| FOSS does not appear to value user accessibility as a priority. Non-IRC, non-XMPP chat systems continue to implement features that users enjoy and appreciate, while IRC/XMPP clients argue that those features are irrelevant because the ideals of IRC/XMPP should take precedence. IRC has, in the past ten years, fallen behind on: - Scrollback syncing (client-to-client) and persistence (server-to-client) - Everyday user interface (mIRC ships a UI from 1995) - Setup and configuration (I can't get SASL right on the first try and I helped upgrade an IRC network to support it) - Authenticity at a network level (not just Anope setting a umode) - Protocol resilience (netsplits should not be visible to users) - Defense against attackers (pitting the idealism of anonymity against the safety of identity) Why has FOSS allowed itself to be eclipsed by closed-source chat providers in these regards? I believe it's because the ideals of FOSS are now in direct conflict with the needs of modern users, including FOSS people themselves. For example: - Anonymity is an ideal to be held up above all others, so defending against spam attacks is impossible, because anonymous users are granted equal rights as my friends. - Accuracy is an ideal to be held up above all others, so preventing netsplits is impossible, because the clients must know when they don't have a realtime immediate connection to each other. - Maximally-capable UX is an ideal to be held up above all others, so building a less-capable UX that is more widely easier to understand is impossible, because otherwise we might not be able to view our chat at the maximum information density possible. - Local-only data is an ideal to be held up above all others, so scrollback syncing must be outright prohibited and campaigned against, because otherwise the clients would expect the server to help them exchange data that the server must never permit itself to hold. If FOSS realigns its ideals with those of modern users such as ourselves, then it could easily retake the gap covered in the past decade by closed-source software. I hope with all my heart that it does so someday, but I'm not holding my breath. Footnote: Apologies for all the whitespace but, ironically, HN doesn't support formatted text such as bulleted lists, nor does IRC. This would take up half as much vertical space on your screen on Slack :) |
I use Slack, Facebook, Twitter etc. because I want to communicate with other people who use those services for communication. If I only use IRC and email, I would miss out on some of that communication.
I don't know the various reasons why each of those people use them, and I agree that it is, in part because of some of the things you mention. However, it is also probably also down to marketing. Many people use XMPP via Whatsapp without knowing it, they are just using Whatsapp.
The user accessibility problem is not universal to all FOSS. In my opinion, LibreOffice (MPL) is a superior office suite in terms of usability to MS Office. Audacity (GPL) has a simpler UX than many proprietary audio editing suites.