[bigiain]

For one thing, an IRC client doesn't pin a core of my cpu at 100% and consume half a gig of ram...

(But I realise I'm well out on the losing end of this argument, even in groups of old-school hard core technical friends/colleagues, I've been given the "crazy look" when suggesting we just use irc for chat... )

[amorphid]

Slack isn't perfect; I agree with that. I haven't experienced the CPU issue, but it does seem to like RAM quite a bit. I just opened it w/ one account active, and it was eating maybe 400MB of RAM. I bumped that up to 6 open accounts, and now it's chewing up maybe 2GB of RAM.

[eadmund]

I'm quite fond of emacs-slack, which is a much better client experience than the Slack 'web' UI.

[Diederich]

> pin a core of my cpu at 100% and consume half a gig of ram...

I'm not doubting you, and I acknowledge that I hear that kind of thing with some frequency, but I've not seen Slack (running in Chrome on Ubuntu) use anything like those amounts of resources.

I've had a pretty busy slack client running for several days, and it's using 204,484K of memory and 2.0% of one CPU.

[contras1970]

200M/2% is still pretty bad, isn't it? IRC clients worked perfectly on machines with less total virtual memory 20 years ago (and before).

    USER        PID %CPU %MEM    VSZ    RSS TT  STAT   STARTED      TIME COMMAND
    fubar      2922  0.0  0.1  61648  26668  2  S0+    19Mar18  22:58.73 weechat

[Diederich]

I hear you! I've been using the Internet most every day since 1988, and am still occasionally struck by the amount of resources seemingly straightforward programs use these days.

Re: Slack resource utilization: I'm not passing a value judgment as much as expressing confusion over multiple claims I've noticed about Slack utilization that is far, far greater than anything I've seen.

[tecleandor]

If I had an irc server/service were I could easily login/control access with a Google domain account... <3

[jfoster]

I had this problem with Slack. I switched to using it within Chrome. I can't be sure why it performs so much better that way (Chrome throttling it?), but it does.