Looking at the code, it appears to be a client, but in that case why does the site talk about it providing support for "Channels, Users, Permission, Private, Public and much more", why does it claim it makes my channel contents more secure (under "Secure Your Logs"), and why does it talk about setting up an IRCd (" With a ZNC bounce, a simple ircd server and 5 minutes you can avoid paying for communication and keep your company chat logs secure and on your own infrastructure.").
If it's a server, why is how to set it up not described?
Not sure if OP is actually part of the dev team, or just somebody who found the site, but a word to the devs: your website should clarify which of the above you are providing. If it's a client, the site shouldn't talk about the benefits I'd get running my own IRCd (security of communication, IRCd features like channel modes and permissions, or lower cost). If you are intending for folks to run their own IRCd, the site needs to have information on where that software lives and how to set it up, and why I'd want to do that instead of just making a channel on OFTC or Freenode or similar.
I think that description is pitching it as a tool for small businesses or development teams (that don't already know about ZNC, HexChat, irssi, weechat, freenode, etc).
It's beyond me why anyone would write a desktop application in JS, CSS, and HTML, and require node as a dependency. These technologies are already bastard children of the 'just make it work' mentality. Using them for an environment they were never designed for, when there is decades of existing infrastructure purpose-built (and far easier to use), makes no sense. The only reason that I can come up with for why someone would build a desktop app with these technologies is that they cbf to learn to use the correct tools for the job.
As for "the best client for developers" -- I'll stick with irssi, thanks.
This kind of elitism is what turns so many people off about technology. What if these are kids that are building this? Do you care so much about your view that you would want to shut them down? Not everyone has the time or interest in learning systems programming or C/C++.
In the end, optimization forces operating at levels beyond our comprehension and ability to fully model will determine whether or not this project sees continued development. Personal lives, adcademic interest, social proliferation of memes, economic constraints...all serve as inputs. Don't force an outcome like this. You might damage the author's impetus to try again with more ambition in the future. Let nature run its course; you may occasionally find yourself surprised by the outcome.
In general, it is pointless to rationalize your choices to the rest of the world, which frankly doesn't put as much effort into listening as you might think.
Sorry if I come across as rude. I just think this could be better framed as constructive criticism.
Actually, it's far easier to write one web app that can be used on smartphones, desktop systems, tablets etc., on all platforms.
Believe it or not people actually use smartphones and tablets now, and even if you hate that and use desktop for all chatting and all repository notifications and the like, some people don't, and making stand alone GUI applications isn't helping those people.
And indeed often, just making the web app is easier than getting your app to look good natively across multiple operating systems, especially now with mobile being so prominent.
It's not a desktop application. It's a browser application masquerading as a desktop application. It makes sense if you believe the desktop is dead and the browser won, which many people do.
Node - for node-webkit, I believe. As for the general question - why use web technologies for desktop app, I think it's like "Qt for those who don't want to use C++". Cross-platform GUI toolkit. As someone who used Qt extensively in the past I don't see a lot of value in using web technologies to develop desktop apps, unless there's a plan to use the same codebase on the real web. But it's just me.
> With a ZNC bounce, a simple ircd server and 5 minutes you can avoid paying for communication and keep your company chat logs secure and on your own infrastructure.
Having watched a coworker spend a solid week getting our company's ircd setup (and this was our VP of Engineering, mind you), I've gotta call BS here. Also, until I started using irccloud[1] a few months ago, I was using ZNC, and that's no walk in the park either.
Agree, ZNC is a crappy experience. The targeting seems wrong here -- if you wanted to pick one feature that developers need that casual IRC users don't, it's the ability to stay connected 24/7, because otherwise the chance of actually being online at the same time as someone who wants to talk about their project is low.
So I'd question the point of building a native client, given ZNC's shortcomings. What's so special about this client that you couldn't just run it as a web service using Node, rather than only making it available as a fat node-webkit client?
I can only assume your coworker had quite an elaborate setup, as most ircds (e.g., ircu, charybdis, ircd-hybrid) take an hour, tops, to configure and get running.
> Having watched a coworker spend a solid week getting our company's ircd setup (and this was our VP of Engineering, mind you), I've gotta call BS here.
I've gotta call BS on your story. Unless he was learning Unix from scratch, it shouldn't take more than a couple hours to setup an ircd.
Since a lot of people are saying it shouldn't have taken that long for your VP to set up an irc server (which I agree with), I'd like to argue a case I haven't seen made here. What were your specific needs? Was he setting the server up for just those needs, or what "might be needed"? Both a IRC server and ZNC do not take much to configure for basic needs.
When you start adding features you don't need but think are cool or may one day get used, setting up these things becomes a whole other thing. A IRC server with simple nick auth and chanserv I'm sure would've been enough. What else did your VP implement? A egg drop not? Some other features? There has to be more to this story then you've said.
The reason irccloud is popular is that it is simple to set up and there is a really great mobile client. No one really needs another web based client, even if it is free; there are plenty of alternatives for that such as ircanywhere[1] or Convos[2].
I'm really not sure who this is for.
I keep an IRC client (Colloquy for OSX) open everyday when I get home from work. However, it crashes a few times a day and I think it's about time to switch. Is this a suitable replacement for Colloquy? Any recommendations on a better IRC client to use, web-based or OSX, are much appreciated. Thanks!
irssi, textual, or IRCCloud (if you care about a mobile client as well) would be good. Textual over Limechat because it is a forked version of Limechat and is much improved in terms of functionality.
I think this is aimed to compete with IRCcloud solution, which cost around $5/month/user. IRCcloud features private IRC server, bouncer, and gist/picture/etc viewer in its (web-based) client. This is why the front page is very confusing, as right now this Komanda (probably) is client-only.
It's worth noting that despite the "ZNC bounce" stuff on http://komanda.io/ this is actually just an IRC client.
It seems to run on all my systems because it's webkit based; it's quite pretty. Had a bit of trouble with the setup which resulted in "USER Not enough parameters"; pretty rubbish first experience using it.
I don't see any 'developer features' that make it worth bothering with over any other irc client, but I appreciate the idea that it's javascript based and I could download and customize it if I wanted to.
Cute project; yet another 'uses webkit for desktop app'. For better or worse, that seems to be flavor of the month at the moment.
1. If I wanted a customizable IRC client for developers, I'd use ERC in Emacs. Note: I still haven't figured out how to prefer it over XChat. I think that's what I'll be doing tonight.
2. Part of the justification for the client seems to be "People are charging for this, just get it for free!!!" That's terrible logic. Professionals pay for their tools if the best tool for the job is commercial.
I assume the the people choosing the methods of communication for startups are capable of learning to use irssi or weechat, but both of those clients take quite a bit time to learn and require significant amounts of customization to make them truly comfortable. It isn't a good business decision to require your teams to learn to use these tools.
Is IRC an acceptable medium for a company? Maybe it can be. Is it wise? Not with tools like irssi.
[+] [-] akerl_|11 years ago|reply
Looking at the code, it appears to be a client, but in that case why does the site talk about it providing support for "Channels, Users, Permission, Private, Public and much more", why does it claim it makes my channel contents more secure (under "Secure Your Logs"), and why does it talk about setting up an IRCd (" With a ZNC bounce, a simple ircd server and 5 minutes you can avoid paying for communication and keep your company chat logs secure and on your own infrastructure.").
If it's a server, why is how to set it up not described?
Not sure if OP is actually part of the dev team, or just somebody who found the site, but a word to the devs: your website should clarify which of the above you are providing. If it's a client, the site shouldn't talk about the benefits I'd get running my own IRCd (security of communication, IRCd features like channel modes and permissions, or lower cost). If you are intending for folks to run their own IRCd, the site needs to have information on where that software lives and how to set it up, and why I'd want to do that instead of just making a channel on OFTC or Freenode or similar.
[+] [-] msturgill|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fail2ban|11 years ago|reply
As for "the best client for developers" -- I'll stick with irssi, thanks.
[+] [-] possibilistic|11 years ago|reply
In the end, optimization forces operating at levels beyond our comprehension and ability to fully model will determine whether or not this project sees continued development. Personal lives, adcademic interest, social proliferation of memes, economic constraints...all serve as inputs. Don't force an outcome like this. You might damage the author's impetus to try again with more ambition in the future. Let nature run its course; you may occasionally find yourself surprised by the outcome.
In general, it is pointless to rationalize your choices to the rest of the world, which frankly doesn't put as much effort into listening as you might think.
Sorry if I come across as rude. I just think this could be better framed as constructive criticism.
[+] [-] moonshinefe|11 years ago|reply
Believe it or not people actually use smartphones and tablets now, and even if you hate that and use desktop for all chatting and all repository notifications and the like, some people don't, and making stand alone GUI applications isn't helping those people.
And indeed often, just making the web app is easier than getting your app to look good natively across multiple operating systems, especially now with mobile being so prominent.
[+] [-] snarfy|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kika|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coderzach|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bagels|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mattdawson|11 years ago|reply
Having watched a coworker spend a solid week getting our company's ircd setup (and this was our VP of Engineering, mind you), I've gotta call BS here. Also, until I started using irccloud[1] a few months ago, I was using ZNC, and that's no walk in the park either.
[1] https://www.irccloud.com/
[+] [-] rdtsc|11 years ago|reply
Was he writing custom patches for it, re-implementing SSL, custom services.
I think you wanted to tell us about how hard setting up irc could be but ended up telling us something about your VP of Engineering.
[+] [-] cjbprime|11 years ago|reply
So I'd question the point of building a native client, given ZNC's shortcomings. What's so special about this client that you couldn't just run it as a web service using Node, rather than only making it available as a fat node-webkit client?
[+] [-] AaronIG|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nknighthb|11 years ago|reply
I've gotta call BS on your story. Unless he was learning Unix from scratch, it shouldn't take more than a couple hours to setup an ircd.
[+] [-] girvo|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ibelimb|11 years ago|reply
When you start adding features you don't need but think are cool or may one day get used, setting up these things becomes a whole other thing. A IRC server with simple nick auth and chanserv I'm sure would've been enough. What else did your VP implement? A egg drop not? Some other features? There has to be more to this story then you've said.
[+] [-] tr4656|11 years ago|reply
[1] http://ircanywhere.com/
[2] https://github.com/Nordaaker/convos
[+] [-] shadowmint|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Abundnce10|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Killswitch|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] linhmtran168|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tr4656|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] workoy|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] z3niMAGiNE|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] baudehlo|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] stock_toaster|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] innocenat|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shadowmint|11 years ago|reply
It seems to run on all my systems because it's webkit based; it's quite pretty. Had a bit of trouble with the setup which resulted in "USER Not enough parameters"; pretty rubbish first experience using it.
I don't see any 'developer features' that make it worth bothering with over any other irc client, but I appreciate the idea that it's javascript based and I could download and customize it if I wanted to.
Cute project; yet another 'uses webkit for desktop app'. For better or worse, that seems to be flavor of the month at the moment.
[+] [-] cheez|11 years ago|reply
2. Part of the justification for the client seems to be "People are charging for this, just get it for free!!!" That's terrible logic. Professionals pay for their tools if the best tool for the job is commercial.
[+] [-] nextos|11 years ago|reply
Perhaps some IRC users can pop up and illustrate us a bit about their client of choice.
[+] [-] Nux|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikeash|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nsmartt|11 years ago|reply
Is IRC an acceptable medium for a company? Maybe it can be. Is it wise? Not with tools like irssi.
[+] [-] jwh018|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ossreality|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] thibauts|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ziziyO|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] prezjordan|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]