Jump to content

IM Survey Results: Difference between revisions

From KDE Community Wiki
Argonel (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Fuchs (talk | contribs)
Minor updates, mostly on Tor and bots and freenode
Line 59: Line 59:
|
|
|-
|-
| Anonimity
| Anonymity
|{{Maybe|feature loss}}
|{{Maybe|feature loss}}
|
|
Line 95: Line 95:
|-
|-
| Channel list with search
| Channel list with search
|{{Yes|freenode}}
|{{Yes|freenode alis}}
|
|
|
|
Line 143: Line 143:
|-
|-
| Encrypted communication
| Encrypted communication
|{{Maybe|HTTPS}}
|{{Yes|HTTPS / IRC with TLS / Tor / encrypted messages}}
|
|
|
|
Line 192: Line 192:
|-
|-
| Persistant public logging
| Persistant public logging
|{{Maybe|opt-in}}
|{{Maybe|possible via bots, other channels do this, has to be communicated, opt-in}}
|
|
|
|
Line 220: Line 220:
|-
|-
| No sign-up
| No sign-up
|{{Maybe|some features require}}
|{{Maybe|some channels (opt-in), some features and Tor require it}}
|
|
|
|
Line 234: Line 234:
|-
|-
| Tor support
| Tor support
|{{Maybe|freenode?}}
|{{Yes|on freenode, requires a registration and using an .onion service}}
|
|
|
|
Line 248: Line 248:
|-
|-
| Web client
| Web client
|{{Maybe|3pty}}
|{{Yes|Various availabie, qwebirc, irccloud, kiwiirc, ...}}
|
|
|
|
Line 262: Line 262:
|-
|-
| Text mode client
| Text mode client
|{{Maybe|3rd party}}
|{{Yes|3rd party (irssi, weechat, ...)}}
|
|
|
|
Line 269: Line 269:
|-
|-
| Low sysadmin requirements
| Low sysadmin requirements
|{{Yes|Freenode}}
|{{Yes|freenode}}
|
|
|
|
Line 276: Line 276:
|-
|-
| Remembers last-read position
| Remembers last-read position
|{{Maybe|needs 3pty support}}
|{{Yes|needs 3pty support, konversation does it}}
|
|
|
|
Line 290: Line 290:
|-
|-
| User search
| User search
|{{Maybe|primitive}}
|{{Maybe|primitive, could be improved client-side}}
|
|
|
|
Line 311: Line 311:
|-
|-
| Mass messaging
| Mass messaging
|{{Maybe|considered impolite}}
|{{Yes|considered impolite}}
|
|
|
|
Line 339: Line 339:
|-
|-
| Broadcast messages
| Broadcast messages
|{{Maybe|bot?}}
|{{Yes|Can be done via bots and amessage}}
|
|
|
|

Revision as of 09:33, 5 September 2017

The IM Survey results are in. Below is a table for comparison of features:

Requirement IRC Matrix
FOSS server Yes
Can self-host Yes
FOSS Clients Yes
Open API Yes
Open Governance #ircv3?
No monetary cost Yes
Defined protocol Yes
Anonymity feature loss
Low bandwidth Yes
Widely legal uh?
Away Yes
Mute standard client feature
Channel list with search freenode alis
IRC Bridge n/a
File Sharing DCC or external
Private channels Yes
Access control freenode
Channel topics Yes
Permanent channels freenode_GC
Encrypted communication HTTPS / IRC with TLS / Tor / encrypted messages
Plasma Integration Konversation
Client accessibility Konversation
High volume performance Yes
High channel count performance Yes
Low client overhead Yes
Federation freenode
Persistant public logging possible via bots, other channels do this, has to be communicated, opt-in
Firewall friendly tunnels available
IRC-like GUI Yes
Multiple accounts per app instance Yes
No sign-up some channels (opt-in), some features and Tor require it
Migration Path n/a
Tor support on freenode, requires a registration and using an .onion service
Dev system messages provided by a bot
Web client Various availabie, qwebirc, irccloud, kiwiirc, ...
Message quoting editable text
Text mode client 3rd party (irssi, weechat, ...)
Low sysadmin requirements freenode
Remembers last-read position needs 3pty support, konversation does it
Popular bridges n/a
User search primitive, could be improved client-side
File share search No
Avatars client feature
Mass messaging considered impolite
Dev service bots Yes
Spacious, low contrast flat ui see wip/qtquick
Unicode character picker konvi
Broadcast messages Can be done via bots and amessage
Sharable content markup Client feature