
FWIW TheLounge [1] and Convos [2] can front-end an IRC server giving it much of the look of a modern client and also chat persistence when using TheLounge in private mode. The trade-off in my opinion is scalability. With a bog standard IRCD I can handle tens of thousands of clients per node. Adding web persistent increases memory usage.
In an ideal (and therefore unrealistic) world, it would be done by the UX designer/dev equivalent counterparts of the ones developing these open source softwares.
Why do low level engineers work freely on FOSS but designers or UX devs don't is the question.
There should be a way to decouple the UX from the program and if people want a Discord “skin” for IRC that looks nearly 1:1 they should be able to have that.
I don't think that would help. The IRC protocol is missing so many messaging features that platforms like Discord have. Just looking like Discord wouldn't fix that.
This is lipstick on a pig. I'd be perfectly happy with a client that looks like IRC but has the features of Discord. I'd like to be able to chat on my phone without running an external service that provides a modern HTTP based protocol.
Irssi's UX is better than that of any other chat software, though. Why it hasn't been replicated for things like XMPP and Matrix is probably due to the more difficult and featureful state transitions of those protocols.
I switched over from irssi to poezio a few years ago (with a self-hosted biboumi as XMPP<->IRC gateway) and I don't miss irssi (anymore).
Of course, the transition was a bit bumpy, but I think that'd go both ways. As someone else said, it's not a direct replica. Yet, it feels close enough and not too close for the uncanny valley.
There are several XMPP clients trying to replicate -more or less freely- the same experiences, such as poezio [1] or profanity [2]. YMMV of course, and nothing will be a carbon copy of irssi, except if you use a plugin (but in my experience bolting another protocol on top of a client for another will result in a poor UX).
I do believe there are TUI clients for Matrix, but I am unsure of their maturity and state, or how they compare to Irssi.
Do any IRC clients support inline media upload/viewing, profile pictures, voice/video calls, or replies/threading? These are the things I would consider the core essentials of IM. Any serious platform has all of this plus a whole lot more.
chungy|3 years ago
ilyt|3 years ago
Open is entirely unrelated to that, but optional features means crippled UI/UX in the long run. Some server won't support it so users can't use it, or some client won't support it so they will see garbage/nothing when others use that feature.
XMMP showed that well enough and it seems IRCv3 follows suit.
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
LinuxBender|3 years ago
[1] - https://github.com/thelounge https://thelounge.chat/
[2] - https://github.com/convos-chat/convos/ https://convos.chat/
arka2147483647|3 years ago
If open source/community, then chronically starved for resources and contributors have divided directions.
If commercial, then they want to differentiate and do embrace, extend, extinguish, in order to drive everybody to their client.
I have come to believe, that the protocol spec and servers, is just the easy part of chat apps.
BonitaPersona|3 years ago
Why do low level engineers work freely on FOSS but designers or UX devs don't is the question.
323|3 years ago
In fact, they will probably say something like "just use the CLI, it's a superior way anyway".
unknownaccount|3 years ago
kelnos|3 years ago
Gigachad|3 years ago
vegai_|3 years ago
jssfr|3 years ago
Of course, the transition was a bit bumpy, but I think that'd go both ways. As someone else said, it's not a direct replica. Yet, it feels close enough and not too close for the uncanny valley.
Jiejeing|3 years ago
I do believe there are TUI clients for Matrix, but I am unsure of their maturity and state, or how they compare to Irssi.
[1] https://poez.io/en/ [2] https://profanity-im.github.io/
unknown|3 years ago
[deleted]
eurasiantiger|3 years ago
Gigachad|3 years ago