It doesn't seem comparable to Zulip at all. The idea behind Zulip is all around threads ("topics" in Zulip vernacular), channels just happen to be a way to group the threads.
SAMA seems more alike to Slack, where channels is the main grouping, and threads just happen to be a thing you can create in channels.
Slack threads are a failure imo. They were introduced in Discord too, with the same failure case. The problem is that you silo off communication and make it hard to notice that anything was said at all. The exact opposite of what communication software is for.
Mattermost does it the best imo: "threads" in mattermost are just reply chains that go in the main channel, and you can open them separately too.
I 100% disagree. I love threads in Slack. In fact, we actively encourage their use in our workplace. Not everyone in every channel needs to be involved in every discussion. If someone on my dev team says, "Hey, I'm having a problem with X", one person can respond in a thread and they can have a little discussion that doesn't ping everyone else all the time. However, other people have the option of contributing to the discussion if they wish. In addition, the thread can be found in a search at a later date if someone is having a similar problem.
Sure. And then you try Zulip and realize what could actually be.
Besides Matrix's whole matrix-y-ness (lol been using it 4 years, still have E2EE problems REGULARLY), they also completely, completely fumbled threads. Sadly, Zulip has no ecosystem, and the near universal gut reaction to it's UX is "eww". All around, just a god damn travesty.
And in the Discords I am on it's a disaster too. Every time a beginner uses one it cuts the chance of getting help by a lot. You basically have to get lucky that the first person who responds will solve it, otherwise you're out of luck.
For me they are the reason I use Slack. They allow us to have a meaningful conversation and not overlook anything important and at the same time allow interested people to dive into more detailed discussions. For comparison, I use Teams for another project and this is madness - people actively avoid discussion in order not to force the other team members to spend too much time scrolling the screen, and search is abysmal. (Note I'm using these for work, maybe if it was for other types of communication I might not care.)
> and at the same time allow interested people to dive into
Discussions often start out one way and then go off to something else. People can't know ahead of time if they should dive in or not. That's one of the problems.
Threads are good for some conversations and not others.
It does keep it neater but also doesn’t include or invite others into it as easily.
I’ve seen another presentation of chat where the latest few messages are shown threaded in-line inder the message. If it’s a message I’ve clicked into before, it remembers and shows me more of the thread in line.
I think slack could do this well but would be happier if mattermost or something had it first :)
Agreed, I run a 100+ member discord server for my WoW guild and so far both threads and forums are total dumpster fires that both go unused despite us trying to make them work. Slack's approach to threads is everything I want for Discord; I enjoy talking with my clients more on their Slack workspaces than I do talking with my guild on Discord just because the experience is so dismal on Discord.
SAMA seems more alike to Slack, where channels is the main grouping, and threads just happen to be a thing you can create in channels.