Hacker News Reader

Comment by sidlls | Hacker News Reader

Actually I would find a desktop client more appealing. I'm not a fan of browsers-as-poorly-functioning-userlands-on-userlands that seems to be the modern fad.

View on HN

But Slack's desktop client is excellent. Furthermore, Ryver makes a big point about guest access - and a browser client would be much better for guests than a dedicated client they may only use once.

HipChat has both: a web client and a native windows/mac client.

And per-channel guest access, too.

Slack also - you can use it in browser. Most people don't want to, but I've seen some people say that they do so much work there that it's nice to have a browser tab visible.

We run in every browser and also have native apps for every platform.

Yeah, not having a desktop client was one of the reasons we went with Hipchat over Slack. I can understand not everyone wants to use a native app, but it sure would be a nice option.

> Yeah, not having a desktop client was one of the reasons we went with Hipchat over Slack.

Is Slack's desktop client a new thing? I'm relatively new to it, but they certainly have one now.

Slack has a native desktop client and has for a long time.

Or, better yet, irssi in persistent tmux. Slack really can't compare to terminal irc clients in terms of usability and flexibility.

We run in every browser very well. Have a Mac, Windows, Linux, iOS and Android client.

Agreed. Desktop apps are generally so much better.

Most of our users do use the native apps. Some prefer the browser though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com